Connect with us

Politics

Ahead of second Trump term, California vows 'ironclad' abortion access

Published

on

Ahead of second Trump term, California vows 'ironclad' abortion access

California lawmakers are rushing to introduce legislation that reaffirms the state’s role as a reproductive rights “haven” as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House and abortion rights advocates warn of an uncertain future.

Abortion remains legal in California, home to the strongest reproductive rights in the nation — unlike in some states, there is no required waiting period or counseling before the procedure, and minors can get abortions without parental involvement. In 2022, voters solidified abortion access in the state Constitution after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the federal right, limiting healthcare for millions of women.

But as Trump prepares to take the White House again, California’s Democratic leaders are adamant that not enough has been done to secure reproductive access in case of further federal rollbacks.

“The truth is, this is an urgent and dangerous situation,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said at a news conference in Sacramento on Monday, pointing to renewed legal challenges to the distribution of abortion pills. “The right-wing extremists continue to wage attack after attack on our bodily autonomy at the expense of the health or life of pregnant persons.”

Bonta, a Democrat, said new legislative proposals will make reproductive rights in California “ironclad.”

Advertisement

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s earlier focus on abortion rights after Trump’s first term — including ad campaigns in red states — have drawn criticism from California Republicans skeptical of his national political motives and praise from advocates who say it is better to be safe than sorry. He has signed dozens of bills firming up abortion access in recent years, but some of his plans have proved to be more flash than substance. A temporary law allowing doctors licensed in Arizona to provide abortions in California, for example, expired without any doctors using it.

“He makes the big pronouncements, but he’s not a very good executor of those policies,” said Assembly Republican leader James Gallagher of Yuba City. “It’s kind of become his M.O., to make a big splash and then nothing really ever comes of it.”

Democrats, however, see the need to shore up abortion access given the uncertainty of Trump’s plans. A bill introduced this week aims to ensure availability of mifepristone and misoprostol — the commonly used two-step medication abortion process — even if the Trump administration attempts to interfere.

At issue is how antiabortion government officials could revive and interpret the Comstock Act, a federal law that once banned the mailing of “obscene” materials related to abortions.

While Trump has said he has no plans to ban abortion nationwide, he has repeatedly flip-flopped on the issue and taken credit for appointing conservative Supreme Court justices who reversed the federal right to abortion with their decision in the landmark Dobbs case.

Advertisement

Reproductive health advocates are worried that under his second term, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration could limit access to abortion medication. To lead the FDA, Trump has tapped Dr. Marty Makary, who has echoed antiabortion messages on Fox News about fetal pain — something disputed by major medical organizations.

The California bill by Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D-Sacramento), a legislative newcomer and former Planned Parenthood attorney, aims to ensure that Californians continue to have access to medication abortion for the foreseeable future and protects “manufacturers, distributors, authorized healthcare providers and individuals” from any legal action for distributing or administering the pills.

“There are emerging threats to the availability of mifepristone and misoprostol, and California may not be able to guarantee a continued supply,” the bill states. “Previously, Governor Newsom implemented a plan to stockpile doses of misoprostol. While this effort was successful, the Legislature finds that the state needs to renew its stockpile to ensure that Californians can continue to exercise their constitutional rights.”

Last year, Newsom rushed to stockpile hundreds of thousands of abortion pills after a Texas judge ruled against the authorization of the medication.

“We will not cave to extremists who are trying to outlaw these critical abortion services. Medication abortion remains legal in California,” Newsom said then.

Advertisement

But, facing expiration dates, the state released the stockpile to the public before the U.S. Supreme Court decision that rejected the Texas court’s ruling.

In Washington, Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee chose to hold on to a similar stockpile in case Trump was elected again.

A spokesperson for Newsom said California “remains ready” to procure more pills if needed.

In another precautionary move last year, Newsom signed a law that allowed abortion providers in Arizona to temporarily practice in California. The action came after the Arizona Supreme Court reinstated an 1800s law that essentially banned all abortions.

No Arizona providers ended up using the program, which expired Dec. 1, according to the California Department of Consumer Affairs. Concerns settled in Arizona after Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a bill that repealed the court decision, and voters last month passed a state constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to abortion.

Advertisement

The California legislation “was designed to serve as a swift stop gap measure to preserve continued access to abortion care, if necessary, during this very precarious moment,” California Department of Consumer Affairs spokesperson Monica Vargas said in an email when The Times asked for data about the program’s use.

Newsom also signed a law last year that allowed medical residents from states with “hostile” laws to get abortion training in California. The state does not require the California Medical Board to track whether that program is being used as intended, a spokesperson said.

For Republican critics like Gallagher, those programs are instances of “political theater” meant more to draw attention to an issue than provide substantive policy. Newsom this week called a special legislative session in Sacramento to prepare for legal combat with Trump on issues such as abortion and immigration — a move heralded by liberals as smart preparation for an unpredictable president and criticized by conservatives as unnecessary panic.

“In California, abortion is constitutionally protected, and you have a president-elect who has said very clearly he will not support any national abortion ban,” Gallagher said. “This perceived threat that they’re trying to make into a political volley … it’s just Newsom drawing attention to himself.”

Some abortion advocates said that they’d rather have a nimble governor like Newsom and be cautious even if the emergency plans don’t always pan out.

Advertisement

“Now more than ever is the time for innovative policy solutions,” said Shannon Olivieri Hovis, a spokesperson for Essential Health Access. “And inevitably, it is going to be the case that not all solutions we put forth will be equally effective.”

Other bills introduced this week seeking to fill California’s reproductive health access gaps include a proposal to financially penalize cities and counties that block the building of abortion clinics, as has happened in Beverly Hills and Fontana.

Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D-Oakland) introduced a package of bills that would ensure hospitals enforce laws that require emergency rooms to provide abortion care; make it easier for Medi-Cal recipients to get birth control; and prevent birthing centers from closing.

About 40% of California counties don’t have abortion clinics, including rural areas where transportation can be a hurdle. In September, the state sued a Humboldt County Catholic hospital after a patient said she was denied an emergency abortion even as she feared for her life because of miscarriage risks.

“We have to be absolutely clear-eyed about the political and social moment we’re in right now … when we have a proven misogynist as a president,” said Mia Bonta, who is married to the attorney general, referring to Trump’s sexual abuse allegations and “your body, my choice” refrains that surged after his election.

Advertisement

“I think while California has done an amazing job, we still have a lot of work to do to shore up the infrastructure of support for people who are seeking healthcare and abortion access and protection of our reproductive and sexual freedoms.”

Politics

GOP rebels go to war over Biden’s mammoth $98B disaster aid request

Published

on

GOP rebels go to war over Biden’s mammoth B disaster aid request

FIRST ON FOX: The ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus is calling on Republican leaders to reject President Biden’s $98.4 billion disaster aid request.

In an official position staked out by the GOP group on Wednesday evening, lawmakers are demanding a slimmed-down package covering what is “absolutely necessary,” to be offset with spending cuts elsewhere.

“Congress should not pass a whopping $100 billion unpaid disaster supplemental funding bill — that Democrats will use to cement their own unrelated priorities — in the waning days of Democrat control in Washington right before Republicans take control of the White House and both Chambers,” the House Freedom Caucus statement read.

JOHNSON BLASTS DEM ACCUSATIONS HE VOWED TO END OBAMACARE AS ‘DISHONEST’

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, speaks during a House Freedom Caucus news conference outside of the US Capitol on Monday, May 30, 2023. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Advertisement

“The House should consider only what is absolutely necessary right now to provide critical relief to hurricane victims and farmers, and pay for it with offsets from wasteful spending elsewhere in the government, then wait for President Trump to take office to better manage disaster relief.”

It comes as both House and Senate lawmakers negotiate over how large the disaster aid package should be, and whether it should be attached to an end-of-year federal funding bill that’s critical to avoiding a partial government shutdown during the holiday season.

More than 100 people were killed in North Carolina alone when Helene barreled into the Southeastern U.S. in late September.

Hurricane Milton, another deadly storm, hit Florida and Georgia roughly a week later.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., told “Your World” host Neil Cavuto that a $100 billion disaster aid package may be necessary.

Advertisement

MIKE JOHNSON WINS REPUBLICAN SUPPORT TO BE HOUSE SPEAKER AGAIN AFTER TRUMP ENDORSEMENT

President BIden

U.S. President Joe Biden attends a meeting, at a Carrinho facility, near Lobito, Angola, December 4, 2024. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz (REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz)

“I believe that we need that disaster supplemental at about $100 billion. There’s nearly an estimate of $50 billion in North Carolina alone,” Tillis said. “It’s going to take years to recover and we shouldn’t be playing games with people’s lives.”

But some fiscal conservatives have balked at the prospect of granting the mammoth-sized federal request without cutting costs elsewhere.

They’ve argued that granting the Democratic administration’s request for such a hefty package would be a reckless move that would further balloon the national debt.

“I’m not going to vote for $100 billion unpaid for. Zero chance,” Freedom Caucus Policy Chair Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital last month.

Advertisement

Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., who is not a member of the Freedom Caucus and whose district was hit hard by Helene, told Fox News Digital that he was in touch with House leaders about a disaster aid bill but said details were still being crafted.

Meanwhile Congressional leaders are expected to negotiate on a continuing resolution (CR), a short-term extension of the current government funding levels, by the Dec. 20 partial shutdown deadline.

Mike Johnson and Chuck Schumer

House Speaker Mike Johnson will need to work with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer if a disaster aid bill is to be passed this year. (Reuters)

“We’re looking at a couple of different options,” Edwards said on Wednesday morning. “It may be attached to the CR, it may run parallel to the CR, but it’s very much being constructed right now.”

Asked about Biden’s requested total, he said, “It’s still being built. We’ve got pretty much the bones established, we’re just trying to determine proportionately, how much money we spend in each of the various areas.”

Advertisement

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who discussed disaster aid and government funding with the House Freedom Caucus on Tuesday evening, gave little insight into his plans during his weekly press conference.

“It’s serious, serious damage. But the initial request was $116.5 billion. And what we’re doing right now is the important, methodical job that the House has, to go through really line by line and assess those requests and make sure that they all are actually tied to disaster and not superfluous items and issues that are included,” Johnson said.

Continue Reading

Politics

Column: Trump has named a pro-union secretary of Labor, but will she be able to do anything for workers?

Published

on

Column: Trump has named a pro-union secretary of Labor, but will she be able to do anything for workers?

Dear readers: Hang on to your hats. I’m about to praise Donald Trump for one of his Cabinet nominees.

She’s Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Ore.), who will be the nominee for secretary of Labor.

Chavez-DeRemer has solid pro-labor credentials, a huge departure from the two men who served Trump as secretaries of Labor in his first term. She was one of only three Republicans in the House to vote in favor of the so-called PRO Act, which would significantly strengthen collective bargaining rights. (The measure passed the House in 2019 and 2021 but has been becalmed in committee during the current Congress.)

‘If Chavez-DeRemer commits as Labor secretary to strengthen labor unions and promote worker power, she’s a strong candidate for the job.’

— Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)

Advertisement

During her last electoral campaign she promoted herself as the daughter of a Teamsters union member; that might have been connected to her strong endorsement for the Cabinet post by Teamsters President Sean O’Brien, one of the very few major labor leaders who favored the Republicans during the presidential campaign, to the extent of speaking from the podium at the Republican National Convention in July.

Chavez-DeRemer is a one-term Republican member of Congress who lost her bid for reelection last month to Democrat Janelle Bynum. Her loss wasn’t much of a surprise: Her congressional district has been a solid Democratic stronghold for more than a decade, and she won election in 2022 by only two percentage points.

Labor activists and pro-labor politicians promptly announced support for Chavez-DeRemer after Trump announced her nomination on Nov. 22. Among those making positive noises about the nominee was the staunchly pro-labor Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

Advertisement

“It’s a big deal that one of the few Republican lawmakers who have endorsed the PRO Act could lead the Department of Labor,” Warren said. “If Chavez-DeRemer commits as Labor secretary to strengthen labor unions and promote worker power, she’s a strong candidate for the job.”

Chavez-DeRemer received an explicit endorsement from Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. “Her record suggests real support of workers & their right to unionize,” Weingarten tweeted. “I hope it means the Trump admin will actually respect collective bargaining and workers’ voices from Teamsters to teachers.”

The labor-affiliated Economic Policy Institute also offered encouraging words, citing Chavez-DeRemer’s support for the PRO Act and the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act, which would protect organizing and collective bargaining rights for government employees.

“While Congresswoman Chavez-DeRemer’s support for these needed reforms is encouraging,” EPI general counsel Celine McNicholas wrote, “if confirmed, she will be Secretary of Labor for a president who steadfastly pursued an ambitious anti-worker agenda during his first term in office.”

Another indicator of Chavez-DeRemer’s pro-labor outlook is the bilious reaction from anti-labor conservatives and Republicans to her nomination. Much of that opposition has been focused on her support of the PRO Act. Among other provisions, the act would override state right-to-work laws, racist and anti-union statutes that are common in southeastern and heartland states.

Advertisement

“In this woman’s America, every worker would have to have a boss and pay the union for the privilege of working,” said Grover Norquist, the right-wing anti-tax warrior. The New York Post, a mouthpiece for Rupert Murdoch, quoted an anonymous GOP insider labeling Chavez-DeRemer “toxic for so many Republicans.”

Indeed, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) tweeted that he would “need to get a better understanding of her support for Democrat legislation in Congress that would strip Louisiana’s ability to be a right to work state.”

As McNicholas observed, the chief challenge for Chavez-DeRemer if she’s confirmed may be navigating the shoals of an anti-labor Trump administration. During his first term, he turned the Department of Labor into something that more resembled a Department of Employer Rights.

That was especially true under his second Labor secretary, Eugene Scalia —the son of the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who had made a career as a lawyer for big corporations resisting labor regulations. (Scalia succeeded Alex Acosta, who resigned as Labor secretary when a furor arose over the solicitous plea deal he had reached with child trafficker Jeffrey Epstein in 2008 when he was a U.S. attorney in Florida.)

Trump pursued what economics commentator Pedro Nicolaci da Costa called “the most hostile anti-labor agenda of any modern president” in 2019. He overturned an Obama administration rule on overtime pay that eliminated overtime protection for an estimated 8.2 million workers. The Biden administration tried to restore much of that protection, but its effort was blocked by a Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas.

Advertisement

Through changes to the National Labor Relations Board, Trump reversed the board’s trend toward expanding the definition of “joint employer,” which would have made big franchisers such as McDonald’s jointly liable with their franchisees for violations of employees’ wage and hour rights. He rescinded the Obama-era “persuader” rule, which required employers to disclose their relationships with union-busting law firms.

Amazingly, Trump’s Labor Department fought legislation to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour from its woefully outdated $7.25. (The federal minimum wage is still mired at $7.25.)

Among the challenges facing Chavez-DeRemer would be a tough comparison with the labor policies of the Biden administration, who has been the most pro-labor president in decades, possibly ever. In an unprecedented move, Biden walked a United Auto Workers picket line in 2023 while the union was negotiating what became a landmark contract with major automakers.

Trump had tried to counter Biden’s appearance by staging a rally at a nonunion auto parts factory, but it was shortly revealed that some of the workers brandishing signs reading “union members for Trump” and “auto workers for Trump” weren’t actually union members or auto workers.

Promptly after taking office, Biden swept a gang of union-busting Trump appointees out of an important federal labor relations agency — the Federal Service Impasses Panel, which rules on disputes between labor and management involving government union contracts. Trump had stacked the 10-member panel with professional union busters and anti-union ideologues, including corporate lawyers and officials from Koch network-funded right-wing organizations. Eight of the 10 resigned under pressure; Biden fired the two holdouts.

Advertisement

The Democratic majorities Biden assembled at the National Labor Relations Board and Federal Trade Commission drafted and implemented pro-worker policies. The Labor Department revived enforcement of overtime and worker safety laws, which had grown cobwebs under Trump.

Biden didn’t get everything he wanted on the labor front. The Federal Trade Commission, headed by Biden appointee Lina Khan, crafted a rule to ban noncompete clauses in employment contracts, which tend to suppress wages and innovation, but the rule was blocked by another Trump-appointed federal judge this summer just days before it was scheduled to take effect.

The Senate confirmations of two superbly qualified Biden nominees for top posts at the Labor Department were blocked by a Big Business cabal allied with not only Republicans but supine Democrats including Sens. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. (Manchin and Sinema subsequently changed their party affiliations from Democratic to independent, but continued to caucus with the Democrats. Neither will be in the Senate after their current terms end this year.)

Ferocious opposition from business interests forced David Weil, an expert in labor law and all the ways employers cheat their workers of wages, to withdraw his name from consideration as head of the Labor Department’s Wage and Hour Division in 2022.

The same cabal denied confirmation of Julie Su, a stalwart and exceptionally effective advocate for worker rights throughout a professional career that included service as California Labor Commissioner, as successor to Biden’s first Labor secretary, Marty Walsh. Su has been serving as acting secretary since Walsh’s departure in February 2023.

Advertisement

Many Biden administration policies are likely to be rolled back in the new administration, just as Trump in his first term rolled back Obama’s pro-labor policies. These efforts will be test cases for Chavez-DeRemer’s independence from the worst instincts of her boss and his inner circle.

EPI’s McNicholas points to several issues that worker and union advocates will be watching closely. Will she fight to defend the Biden administration’s expansion of overtime eligibility? The Trump administration could act to challenge the court ruling that blocked the expansion, or let it ride. Will she act to preserve the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s new standard requiring employers to protect workers from heat-related injuries?

Will she fight any effort to reimplement a Trump-era program that gave employers a free pass if they confessed when accused of wage theft, in which case penalties and damage assessments were waived?

“Chavez-DeRemer should make it harder for employers to steal workers’ wages,” McNicholas argued, “not easier.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: How Kash Patel, Trump’s F.B.I. Pick, Plans to Reshape the Bureau

Published

on

Video: How Kash Patel, Trump’s F.B.I. Pick, Plans to Reshape the Bureau

new video loaded: How Kash Patel, Trump’s F.B.I. Pick, Plans to Reshape the Bureau

transcript

transcript

How Kash Patel, Trump’s F.B.I. Pick, Plans to Reshape the Bureau

Donald Trump’s pick to lead the F.B.I. has called for firing the agency’s top officials, shutting down its Washington headquarters and has vowed to investigate the president-elect’s political adversaries.

“I’d shut down the F.B.I. Hoover building on Day 1, and reopen it the next day as a museum of the deep state. And I’d take the 7,000 employees that work in that building and send them across America to chase down criminals. Go be cops. You’re cops, go be cops.” “A man who’s also been with me just about from the beginning. He’s tough, he’s smart. He loves our country and he is a warrior, Kash Patel.” “We are blessed by God to have Donald Trump be our juggernaut of justice, to be our leader, to be our continued warrior in the arena. I am going to go on a government gangsters manhunt in Washington, D.C., for our great president. Who’s coming with me? And we have to take out not just the government gangsters, but the mainstream media, the ones that perpetuated the fake news narratives. We’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections. We’re going to come after you.”

Advertisement

Recent episodes in 2024 Elections

Continue Reading

Trending