Connect with us

News

Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham reveal Republican split over Trump’s IVF proposal

Published

on

Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham reveal Republican split over Trump’s IVF proposal

Donald Trump’s new proposal for the government or insurance companies to be mandated to pay for in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment for Americans has already divided the Republican party – with two GOP senators giving opposing stances on the matter on Sunday.

The ex-president has been trying to navigate the post-Roe landscape since 2022, with limited success. As his presidential campaign has progressed throughout 2024, Trump has repeatedly claimed credit for appointing Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn federal protections on abortion — while he has simultaneously sought to distance himself from hardline opponents of abortion who are seeking to ban IVF and other fertility treatments, as well as the stricter end of GOP-led proposals to ban abortion at various points during the pregnancy.

Over the past week, the former president made his latest attempt.

Speaking to NBC News minutes before taking the stage in Potterville, Michigan, the ex-president made two announcements on the issue.

Advertisement

First, he put forward a plan to force insurance companies or the federal government to cover the costs of IVF for all Americans. And second, he came out against Florida’s six-week abortion ban, which he said restricted abortion too early into the pregnancy.

Campaign aides would clarify over the next few days that this did not mean he would support a ballot measure up for debate this year in Florida that would enshrine abortion access into the state constitution.

Both statements triggered furious responses from within his own party. Anti-abortion groups and supporters of Florida’s conservative Governor Ron DeSantis ripped Trump for his supposed betrayal in statements to the press and on social media.

Republicans took different positions on Donald Trump’s proposal to force insurance companies to cover IVF treatments on Sunday with Tom Cotton (pictured) saying he was ‘open’ to the plan
Republicans took different positions on Donald Trump’s proposal to force insurance companies to cover IVF treatments on Sunday with Tom Cotton (pictured) saying he was ‘open’ to the plan (The Independent)

And on Sunday, two Republican senators appearing in separate interviews across NBC and ABC took opposite positions on the pledge by Trump to fund IVF either through public or private means — suggesting that the plan will cause more internal divisions for the right as the general election nears.

On NBC’s Meet the Press, Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton — a MAGA populist — said that he could see himself supporting the former president’s plan and added that he thought “most Republicans” would be open to doing so.

“It’s something I’m open to, that most Republicans would be open to,” he said, before adding that he would need to determine the “fiscal impact” of such a proposal first and consider “whether the taxpayer can afford to pay for this, what impact it would have on premiums.”

Advertisement

He went on to claim that to his knowledge, no Republicans in Congress opposed the legality of IVF (a factually untrue statement, whether he knows it or not) and claimed that no state governments made fertility care “unaccessible” — though it was briefly blocked in Alabama earlier this year after a push by conservatives to extend the rights of a human being to unborn fetuses through the courts. That same strategy is being pushed by supporters of Project 2025, a conservative blueprint for reshaping the federal government, which is tied to numerous former Trump administration officials.

“In principle, supporting couples who are trying to use IVF or other fertility treatments — I don’t think that’s controversial at all,” Cotton added.

But the same morning that Cotton proclaimed Republicans would be open to Trump’s proposal, Lindsey Graham appeared on ABC’s This Week and immediately dimissed that idea.

Trump, he argued, was trying to show his support for the practice of providing IVF treatments to families seeking to have children. The furthest Graham seemed prepared to go was a hypothetical tax credit for families undergoing IVF but he was firmly opposed to forcing insurance companies to directly fund the procedure. He added that it may be an issue on which Republicans could find “common ground” with Democrats.

Advertisement

“I wouldn’t [support that] because there’s no end to that,” he said. “I think a tax credit for children makes sense, means tested.”

“We’ve been accused — the party has — of being against birth control. We’re not. We’ve been accused of being against IVF treatments. We’re not,” Graham added as his explanation for Trump’s latest announcement.

First, though, he’ll have to find common ground with the rest of his party. Graham remains the lead Senate supporter of efforts to restrict abortion at the national level — an idea the Trump campaign has repeatedly insisted the former president opposes.

Advertisement

JD Vance, Trump’s running mate and Graham’s colleague in the Senate GOP caucus, echoed that opposition last week on NBC’s Meet the Press.

Regardless of how GOP senators and members of Congress come out on the issue of funding for IVF over the next days or weeks, the Republican party will still have to contend with the push by the anti-abortion right to extend “personhood” rights to unborn fetuses through the court system. Many on the far right are looking at the conservative majority on the Supreme Court, which voted to overturn Roe v Wade in 2022, as the easiest vessel to achieve their goal of banning abortion and some fertility care nationwide without going through Congress.

Lindsey Graham shot down the idea
Lindsey Graham shot down the idea (The Independent)

The Harris campaign continues to pummel Trump over the twin issues of abortion and IVF as well. Vice presidential nominee Tim Walz has talked about his own experiences seeking fertility treatments with his wife as Democrats have argued that Republicans are overreaching into Americans’ personal and private medical choices.

“Donald Trump’s own platform could effectively ban IVF and abortion nationwide,” Sarafina Chitika, a spokesperson for the Harris campaign, said on Thursday.

“Trump lies as much if not more than he breathes, but voters aren’t stupid. Because Trump overturned Roe vs. Wade, IVF is already under attack and women’s freedoms have been ripped away in states across the country. There is only one candidate in this race who trusts women and will protect our freedom to make our own health care decisions: Vice President Kamala Harris.”

Advertisement

News

Arson engulfs Mississippi synagogue, a congregation once bombed by Ku Klux Klan

Published

on

Arson engulfs Mississippi synagogue, a congregation once bombed by Ku Klux Klan

A fire damaged the Beth Israel Congregation in Jackson, Miss. The fire department said arson was the cause.

Hannah Orlansky/Beth Israel Congregation


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Hannah Orlansky/Beth Israel Congregation

Authorities have charged one person with arson in a fire that badly damaged Beth Israel Congregation in Jackson, Miss., early Saturday morning. The Jackson Fire Department, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, and the FBI are investigating.

Zach Shemper, Beth Israel Congregation president, said he’s stunned.

“Crazy things happen all over the world and nothing really hits home until it actually hits directly home,” he told Mississippi Public Broadcasting. “When it hits home, it’s just hard. Honestly, I’m still trying to wrap my own head around it.”

Advertisement

Shemper also released a statement saying the synagogue and its 150 families are resilient.

“As Jackson’s only synagogue, Beth Israel is a beloved institution, and it is the fellowship of our neighbors and extended community that will see us through,” he said.

The congregation was founded in 1860, according to Beth Israel’s website. In 1967, local Ku Klux Klan members bombed the place of worship and the home of the rabbi at the time, who had spoken out against racism and segregation. No one was hurt in the civil rights-era bombings or Saturday’s fire.

Charles Felton, Jackson Fire Department chief of fire investigations, told NPR in an interview on Sunday that flames and smoke caused extensive damage and destroyed Beth Israel’s library, where he says the fire was started. The fire was reported to 911 just after 3 a.m.

“All contents in that library are destroyed. There’s not much that can be retrieved from the library area. The other portions of the building do not have actual fire damage, but they have damage as far as smoke and soot,” he said.

Advertisement

Shemper said the fire destroyed two Torahs, the Jewish sacred texts, and damaged five others. A Torah that survived the Holocaust was protected by a glass display case and was not damaged. The synagogue’s Tree of Life plaque honoring congregants’ meaningful occasions was destroyed. Shemper said the library, administrative offices and the lobby suffered the most damage.

Surveillance video shows a man wearing a hoodie and a mask pouring liquid from a can inside the synagogue, according to Shemper. Felton said Jackson Fire investigators later received information from an area hospital that led them to the suspect, who was arrested Saturday evening.

“There was a suspect possibly burned at a local hospital,” he told NPR. “They did go to the hospital at which point they interviewed the person of interest and that person did confess to having involvement in the fire.”

The Jackson Fire Department’s powers include the authority to charge suspects, according to Felton, who said the department has filed arson charges against the suspect, who authorities have not publicly named. He said federal authorities will make a determination on whether to pursue hate crime charges.

The FBI’s office in Jackson said in a statement that it was aware of the incident and was working with other law enforcement on the investigation.

Advertisement

Jackson Mayor John Horhn said the city stands with Beth Israel and the Jewish community.

“Acts of antisemitism, racism, and religious hatred are attacks on Jackson as a whole and will be treated as acts of terror against residents’ safety and freedom to worship,” said a statement from the mayor’s office.

Beth Israel is planning to immediately move forward.

“With support from our community, we will rebuild. Beth Israel Congregation has been the Jewish spiritual home in Jackson, Mississippi, for over 160 years,” said Shemper’s statement. “We are devastated but ready to rebuild.”

He said several local churches have offered temporary space for Beth Israel to continue services.

Advertisement

The attack comes after investigators say a father and son opened fire on Jewish people celebrating Hanukkah on Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia, last month. Fifteen people were killed and dozens were injured.

Continue Reading

News

Nationwide anti-ICE protests call for accountability after Renee Good’s death

Published

on

Nationwide anti-ICE protests call for accountability after Renee Good’s death

A large bird puppet crafted at In the Heart of the Beast Puppet and Mask Theatre in Minneapolis is carried down Lake Street during a march demanding ICE’s removal from Minnesota on Saturday, Jan. 10, 2026.

Ben Hovland/MPR News


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Ben Hovland/MPR News

People have been taking to the streets nationwide this weekend to protest the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics following the death of Renee Good in Minneapolis, a 37-year-old woman who was shot and killed by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer this week.

At least 1,000 events across the U.S. were planned for Saturday and Sunday, according to Indivisible, a progressive grassroots coalition of activists helping coordinate the movement it calls “ICE Out For Good Weekend of Action.”

Leah Greenberg, a co-executive director of Indivisible, said people are coming together to “grieve, honor those we’ve lost, and demand accountability from a system that has operated with impunity for far too long.”

Advertisement

“Renee Nicole Good was a wife, a mother of three, and a member of her community. She, and the dozens of other sons, daughters, friends, siblings, parents, and community members who have been killed by ICE, should be alive today,” Greenberg said in a statement on Friday. “ICE’s violence is not a statistic, it has names, families, and futures attached to it, and we refuse to look away or stay silent.”

Large crowds of demonstrators carried signs and shouted “ICE out now!” as protests continued across Minneapolis on Saturday. One of those protestors, Cameron Kritikos, told NPR that he is worried that the presence of more ICE agents in the city could lead to more violence or another death.

“If more ICE officers are deployed to the streets, especially a place here where there’s very clear public opposition to the terrorizing of our neighborhoods, I’m nervous that there’s going to be more violence,” the 31-year grocery store worker said. “I’m nervous that there are going to be more clashes with law enforcement officials, and at the end of the day I think that’s not what anyone wants.”

Demonstrators in Minneapolis on Saturday, Jan. 10, 2026.

Demonstrators in Minneapolis on Saturday, Jan. 10, 2026.

Sergio Martínez-Beltrán/NPR


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Sergio Martínez-Beltrán/NPR

The night before, hundreds of city and state police officers responded to a “noise protest” in downtown Minneapolis. An estimated 1,000 people gathered Friday night, according to Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara, and 29 people were arrested.

Advertisement

People demonstrated outside of hotels where ICE agents were believed to be staying. They chanted, played drums and banged pots. O’Hara said that a group of people split from the main protest and began damaging hotel windows. One police officer was injured from a chunk of ice that was hurled at officers, he added.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey condemned the acts of violence but praised what he said was the “vast majority” of protesters who remained peaceful, during a morning news conference.

“To anyone who causes property damage or puts others in danger: you will be arrested. We are standing up to Donald Trump’s chaos not with our own brand of chaos, but with care and unity,” Frey wrote on social media.

Commenting on the protests, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin told NPR in a statement, “the First Amendment protects speech and peaceful assembly — not rioting, assault and destruction,” adding, “DHS is taking measures to uphold the rule of law and protect public safety and our officers.”

Advertisement

Good was fatally shot the day after DHS launched a large-scale immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota set to deploy 2,000 immigration officers to the state.

In Philadelphia, police estimated about 500 demonstrators “were cooperative and peaceful” at a march that began Saturday morning at City Hall, Philadelphia Police Department spokesperson Tanya Little told NPR in a statement. And no arrests were made.

In Portland, Ore., demonstrators rallied and lined the streets outside of a hospital on Saturday afternoon, where immigration enforcement agents bring detainees who are injured during an arrest, reported Oregon Public Broadcasting.

A man and woman were shot and injured by U.S. Border Patrol agents on Thursday in the city. DHS said the shooting happened during a targeted vehicle stop and identified the driver as Luis David Nino-Moncada, and the passenger as Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras, both from Venezuela. As was the case in their assertion about Good’s fatal shooting, Homeland Security officials claimed the federal agent acted in self-defense after Nino-Moncada and Zambrano-Contreras “weaponized their vehicle.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Why men should really be reading more fiction

Published

on

Why men should really be reading more fiction

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

A friend sent a meme to a group chat last week that, like many internet memes before it, managed to implant itself deep into my brain and capture an idea in a way that more sophisticated, expansive prose does not always manage. Somewhat ironically, the meme was about the ills of the internet. 

“People in 1999 using the internet as an escape from reality,” the text read, over an often-used image from a TV series of a face looking out of a car window. Below it was another face looking out of a different car window overlaid with the text: “People in 2026 using reality as an escape from the internet.” 

Oof. So simple, yet so spot on. With AI-generated slop — sorry, content — now having overtaken human-generated words and images online, with social media use appearing to have peaked and with “dumb phones” being touted as this year’s status symbol, it does feel as if the tide is beginning to turn towards the general de-enshittification of life. 

Advertisement

And what could be a better way to resist the ever-swelling stream of mediocrity and nonsense on the internet, and to stick it to the avaricious behemoths of the “attention economy”, than to pick up a work of fiction (ideally not purchased on one of these behemoths’ platforms), with no goal other than sheer pleasure and the enrichment of our lives? But while the tide might have started to turn, we don’t seem to have quite got there yet on the reading front, if we are on our way there at all.

Two-fifths of Britons said last year that they had not read a single book in the previous 12 months, according to YouGov. And, as has been noted many times before on both sides of the Atlantic, it is men who are reading the least — just 53 per cent had read any book over the previous year, compared with 66 per cent of women — both in overall numbers and specifically when it comes to fiction.

Yet pointing this out, and lamenting the “disappearance of literary men”, has become somewhat contentious. A much-discussed Vox article last year asked: “Are men’s reading habits truly a national crisis?” suggesting that they were not and pointing out that women only read an average of seven minutes more fiction per day than men (while failing to note that this itself represents almost 60 per cent more reading time).

Meanwhile an UnHerd op-ed last year argued that “the literary man is not dead”, positing that there exists a subculture of male literature enthusiasts keeping the archetype alive and claiming that “podcasts are the new salons”. 

That’s all well and good, but the truth is that there is a gender gap between men and women when it comes to reading and engaging specifically with fiction, and it’s growing.

Advertisement

According to a 2022 survey by the US National Endowment for the Arts, 27.7 per cent of men had read a short story or novel over the previous year, down from 35.1 per cent a decade earlier. Women’s fiction-reading habits declined too, but more slowly and from a higher base: 54.6 per cent to 46.9 per cent, meaning that while women out-read men by 55 per cent in 2012 when it came to fiction, they did so by almost 70 per cent in 2022.

The divide is already apparent in young adulthood, and it has widened too: data from 2025 showed girls in England took an A-Level in English literature at an almost four-times-higher rate than boys, with that gap having grown from a rate of about three times higher just eight years earlier.

So the next question is: should we care and, if so, why? Those who argue that yes, we should, tend to give a few reasons. They point out that reading fiction fosters critical thinking, empathy and improves “emotional vocabulary”. They argue that novels often contain heroic figures and strong, virtuous representations of masculinity that can inspire and motivate modern men. They cite Andrew Tate, the titan of male toxicity, who once said that “reading books is for losers who are afraid to learn from life”, and that “books are a total waste of time”, as an example of whose advice not to follow. 

I agree with all of this — wholeheartedly, I might add. But I’m not sure how many of us, women or men, are picking up books in order to become more virtuous people. Perhaps the more compelling, or at least motivating, reason for reading fiction is simply that it offers a form of pleasure and attention that the modern world is steadily eroding. In a hyper-capitalist culture optimised for skimming and distraction, the ability to sit still with a novel is both subversive and truly gratifying. The real question, then, is why so many men are not picking one up.

jemima.kelly@ft.com

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending