Politics
Column: Will abortion rights boost Biden and fellow Democrats? Arizona offers a test case
On a recent sunny morning, Riley Heesch stopped outside a coffee shop and signed her name to a petition aimed at putting the abortion issue on Arizona’s November ballot.
She was glad to do so.
“I am really passionate about abortion access,” Heesch said. “It is, especially in Arizona, something that’s being threatened and it shouldn’t be. It needs to be available to everyone and anyone that needs it.”
But her passion fizzled when it came to the presidential race.
The 22-year-old childcare worker, who just graduated from Arizona State University in Tempe, has paid little mind to the contest. And while she definitely won’t back Donald Trump, she’s not at all certain she’ll support Joe Biden, as she did in 2020.
She couldn’t say why. “Maybe he’s not the best candidate?” Heesch ventured, before tepidly pledging a maybe-vote for the president.
“I will if I have to,” she said. “I think.”
As Biden battles for a second term, he’s counting on reluctant voters like Heesch to eventually come around — and ballot measures like the abortion rights initiative in Arizona to help prod them in his direction.
Ever since the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, and with it a 50-year-old constitutional right to abortion, the issue has played to Democrats’ considerable advantage.
It helped the party avoid a widely predicted wipeout in the 2022 midterm elections and has also forced Republicans, including Trump, to contort themselves as they try to satisfy social conservatives without alienating the majority of Americans who believe abortion should be legal in most cases.
Voters in seven states — including such GOP strongholds as Kansas, Kentucky and Montana — have either upheld abortion rights at the ballot box or rejected efforts to restrict access.
The issue has yet to be tested, however, in a presidential election year, when turnout will be significantly higher and any number of issues — the economy, border security, the war in Gaza — will compete for voters’ attention.
That doesn’t diminish the importance of the abortion issue. “It’s just a matter of priorities, given all the other ones that matter,” said Republican pollster David Winston.
Nearly a dozen states could have abortion rights initiatives on their ballot in November. (Efforts to place antiabortion measures before voters in Iowa and Pennsylvania fell short.)
Democratic strategists see the issue as vital not just to keeping hold of the White House, but boosting their candidates for Congress and statehouses across the country, in part by engaging voters — in particular Democrats and independents — who might otherwise sit out the election.
“I hear all the arguments about the border and immigration and the economy,” said Mini Tammaraju, president of Reproductive Freedom for All, a national abortion rights organization. “But we can motivate voters on this issue and we can motivate young voters who are, frankly, a little disaffected right now and don’t feel like they’re being listened to.”
Most of the abortion measures that have reached the ballot, or might, are in states such as Maryland, New York and South Dakota that are not seriously contested in the presidential race.
In Florida, voters will decide whether to repeal a six-week abortion ban and codify a right to abortion in the state’s constitution. But Florida is no longer the political battleground it was, having moved decisively toward Republicans in recent years. It is only marginally competitive in November.
That leaves two important swing states, Arizona and Nevada, where Democrats hope abortion rights and measures enshrining them into law will help put Biden over the top.
Both were narrowly decided in 2020, but Arizona was the closer of the two; Biden won by fewer than 11,000 votes, a margin of 0.3%.
The state has since become a focal point of the abortion debate, after its Supreme Court upheld an 1864 law imposing a near-total ban. (Bowing to pressure, the Republican-run Legislature passed a measure defaulting to a 15-week limit, with few exceptions. It was swiftly signed into law by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs.)
The court’s decision “rocked the body politic,” said Stan Barnes, a GOP strategist in Phoenix, and gave a big boost to Democrats up and down the ballot — though he expects the sentiment to dissipate by fall.
Chuck Coughlin, an independent pollster in Phoenix, isn’t so sure.
The abortion issue “unquestionably helps Democrats” as a “motivational thing to turn people out and hang around [Trump’s] neck,” said Coughlin, who used to work for Republicans but left the party after Trump’s election.
“It’s a major tsunami in American political life to take away a right that people have assumed they’ve had,” Coughlin said. “And so the electoral response is, ‘Get your government off my body!’”
On the far north side of Phoenix, where scraps of desert are still visible amid the relentless urban sprawl, Ruth Lambert was collecting signatures to put the abortion question before voters.
It was already nearing 80 degrees at 8:30 in the morning and Lambert was seated in the corner of a strip mall, sheltered beneath the partial shade of a palo verde tree.
The 73-year-old retiree moved to Arizona in 2004, just as her daughter was about to give birth. That grandchild is now 20, Lambert said, and “can’t wrap her head around” the countrywide rollback of abortion rights.
“It’s almost like a foreign concept,” said Lambert, who has volunteered for the initiative campaign since September.
She’s surprised at how easy it’s been gathering support — organizers expect to turn in the most signatures in state history — and struck by the number of Republicans and self-described conservatives who’ve affixed their names to petitions.
“I really don’t like to talk party. It’s good policy,” Lambert said of the Arizona Abortion Access Act, as the measure is formally known. “It’s not necessarily political.”
Proponents of an abortion rights initiative expect to turn in the most signatures gathered in Arizona history. The question is whether the measure can survive an anticipated legal challenge.
(Mark Z. Barabak / Los Angeles Times)
But, of course, it very much is. The ballot measure engenders strong resistance from abortion opponents and others who feel it goes too far.
The initiative would amend the state constitution to ensure a “fundamental right” to abortion until fetal viability — or roughly the 24th week of pregnancy — and beyond that if a healthcare professional deemed it necessary to “protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.”
Opponents say that would amount to abortion on demand and that is why Coughlin, among others, intends to vote against the initiative — provided it makes the ballot.
That is by no means certain.
After Arizona voters passed a 2016 measure raising the minimum wage, Republican lawmakers pushed through legislation making it much tougher to qualify ballot initiatives, imposing a number of nitpicky rules.
If, for instance, a signature on a petition extends into the one below, both can be disqualified. If someone who is registered to vote as “Jonathan” signs their name “John,” that, too, can be rejected.
And so on.
Organizers say they have already collected well in excess of the roughly 400,000 signatures needed to make the ballot, with more than a month left before the July 3 deadline. The cutoff to start printing ballots is late August.
That opens up “a seven-week gauntlet where every imaginable line on the petition sheets will be challenged,” said Stacy Pearson, a Democratic strategist who has run several initiative campaigns. The final arbiter will the same conservative-leaning Supreme Court that upheld the Civil War-era abortion law.
Polling suggests if the initiative makes the ballot, it will likely pass. And it would probably help Biden and boost the rest of the Democratic ticket at least some.
While abortion may not be top of the mind for most voters, the issue could engage those like Heesch, the 22-year-old childcare worker who otherwise has little use for the president.
“In a lot of ways, Democrats are going to be fighting against the couch” — that is the stay-at-home indifference of voters the party is counting on, said pollster Natalie Jackson.
“In a close election, you’d rather be on the side of the vast majority of the population,” said Jackson, a Democrat who has extensively researched attitudes on abortion. While it won’t be “the top driver” for most, Biden would definitely rather have “the issue at his back.”
It could make all the difference.
Politics
ActBlue CEO faces June 10 grilling after fundraising powerhouse allegedly misled Congress on foreign donations
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: The embattled head of a Democratic fundraising behemoth is headed for a congressional grilling next month over allegations of fraudulent donations on its platform.
ActBlue’s CEO Regina Wallace-Jones will testify in a public hearing before the House Administration Committee on June 10, a committee spokesman told Fox News Digital.
Wallace-Jones’ agreement to testify comes as ActBlue faces mounting scrutiny over whether it misled Congress regarding foreign donations on its payment processing platform.
“Ms. Wallace-Jones allegedly misled our committee at the outset of our investigation into ActBlue’s fraud prevention standards,” House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., said in a statement. “It’s past time we set the record straight and got answers for the American people. I look forward to hearing her testify.”
House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., holds a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 10, 2025. (Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images)
DEM FUNDRAISING GIANT ACTBLUE ROCKED BY ALLEGATIONS IT MISLED CONGRESS ABOUT FOREIGN DONATIONS
The statement referenced an explosive report in The New York Times earlier this year that said ActBlue’s then-outside counsel warned Wallace-Jones in 2023 the group may have misrepresented facts to Steil’s committee about its vetting of potentially illegal foreign donations.
Under U.S. law, foreign nationals who are not lawful permanent residents are generally prohibited from donating to candidates seeking federal office or political action committees.
Steil previously requested that Wallace-Jones testify before his committee on May 19. The invitation was met with outrage from ActBlue’s lawyers, who dismissed the committee action as a “partisan attack.”
But Republicans have pointed to documents that ActBlue has allegedly withheld in response to subpoenas issued in 2025, which Steil has characterized as “deliberately incomplete.”
All five current or former ActBlue employees who appeared in depositions with the committee invoked their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination a combined 146 times, according to an interim staff report released in April by House Republicans.
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones, a delegate from California, wears a U.S.-flag themed outfit ahead of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center in Chicago, Ill., on Aug. 19, 2024.
TEXAS AG PAXTON SUES DEM FUNDRAISING PLATFORM ACTBLUE, ALLEGING ‘FRAUDULENT AND FOREIGN DONATIONS’
The House Administration Committee has been probing ActBlue’s fraud prevention safeguards since 2023, when Steil’s panel investigated the group’s failure to require credit card verification value (CVV) when processing payments.
“Given ActBlue’s demonstrated history of misleading Congress, there is considerable reason to believe that ActBlue may have deliberately withheld this responsive material to impede our investigation,” Steil and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote in a letter to Wallace-Jones in April.
In the letter, the senior Republicans also directed ActBlue to produce a trove of documents related to its vetting of political contributions from abroad.
Wallace-Jones has denied making false statements to Congress. The group’s lawyers have previously characterized the investigation as politically motivated and contended that ActBlue has been forthright with the committee.
Amid the GOP scrutiny, ActBlue has experienced a wave of resignations from senior legal and compliance staff.
An election countdown calendar hangs at the ActBlue fundraising office in Somerville, Mass. (Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The June hearing notice immediately follows the House Administration Committee advancing legislation to crack down on fraudulent political donations, including illegal contributions from foreigners. The campaign finance measure cleared Steil’s panel unanimously on Thursday.
“It’s a positive sign that people are beginning to take this risk and this threat seriously,” the Wisconsin Republican told Spectrum News.
Politics
The Steyer campaign pays influencers. Their posts don’t always make that clear
WASHINGTON — In recent weeks, several social media influencers have popped up in online feeds touting the California gubernatorial campaign of billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer.
Some complain about the price of gasoline. Others mention environmental concerns. One cites her newfound sobriety as evidence that people can change — a nod to Steyer’s self-proclaimed metamorphosis from hedge fund titan to scourge of big corporations.
“I did not expect the most progressive governor candidate to be a billionaire, but look at the policies you guys,” said one content creator on TikTok with the user name Jaz R. “Hear me out. I know Tom Steyer is a billionaire, but he also is for the people.”
The posts include direct-to-the-camera appeals, with personal details interwoven into messages of support for Steyer. An influencer goes for a stroll as onscreen text touts Steyer’s policies. Some seek to convey authenticity, if occasionally ham-fistedly; one influencer mispronounces Steyer’s last name.
What they do not include is a disclosure that their creators were paid by the Steyer campaign to produce the videos, according to a complaint filed this week with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission and a Times review of the posts.
The complaint alleges that the Steyer campaign failed to notify the influencers it hired of their obligation to inform their audience when their posts have been sponsored by the campaign.
California passed a law in 2023 requiring that influencers disclose if they have been paid to create promotional content for or against a candidate or ballot measure, one of the few jurisdictions in the country with such a requirement. There is no such requirement at the federal level.
“Every time there’s a new technology, you have to create legislation that requires them to disclose,” said state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Orange), who sponsored the bill.
Violating the law doesn’t carry criminal, civil or administrative penalties, but the FPPC can take influencers who break the law to court and ask a judge to force them to comply.
The complaint was filed by two California women — political influencers themselves — who said they noticed a number of new accounts that suddenly started posting similar-sounding videos promoting Steyer earlier this month.
“They had the exact same language, they had the same talking points,” said Beatrice Gomberg, who worked with Kaitlyn Hennessy in their digital sleuthing efforts.
The FPPC did not comment on the complaint.
Steyer’s campaign appears to have relied on paid influencers more than any candidate for governor, according to the most recent campaign finance filings.
That spending represents only a small fraction of the massive campaign war chest Steyer has seeded with nearly $180 million of his own money. But the complaint highlights the growing degree to which political candidates have come to seek out the authenticity that social media influencers seem to offer.
Steyer campaign spokesperson Kevin Liao said the campaign had properly followed the rules in hiring influencers and that the campaign is “confident” that Gomberg and Hennessy’s complaint is “baseless.”
“Creators make their living generating content. The campaign believes in compensating people for their time and work product and has paid creators to generate content,” Liao said in a statement. “Payments for creator content are disclosed in campaign finance reports, and we notify creators we directly work with of their disclosure requirements.”
While many of the new Steyer influencers have few followers, Steyer’s campaign disclosed in its most recent campaign finance report that it had paid thousands of dollars to numerous social media influencers with massive audiences, the Sacramento Bee reported.
Several of the videos produced by these popular social media personalities also failed to disclose that they had been paid by the campaign, according to the complaint and The Times’ review of the content.
But even accounts with few followers can still have a big impact if they are producing a steady stream of content supporting Steyer, said veteran California political strategist Mike Madrid.
“What they’re trying to do is trip the algorithm,” he said. “It looks like it has a bigger audience than it really does. It’s taking the concept of astroturfing into the digital age.”
Gomberg and Hennessy said they became friends after meeting at an April campaign event for Xavier Becerra, Steyer’s chief Democratic rival in the race, who holds a narrow advantage over Steyer in several recent political polls.
The pair have been prolific social media supporters of Becerra’s campaign ever since, though they insist they are not being paid for their efforts.
They said they discovered that many of the new pro-Steyer accounts seemed to be run by influencers — mostly women — who had previously created different social media accounts to hawk other products.
One of the pro-Steyer influencers had an online portfolio listing numerous clients, including the Steyer campaign and a gummy designed to boost arousal, according to the complaint and the Times review of the publicly accessible website.
The pair said they stumbled on an advertisement placed by a vendor for the campaign on a platform used by creators to find work. The advertisement indicated that creators would be paid $10 for each post, with bonuses for posts that amassed large viewership.
The vendor who posted the ad did not respond to a request for comment.
The advertisement has since been updated to say that it pays $1,000 per month and that creators will have to disclose that it is paid content.
As Gomberg and Hennessy dug deeper, they determined that some of the influencers promoting a candidate for governor weren’t even based in California.
A TikTok account using the handle jess.votes, for example, appears to be connected to a woman registered to vote in Florida. Other accounts were connected to women who indicated elsewhere that they were based in Pennsylvania, Missouri and Michigan.
Several influencers who created seemingly paid content promoting Steyer did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Times.
The brouhaha over paid social media content is just the latest instance of the growing political impact of online creators.
Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor — and congressional career — came to an end after multiple women accused him of sexual assault. A pair of influencers had publicly raised concerns about Swalwell’s behavior and helped connect victims with journalists who produced highly detailed reports of the allegations.
The California law requires influencers to disclose in a political post’s audio or text that it was sponsored and who paid for it.
The onus is on the creators to make the disclosure, but campaigns are required to tell them that they must do so. Despite passage of the law, the issue has so far remained largely under the radar.
“I have dozens of candidates and campaigns and I have not heard this issue come up one time,” said a campaign finance lawyer who requested anonymity because they represent numerous candidates with active campaigns.
Gomberg and Hennessy said that they were driven to call attention to potential violations of the disclosure requirements because of their concern about the corrosive influence such paid content could have if left unchecked.
“You have people who have trust in these creators,” Hennessy said. “You have a responsibility to your audience.”
Politics
Video: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
new video loaded: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
By Ana Swanson, Nour Idriss, Nikolay Nikolov and James Surdam
May 15, 2026
-
Lifestyle16 minutes ago‘Wait Wait’ for May 16. 2026: With Not My Job guest Ken Jennings
-
Education22 minutes agoVideo: How We Tested Dog Leashes
-
Technology28 minutes agoSnap, YouTube, and TikTok settle suit over harm to students
-
World34 minutes agoSeveral injured after car plows into Italy crowd, driver stabs passerby: report
-
Politics40 minutes agoActBlue CEO faces June 10 grilling after fundraising powerhouse allegedly misled Congress on foreign donations
-
Health46 minutes agoRudy Giuliani reveals he had ‘spiritual experience’ while in pneumonia-related coma
-
Sports52 minutes agoIt’s Game 7, and we have a bet locked in as the Cavaliers and legacies are on the line against the Pistons
-
Technology58 minutes agoMissed voicemails with no calls? It could be a scam