Hawley touts provision in Big, Beautiful Bill that has even hard-left Democrats celebrating
Hawley has fought for the passage of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) since the program was canceled in 2023. It has now been re-upped and greatly expanded thanks to persistent bipartisan advocacy.
Among the cross-aisle attendees was former Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., who was among the most aggressive critics of Republicans while in Congress. Hawley embraced Bush at the event, however.
"Cori, thank you. We would not be here without you and your work," he said, recounting their multiple prior efforts to pass the legislation.
Also at the event was Rep. Wesley Bell, D-Mo., who voted against the OBBB, but said he supports the RECA legislation. Navajo Nation president Buu Nygren also attended the event and recounted the impact of nuclear testing on his community.
The bill applies to sites across the country where Americans, civilian, military and members of the Navajo Nation, were exposed to radiation due to nuclear weapons testing and the storing of nuclear waste.
The event took place at one such site: St. Cin Park in St. Louis. The surrounding area has been determined to be a cancer hotzone thanks to the storing of nuclear waste nearby.
The legislation applies to similar sites across Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky and Alaska, but advocates of the bill and Hawley himself say there remains more work to be done.
"This is a great first step, but there is definitely more to do," NAACP St. Louis president John Bowman told Fox at the event. "This is a good day, but there are better days to come."
Bowman and others highlighted some zip codes that aren't eligible for the compensation, and they say work needs to be done to expand the documentation Americans can use to prove they qualify for compensation.
Dawn Chapman, founder of Just Moms STL, an advocacy group devoted to the radiation exposure issue, told Fox that the process – while difficult – reinforced her belief in the legislative process.
She recounted seeing staffers from opposite sides of the aisle celebrating and sharing high-fives after the bill was passed. The bill passed through the Senate three times in recent years before finally making it to the president's desk.
"The system still works. It does," she said. "The media just often doesn't share it."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This Viral Debate Clip Highlights A Scary Reality About Today's Conservatives
A viral clip from a debate between political commentator and journalist Mehdi Hasan and a self-proclaimed fascist is bringing to light some troubling realities about the conservative movement and the general level of public discourse today. Hasan appeared in the latest episode of Jubilee's 'Surrounded' series titled '1 Progressive vs 20 Far-Right Conservatives,' during which the former MSNBC host at one point debated a participant by the name of Connor. When asked to describe his ideal vision of the U.S., Connor referenced deporting people and then expressed a desire for a 'benevolent' autocrat who puts an end to American democracy. He also insisted that he would not be harmed by such a dictator and started to quote Nazi theorist Carl Schmitt, leading Hasan to ask if he was a fan of the Nazis. 'We may have to rename this show because you're a little bit more than a far-right Republican.'@mehdirhasan called out a self-proclaimed 'fascist' on the show 'Surrounded' where he debated 20 far-right Republicans. — Zeteo (@zeteo_news) July 20, 2025 'I frankly don't care about being called a Nazi at all,' Connor responded, later adding, 'Well, they persecuted the church a little bit. I'm not a fan of that.' Asked about Nazi persecution of Jews, he said, 'I certainly don't support anyone's human dignity being assaulted.' And when Hasan suggested that his views make him a fascist, he proudly replied, 'Yeah, I am.' This particular exchange highlights a number of disturbing aspects of the modern far-right movement, particularly the extremist vision of government and dangerous delusions about how such a system would impact people. 'I don't think that it is terribly rational to believe that one couldn't be harmed by a benevolent dictator, should one rise to take power,' Jacob Neiheisel, associate professor of political science at the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences, told HuffPost. 'Even 'benevolent' dictators have rarely remained so throughout their tenure in office and have a track record of hurting even those who are closest to them.' When Connor shared his vision of government under a 'benevolent' autocrat, he stated, 'I'm not going to be a part of the group that he kills.' But this viewpoint is particularly misguided and dangerous, in addition to callous. 'Excessive executive power is always dangerous because of the potential for capriciousness,' said Todd Belt, professor and political management program director at The Graduate School of Political Management at The George Washington University. 'The autocrat who is friendly to you one day may not be the next. Also, power corrupts.' With this in mind, Neiheisel emphasized the value of a critical and engaged citizenry. 'I would also say that a healthy distrust of power is, on balance, a positive orientation to have in a democratic public,' he said. To maintain this kind of critical thinking and healthy distrust, however, the public must be educated and informed about historic events and politics. 'I think it is terrifying that fascism seems to be making a comeback among some young people who are terribly misinformed about what awful, immoral, murderous regimes they were,' said John Jost, a professor of psychology and politics at New York University. 'This guy seems to think that Francisco Franco was a good Catholic guy, but he is either completely clueless or in massive ideological denial. Even the slightest bit of research reveals that Franco killed much more than 100,000 innocent people, and it took many decades for the Spanish people to get over it, if indeed they have.' Jost published a paper in September titled 'Both-Sideology Endangers Democracy and Social Science' ― in which he points to evidence that 'false, misleading, and poor-quality information is more likely to populate conservative-rightist than liberal-leftist media ecosystems.' Thus, misleading and incorrect information about dictators like Franco can more easily spread and give rise to troubling views on government. 'The kind of rhetoric on display from the person Hasan was questioning appears to have become more prevalent on the right in recent years,' Neiheisel said. 'Although he doesn't say as much, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the individual in the clip is motivated by a desire to see some flavor of Christian dominion or theonomy come into practice in the United States.' He added that many others have come to support autocratic rule without a religious motivation ― as seen with influential far-right blogger Curtis Yarvin's argument for an American monarchy. 'I think that pro-fascist guy's comment about having a benevolent dictator speaks to a bit of a larger phenomenon that's happening in the United States where some portion of the electorate hungers for a strongman,' said Matt Dallek, a political historian and professor at The Graduate School of Political Management at The George Washington University. He pointed to a far-right vision of an all-powerful figure who expels immigrants, fosters a more white and native-born population, and unleashes law enforcement to go after alleged bad actors like 'the corrupt evil Deep State' with Democrats and 'Never Trumpers' and whoever the enemy of the moment is. 'That sentiment has become increasingly mainstream over the past few years ― that if you are a citizen, you're native born, you're white, you're a man and you have resources, then the authoritarian forces that this benevolent dictator will unleash will only target the bad guys, not you,' Dallek said. This delusional viewpoint in service of a racist, extremist and even murderous vision for the future suggests public discourse might be reaching new lows ― which begs the question of whether these kinds of 'debates' involving extremists are in any way helpful or productive for the participants, viewers or society at large. 'I'm not sure how helpful these types of debates are,' Neiheisel said. 'The only possible way in which the exchange between Hasan and Connor could be seen as a normative good from my perspective is that it might showcase that there actually are people who believe what Connor professes to believe about what government ought to look like. Acknowledging that there are those who would turn the country into more of an autocratic state is the first step en route to understanding why this impulse exists.' Belt noted that rather than a censoring or 'cancelling' approach, the 'Surrounded' debate setup takes the position of 'counterspeech' ― responding directly to harmful or offensive speech and countering it with more speech. 'While this approach aligns with constitutional values theoretically, I think that in practice it does not achieve the thoughtfulness of dialogue implicit in the counterspeech doctrine,' he said. 'The incessant interruptions make the video look more like a game of who can score the most points by making the other look as radical as fast as they can, and that's not really thoughtful dialogue. I think this video appeals to audiences who are looking for someone to take the other side 'down a peg' ― there's a real schadenfreude appeal to this type of video.' He added that progressives disillusioned with the Democratic Party's 'milquetoast' response to Trump's second term might find particular satisfaction in these kinds of viral clips and seeing someone take their arguments more forcefully to the other side. 'On one hand, the old Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis shared the idea that 'sunlight is the best disinfectant,' and typically those who believe in free speech believe you counter bad speech with good speech,' Dallek said. 'So I understand the impulse of taking on someone with really hateful, horrific views, and trying to expose that person for holding those extremist positions.' On the other hand, he believes it is 'a little bit nuts' to platform someone who is a self-proclaimed fascist and seemingly refuses to condemn Hitler and the Holocaust. Sure, this choice might draw attention and traffic to your clip and to your platform, but at what cost to humanity? (For his part, Hasan has said the producers did not communicate the extreme nature of the conservative participants' views to him ahead of his appearance.) 'I don't think much, if anything, can be gained by providing a platform and legitimizing such extreme, repugnant views via a debate with someone who is so far out because you're helping put these horrific ideas ― which have mostly been confined to the fringe since World War II ― into the mainstream,' Dallek said. 'And in the age of the internet and social media, some people will listen to others who express hateful or conspiratorial rhetoric, and they will act on these ideas in violent ways. So it's really kind of perilous and a way of further debasing a public discourse that has already been debased quite dramatically.' He emphasized that he has a lot of respect for nonprofits, civic organizations and individuals who attempt to bridge divides in the United States by having conversations with right-wing Trump supporters in which they seek to listen and understand why people believe systems are rigged or corrupt. 'I think that kind of dialogue can be productive and is important, but it's very different from what seems to me to be an almost Jerry Springer-esque pie-throwing contest with a self-described fascist,' Dallek noted. 'That's a bad idea if you want to have a serious conversation about the divisions in the U.S. The country is awash in hateful, dehumanizing rhetoric, and these ideas have become more mainstream. Platforming a self-described fascist only serves to further that process.' Related... Former MSNBC Host's Reaction To Right-Winger Calling Self A 'Fascist' Goes Viral Trump Called MAGA Supporters 'Stupid' — But Do They Even Care? Experts Weigh In. Trump Leveled A Baffling Threat At Rosie O'Donnell — Experts Explain Why It's Truly Terrifying
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lawler won't run for New York governor; Stefanik plans to announce after November election
Jul. 23—Rep. Mike R. Lawler will not run for governor of New York next year, clearing the way for Rep. Elise M. Stefanik to potentially clinch the Republican nomination without a primary. After months of teasing a potential run, previously pledging to announce a decision in June that did not come on time, Lawler announced on Wednesday morning that he wouldn't be seeking higher office next year and would instead run for reelection in his Hudson Valley swing district. "I've decided that the right thing to do for me, my family and my district is to run for re-election," he told the Fox network. That clears the way for his leading opposition for the GOP nomination — Stefanik. Lawler has previously said he would not push the party into a primary, which would force the two candidates to compete for conservative votes, commit to conservative positions and spend significant sums of money before starting the real competition against the Democratic candidate. In a statement shortly after Lawler's announcement went wide, Stefanik lauded Lawler as an "effective and hardworking Republican for New York's 17th Congressional district" and said she would announce her own plans once this year's general election is over. "I am focused on supporting strong Republican local and county candidates on the ballot this November to lay the groundwork with a strong team for next year," she said. "I will make a final decision and announcement after this year's November election which we are all focused on." Stefanik has been similarly teasing a potential run for the seat, but she has gained more traction than Lawler. While the Hudson Valley congressman has been relatively quiet in his positioning, meeting behind closed doors with Republicans and only infrequently criticizing Democratic Gov. Kathleen C. Hochul, Stefanik has had much higher profile visits and hosted a press conference after meeting with the state Republican delegation earlier this year. Stefanik has criticized Hochul far more frequently than her supposed competition for reelection in the 21st District. And in perhaps the most significant sign that Lawler wouldn't be running for governor, President Donald J. Trump endorsed him for reelection to the House earlier this year. Lawler met with Trump again last week ahead of his announcement. Nassau County Executive Bruce R. Blakeman has also considered a run for governor, but has far less name recognition and fundraising prowess than Stefanik does. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is headed into a likely primary between Hochul and her Lt. Gov. Antonio Delgado. In early polling, it appears Hochul is likely to ignore Delgado's challenge and forge ahead to a victory. Hochul and her team seemed to revel in the news Wednesday. "Of course he doesn't have the spine to face me," Hochul said on X, formerly Twitter. In a separate post, Hochul showed an image of a Milk Bone dog treat box, adorned with a sticky note with Lawler's name on it. "A treat for Donald Trump's good boy," the post reads.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump was told by Bondi his name appeared multiple times in Epstein files: Report
According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, Attorney General Pam Bondi and her deputy Todd Blanche informed President Donald Trump in May that his name appeared multiple times in the government's files on Jeffrey Epstein that the Department of Justice and the FBI reviewed. The officials told Trump of their plan not to release any additional documents, the report says, because the material contained child pornography and the personal information of victims. President Trump, according to the Journal, said he would defer to the Justice Department's decision not to release additional files on Epstein, the wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who died by suicide in jail in 2019. MORE: Florida judge rules Epstein grand jury records will remain sealed According to the report, Trump was also informed that the names of many other high-profile individuals appeared in the documents, which the Journal reported was not evidence of wrongdoing. The Trump administration did not say anything publicly about the decision not to release additional files until July, when it angered many of Trump's supporters by announcing that it would not release any additional files after earlier promising to do so. The DOJ and FBI stated that their review "did not uncover evidence" that could lead to further criminal charges. When asked by ABC News on July 15 what Bondi told Trump about the review -- "specifically, did she tell you at all that your name appeared in the files?" Trump responded: "No, no, she's -- she's given us just a very quick briefing," before making baseless claims that the files were created by some of his political foes. Asked by ABC News following the publication of the Journal article if the president had been told his name is in the files, White House spokesperson Steven Cheung, said, "The fact is that the President kicked him out of his club for being a creep. This is nothing more than a continuation of the fake news stories concocted by the Democrats and the liberal media, just like the Obama Russiagate scandal, which President Trump was right about." In a statement, Bondi and Blanche said, "The DOJ and FBI reviewed the Epstein Files and reached the conclusion set out in the July 6 memo. Nothing in the files warranted further investigation or prosecution, and we have filed a motion in court to unseal the underlying grand jury transcripts. As part of our routine briefing, we made the President aware of the findings." FBI Director Kash Patel, who prior to joining the new administration called for the release of all Epstein files, said in a statement, "The memo released on July 6th is consistent with the thorough review conducted by the FBI and DOJ. The criminal leakers and Fake News media tries tirelessly to undermine President Trump with smears and lies, and this story is no different." Solve the daily Crossword
