Politics
Tom Emmer blasts Democrats’ double standard on SAVE Act: ‘They require photo IDs’ at their own DNC
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
EXCLUSIVE: House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., is accusing Democrats of being hypocritical in their opposition to Republicans’ latest election integrity bill.
The No. 3 House Republican ripped the rival party after nearly all of them voted against the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act last week, specifically over its provision mandating federally accepted photo identification at the polls. It’s also sometimes referred to as the “SAVE Act.”
“These guys are doing the same old broken record about voter suppression,” Emmer told Fox News Digital. “Why aren’t they screaming about photo IDs at the airport? Why aren’t they screaming about photo IDs when you check out a book at the library?”
NOEM BACKS SAVE AMERICA ACT, SLAMS ‘RADICAL LEFT’ OPPOSITION TO VOTER IDS AND PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer accused Democrats of hypocrisy for requiring photo IDs for the DNC but not supporting the SAVE America Act. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images; Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Emmer pointed out that a photo ID was required for attendees to watch former Vice President Kamala Harris accept the Democratic Party’s nomination for the White House in Chicago last year.
“By the way, if they think it’s voter suppression, why do they require photo IDs at the Democrat National Convention to get in?” Emmer said.
“I mean, I think Americans are so much smarter than these people can understand, can let themselves understand,” he said.
The SAVE America Act passed the House on Wednesday with support from all Republicans — an increasingly rare sight in the chamber — and just one Democrat, Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas.
A previous iteration of the bill, just called the SAVE Act, passed the House in April of last year with support from four House Democrats.
Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, talks with reporters in the Capitol after a meeting of House Democrats in Washington, June 27, 2019. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images)
Whereas the SAVE Act would have created a new federal proof-of-citizenship mandate in the voter registration process and imposed requirements for states to keep their rolls clear of ineligible voters, the updated bill would also require photo ID to vote in any federal election.
That photo ID would also have to denote proof-of-citizenship, according to the legislative text.
DEMOCRAT CLAIMS SAVE ACT WOULD BLOCK MARRIED WOMEN FROM VOTING; REPUBLICANS SAY THAT’S WRONG
Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have both panned the bill, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries calling it “voter suppression” and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., dismissing it as “a modern-day Jim Crow.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., speaks to the media next to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., at the White House in Washington, Sept. 29, 2025. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
Jeffries also specifically took issue with a provision that would enable the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to initiate removal proceedings if an illegal immigrant was found on a state’s voter rolls, arguing DHS would weaponize the information.
But voter ID, at least, has proven to be a popular standard in U.S. elections across multiple public polls.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
A Pew Research Center poll released in August 2025 showed a whopping 83% of people supported government-issued photo ID requirements for showing up to vote, compared to just 16% of people who disapproved of it.
A Gallup poll from October 2024 showed 84% of people supported photo ID for voting in federal elections.
Politics
Trump Was Flattering, Xi Was Resolute. The Difference Spoke Volumes.
For President Trump, the first day of his visit to Beijing was all about the personal relationship between him and Xi Jinping, the Chinese leader.
“You’re a great leader,” he told his host, whom he has often said he admires for his “powerful” control over a nation of 1.4 billion people. “I say it to everybody.”
Mr. Xi, unsurprisingly, spent little time on flattery. Once the 21-gun salute and precision-marching by units of the People’s Liberation Army were finished, the disciplined Chinese leader plunged right away into setting boundaries for the two country’s relations. The red line was Taiwan, he said, making it abundantly clear that Mr. Trump’s effort at rapprochement could crash on takeoff if he interferes with China’s long-term effort to take control of the self-governing island.
“The U.S. must handle the Taiwan issue with utmost caution,” he said according to a readout from Xinhua, China’s official news agency. The warning came just minutes into his public remarks in the Great Hall of the People, the center of power for the People’s Republic starting just a decade into Mao’s revolution. For Mr. Xi, it was all about setting boundaries, from the start.
The moment seemed to capture the new equilibrium between the two adversaries. Mr. Xi arrived highly scripted, leaving no doubt that for all of China’s problems — deflation, depopulation, the bursting of the real estate bubble — the moment when China acts as a peer superpower had arrived.
At every turn, at least has he began his two-day trip to China, Mr. Trump sounded conciliatory, the exact opposite of his portrayals of China in public appearances back home, where during his presidential campaigns he has talked about the country as a job-stealer and national security threat. Mr. Xi, while smiling and welcoming to Mr. Trump, was quietly more confrontational — especially on Taiwan, where he delivered an unequivocal warning.
The gap spoke directly to the new level of confidence and authority Mr. Xi has adapted in his public speech, despite his challenges with the domestic economy, as he watches the United States plunge into conflict with Iran, another Middle East confrontation with no easy exit.
The Chinese president designed the day meticulously, down to a visit to the Temple of Heaven, the Ming dynasty complex not far from the Forbidden City. As Mr. Trump sat in the 13th-century wonder, he got a history lesson from the Chinese leader, tailored to echo the modern era.
At his toast at a televised State Banquet on Thursday night, Mr. Trump came with a lesson of his own, describing links between China and the United States that went back to the Empress of China, the ship that took a 14-month journey in 1783 to open trade and bring the first American diplomats to what was then known as Canton, now called Guangzhou.
“We’ve gotten along when there were difficulties, we worked it out,” Mr. Trump said. But even then he cast relations in personal terms, making clear that the huge divisions between the two countries had to be solved by two strong leaders.
“I would call you, and you would call me whenever we had a problem, people don’t know, whenever we had a problem,” he said. “We worked that out very quickly, and we’re going to have a fantastic future together.”
For his part, Mr. Xi returned to his mantra: to keep from turning competition into conflict, the two nations must keep from falling into the “Thucydides Trap.”
(The trap, popularized by the Harvard professor Graham Allison in his book “Destined for War: Can America and China Escape the Thucydides’s Trap,” comes when a rising power challenges a status-quo power, often leading to war. “It was the rise of Athens and the fear that rise engendered in Sparta,” the ancient Greek historian Thucydides wrote, “that made war inevitable”.)
Mr. Xi proposed a familiar solution: ban talk of competition between the No. 1 and No. 2 economic superpowers — a regular staple of the Biden White House — and focus on “stability,’’ a governing characteristic rarely associated with Mr. Trump.
“The common interests between China and the United State outweigh our differences,” Mr. Xi said, according to state media. “Stability in China-U.S. relations is a boon to the world.”
But unlike Mr. Trump, he explored the alternative scenario.
“If handled poorly, the two countries will collide or even clash, putting the entire U.S.-China relationship in an extremely dangerous situation,” he said, a clear reference to Taiwan, according to the readout.
If much of this sounds familiar, it was. Mr. Xi has go-to homilies, part of his philosopher-king approach to ruling over China. And in this summit he invented one new one: He said he agreed with Mr. Trump on “a new vision of building a constructive China-US relationship of strategic stability.”
As Rush Doshi, a China scholar at Georgetown University noted, that sounded like an effort “to lock in a ‘truce’ favorable to them, and they want to do so beyond Trump, with this post-trade war détente setting the base line.”
Future disputes over China’s excess manufacturing capacity or rebuilding American military capability in the Indo-Pacific could be declared “a violation of this frame,” he wrote on X.
The contrast with Mr. Trump’s style — where summits are first and foremost for instant “deals,’’ usually ones he can boast will provide jobs or sales — is often jarring. Mr. Trump, for example, brought a group of business executives, whose presence he said was intended to show “respect” for China while seeking market access.
It had a 1990s ring to it, the days when Bill Clinton and George W. Bush brought business leaders to explore the promise of the Chinese market, often for the first time. But Mr. Trump’s delegation came with decades of experience, much of it bitter. Some of them were survivors of the battles over intellectual property theft and sharp restrictions intended to favor local Chinese industry.
Mr. Xi did not bring an equivalent group. There were no executives from BYD, the huge Chinese carmaker trying to figure out how to do business in the United States, or DeepSeek, the innovative artificial intelligence firm at the heart of the battle with A.I. firms in the United States.
There were other discordant notes, heard just beneath the noise of the clinking glasses and optimistic toasts. In contrast to the Chinese readout, the American account, released by the White House, talked about cracking down on fentanyl precursors, a long-running issue with China, and buying American agricultural goods. It did not mention Taiwan, or China’s restrictions on rare earths, or its rapid nuclear weapons buildup.
The White House also described the United States and China as aligned on the need to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and keep it free of Iranian tolls. All that was true, but ignored the deeper complication: despite American entreaties, China is unlikely to deploy whatever influence it has with the Iranians for free. What the price might be is unclear.
The real test of how these two men debate their differences might come on Friday morning, when Mr. Trump is scheduled for much smaller meetings with Mr. Xi. It is the kind of session he likes best: leader to leader. And once he leaves Chinese airspace, he seems likely to present his preferred version of those talks.
The Chinese government will likely be more circumspect.
Politics
Jordan grills Soros-backed DA Descano in heated spat over soft-on-crime policy: ‘This is almost laughable’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, tussled with high-profile Soros-backed Fairfax Commonwealth’s Attorney Stephen Descano over soft-on-crime policies that critics said let illegal immigrant criminals back on the street.
Descano was seated two spots away from Cheryl Minter, mother of Stephanie Minter, who was allegedly murdered by Sierra Leone national Abdul Jalloh at a bus stop not far from George Washington’s Mount Vernon.
Minter’s case, following several similar incidents and the failure by Descano or fellow witness Fairfax County Sheriff Stacey Ann Kincaid to honor ICE detainers, spurred lawmakers to haul them across the river to testify about the rapidly deteriorating safety of what the prosecutor called one of America’s safest counties.
Jordan began by pressing Kincaid on why she “let” illegal immigrant suspect Marvin Morales-Ortiz out of her jail: “Because the guy beside you wouldn’t prosecute him, right?”
HOUSE PANEL SUMMONS SOROS-BACKED FAIRFAX PROSECUTOR OVER RELEASES TIED TO VIOLENT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CASES
Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano speaks at an event in Fairfax County, Va. (Sarah Voisin/Getty Images)
“You’d have to talk to him,” Kincaid replied, adding a judge later ordered his release, before bristling at Jordan’s follow-up question about law enforcement morale in Fairfax.
Jordan then turned to Descano, questioning changes to language on his website about considering immigration consequences in charging decisions.
Descano said the excerpt was part of a “campaign” statement and not an actual law enforcement policy, leading Jordan to incredulously ask whether people should believe his campaign statements will translate into policies upon election.
“That’s not what I’m saying,” Descano countered.
“This is almost laughable,” said Jordan. “This is your policy. You said it right here. You told the voters, if you elect me, I will take into account immigration consequences when making, charging and pleading [decisions].”
Descano’s exchange with next Republican to ask questions, Rep. Jeff Van Drew of South Jersey, also quickly escalated into near-shouting.
WAVE OF ALLEGED MIGRANT MURDERS IGNITES FURY ACROSS US AS OFFICIALS WARN OF MORE CARNAGE, CRACKDOWN NEEDED
Van Drew criticized sanctuary policies, including in his home Garden State, and told Minter that his own condolences could not do justice to what happened to her daughter in Descano’s territory.
He called the conditions in sanctuary jurisdictions “bizarro world” and asked the prosecutor if communities are safer when illegal immigrant criminals are deported or when they are released.
“Well, sir, that’s not –” Descano began before Van Drew cut him off. “Yes or no – I’m asking the questions.”
“You’re a human being. You’re sitting next to a woman who lost her daughter. Can you tell me if illegal criminals are removed from the country; if we’re safer,” Van Drew said, prompting a fiery response from Descano:
“To suggest I don’t care about what happens in my community…” he began before more crosstalk ensued.
“Dammit, answer my question,” Van Drew eventually fumed.
GRIEVING VIRGINIA MOTHER TELLS FAR-LEFT PROSECUTOR ‘DO YOUR JOB’ AFTER DAUGHTER STABBED TO DEATH
“Explain to the lady next to you (Cheryl Minter). Abdul Jalloh was charged in your county more than 40 times. Not four times. 40 times. Your office dropped the charges in almost every single case. That’s fact. We have it documented. We can look at it your own. Fairfax County Police Department wrote your office [in] May 2025 saying he had shown a, quote, ‘blatant disregard for human life and was a danger to the community’ and that if he wasn’t detained and deported, he would seriously hurt someone or kill someone,” Van Drew said.
“The very man went out and then killed someone. So the question is, couldn’t’ve we done better there?”
Another panelist also elicited occasional rifts with the lawmakers. Libertarian analyst David Bier of the Cato Institute often defended the idea of counties making their own decisions about whether to cooperate with federal law enforcement.
Part of Bier’s opening statement drew some eyebrows on X, as he appeared to suggest as much as 20% of Fairfax County’s population is deportable – when trying to argue against mass deportation.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“The first step would be to give up on the mass deportation fantasy. About 1 in 5 Fairfax residents is someone who could be deported or who lives with them. It would destroy neighborhoods, rip Americans away from their spouses, parents, friends, families, customers, employees, employers, nurses, nannies, and teachers,” Bier said.
Bier also accused DHS of ignoring the Laken Riley Act and instead of “racially profiling Americans at Home Depot” and shooting people like Alex Pretti and Renee Good.
Politics
Newsom offers early peek at rosy budget projections
SACRAMENTO — Hours before Gov. Gavin Newsom is expected to present his budget plan on Thursday, his office released new projections of a $16.5-billion state revenue windfall over three years and offered a rosy outlook on California’s fiscal position during his final year in office and the year after.
Newsom’s office provided few details about his plan to reduce spending or other adjustments that he would need to propose in combination with the increase in revenue to eliminate projected deficits from 2026-27 through 2027-28.
The unusual early look at his budget proposal comes as Newsom begins to wind down his time at the state Capitol and considers a run for president in 2028.
Two weeks ago, the Legislative Analyst’s Office issued an analysis of state spending that said California could not, in the long term, afford to pay for existing services and the new programs that Newsom and Democratic lawmakers have enacted since he took office in 2019. State spending has outpaced California’s strong revenue growth by about 10%, creating a perennial budget shortfall, defined as a structural deficit.
California’s spending problem threatens to define Newsom’s fiscal legacy and could provide ripe fodder for his critics. If projections of the unexpected tax windfall, which analysts attribute to stock market interest in artificial intelligence companies, bear out, the upswing could mark a lucky break for Newsom.
The governor has largely resisted adopting new across-the-board tax increases or sharply curtailing his expensive policy proposals in order to align state spending with revenue.
His budget proposal includes a call to increase taxes on corporations by limiting state tax credits to no more than $5 million, or 50% of a company’s tax liability, beginning in the tax year 2027. No estimates were offered to explain how much revenue the new cap would bring in to support the state budget.
The preview of his budget has several new spending proposals, including providing $300 million to help low-income Californians keep $0 monthly premiums on healthcare coverage through the Affordable Care Act in response to cuts by the federal government, as well as $100 million to help wildfire victims afford construction loans to rebuild their homes. Two days before Mother’s Day, Newsom also introduced a plan to provide 400 free diapers for every California newborn at select hospitals beginning this summer.
Newsom is expected to present his budget in more detail late Thursday morning in Sacramento.
-
Nebraska5 minutes agoNo. 1 Nebraska ready to open NCAA Tournament against Summit League Champion South Dakota
-
Nevada11 minutes agoNevada designates more than 119,000 voters inactive
-
New Hampshire17 minutes agoNotable New Hampshire Deaths: Funeral Director Eric Rochette
-
New Jersey22 minutes agoNew Jersey swim team left without pool after Wayne Community Center abruptly ends agreement
-
New Mexico29 minutes agoThe most popular baby names in New Mexico for 2025
-
North Carolina35 minutes agoBusinesses worry of potential impacts as Marion tightens water restrictions amid drought
-
North Dakota41 minutes agoHighway Patrol: Blowing dirt cuts visibility in northwest North Dakota
-
Ohio47 minutes agoWarren man sentenced for Niles police chase