Tag: no-latest

NEW YORK — President Donald Trump pivoted the nation’s attention back to vaccines this week with an executive order that aims to scale back the childhood immunization schedule and space out shots into separate visits.

After acting to overhaul the nation’s vaccine policy and guidance, the Trump administration had recently largely stepped back from additional changes to focus on less controversial subjects, raising questions over the political impetus behind and implications of the Republican president’s renewed focus on vaccines.

For well over a decade, Trump has expressed his view — against medical groups’ guidance — that childhood vaccines should be administered in smaller doses over a long period of time. The executive order sought to bear out that discredited theory.

While the move could endear Trump to some “Make America Healthy Again” voters who want more flexibility on immunizations, it’s also already attracting attacks designed to hurt Trump’s aligned candidates in November’s midterm elections.

Jayme Franklin, a 28-year-old conservative activist who appeared with the president to promote his executive order on Monday, said she thinks the action is “going to go a long way” for MAHA mom voters like herself.

But Shaughnessy Naughton, president of the left-leaning political action committee 314 Action, which aims to elect doctors to office, said she sees the order as “one more data point” in support of Democrats’ cause.

“Our organization and our candidates are certainly going to hammer that message home — that if you want healthcare that’s accessible and affordable, if you want medical advice that is science-based, we need to have accountability in Washington,” she said.

Trump has long called for shots spread out in separate visits

Trump’s doubt in the number and cadence of vaccines dates back at least to 2014, when he posted to social media the disproven claim that combination shots can cause autism and said if he were president he would spread them out.

While he’s since shown pride in his first-term Operation Warp Speed effort to disseminate COVID-19 vaccines quickly and praised certain other shots like the polio vaccine, he also has repeatedly called for reforming the childhood vaccine schedule. While his administration released an assessment comparing U.S. childhood vaccine schedules to peer nations’, several of his suggestions have come without any new scientific evidence.

“This is based on what I feel,” Trump said last September when he called for splitting the measles, mumps and rubella, or MMR, vaccine into three single-disease vaccines.

On Monday, he again pushed for separating the MMR shot into three, ordering the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to work on developing that option for children, since it doesn’t currently exist in the United States. Public health experts have warned that spacing out shots could increase the risk of infection with a vaccine-preventable disease before a child returns for the next visit.

Most Americans don’t see reevaluating vaccine safety as a top issue

Trump’s views have aligned him with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime anti-vaccine activist before he entered politics.

The president credits Kennedy’s diverse coalition of MAHA followers — whose priorities range from regulating pesticides to ending vaccine mandates — with helping him win back the White House in 2024.

Even as the Trump administration has handed several wins to the MAHA coalition, including changing the federal dietary guidelines and loosening restrictions on peptides, some in the movement have grown impatient as their other priorities remain unfinished. It’s unclear whether Trump’s action to loosen vaccine recommendations, an issue some MAHA supporters are passionate about, will be enough to shore up those voters ahead of the midterms.

Franklin, who runs a conservative magazine, said she had talked with Trump about making vaccine recommendations more flexible at a MAHA roundtable earlier this year. She was pleased when the administration informed her that her requests were coming true.

“I think it just really shows he loves to hear from everyday Americans on how his policies and his administration affect the lives of people who are raising kids in this country,” she said.

But political strategists and Trump’s own pollster Tony Fabrizio have warned that efforts to shave down vaccine recommendations may not matter much to most voters this fall.

Polls show most Americans believe children should be vaccinated to attend school, though Republicans are less likely to see vaccines as important. And as rising prices on things like groceries, gas and healthcare tighten Americans’ budgets, many view the economy as a top issue they care about.

“Nothing in America matters more than affordability,” pollster Frank Luntz said. “And anytime the administration or Republicans goes off affordability, they’re not talking about what Americans really care about.”

Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster, said with most Americans viewing vaccines positively, Trump’s announcement “does not strike me as the most persuasive political message.”

Recent polling from the healthcare research nonprofit KFF suggests that even among MAHA supporters, only 10% rank reevaluating vaccine safety as their top priority for the federal government. Higher-ranking priorities included lowering health costs (42%) and restricting chemical additives in the food supply (21%).

Democrats are seizing on Trump’s message

Asked about the timing of the order with the midterms approaching, a White House official who insisted on anonymity to brief reporters said that the move was a longstanding presidential priority and that other health issues voters care about were still being addressed.

To that effect, on the day Trump signed the order, the Food and Drug Administration announced an effort to require more transparency from food manufacturers about new ingredients or additives in foods — something many in the MAHA movement had been calling for.

The administration has also touted its efforts to lower drug prices and crack down on federal health program fraud, which it argues will save taxpayers money.

Still, Democratic candidates, including doctors linked to Naughton’s group 314 Action, seized on Trump’s order in messages to voters this week.

Richard Pan, a physician running as a Democrat for the U.S. House in Northern California, reposted the American Medical Association’s condemnation of Trump’s vaccine falsehoods, among other fact checks. He told the Associated Press he thinks voters are deciding between electing people who choose not to hold the administration accountable and those who “stand for the science.”

Annie Andrews, a pediatrician and Democrat running for the U.S. Senate in South Carolina, pleaded with voters not to take health information from Trump in a video posted on Instagram in collaboration with the left-leaning Courier Newsroom.

“Do whatever you can to help elect scientists up and down the ballot in November, including sending me to the U.S. Senate,” she said to the camera. “I cannot think of a more urgent time for us to have a pediatrician in the room where these conversations are happening.”

The Trump administration plans to spend at least $900 million for construction projects on the White House grounds, a significantly larger price tag than has been previously reported and one that would be covered primarily by taxpayers, according to records reviewed by the Washington Post.

Instead of securing money directly from Congress, the records show, the administration has pieced together funding from other agencies and private donors and directed it to a little-known account that typically holds a few million dollars for routine maintenance of the executive mansion.

Confidential contracts and related planning documents indicate that the administration plans to use money in that account for White House “modernization projects” — the administration’s term for President Donald Trump’s planned overhaul of the property, at the center of which is a gilded East Wing ballroom.

Together, the records reveal in the greatest detail yet how the Trump administration has sidestepped Congress and shielded visibility into what would become the most expensive overhaul of the White House in more than 80 years.

A federal appeals court struck a blow to Trump’s plans on Friday, ruling that the administration needed congressional approval to continue building the East Wing ballroom. Trump vowed to appeal the ruling, which applied only to the ballroom, setting up a Supreme Court battle over the limits of his authority to remake the White House.

“Congress has exclusive authority to regulate the construction and demolition of White House structures,” Judges Patricia A. Millett and Bradley N. Garcia wrote in the accompanying opinion.

In the past, administrations planning major changes to the White House grounds have done so by submitting budget requests to Congress, receiving appropriations, and directing agencies to seek approvals and hire contractors, according to historians and budget records.

The Trump administration has not disclosed the total cost of all planned White House construction or shared details about the sources or original intended purposes of most of the money it has assembled. Trump has repeatedly said that the East Wing ballroom project would be covered by private donations.

The Post previously reported that the projected cost of the East Wing construction alone was $600 million, with half coming from taxpayers. The confidential contracting documents include the costs of upgrades to nearby Lafayette Square, construction of a helipad, a new visitor screening center, and other previously reported projects that would drive the total cost of work on the grounds to at least $927 million.

The contracts reviewed by the Post leave open the possibility that the work will not move forward as planned and that the money will not be spent. As of the end of June, administration officials had issued orders for over $100 million of work to be paid from the White House maintenance account, budget office records show.

The White House did not answer questions from the Post about the source of all the funding or the total cost of the planned work, but said the money is being spent in a “manner consistent with” Congress’ original intent.

“President Trump continues to implement long-overdue and necessary renovations to beautify the People’s House as we celebrate our great Nation’s 250th anniversary of independence,” White House spokesman Davis Ingle said in a statement. “Thanks to the Builder-in-Chief, the White House will be properly glorified and remain in excellent condition for generations to come.”

The contracts and money for the work are being routed through the Executive Residence, a White House office with fewer than 100 employees that maintains the president’s private home. The office is not subject to rules that require most federal agencies to disclose government records, rendering the contracts confidential.

The Executive Residence, which employs housekeepers, curators, calligraphers, and carpenters, has not previously managed major construction efforts, experts said. In recent years, Congress has appropriated $2.5 million annually to its maintenance account, known as “White House Repair and Restoration.”

Since Trump took office, the administration has directed $875 million to that account, public budget records show.

“That is incredibly unusual,” said Cerin Lindgrensavage, counsel for Protect Democracy, an advocacy group that is suing the Trump administration for allegedly withholding public information about federal spending.

To assemble funding in that account, the White House budget office authorized a series of transfers from the U.S. Secret Service and the White House Military Office totaling $500 million, planning and budget documents indicate, while an additional $305 million came from private donations. The documents reviewed by the Post show another $70 million directed to that account but do not identify the source.

Most of the $415 million in Secret Service funding was directed to the account in June after Trump allies on Capitol Hill were unable to pass legislation that would have allocated $400 million toward the East Wing and the visitor screening facility.

That Secret Service funding was appropriated by Congress in part to recruit and train Secret Service agents, the Post previously reported, raising concerns from members of both parties on Capitol Hill that the administration was improperly using funds.

After his confirmation hearing in June, Hal Duncan, Trump’s pick to be deputy budget officer, wrote in response to questions from Sen. Gary Peters (D., Mich.) that using the money for White House construction was consistent with the Secret Service’s mission because the project “includes security enhancements related to the East Wing Modernization Project, to include structural hardening.”

Ingle, the White House spokesman, told the Post that the ballroom itself would be paid for by $400 million in private donations and that it was appropriate for the Secret Service and the White House Military Office to be involved in providing security infrastructure on the campus.

“Recent events such as the foiled attack on the historic UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House proves exactly why the East Wing Modernization Project is severely needed for large scale events, which include drone proof structures and drone ports among other critical security enhancements,” Ingle said.

A Secret Service spokesman referred questions to the White House.

The Constitution reserves for Congress the power to decide how tax dollars should be spent. The White House budget office is permitted to move funds from one account to another, for purposes that are consistent with the original appropriation, but experts said the extent to which the Trump administration has relied on such transfers is unusual.

“If the executive can do anything they want with appropriated funds, then the executive can do anything they want, period,” said Joe Carlile, who served as an associate director of the Office of Management and Budget during the Biden administration and now runs a firm that analyzes federal appropriations data.

In scope, Trump’s plans rival those of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who oversaw the completion of the East Wing in 1942. Trump’s vision dwarfs all White House construction projects since, according to Ed Lengel, former chief historian for the White House Historical Association.

Roosevelt’s successor, Harry S. Truman, carried out what Lengel said was the most extensive overhaul of the private residence of the White House, where the president and his family live. At Truman’s request, Congress approved around $80 million in today’s dollars to refurbish and bolster the structure, which had fallen into disrepair, and established a six-person commission to oversee the work.

To fund the most recent major White House construction project, in 2009 the Obama administration requested $376 million over multiple years for electrical upgrades and structural repairs to the East and West wings. Congress appropriated money over the next several years to fund the work, and it was largely managed by the General Services Administration, which typically oversees government real estate projects.

The federal lawsuit now headed to the Supreme Court alleges that the Trump administration illegally circumvented Congress when it demolished the East Wing in December. In response, government lawyers argued that the president is permitted by law to spend funds on “the care, maintenance, repair, alteration, refurnishing, improvement” of the executive mansion.

The D.C. Circuit court disagreed, upholding a lower court’s decision.

“Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help,” the judges wrote.

As President Donald Trump secretly left an Air Force One jet on a catering truck last month in response to a potential Iranian assassination threat in Turkey, he was accompanied by some of his most loyal and longest-serving aides but no cabinet officials.

Other passengers on the truck included Dan Scavino, the White House deputy chief of staff; Natalie Harp, the president’s executive assistant; and Walt Nauta, the director of Oval Office operations, according to a U.S. official familiar with the operation and corroborating material reviewed by the Washington Post. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

A few lower-profile aides also were present, but the group did not include Secretary of State Marco Rubio or other officials at the highest level of the government, according to the official and the material. Together, those aboard the catering truck moved under concealment from the legacy Air Force One aircraft to a smaller Air Force C-32A before flying to Britain separately from the White House press corps and senior officials.

The account adds a new level of understanding to a July 8 operation that was first reported by the Post on Monday and has triggered calls from congressional Democrats for an immediate briefing. White House officials withheld the secret move from journalists traveling with the president that day and for more than a month afterward.

Among those on the smaller jet was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who boarded the C-32A using external stairs in a manner that made him look like the senior-most official on the flight, the Post reported Monday.

Scavino, Harp, and Nauta were among an inner circle of supporters who worked for Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida during the four years between his presidencies, after many other officials who served in the first Trump White House distanced themselves following his two impeachments and multiple criminal investigations.

Other senior administration officials, military personnel, Secret Service agents, and journalists remained on the legacy Air Force One plane, which had been deemed too risky for the president’s travel.

More than a month after the operation and two days after the Post first revealed the ruse involving the military aircraft, the White House has declined to say which administration officials remained on that jumbo jet, which the White House falsely claimed Trump used to leave Turkey.

In his first public comments about the operation, Trump said the decision for him to take an alternative flight was made by the Secret Service.

“It’s really just up to Secret Service. I just follow what they like to do,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews on Tuesday night. “They wanted me to go on a different flight, a different plane, equal safety. … I do what they say.”

It remains unclear whether all the top administration officials involved were aware they were flying on a different plane than the president or whether they, like the reporters assigned to be in the pool covering him, were kept in the dark.

When asked Tuesday why it was too dangerous for him to fly on the legacy Air Force One but not the press, Trump asserted that he still faced a greater threat than those on the other plane.

“The plane that I was on was at greater risk,” Trump said. “Because that would be the plane that I think that they would be more likely to go for.”

The White House did not provide the media with a list of passengers leaving Turkey — information that it commonly does share. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Rubio were among the officials listed on the manifest on the way to Turkey, where they attended a NATO summit. Other officials on that flight included White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, Communications Director Steven Cheung, deputy national security adviser Michael Needham and staff secretary Will Scharf, who was promoted this week to White House counsel.

Scavino, Harp, and Nauta did not respond to requests for comment about accompanying Trump on the catering truck and the ensuing flight from Ankara to Britain.

Scavino has worked for Trump for more than a decade, managing his social media presence and running the White House Presidential Personnel Office. Harp, known as the “human printer,” constantly accompanies Trump with hard copies of emails, news articles, and social media posts. Nauta, a Navy veteran who served as a valet in the first Trump White House, was a key witness in the Justice Department’s probe of Trump’s handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

The journalists flying on the old Air Force One were unaware of the operation, though they asked Trump later in the day why staff directed them to keep their windows closed throughout the flight.

Trump responded that it was “because you’re probably on a dangerous flight because of the sleaze bags that we have to deal with.” Trump said that he has a “threat all the time” against his life and that he is “number one” on Iran’s “list.”

Democrats have raised concerns that the maneuver left the press and some White House staff unwittingly in harm’s way. They’ve called for the administration to brief Congress on the operation.

“There has to be a congressional briefing because it involves not just the safety of the president,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D., Conn.) said in an interview with CNN.

“I want to know what precautions were taken to make sure that all of the passengers on that Air Force One, which was judged too dangerous for the president to fly on, what precautions were taken to keep the staff and reporters on that plane safe.”

Trump told reporters Tuesday that he was not surprised by the Secret Service operation because he faces “a lot of threats that you don’t know about.”

“Any consequential president has a lot of threats,” he said. “Non-consequential presidents don’t get threatened. And I think that I may be the most consequential.”

Progressive Democrats notched another big victory in Tuesday’s Minnesota Senate primary. But a moderate Democrat narrowly won the high-profile governor’s race in Wisconsin, defying expectations of an easy win for the party’s surging democratic socialist wing.

President Donald Trump, meanwhile, suffered a defeat after the candidate he endorsed for Minnesota governor fell short in the Republican primary.

Here are five takeaways from Tuesday’s primaries:

Crowley upsets Hong in Wisconsin governor’s race

Milwaukee County executive David Crowley defeated Francesca Hong, a State Assembly member and democratic socialist, in the Democratic primary for governor after an unusually unpredictable — and unexpectedly close — primary.

Crowley initially dropped out last month, saying it was clear he could not win. Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez dropped out the following week, citing irregularities with her campaign’s financial reports. Then Crowley returned to the race with the endorsement of Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D). After that, yet another Democrat — Mandela Barnes, a former lieutenant governor — dropped out, further scrambling the race. To add to the confusion, Barnes and Rodriguez remained on the ballot.

Hong was the latest democratic socialist to catch fire after several other democratic socialists defeated House Democrats in primaries earlier this year. She led in polling in the final weeks of the race but attracted criticism for calling years ago for the cancellation of Thanksgiving, which she described as a holiday “celebrating colonialism.” Evers warned that Hong probably could not defeat Rep. Tom Tiffany, who won the Republican nomination.

Progressives prevail in Minnesota

Another progressive, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, won the Democratic primary for an open Senate seat in Minnesota, defeating a more moderate rival, Rep. Angie Craig. Flanagan had the backing of Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and other progressives in Congress. She will face Michele Tafoya, a former sideline reporter for NBC’s “Sunday Night Football” who easily won the Republican nomination.

Republicans view Flanagan as vulnerable due to the welfare-fraud scandal that rocked the state while Flanagan was in office, and they have expressed enthusiasm that Tafoya could put the seat in play.

However, no Republican has won a Senate seat in Minnesota since 2002, and Republicans are more optimistic about flipping Democratic-held seats in Michigan, New Hampshire and Georgia than Minnesota. The Cook Political Report, which rates the race as “likely Democratic,” said it would maintain its rating regardless of which Democrat won the nomination.

Another progressive, Matt Little, won the Democratic primary to succeed Craig in the House. Little, a former state senator and Lakeville mayor, was endorsed by Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, among others.

Another Democrat falls to a primary challenge

Luke Bronin, a 47-year-old former Hartford mayor, ousted Rep. John B. Larson, 78, from his House seat representing central Connecticut in the latest generational clash to convulse the Democratic Party.

Larson is not the only older House Democrat to lose a primary this year. Reps. Al Green (D-Texas), who is 78; Adriano Espaillat (D-New York), who is 71; Diana DeGette (D-Colorado), who is 69; and Shri Thanedar (D-Michigan), who is 71, all lost primaries to younger challengers. (Green lost his seat to another House Democrat, Rep. Christian Menefee, after redistricting reshaped their districts.)

Unlike some of those races, Larson’s primary did not feature a strong ideological divide. Instead, Bronin campaigned on “energy, urgency and change,” and urged Larson to “pass the torch,” though he did not explicitly criticize Larson as too old.

Larson, in turn, tried to cast himself as more progressive than Bronin and emphasized his experience representing the solidly Democratic district.

“It’s not about age, generational change,” Larson said at a recent rally alongside Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) and labor groups. “This campaign … is about who has the record of delivering in this community.”

Lamont, 72, who is running for a third term, also faced a younger primary challenger on Tuesday. He prevailed, easily defeating state Rep. Josh Elliott, 41.

Graham, Norman advance to runoff in South Carolina

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) defeated a primary challenger in June, avoiding a runoff by winning a majority of the vote. But his sudden death last month forced South Carolina to hold a second Republican primary, pitting Graham’s sister, Sen. Darline Graham — whom Gov. Henry McMaster named to succeed him — against nine other Republicans.

Graham won 33 percent of the vote on Tuesday, leading her rivals. But she did not win a majority of the vote, forcing an Aug. 25 runoff. She will face Rep. Ralph Norman, who trailed Graham with 25 percent of the vote.

Trump endorsed Graham ahead of the primary, giving her an edge in the runoff — but it’s not clear whether it will be enough to defeat Norman.

Consider what happened in the Republican primary for South Carolina governor. Trump endorsed Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, who made the June runoff along with Alan Wilson, the state attorney general. When it appeared that Evette might lose to Wilson ahead of the runoff, though, Trump also endorsed Wilson, allowing him to claim victory days later when Wilson won.

Trump could be more reluctant to back Norman, who endorsed former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley over Trump in 2024 in the presidential primary. It is also unclear whether Rep. Russell Fry — who finished third in the primary — will endorse Norman or Graham.

Asked Tuesday night whether he would campaign for Graham in South Carolina, Trump told reporters, “I think so.” He added that he also liked “the other people” in the race, without naming them.

“They’re all Trumpers,” he said.

Norman told The Washington Post last week that he wasn’t sure Trump would issue a dual endorsement again. “I think people see it for what it is,” Norman said. “Double endorsement, really, is problematic to me.”

But, he added, “I’d love to have it at any time.”

Lindell loses primary despite Trump’s endorsement

Trump endorsed Mike Lindell, the MyPillow chief executive who enthusiastically supported his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, for governor of Minnesota.

But Trump’s endorsement wasn’t enough. Lisa Demuth, the state House speaker, defeated Lindell on Tuesday. She will face Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who easily won the Democratic nomination, in November.

Lindell’s loss was the latest blow to Trump’s endorsement record. The candidates he backed for governor in Georgia and Iowa also lost. So did Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tennessee) and Amir Hassan, whom Trump backed for an open House seat in Michigan.

Other Trump picks prevailed on Tuesday.

Graham led in South Carolina. Tiffany won in Wisconsin. Michael Alfonso won the Republican primary for a House seat in northern Wisconsin that his father-in-law, Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy, once represented. And former congressman Jerry L. Carl and state Rep. Rhett Marques won primaries for House seats in Alabama that the state legislature redrew earlier this year following a Supreme Court ruling that weakened the Voting Rights Act.

Natalie Allison, Matthew Choi and Ben Binday contributed to this report.