Latest news with #CenterforAmericanProgress
Politico
4 days ago
- Politics
- Politico
‘Crazy hill to die on': Newsom jolts California with bid to throw out House maps
And Newsom is not without support in the party after Democrats' throttling in November. 'A lot of people are looking for a fight from the Democratic Party, and Governor Newsom's response to Texas is the kind of thing I think they are looking for,' said Neera Tanden, a former Biden administration official and president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, the influential Democratic think tank. 'People who argue we shouldn't look at measures like this — I think fundamentally they're responsible for Democrats' backsliding because what we see time and time again is the Republican Party is ruthless to achieve their goals.' Newsom has laid out two options for a retaliatory redistricting, both of which present legal and political challenges. He could test a novel legal theory by asking the Legislature to create new maps now, rather than wait for decennial redistricting. Or he could ask voters, who in 2010 resoundingly approved the creation of a non-partisan process, to support a Democratic gerrymander in a state where Republicans hold just nine of 52 seats despite comprising a quarter of the electorate. The idea startled Sacramento, where lawmakers and staffers were scrambling to decipher Newsom's intentions. And it's generated intense skepticism among good government advocates who see it as Newsom, a likely 2028 presidential contender, simply posturing. 'Pretty much everything the governor says lately we have to look through the lens of his eventual run for president,' said Mindy Romero, founder and director of the Center for Inclusive Democracy at the University of Southern California. 'It just looks like blustering. It just looks like an attempt to get attention and headlines and show himself sparring directly with the president or with Republican leadership.' Newsom is not alone in his frustration with Texas. Democrats around the country are decrying Texas' move to redraw its seats — particularly as Trump has floated having four additional red states manipulate maps to boost the GOP. The effort has some national Democrats feeling heartburn for the power that some blue states handed independent redistricting commissions to draw district lines while red states like Texas weaponized theirs. Following his meeting with members of the California delegation on Wednesday, Jeffries said in a brief interview, 'It was a thoughtful and robust discussion. An important one, given what's happening in Texas, but beyond that, I'll defer to Zoe Lofgren and Pete Aguilar.'
Business Insider
08-07-2025
- Business
- Business Insider
A big change to student loans in Trump's spending bill could make it harder to become a doctor or lawyer
It might soon be harder to attend medical or law schooldue to President Donald Trump's big spending bill. Trump signed his "big beautiful" tax and spending bill into law on July 4, codifying a slew of changes to the tax system, healthcare, and education. The law includes a major overhaul to the country's education system, particularly to the way students take out and pay off their student loans. One specific student-loan change in the bill places new caps on the amount of loans students can borrow for graduate school, including medical and law school. Specifically, the bill eliminates the Grad PLUS loan program, which allowed graduate and professional students to borrow up to the full cost of attendance for their programs. It also caps borrowing for graduate students at $20,500 a year and $100,000 over a lifetime and for professional students, like those in medical or law school, at $50,000 a year and $200,000 over a lifetime. Those caps mean many students won't be able to borrow enough to cover the full price of graduate or professional school. The Association of American Medical Colleges found that the median cost for four years of public medical school was $286,454 for the class of 2024, with that amount rising to just over $390,000 at a private school. The average total cost of law school in the latest school year, according to the Education Data Initiative, was just over $217,000. "Eliminating or restricting these critical programs would undermine the future physician workforce and ultimately make it harder for patients in communities nationwide to get the care they need," AAMC's president and CEO, David Skorton, said in a statement. Sara Partridge, associate director for higher education policy at the left-leaning think tank Center for American Progress, told Business Insider that she expects these new caps to worsen doctor shortages and "shut off pathways to these important jobs for students from low income families." The Health Resources and Services Administration — a federal agency that ensures healthcare access — said in a 2024 report that 75 million people currently live in a primary care health shortage area, and it projects a shortage of 187,130 full-time physicians in 2037. Some students might also turn toward private student loans with higher interest rates, Partridge said. "Private student loans often require a cosigner, so some students may not qualify, and they may have no options to fully finance and attend graduate school. So there is a possibility that for some students, this will be a barrier to accessing graduate school," Partridge said. The parent PLUS program, which previously allowed parents to borrower up to the full cost of attendance, still exists, but the bill places a $65,000 lifetime cap on parents borrowing for their kids' educations. Along with the borrowing caps, the spending bill also instituted significant changes to student-loan repayment. It eliminated existing income-driven repayment plans and replaced them with two new options. The first option is a standard repayment plan with a payment period ranging from 10 to 25 years, based on the borrower's original balance. The second option is a new plan called the Repayment Assistance Plan, which sets borrowers' payments at 1% to 10% of their income, and any remaining balance is forgiven after 30 years. It's less generous than former President Joe Biden's SAVE plan, which the bill eliminated. The SAVE plan would have reduced payments on undergraduate loans from 10% to 5% of a borrower's discretionary income. Linda McMahon, Trump's education secretary, lauded the passage of the bill in a July 3 post on X, saying it "simplifies the overly complex student loan repayment system" and "reduces federal student loan borrowing amounts to help curb rising tuition costs." "A truly beautiful bill for the American people," she said. The Department of Education did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.
Time of India
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Can Democrats find their way on immigration?
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Democrats onstage saw themselves as morally courageous. American voters, it turned out, saw a group of politicians hopelessly out of side by side at a primary debate in June 2019, 10 of the party's candidates for president were asked to raise their hand if they wanted to decriminalize illegal border crossings. Only one of them held years later, the party remains haunted by that tableau. It stands both as a vivid demonstration of a leftward policy shift on immigration that many prominent Democratic lawmakers and strategists now say they deeply regret, and as a marker of how sharply the country was moving in the other year, 55% of Americans told Gallup that they supported a decrease in immigration, nearly twice as many as in 2020, and the first time since 2005 that a majority had said so. The embrace of a more punitive approach to illegal immigration includes not only white voters but also working-class Latinos, whose support Democrats had long courted with liberal border policies."When you have the most Latino district in the country outside of Puerto Rico vote for Trump , that should be a wake-up call for the Democratic Party ," said Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, D-Texas, who saw Trump win every county in his district along the border with Mexico. "This is a Democratic district that's been blue for over a century."How the Democrats reached this point, and their continued struggles on immigration, is a decades-long story of political failures, missteps, misreadings and misplaced bets -- and some shrewd Republican moves."We got led astray by the 2016 and the 2020 elections, and we just never moved back," said Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., who introduced an immigration and border security plan in May. "We looked feckless, we weren't decisive, we weren't listening to voters, and the voters decided that we weren't in the right when it comes to what was happening with the border."What the party does to change its approach -- and to change how voters see Democrats on immigration -- may be the most consequential and difficult decision it faces as it searches for a path back to while there is party-wide agreement that Democrats have a problem on immigration and border security, there is no consensus on how to fix are pushing for a course correction they see as overdue. A new proposal from the Center for American Progress, the party's leading policy shop, calls for expanding legal immigration while embracing ideas long championed by conservatives, including making it harder for migrants to qualify for Tanden, the center's CEO, said the plan acknowledged a reality that Democrats had long resisted: They must embrace new immigration restrictions in order to have the credibility with voters to fight the far more expansive plans of the Trump administration."I'm happy to argue with Stephen Miller or anyone else about why they are wrong," she said. "But the way we're going to be able to do that is to also honestly assess that the border has been too insecure, that it allowed too many people to come through and that we need to fix that."Many on the left vehemently disagree, insisting that more conservative policies will only aid what they see as an insidious and ambitious effort by the Trump administration to demonize and deport Black and brown immigrants who have been in the country for years, remaking the fabric of a nation that once took pride in its diversity."Democrats have to stop talking about the issue of immigration within a Republican frame," said Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass. "This has nothing to do with law and order. This is about power, control, terror, and it is about racism and xenophobia. Donald Trump wants to make America Jim Crow again, and then some."Complicating Democrats' efforts to chart a new path is the fact that the party's debate is unfolding in the midst of what it sees as a national crisis. The Trump administration is pursuing the harshest crackdown on immigrants since World War II. Raids and patrols by masked officers, detentions at courthouses and workplaces, the promises to arrest and deport millions, and the deployment of National Guard troops against protesters have immigrants who lack legal status and even some naturalized citizens running scared and lying low."We, and I include myself in this, created a vacuum on this issue that we allowed the current president to fill," said Cecilia Muñoz, who led the Obama administration's domestic policy council. "And the country is now living with the results. And the results are appalling."Some Democrats believe their party can find its path forward by looking to the was under President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, that Congress broadly expanded the grounds for deportation and that border enforcement officers saw their ranks increase sharply. The next Democrat to win the White House , Barack Obama, promised to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, including a pathway to legal status for an estimated 12 million Republican support, Obama also pursued aggressive enforcement, deporting more immigrants in his first term than any president had since the 1950s. But his attempts to balance the two priorities ultimately failed: His plan to modernize the immigration system stalled in Congress, while his executive actions to aid students, workers and families who lacked legal residency status were challenged in the courts. Disillusioned advocates denounced him as the "deporter in chief."Then came Trump, who rode down the golden escalator at Trump Tower to announce his presidential campaign with promises to build a "great wall" along what he described as an out-of-control southern border and to expel migrants he condemned as criminals, drug traffickers and Trump competed for his party's nomination, Hillary Clinton was under pressure in the Democratic primaries from Sen. Bernie Sanders on the left. Immigration activists persuaded her to break with Obama's approach -- not to mention her husband's -- and pledge not to deport illegal immigrants beyond violent criminals and terrorists. But that promise fueled Trump's candidacy more than it helped hers. He hammered away at her, saying she wanted to "abolish" the country's Trump won, Democrats moved even further to the left in opposition to what they saw as the cruelty of his Democratic officials echoed activists' calls to "abolish ICE," ban deportations, decriminalize border crossings and end detention. Their efforts focused mainly on curtailing enforcement and standing up to Trump. They said little about the economic and social benefits of expanding legal restrictive policies, particularly the separation of children from their families, inspired a broader backlash: By the time he left the White House, more Americans favored increasing immigration than opposed it for the first time in six decades of Gallup soon after President Joe Biden entered office, illegal crossings at the southern border began to increase, as pandemic lockdowns were lifted and would-be migrants in Central America responded to Washington's changed aides urged Biden to avoid the subject and stay focused on the pandemic, the economy, Afghanistan and Russia's invasion of Ukraine, issues more politically favorable to him."The through line in every decision they made around immigration was 'What can we do to stop having to talk about this?'" said Carlos Odio, a founder of Equis, a Democratic-aligned polling firm specializing in Latino voters. "The problem is that doesn't work when you're in charge and people expect you to deal with everything."Republican governors made the subject impossible to first buses of migrants chartered by the Texas Division of Emergency Management pulled into Washington from Del Rio, Texas, in April 2022. The White House dismissed the effort, organized by Gov. Greg Abbott, as a "political stunt." But the buses kept the next two years, Texas sent nearly 120,000 migrants to cities such as New York, Chicago and Washington. Doug Ducey, then the governor of Arizona, sent buses to Denver, and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida flew migrants to Martha's Vineyard, Democratic governors and mayors struggled to house and feed the arrivals, Republicans blamed Biden for the crisis engulfing liberal Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, said she first realized Democrats were in trouble in December 2022. So many migrants were crossing into El Paso that they were sleeping on pizza boxes as temperatures fell below freezing. A city known as a haven for immigrants since the 1800s was overwhelmed. Residents were losing patience, she when she worked on bipartisan legislation to expedite asylum cases at the border, Escobar said, fellow Democrats criticized the proposal as too restrictive."Living through what El Paso lived through, feeling how unsustainable all of this was, and frankly how challenging this was, I knew this would cause a massive shift in the perspective of Americans about immigration," she said. "There was a failure on the part of the Democratic Party altogether during the last administration in adequately recognizing what was happening."Democrats far from the border saw public opinion moving toward Republicans, Lightfoot, a former mayor of Chicago, recalled a homeless Black woman complaining that she could not get help finding an apartment because "they're giving everything to the migrants." The city's established Mexican American communities, Lightfoot said, were not thrilled to welcome busloads of Venezuelans."What we started to hear, which was also a little bit of a surprise to me, was, 'Hey, what about us? We've been here forever. Why are you paying attention to and giving resources to these newcomers who, by the way, you know' -- in soft voice -- 'are Venezuelans?'" she mayors and governors begged Biden to authorize emergency aid and work permits for the migrants. Some took their criticisms public in frustration with what they saw as White House Biden aides were locked in furious debates over how, and how fast, to dismantle Trump's policies and what should replace them. That infighting crippled the administration's ability to respond Democrats tried to step in, striking a compromise on a bipartisan border bill that would have made illegal entry more difficult while allowing admitted migrants to receive work permits more quickly. But Trump pressed Republicans to torpedo it, to deny Biden a victory and keep the issue inflamed heading into New York, immigration and border politics overtook a special House election in February 2024. Tom Suozzi, a Long Island Democrat, prevailed after adopting a hard-line approach, calling for a temporary shutdown of the border and for deporting migrants who assault the attributed his win to a willingness to take tough stands, as the Biden administration waited for legislation that would never happen.I don't think that the voters moved to the right," he said. "I think they voted more for the Republicans because they felt that they were not getting attention paid to their concerns."Biden finally responded to the crisis in June, issuing an executive order preventing migrants from seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border when crossings surge -- the most restrictive border policy any modern Democrat has crossings plummeted. But it was too late to change voters' perceptions. Trump maintained his advantage on the issue when Vice President Kamala Harris replaced Biden on the campaigned in front of signs reading "Deport Illegals Now." He interpreted his victory as a mandate to push through an even more aggressive immigration agenda that would reach beyond the mass deportation of immigrants lacking legal residency status and into a broad swath of American school students are getting arrested at traffic stops. Children are being handcuffed outside courthouses. Restaurant workers are being hauled from kitchens during their shifts. And when protests erupted, the administration deployed the military in Los Angeles and arrested or manhandled many people, including high-profile Democratic as Democrats publicly oppose the president, they have privately traded recriminations over their failure at immigration civil rights organizations are busy with "listening tours" to understand how Democrats misunderstood voters. Party strategists are conducting surveys and focus groups on immigration and border security. Some immigration advocates are warning that unless Democrats determine how to go on the offensive, they will keep losing a private briefing for Democratic senators recently, Andrea R. Flores, a border official in the Biden White House who is the migration policy expert at a bipartisan advocacy group, blasted the party's failure to make the case for immigration and its benefits, according to people in the room. She urged Democrats to lay out a clear vision for how to fix the immigration system -- something she said the Biden administration had failed to trail Republicans by as many as 41 percentage points in whom voters trust more on immigration and border security, according to polling released in May by Third Way, a center-left think tank. Still, Trump's sinking approval ratings on immigration give some Democrats hope that voters will listen if the party has something new to say."The vast majority of Americans, including Republican voters, are appalled by Trump deporting a child who's recovering from brain cancer, or appalled by Trump deporting students simply for writing an opinion piece in a student newspaper," said Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas. "Democrats can't be scared about talking about immigration. We have to recognize that Trump's overreach is also not popular with the American people."Casar and Pressley expect to reintroduce proposed curbs on mandatory detention and a ban on privately run, for-profit detention moderate Democrats say easing up on the border and fighting over incarceration won't win back working-class insists that what Americans want is simple: a secure border, deportation of dangerous criminals and a humane path to legal status for families already in the country. If Democrats fail to provide that, he argues, they will continue to pay a price."We have to be able to present an idea of what border security looks like that is not Donald Trump," he said. "And when we actually say what Donald Trump is doing wrong, we need to be able to point to what we would be doing right."
USA Today
02-07-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
With Mamdani, Democrats flirt with full-tilt socialism. But his plan is alarming.
If progressive Democrats prevail in determining the party's direction, their agenda would pose the biggest threat to our nation's future. The Democratic Party is in the doldrums. For the past decade, it's been so obsessed with trying to take down Donald Trump that it's overlooked what it stands for. Former Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris certainly couldn't conjure a coherent platform. Party infighting and chaos have ensued. 'We're like a solar system with no sun,' U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat from Michigan, recently said in a speech at the Center for American Progress. 'We don't act as a team, and when we don't work as a team, we turn our guns on each other, and it's so, so, so, fruitless.' As the party looks to the future, I'm wondering what direction it plans to go and what 'team' will win. Some Democrats – like Slotkin – have encouraged the party to embrace a message that appeals to a broader range of Americans. Even far-left California Gov. Gavin Newsom has dipped his toes in the waters of moderation, at least on some issues. Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman has no problem calling out the problematic progressives in his party. Yet, there is another, more troubling, direction where it appears Democrats may go. Socialism and antisemitism should set off alarms – not applause New York City Democrats in June went all in for self-proclaimed democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani, choosing the 33-year-old state legislator as their primary pick in the mayoral election this fall. They rejected the more 'traditional' Democrat on the ballot, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo. The leading takeaway from Mamdani's victory in the nation's largest city seems to be that the party should take note and perhaps adopt some of the vision that spoke to Big Apple liberals. Yet, that vision is alarming – or should be – to anyone who believes in capitalism and true democracy. Mamdani claims he wants to make the city 'affordable,' but his proposals would do the opposite. He envisions a much more powerful government that controls the lives of New Yorkers. Opinion: Trump is winning on immigration – and Democrats are falling right into his trap Mamdani proclaimed on X that he is 'running for Mayor to freeze the rent, make buses fast + free, and deliver free universal childcare.' Those straightforward-sounding goals carry a lot of baggage. In an editorial ahead of the primary, the left-leaning New York Times warned against voting for Mamdani: 'He is a democratic socialist who too often ignores the unavoidable trade-offs of governance. He favors rent freezes that could restrict housing supply and make it harder for younger New Yorkers and new arrivals to afford housing. He wants the government to operate grocery stores, as if customer service and retail sales were strengths of the public sector. He minimizes the importance of policing.' Mamdani also said he wants to 'shift the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.' Oh, and he doesn't think 'we should have billionaires.' In addition, Mamdani, who is Muslim, has a well-documented history of standing against Israel and defending the use of antisemitic language, including phrases such as 'globalize the intifada.' As violence against Jews in America grows, that's troubling. Opinion: Iran protests aren't just anti-war. They're siding with terrorism. Americans feel democracy is under threat. Embracing socialism won't help. Mamdani's fellow big-government-loving politicians, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, are likely thrilled with a broader embrace of their socialist vision. Democrats should think hard, however, about whether that is the road they want to take. Americans are already fearful about the future of our democracy. The country will celebrate its 249th birthday on Friday, July 4. A new NPR/PBS News/Marist poll shows that 76% of respondents believe democracy is under serious threat. Most Democrats point to Trump as the reason for their fears. Yet, if progressives prevail in directing the party's future, it would be their agenda that poses the biggest threat to the country. Opinion: Parents, not progressives, know their kids best. They should control education. Socialism – even the more palatable-sounding 'democratic socialism' – would upend the free markets and discourage individual initiative, strengths that have made America the economic force it is today and that are central to our republic's success. Sen. Slotkin is right: Democrats do need a 'sun' to center their party. They should choose it carefully. Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at ijacques@ or on X, formerly Twitter: @Ingrid_Jacques
Indianapolis Star
01-07-2025
- Health
- Indianapolis Star
Trump's tax bill will gut Medicaid in Indiana
President Trump's Big Beautiful Bill is set to become law. What's being celebrated in Washington as a political victory will hit Indiana as a health care crisis. Marketed as tax and budget reform, the bill guts Medicaid, strips away insurance protections and enacts policy changes that will leave tens of thousands of Hoosiers without coverage. For a state that already ranks near the bottom in public health funding, this is deeply irresponsible. This bill creates unmistakable winners and losers. Wealthier Americans and large employers benefit from extended tax cuts and fewer insurance requirements. States with conservative leadership gain more control over Medicaid, allowing them to cut spending with less federal oversight. Meanwhile, the losses fall squarely on working families, rural communities and people with chronic illness. More from Raja Ramaswamy: Nurses are drowning while Braun ignores Indiana's health care crisis Giving Indiana more control over Medicaid isn't inherently harmful. But in Indiana, where leaders have consistently underfunded public health and pushed for tighter eligibility, that control is likely to mean stricter rules, fewer benefits and more people losing coverage. Indiana's hospitals will absorb roughly $800 million in unpaid care, leading to higher bills, strained clinics and more Hoosiers forced into medical debt. Patients who rely on comprehensive plans may find themselves stuck with stripped-down policies that exclude mental health, maternity care or treatment for serious illness. The people who need care the most are the ones being asked to sacrifice. The bill cuts Medicaid by more than $1 trillion nationwide, according to the Congressional Budget Office. In Indiana, 2.3 million people rely on Medicaid, including children, seniors and low-income workers. New work and paperwork requirements are expected to knock tens of thousands of Hoosiers off the rolls. These are bureaucratic obstacles that force families to choose between treatment and financial stability. Supporters claim the bill will root out fraud and encourage work. But with Indiana ranked 48th in public health funding, we are in no position to absorb cuts of this scale. Medicaid is not a handout. It is a lifeline for working families. This bill severs it, leaving thousands vulnerable to financial and health crises. The Center for American Progress estimates the legislation will add $36 billion in uncompensated care costs nationwide, with Indiana's share at roughly $800 million. Those costs will strain hospitals, raise premiums and burden families already struggling to afford care. This bill is a failure of health policy. Health care is not optional. It is as essential as public education or clean water. Cutting coverage for thousands of Hoosiers does not save money. It shifts the burden onto families who cannot afford to get sick. Trump calls it beautiful. In Indiana, it's nothing but brutal.
