Latest news with #lawmakersafety
Associated Press
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Associated Press
Citing security threats, California lawmakers want to shield their addresses from public
California lawmakers want to limit public access to their addresses and phone numbers after two Minnesota lawmakers were shot, one fatally, in their homes last month. One proposal would ban journalists from accessing that information through candidates' and public officials' voter registration records, even though there is no indication the Minnesota shooter used those kinds of records to track down his victims. Officials' voter registration data is already confidential to most of the public. It is available to a select few, including journalists. But AB 1392, authored by Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins of La Mesa and sponsored by Secretary of State Shirley Weber's office, would eliminate that carve-out and effectively block journalists' access to politicians' phone numbers, emails and home addresses and prior voter registration. 'This common-sense bill will protect public servants and their families,' Sharp-Collins told lawmakers during a Tuesday Senate hearing. Stripping the public of vital information? But press freedom advocates say they doubt the measure would protect public officials from violence, arguing it would instead strip journalists of vital information they use to keep government officials in check. Journalists often use a politician's residential address to determine if they live in the district they represent and are eligible for office. 'Democracy is founded on the promise of 'trust but verify.' We are not required to take the government's word for it,' said David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, which advocates for public access to government documents and proceedings. 'We understand the concerns, but this should not deprive the press of its ability to do fundamental watchdog and accountability reporting. Sharp-Collins' chief of staff Michael Lucien said she did not have time for an interview. Her office also did not respond to questions sent by CalMatters via text about how her measure would protect public officials, or whether she believed anyone had used information obtained from their voter registration to target them. State lawmakers have often cited security concerns in passing laws that limit public disclosure. Last year, they made it harder to access politicians' phone numbers, home addresses and records about properties they own, all of which they are required to disclose in their economic interest statements. A 2022 law allowed California government workers and contractors to shield their addresses from the public if they fear violence. This year, as lawmakers pushed to reduce public access, they cited fear of violence when they sought to shield use-of-force reports by peace officers and to restrict data brokers from selling politicians' personal information. 'Every single year, we see a number of attempts to limit the public's access to information and access to their lawmakers in person,' said Brittney Barsotti, general counsel of the California News Publishers Association. '(AB 1392) is just another attempt that is concerning.' Timothy Cromartie, representing Weber's office, said at a Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendment Committee hearing earlier this month that 'escalating threats' to public officials make the measure 'an urgent necessity.' He pointed to the slaying of Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband last month, the arson on Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's home in April, the assassination attempt on President Donald Trump last year and the 2022 hammer attack on former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband at their home. An earlier version of the measure only applied to state and federal officials. But at the suggestion of the Senate elections committee, it was expanded to apply to local elected officials and candidates for office and allow the secretary of state's office to make the information private sooner. But critics doubt the proposal would help prevent tragedies like the Minnesota shootings, where the alleged suspect appeared to have obtained the lawmakers' home addresses via 'people search' sites instead of the voter roll. They argue that state law lays out a rigorous request process, where those qualified to receive the voter registration information must submit their names and contact information, explain the reason for their request and attest to their honesty under penalty of perjury. 'It seems highly unlikely at best that reporters or others able to take advantage of that carve out under those strict conditions are going to commit crimes with that information,' Loy said. Loy said the information not only helps journalists fact check officials' residency claims, but also allows reporters to identify politicians if they did things such as receiving a home as a gift from special interests, or leasing to or renting property from their major donors. A check on data brokers Another proposal inspired by the Minnesota tragedy, AB302 by Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan of San Ramon, sought to allow politicians to request businesses, including data brokers and media outlets, to take down or refrain from publishing their personal information, opening the organizations up to lawsuits and fines if they do not comply. An earlier version of the measure risked violating the First Amendment since it could chill and censor legitimate speech, according to a Senate Judiciary Committee analysis. The First Amendment Coalition and the Freedom of the Press Foundation opposed the effort, citing similar concerns, adding that newsrooms could be exposed to frivolous lawsuits simply because politicians do not like stories they publish. 'These demands and lawsuits will chill news outlets from reporting on matters of public concern,' the groups said in a joint letter. 'The fact that news outlets will have to defend their reporting as relating to a matter of public concern, potentially through multiple appeals, will cause some to self-censor.' Bauer-Kahan told CalMatters Monday that her intention was to discourage data brokers from selling politicians' personal information. She has agreed to amend the measure to instead require the California Privacy Protection Agency to compile a list of politicians and request data brokers to delete their personal information. 'That's not nearly as troubling as giving them … a tool to be weaponized to silence legitimate reporting,' Loy said. ___ This story was originally published by CalMatters and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
CBS News
19-06-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Man arrested after sending text including "threat of violence at the Capitol," Minnesota House GOP says
Safety at top of mind at Minnesota Capitol after lawmaker shootings Safety at top of mind at Minnesota Capitol after lawmaker shootings Safety at top of mind at Minnesota Capitol after lawmaker shootings A man is in jail Thursday after the Minnesota House GOP says he threatened violence at the Minnesota State Capitol, just days after Minnesota House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark were shot and killed. A statement from House Republican staff says a legislator notified law enforcement on Wednesday of a "personal text message" received by a constituent that was threatening in nature. "The threat was not aimed at any particular lawmaker but the message did include a threat of violence at the Capitol," the Minnesota House GOP said. The man was questioned, arrested and is being held at Carver County Jail pending an appearance in court. State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, both survived being shot multiple times inside their Champlin home. The couple is still recovering in the hospital. Vance Boelter is facing both federal and state charges in the shootings, including stalking and murder. He was taken into custody Sunday night near his Sibley County home following a manhunt that lasted over 36 hours. This is a developing story and will be updated. contributed to this report.
Yahoo
18-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘The reality we live in:' Lawmakers consider what they'd sacrifice for safety
Congressional lawmakers are once again grappling with the reality of persistent and escalating political violence — and facing a dilemma about whether to pour more tax dollars into their own protection. On the Capitol grounds, they're surrounded by layers of security and a police force that was dramatically overhauled after the riots of Jan. 6, 2021. But back home in their districts, members of the House and Senate are feeling increasingly exposed following the shootings in Minnesota that killed a state representative and her husband; wounded a state senator and his wife; and revealed a list of other elected officials who might have been harmed had the suspect not first been apprehended. It all has predictably rattled both Democrats and Republicans in Washington, many of whom responded by making new demands for more money and resources for security. A bipartisan Senate duo of Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) made the case for additional lawmaker security funding at a Tuesday morning briefing with the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms and U.S. Capitol Police, according to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Across the Capitol, House Democrats held a briefing Tuesday afternoon to hear from law enforcement officials and get walked through available resources, according to three people familiar with the discussion. And Republican Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee sent a letter to the House Administration Committee calling for an expansion of what House members are allowed to spend on security expenses, including on 'around the clock' security personnel instead of only during 'official conduct and representational duties' — restrictions he called 'inadequate.' Recent events have also prompted fresh questions about what can be done and how much money is actually necessary to alleviate the risks that come with being a public figure. The answer is enormously complicated. Ultimately, lawmakers are divided over welcoming — and paying for — the kinds of additional safety precautions that would inevitably restrict their freedom of movement, limit their interactions with regular people and intrude on their family life. Unlike the senior most leaders who have 24/7 security details, rank-and-file members are typically left to their own devices unless they are deemed to be under active threat by Capitol Police. "I feel like the law enforcement — they're doing their best to protect us. I try to make good, common-sense decisions,' Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said after his chamber's Tuesday morning security briefing. 'But you just can't get locked down. You just got to press on.' 'I don't want to have security on me. I'm a very private person. I like to go outside and be by myself,' added Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), who chairs the Senate appropriations subcommittee that funds Capitol Police. Consider two programs the House and Senate Sergeants-at-Arms and the Capitol Police have spent years trying to promote to members: one for security updates at lawmakers' primary residences and another to coordinate local and Capitol Police resources for in-district events. So far, Capitol Police have mutual aid agreements with more than 100 state and local police departments around the country to do this type of work, according to former chief Thomas Manger, who departed last month. But that's still just a fraction of what would be needed for every member to have access to seamless security coverage in their home state or district, with local departments reimbursed by the agency. More than half of all House lawmakers last year took advantage of the home security program, but those who didn't enroll cited either a lack of interest or a feeling that the paperwork and approval process were too burdensome, according to two people familiar with the administration of the initiative, granted anonymity to speak candidly about it. That left hundreds of thousands of dollars in the House Sergeants-at-Arms budget unspent. The extent to which recent events might be changing lawmakers' thinking will be tested next week, when the House Legislative Branch appropriations subcommittee is scheduled to meet to consider its bill to fund the operations of Capitol Hill. In a spending cycle where Republicans in both chambers are looking for deep cuts, lawmakers will have to decide if their own security is worthy of further investment — and what that security might look like. Manger, in his final budget proposal to House and Senate appropriators, asked for an allocation of $967.8 million for fiscal 2026, a 22 percent boost over the current funding level which was set in fiscal 2024. The Capitol Police budget has already increased more than 70 percent since Jan. 6. And with some lawmakers calling this week for even more resources for member security, the budget for the relatively small force could top $1 billion for the first time this year or next. Top House Democrats, for instance, have asked Speaker Mike Johnson to boost funding for security through what's known as the Member Representation Allowance, which each House member receives to fund basic office expenses including payroll. Increasing the MRA would allow lawmakers to increase security capabilities without taking away money that pays staff salaries. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said he supports additional resources for member security but stressed that it must be implemented in a way that is 'unobtrusive and non-interfering' with lawmakers' work. 'I have no intention of changing the way I live or do my job, because accessibility is part of who I am as a public official,' Blumenthal continued. 'But I understand how people are scared.' Capitol Police have poured significant financial resources over the last four years into overhauling their intelligence operations and expanding the assessment teams that handle the growing threats against lawmakers. Blumenthal said he wants those capabilities further ramped up, saying right now serious threats are too often 'discounted as a prank or a joke.' Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) made a similar case, arguing there would be value in having more tools to identify individuals who are 'going beyond the normal bickering that you find on social media, getting to the point where they appear to be more dangerous or making actual accusations or threats to individuals that they might at some point act on in the future.' Reps. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) and Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.), the chair and ranking member of the House Administration Committee, on Tuesday wrote to the Justice Department requesting that an assistant U.S. attorney or a special assistant U.S. attorney be assigned 'to each of the 94 federal districts to, at least on a part-time basis, investigate and prosecute threats against Members of Congress.' Some lawmakers also continue to push for increased security and Capitol Police protection at their homes in the aftermath of the attackon then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband at their San Francisco residence in Oct. 2022. Capitol Police have tried to build strong working relationships with local departments to counter threats, swatting attempts and problems at town halls or other events — hoping that local law enforcement can help fill the gaps in protection faced by members of Congress when they're back home. The force opened several satellite offices in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 riots, too, in part to respond to increased threats to lawmakers outside of Washington. The department reported more than 9,400 threats against members in 2024, and a good number of those were deemed credible enough to require temporary protective details for rank-and-file lawmakers who otherwise would not be entitled to them. In a statement, a Capitol Police spokesperson said the force would keep doing its work: 'We continue to closely coordinate with the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms to enhance security for Members of Congress. Their partnerships, along with assistance from local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies across the country, are extremely important to keep everyone safe. "For safety and security reasons, we will not discuss those details," the spokesperson said, "but we will continue to focus on continuing intelligence sharing with our partners and providing proactive enhancements.' But Manger lamented in an interview days before his retirement that, 'We're always robbing Peter to pay Paul to put that together,' referring to the need to urgently assemble Capitol Police details for members under threat. Mullin conceded that no matter what choices lawmakers make, worries of political violence will continue to be a way of life. 'I operate right now with a tremendous amount of death threats on us. I mean, if you go to my house, I have bulletproof glass on the bottom part of my house. … We have cameras everywhere. We have security dogs,' said Mullin. 'It is, unfortunately, the reality we live in.' Lisa Kashinsky contributed to this report.
Yahoo
18-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
As safety concerns for lawmakers grow, what security options are there?
The Brief Two Minnesota lawmakers were shot Saturday morning as part of what law enforcement officials described as a coordinated "political assassination." A Minnesota law passed in 2021 allows candidates for state office to use up to $3,000 in campaign money for home security cameras. Thirteen candidates in Minnesota used campaign funds for home security cameras, according to a FOX 9 Investigators review of campaign spending records. MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - Elected officials in Minnesota are on heightened alert following the targeted shootings of two state lawmakers and a plot to target even more. Concerns over lawmaker safety While it's unclear if anything would have prevented the shootings of two Minnesota lawmakers, the safety and security of state lawmakers has been a concern for years. "What's available to them, what security they have, were really inconsistent," said Gowri Ramachandran, of the Brennan Center. "It really depended on the state." About 43% of state legislators nationwide experienced threats or attacks within the past three years, according to a report by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU. Funds for security cameras In 2021, the Minnesota Legislature passed a law allowing candidates of state office to use campaign funds up to $3,000 to pay for home security cameras. Both Democrats and Republicans supported the measure. Since the law was passed, 13 candidates have used that funding to pay for home security cameras, according to a FOX 9 Investigators review of campaign spending. "On some level, it seems small," said Gowri Ramachandran of the Brennan Center at NYU, which tracks political violence. "They may feel that they need to spend every dollar of those campaign funds on mailers or getting out with their constituents and getting to know them – so in a way, I'm not surprised." Addresses removed Following the shootings, the Minnesota State Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board removed the street addresses for all campaign finance entities, including candidates, campaign officials, and lobbyists. The removal of addresses will likely remain in place until further guidance from the Legislature.
CNN
17-06-2025
- Politics
- CNN
GOP senator deletes inflammatory social media posts about Minnesota shootings
Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee on Tuesday deleted a series of inflammatory social media posts from over the weekend in which he reacted to the shooting deaths of Minnesota state representatives, prompting a confrontation with the state's Democratic US senator. Lee provoked controversy when he made a series of posts on X speculating about the political affiliations of the alleged shooter. In one post he wrote, 'This is what happens when Marxists don't get their way.' And in another he appeared to link the suspect to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, posting: 'Nightmare on Waltz Street.' As of Tuesday afternoon, the posts no longer appeared on Lee's X profile. CNN has reached out to Lee's office for comment. The senator's posts – made in the wake of the deadly attacks on Minnesota state representatives and their families that have raised concerns about lawmaker safety – ignited a firestorm of criticism. And Democratic Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota confronted Lee about his rhetoric on Monday. 'I told him that I thought it was brutal and cruel. He should think about the implications of what he's saying and doing,' Smith said Monday evening. 'It just further fuels this hatred and misinformation.' Smith said at the time that she had wanted Lee 'to hear from me directly how painful that was and how brutal that was to see that on what was just a horribly brutal weekend.' CNN has reached out to Smith for comment. Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota also criticized Lee's posts on Monday, telling MSNBC that morning: 'I have condemned what Mike Lee did here at home, and I will speak to him about this when I return [to Washington] and what I'm going to tell him is, you know, this isn't funny what happened here.' Klobuchar and Lee had a 'good conversation' Tuesday morning and she's glad he took the post down, the Minnesota senator's office told CNN. Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut added to the criticism Tuesday while speaking with reporters on Capitol Hill after a briefing on lawmaker safety. 'I feel that a lot of the MAGA rhetoric is an accelerant to this kind of political violence that is burning and metastasizing in our society. And adding fuel to the fire is really irresponsible on the part of not just people in public life, but people who are members of these fringe groups that are increasingly a threat,' Blumenthal said. Blumenthal avoided chastising Lee by name, saying: 'I really think that the problem is much broader than any single public official. And I feel that a lot of the MAGA rhetoric which is so threatening, or other kinds of fuel to the fire is – a real clear and present danger.'
