logo
In Washington and across the country, lawmakers express safety fears: From the Politics Desk

In Washington and across the country, lawmakers express safety fears: From the Politics Desk

NBC News17-06-2025

Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail.
In today's edition, we explore the security concerns elected officials are harboring in the wake of the Minnesota shootings. Plus, Steve Kornacki explains why New York City's Democratic mayoral primary may not be the end of the Andrew Cuomo-Zohran Mamdani battle.
— Adam Wollner
In Washington and across the country, lawmakers express safety fears
After the targeted shootings of two Minnesota lawmakers, elected officials serving in Capitol buildings in Washington and around the country are growing increasingly worried about the level of protection they receive.
In Congress: Law enforcement officials have been holding security briefings with members of Congress over the past several days, Scott Wong, Julie Tsirkin and Melanie Zanona report. Federal lawmakers have been told that they can spend money from their office budgets on home security systems and campaign cash on private security. Only a handful of congressional leaders get 24-hour protection from Capitol Police security details. Members can request extra protection, which is assigned based on whether Capitol Police determine there is an active threat.
But so far, those assurances have done little to calm nervous lawmakers, who have been harboring such concerns amid a string of violent attacks on American politicians over the past 15 years — a period that has included assassination attempts on a presidential candidate and members of Congress and a riot at the U.S. Capitol.
House Democratic leaders have asked Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to boost members' official budgets 'to support additional safety and security measures in every single office.' And over the weekend, House Republicans held a tense call that featured rank-and-file members' expressing concerns about their safety when they are in their districts.
'It's scary as sh--,' a senior House lawmaker said, describing how members of Congress feel after the Minnesota shootings.
In the states: Even the limited protection available to the average member of Congress goes far beyond what is available to most state lawmakers, Adam Edelman reports.
Outside of their state capital complexes, state legislators have little to no security protection. No state offers proactive security to members of its legislature, though law enforcement will typically step in if there are credible threats.
And despite the renewed attention to the issue, lawmakers fear little will ultimately be done that can make a meaningful difference, given that in many states, such positions are effectively part-time jobs with small budgets.
'We are constantly out there, vulnerable. Whether I'm volunteering somewhere, knocking doors for someone, starting to run my own campaign, I'm out there, vulnerable,' said Arizona state Rep. Stephanie Simacek, a Democrat.
, by Megan Lebowitz and Kelly O'Donnell
GOP Sen. Mike Lee deletes social media posts about the Minnesota shooting after facing criticism, by Dareh Gregorian
Political violence thrusts 2028 candidates onto the national stage, by Natasha Korecki and Jonathan Allen
No matter the result of the Democratic primary, NYC's mayoral election could get chaotic
Analysis by Steve Kornacki
New York City is overwhelmingly Democratic, so it seems logical that the winner of the party's mayoral primary next week will be a shoo-in for November. But it may not be that simple, as a confluence of factors could give rise to an unpredictable, multicandidate general election campaign.
Start with the two leaders in the Democratic race, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and state Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani. Each carries significant political baggage.
Cuomo, of course, resigned as governor in a sexual harassment scandal in 2021 and has faced sustained criticism of his Covid pandemic policies, especially relating to nursing homes. Even within his own party, Cuomo is a lightning rod, with a recent poll finding that over 40% of Democrats have unfavorable views of him. And Mamdani is a democratic socialist with a history of far-left pronouncements that are now being featured in attack ads from the Cuomo side.
If either wins the Democratic primary, there figure to be plenty of unhappy customers within the party and — potentially — among general election voters who would be open to an alternative. And if one falls just short in the primary, either Cuomo and Mamdani could decide to turn around and take another shot in the general election. Each already has a ready-made vehicle to do so.
Cuomo has created his own third party, which he is calling the Fight and Deliver Party. Officially, he did that to give himself a second spot on the November ballot if he is the Democratic nominee. Under New York's peculiar election laws, third parties can run major-party nominees as their own candidates. Cuomo's position is that he plans to be both the Democratic nominee and the Fight and Deliver nominee.
But if Cuomo were to lose to Mamdani in the primary, there'd be nothing to stop him from simply running as the Fight and Deliver candidate. In fact, his father, Mario, made that very move back in 1977, when he lost the Democratic mayoral primary to Ed Koch but then ran as the Liberal Party candidate in the fall.
Meanwhile, the Working Families Party, which is closely aligned with progressive Democrats, has already indicated that it won't back Cuomo even if he is the Democratic nominee. The WFP has also encouraged its backers to make Mamdani their top choice in the Democratic primary. That raises the possibility that Mamdani could run as the WFP's general election nominee even if he loses to Cuomo next week. For that matter, given its antipathy to Cuomo, the WFP might also seek out another high-profile candidate if Mamdani isn't interested.
If Cuomo or Mamdani do opt to mount third-party bids in the fall, it could open the door to chaos, since other candidates already loom.
The current mayor, Eric Adams, is bypassing the Democratic primary and already has created two vehicles for the general election, the 'EndAntiSemitism' and 'Safe&Affordable' parties. Adams, who faced federal corruption charges before President Donald Trump pardoned him, has his own political baggage but still retains some support, particularly from Black voters. That base, along with his incumbency, would make him a factor in a multicandidate general election.
Republicans also have their own ballot line and are set to nominate Curtis Sliwa, who was their nominee against Adams in 2021. And a former federal prosecutor, Jim Walden, is running his own independent bid. He is positioning himself as a centrist and says he was motivated to run after Adams was indicted last year.
Of course, it's possible that the Democratic primary result will be decisive enough that the loser stands down for the general election. That would all but ensure the winner a glide path to Gracie Mansion. It's also theoretically possible that another candidate besides Cuomo or Mamdani catches fire in the final week, claims the nomination and unites the party.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senate holds marathon ‘vote-a-rama' on Donald Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
Senate holds marathon ‘vote-a-rama' on Donald Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'

The Guardian

time22 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Senate holds marathon ‘vote-a-rama' on Donald Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'

Update: Date: 2025-07-01T06:44:04.000Z Title: US Senate votes on amendments on Trump's 'big beautiful bill' Content: Good morning and welcome to our live coverage of US politics and the second Trump administration. The US Senate is holding a marathon vote on a sprawling budget that is vital to Donald Trump's agenda and would see sweeping tax breaks and cuts to healthcare and food programmes if passed. Senators have convened at the Capitol for a process known as 'vote-a-rama', in which lawmakers will propose amendments to the legislation over what is expected to be many hours. Democrats say the bill's tax cuts would disproportionately benefit the wealthy at the expense of social programs for lower-income Americans. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (yes, it is formally called this) is expected to add an estimated $3.3tn to the national debt over the next decade. Republicans - who control both chambers of Congress and are generally loyal to Trump - are heavily divided over how deep welfare cuts should be in order to extend tax breaks in the legislation. It is about 2.30am in Washington and it has been over 16 hours since voting began. We are expecting a result in around two and a half/ three hours time. Stay with us for all the latest developments. In other news: Tech billionaire Elon Musk, who spent more than a quarter of a billion dollars in support of Trump's candidacy, has pledged to found a new political party he called the 'America Party' and support candidates who did not back the budget bill in future elections. The Senate parliamentarian found that Republicans can include a provision that would block Medicaid funding from Planned Parenthood in the 'big, beautiful bill'. Trump signed an executive order overturning sanctions on Syria today and issued a memorandum on US policy toward Cuba. The Trump administration sued the city of Los Angeles over policies limiting city cooperation with federal immigration authorities, continuing a confrontation over Donald Trump's aggressive deportation efforts in the largely Democratic city. The Trump administration informed Harvard University that its investigation found that the university violated federal civil rights law over its treatment of Jewish and Israeli students, putting its federal funding further at risk. Trump will host Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House on 7 July. Trump wrote to Fed chair Jerome Powell again urging him to lower interest rates.

This July 4th in Trump's America, our patriotism is protest
This July 4th in Trump's America, our patriotism is protest

The Herald Scotland

time28 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

This July 4th in Trump's America, our patriotism is protest

That's certainly what he would want. If nothing else, Trump in his second term has shown Americans that fealty to him is all that matters. His lackeys in Congress parrot his language and propose bills to put the King of Mar-a-Lago's face on currency or Mount Rushmore. As Trump's un-American actions mount, we have to find our own patriotism On Thursday, June 26, journalists were scolded mercilessly by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for having the audacity to report that Trump's recent bombing of Iranian nuclear sites might not have been as successful as the president claimed. It was as close to "You must not question Dear Leader!" rhetoric as you can get without being in North Korea. He suggested that reporters - you know, the Fourth Estate, the ones responsible for holding the powerful accountable - take the president's word for things, suggesting: "Wave an American flag. Be proud of what we accomplished." Some will follow the administration's instructions, of course. Trump will always have his hardcore MAGA base, and that base will never deign to question his infallibility. They, like Trump, will wrap themselves tight in the American flag and use it as a shield to deflect inconvenient things like facts or criticism. They will, as Hegseth and Trump did, claim any notion that a military action fell short of its goals is a direct insult to our brave soldiers. Opinion: From massive protests to a puny parade, America really let Donald Trump down Patriotism in the age of Trump, for many, is standing up to the nonsense But what of the rest of us? You know, the ones in the majority, assuming you care to believe public polling that shows Trump's favorability well underwater and negative views of his decision to bomb Iran, his stewardship of the economy and his draconian acts against migrants. What does our patriotism, in this rather pivotal moment in American history, look like? How do we celebrate America - the right-now version of America - when democracy looks as fragile as a cracked sheet of thin ice over a warming pond? I imagine everyone will have a different answer, and I'm not here to claim I know best. But as a critic of Trump and all he has done to mangle this country and its sense of decency, I can share my form of Fourth of July patriotism. Share your view: What does patriotism look like to you? Tell us. | Opinion Forum I still love this country. That's why I mercilessly mock the rubes in charge. It involves still loving the heck out of this country, and celebrating the fact that, at least for the moment, I'm free to tell Hegseth to take his little flag-waving idea and his "How dare you question our authority!" attitude and pound sand. It involves sharing a quote from Trump talking about himself, Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in the wake of the Iran bombings: "We feel like warriors." Then it involves using space in my column to mercilessly ridicule the absurdity of that quote: A warrior? You're as much a warrior as I am a duck, and buddy, my hide is featherless and my feet aren't remotely webbed. You bone-spurred your way out of the Vietnam War and quite possibly bombed Iran because people made fun of your sad birthday parade. Get over yourself. Authoritarians are sensitive little flowers - give 'em hell Authoritarian types like Trump hate mockery. Their fragile egos can't bear it. So I, like many non-MAGA Americans, give them the derision they deserve. In a country built on resistance to a monarchy and aristocrats, that is patriotic. In fact, it's almost definitionally American. We can love this country and loathe the people in charge. We can be simultaneously proud of this country and embarrassed of the things being done in its name. So my patriotism this Fourth of July week is to loudly declare that my America doesn't stand for masked federal agents grabbing migrant children and mothers and fathers off the streets and whisking them away without due process. My America is welcoming, and just, and decent. And no two-bit con-artist president is going to take away my belief that these un-American actions can and will be stopped. Nothing less American than saying a mayoral candidate should be deported Republican Rep. Andy Ogles sent a letter Thursday to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi declaring that Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic primary winner in New York City's mayoral race, is "an antisemitic, socialist, communist who will destroy the great City of New York" and calling for him to be deported. Aside from being baseless and laughably stupid, Ogles' letter and the intent behind it are as un-American as it gets. My patriotism will take the form of calling Ogles a sad, opportunistic dingbat and noting that future generations of his family will deny any connection to him, lest they be cast out of civil society or die of embarrassment. My America ridicules powerful dummies and stands strong in protest My America won't tolerate racists or xenophobes or clout-chasing knuckleheads who think the American dream involves trampling carelessly over others while forgetting the very things that make this country great. My America fights back against tyranny and indecency with ridicule, peaceful public protest, voting and a unified voice. I'm not happy with the state of America, and I'm particularly not happy with the array of malicious weirdos currently running the joint. But I'm not going to look at the American flag and feel ashamed. That flag still represents a country I believe to be well worth fighting for, and a set of ideas I won't let a pack of grifters and warped-brain scoundrels erase. Opinion: Trump says we have 'too many non-working holidays.' He's right. Rest is for LOSERS! On the Fourth of July, find your patriotism and live it I'm not alone in feeling this way. I know that. So in the lead-up to the booms and the colorful firework bursts and the barbecues, to the noise and sweat and the dull roar of chatter from family and friends, find your own patriotism. Speak loudly. Stand strong. And believe you have it in you to make a change. Even if it's just throwing up a middle finger to the bastards forcing us to feel like America is upside down. Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on Bluesky at @ and on Facebook at

Was Iran close to developing a nuclear weapon? Who cares
Was Iran close to developing a nuclear weapon? Who cares

The Herald Scotland

time28 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Was Iran close to developing a nuclear weapon? Who cares

We wanted to know what you thought about all this. So, we asked. Do you think Trump was right to bomb Iran? Do you think he should have waited for approval from Congress? Are you concerned about the threat of nuclear war? Hundreds of readers wrote in for this installment of USA TODAY's Opinion Forum, sharing their opinions from across the country and political spectrum. Here's what they said. Trump is immoral and unsuitable for office. But bombing Iran was right. The air strikes were the right decision. Iran cannot be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. We should believe its leaders when they say "Death to America." I should also mention that I normally vote Republican, but I've never voted for Donald Trump. I believe him to be an immoral, intemperate man unsuited for any public office. Presidents have been ordering military actions without congressional authorization for some time. However, that doesn't make it right. Still, as divided as Congress is, I don't believe he would have gotten the green light and we very much needed to act. Further retaliation by Iran is always a possibility. One has to know that once the act is completed, the other side may retaliate. Sometimes, however, the risk must be taken. While the U.S. intelligence community said Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon, the intelligence community has been wrong before. Trump is going to do whatever he wants to do. He is a bit of a loose cannon. -- Kevin O'Grady, Columbus, Ohio Trump said he'd think about it for 2 weeks, then bombs! I do not think Trump made the right decision in bombing three Iranian nuclear sites. There was no emergency and no reason to do it. He said on June 19 he was going to consider it for two weeks and then, two days later, bombs! He has no idea what that little stunt costs - to deploy those types of weapons. He did it to show that he was powerful enough to do it. He has no idea what could result from it. He is an ignoramus! I think the fact that he acted on his own, without authorization from Congress, is a good reason to impeach him. He has already walked all over Congress and the court systems, doing things he does not have the authority to do. He should be impeached. Do you want to take part in our next Forum? Join the conversation by emailing forum@ You can also follow us on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and sign up for our Opinion newsletter to stay updated on future Forum posts. In terms of him saying Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon, the U.S. intelligence community said otherwise. I think Trump is dumb and has no idea what the truth is. I am slightly concerned about Iran's nuclear capabilities or the possibility of them receiving nuclear weapons from an ally. And I am slightly concerned about the threat of nuclear war. -- Diane Whitlock, Waynesville, North Carolina Iran strikes are better than kumbaya attitudes in Congress I absolutely think Trump made the right decision in bombing the Iranian nuclear sites. Iran and many other bad state actors, and their proxies, represent existential threats to the U.S. Bad behavior must not be tolerated. We are neither empire building, nor are we regime changing in our defensive actions. I'm not in the least concerned about Trump ordering the strikes without congressional authorization. He was elected by a majority of American voters to stop the passive, kumbaya attitudes prevailing in the White House and Congress. Congress needs term limits, because the polarization is cause and effect of lobbyists being catalysts for wealth and power acquisition through longer seniority. As for the intelligence community's different assessment than Trump about how close Iran was to developing a nuclear weapon, who cares? When your public posture and oft-stated goals are the destruction of America, the degree of "close to having" is a euphemism for panty waists to wring their hands and experience angst until it's not close, but NOW. -- Robert Jarrard, Shrewsbury, Massachusetts Israel goaded Trump into military action This administration is the least equipped to make complex foreign policy decisions than any other one in this history of the U.S. At least in the first Trump administration there were some competent Cabinet officers and advisers, but now there is nobody to stop him from his worst impulses. Israel very effectively goaded Trump into this war action and it helped Trump domestically, at least in the short run, by taking attention away from his low approval ratings, the unlawful immigration raids, the protests and the lack of any tariff deals. It concerns me that Trump did not get congressional approval before the strikes. There was no urgency or exigency to having to make this decision. Even though the GOP Congress might well have rubber-stamped his decision, Trump is taking every avenue to consolidate his executive power, and Congress is aiding and abetting this by not asserting its constitutional rights. Iran has already performatively fired missiles at U.S. military installations in Qatar, with pre-warning. The supreme leader of Iran has to save face, and this might well be enough for him. I am more concerned that Trump is a loose cannon, and if he feels that his power is slipping he will escalate this to try to get a "rally round the flag" approval bump. In short, I simply do not trust him to act in the best interest of anyone but himself, certainly not in the interest of the American people. Israel has a vested interest in making it seem like a nuclear weapon is imminent. I believe the U.S. intelligence community on this. Trump notoriously refuses to hear briefings or pay any attention to actual facts, but instead relies on "his instincts," which are basically messages from Fox News. -- Patricia Gotschalk, Wailuku, Hawaii Limits on bombing helped make it acceptable I do think President Trump made the right decision in bombing the three Iranian nuclear sites. It seems like it was limited in scope to only neutralizing the nuclear threats. And I'm not concerned about him acting on his own presidential authority, without authorization from Congress. There's a long history of presidents launching attacks like this one. As for additional retaliation by Iran, I'm not concerned because it's too far away and it's not a military power. With Trump's disagreement with the the U.S. intelligence community about whether Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon, I think its nuclear program exceeds civilian use. Why have it secluded in the mountains unless it's to weaponize it? And while I'm slightly concerned about Iran's nuclear capabilities and the possibility it could receive nuclear weapons from an ally, I'm not at all concerned about the threat of nuclear war. -- Scott Forrester, Phoenix, Arizona

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store