Ted Cruz left family trip to Greece amid deadly Texas flash floods
The senator said he spoke with state officials, including Gov. Greg Abbott, and President Donald Trump by phone on July 4. Cruz then "promptly" booked a return flight, according to his office.
He departed Athens Sunday morning and landed in Texas that evening, Cruz's spokesperson Macarena Martinez said, without specifying the exact time of the flight.
By Monday, Cruz was in Kerr County, the site of much of the destruction, for an official briefing.
"Texas is grieving right now," Cruz said. "The pain, the shock of what has transpired these last few days has broken the heart of our state."
As of July 8, more than 100 people have been confirmed dead, including 27 children and counselors from a girls' summer camp in the area. Ten campers and one counselor remain missing, as search efforts are ongoing.
At the same Kerrville conference July 7, Cruz criticized "partisan games" in the wake of weather-related disasters.
"There will naturally be a period of retrospection where you look back and say, 'Ok, what exactly transpired, what was the timeline and what could have been done differently to prevent this loss of life?'" Cruz said. "That's a natural process. I think it should not happen in a bitter and partisan sense, but it should happen in a reasonable sense of saying, what lessons can we learn?"
News of Cruz's trip abroad was first reported July 7 and drew comparisons to a 2021 incident in which the senator fled the state for Cancún, Mexico, in the midst of an ongoing winter storm. Cruz said at the time the trip was "obviously a mistake."
His pre-planned trip to Athens over July 4 followed days of debate and voting in the Senate over Trump's sweeping tax, spending and policy legislation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
What would it take for Elon Musk to create a new political party in America?
On the heels of the Fourth of July -- and amid his feud with President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans over the president's tax policy bill -- tech billionaire Elon Musk announced plans for a brand new political party, dubbed "America Party," to represent what he called "the 80% in the middle." Musk, who recently left his temporary government post as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency, told his X followers that his new party will "give you back your freedom." In a series of posts over the weekend, Musk said his party would use "extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield" to target "2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts," which he believes "would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws." So what would it take for Musk to launch his third-party effort? Here's an overview. Getting on the ballot To start, Musk would have to get his party on the ballots in the states where he wants to compete -- each with its own process for qualifying. In many states -- including Kentucky, where the race to fill retiring Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell's open seat in 2026 is heating up -- a party-designated candidate must win a nomination from a state-recognized political party that has received a certain percentage of votes in the previous presidential election -- or else a candidate has to run as an independent or a write-in candidate. In other states, the America Party's name itself could present a problem -- like in New York, where state law prohibits political parties from having the word "American," or any part of it, as part of their party names, according to Election Law Blog. Bankrolling these state-level efforts would take significant resources. Experts would be needed to navigate each state's election laws and political systems in order to identify and nominate promising candidates, and canvassers would have to gather thousands to tens of thousands of signatures for each candidate to get them on the ballot. Traditionally, candidates and their parties spearhead these operations, working together to strategize signature-gathering, voter registration, and campaign fundraising and spending. But Musk's America Party is unlikely to become a certified political party anytime soon, because the Federal Election Commission, which reviews political organizations' qualification as political parties, has not been in quorum to do so since a commissioner resigned in April, leaving the agency with just three commissioners. FEC commissioners can only be appointed by President Trump himself. It's not yet clear if Musk has filed any paperwork for his America Party, and an FEC spokesperson declined to comment on whether the agency has received any paperwork from Musk's team. Going the PAC route Faced with the long odds of gaining party certification, some election experts say that Musk, at least for the time being, could focus on House and Senate candidates through a super PAC. That's because ballot access for congressional races is governed by the states -- not the federal government -- so the America Party could still put its designated candidates on the ballot without the FEC's certification, as long as they pass state qualifications. And because super PACs are unconstrained by fundraising or spending limits, an America Party super PAC could be funded by unlimited donations from supporters including Musk himself, and could independently spend an unlimited amount of money in support of its candidates. The only catch is that super PACs are unable to work directly with campaigns the way FEC-certified political parties can -- but election lawyer Matt Sanderson of Caplin and Drysdale told ABC News that the efficiency of a super PAC can actually outweigh the advantages of a political party. "Form a super PAC, just call yourselves a political party -- that's not against the rules. The FEC blessing is not needed," said Sanderson, who was legal counsel for the No Labels movement during the 2024 election. "I actually don't think it makes a lick of sense in this day and age to try to form yourself as a national party committee." "They can call themselves whatever they want," Sanderson said, explaining that the FEC doesn't prohibit a super PAC from calling itself a political party as long as it doesn't coordinate directly with campaigns. "Just skip right past this very cumbersome and not-all-that-beneficial process, hold themselves out as a political party, and move forward." Joining forces Additionally, Musk could enlist the help of existing third parties, like the Libertarian Party or the Green Party. However, third parties historically have had little success in gaining office in the United States. During the 2024 election, the centrist group No Labels led a third-party presidential movement but ended its efforts months before the Republican and Democratic national conventions, after failing to find their candidate before their self-imposed deadline. Longstanding Libertarian Party nominee Chase Oliver ran in the 2024 presidential race but received less than 0.5% of the total vote. Still, a possible collaboration could be in the works: Musk has been in touch with one-time Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, who in recent days has spearheaded a third party centrist effort of his own, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to ABC News. Caleb Burns, an election lawyer at Wiley Rein, acknowledged the potential significance of obtaining an official party status through the FEC instead of bypassing that step with a super PAC -- stressing the role of a political party as a "brand for politicians." "The success of any new political party will turn on whether there are sufficient candidates -- and, by extension, members of the public -- interested in aligning with that new brand," Burns said. "If the answer is yes, then it makes sense to do everything possible to enhance and promote that brand -- which means proceeding with the organizational and legal burdens necessary to create and formalize a new political party." "The critical predicate, however, is the political question of whether or not there is sufficient interest in a new brand of politician," Burns said. "For that, it seems we will have to wait and see what Mr. Musk concludes."
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Schumer warns package to claw back funding would ‘poison' annual spending talks
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) warned in a 'Dear Colleague' letter to Democrats on Tuesday that a Republican package to claw back funding for public broadcasting and foreign aid would 'poison' any bipartisan goodwill needed to negotiate the 12 annual spending bills. Schumer argued that for Republicans to negotiate bipartisan spending deals with Democrats, which need 60 votes to pass the Senate, then to turn around and pass a partisan rescissions package that needs only a simple majority would be a blow to the regular appropriations process. 'Republicans' passage of this purely partisan proposal would be an affront to the bipartisan appropriations process,' Schumer warned in his letter, adding that it would be 'absurd' for GOP lawmakers to then 'expect Democrats to act as business as usual and engage in a bipartisan appropriations process to fund government.' Schumer cited reporting suggesting Trump administration officials promised conservatives on Capitol Hill to defund certain federal programs in exchange for their support of the sweeping tax and spending bill, which President Trump signed into law July 4. 'This is beyond bait and switch — it is a bait and poison-to-kill. Senate Republicans must reject this partisan path and instead work with Democrats on a bipartisan appropriations process,' he said. The Senate has until July 18 to vote on the rescissions package Trump sent to Capitol Hill, which would claw back $9.4 billion in congressionally authorized funding. It would revoke $1.1 billion in funding for PBS, NPR and $8.3 billion in foreign aide. It narrowly passed the House by a vote of 214 to 212 last month. 'Republicans are, in effect, proposing Congress negotiate bipartisan deals in the Committee room, while they retreat to a backroom to rubberstamp President Trump's purely partisan scheme that only needs a simple majority to pass to tear up those very same agreements,' Schumer wrote. Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) has voiced concerns about cuts to global health programs, and senators expect the House-passed package to be modified when it comes to the Senate floor. 'I do not support the rescission for PEPFAR and global health programs,' Collins told reporters last month when asked about the rescissions proposal. Schumer on Tuesday urged Collins and other GOP senators to reject the rescissions package and put together bipartisan deals on appropriations for fiscal 2026, warning that a failure to work in good faith would have long-lasting implications for Congress. 'How Republicans answer this question on rescissions and other forthcoming issues will have grave implications for the Congress, the very role of the legislative branch, and, more importantly, our country,' he wrote. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Here's How Much Every Tax Bracket Would Gain — Or Lose — Under Trump's ‘Big, Beautiful Bill'
After many months of touting the 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' President Donald Trump finally passed it with the approval of the House and Senate. Read Next: Find Out: How will it affect Americans' wallets? Most people will win because of this bill, but the Congressional Budget Office projects that lower-income households will lose some money due to the bill. The office came up with the following projections based on impacts to Social Security and Medicaid. It also assessed each state's fiscal responses to the bill and 'other spending and revenues.' The Congressional Budget Office mentions that the lowest three deciles of household income will lose from this bill. Here's the breakdown based on the net effect of the bill: Lowest 10%: -3.9% 10%-20% range: -1.2% 20%-30% range: -0.4% The lowest decile is projected to lose an average of $1,559 per year from now until 2034. The Congressional Budget Office assigned net losses of $749 and $312 per year from 2026-2034 for the next two lowest household income deciles, respectively. The Congressional Budget Office also highlighted how wealthier households are projected to benefit nicely from the bill. There isn't much of a jump until you reach the highest decile of earners. Here's the breakdown: 30%-40% range: 0.1% 40%-50% range: 0.5% 50%-60% range: 0.8% 60%-70% range: 1.1% 70%-80% range: 1.3% 80%-90% range: 1.5% 90%-100% range: 2.3% Household income for the top decile is projected to increase by $12,044 per year from 2026 to 2034. The second-highest decile is forecasted to save an additional $3,275 per year during that timeframe. The average annual change in resources per household steadily declines from there, in line with the percentages from earlier. Some low-income households that receive Social Security, Medicaid, food stamps and other benefits funded by taxpayers may get hurt, but it depends on your situation. The bill will affect people who are 19 to 64 years old without dependents and enrolled in Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act expansion. These individuals will have to work 80 hours per month to remain eligible. Volunteering or taking educational programs in that same amount of time will also keep you eligible. There are exemptions for people who are physically disabled, parents with children younger than 14 and pregnant women. High earners naturally benefit the most from tax cuts since they pay the majority of taxes. The middle class and upper class should see their resources go up as the bill's policies are enacted. More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 4 Housing Markets That Have Plummeted in Value Over the Past 5 Years 25 Places To Buy a Home If You Want It To Gain Value This article originally appeared on Here's How Much Every Tax Bracket Would Gain — Or Lose — Under Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill'
