Connect with us

Politics

Watchdog claims victory over Pentagon animal testing as lawmakers demand accounting of taxpayer funds

Published

on

Watchdog claims victory over Pentagon animal testing as lawmakers demand accounting of taxpayer funds

After several lawmakers criticized the Pentagon for sanctioning painful experiments on dogs, an animal-testing watchdog group said the Defense Department is only the latest agency to be exposed. Now, one-by-one, departments have been forced to put a stop to it. 

One month after Fox News reported on the matter, representatives Young Kim, R-Calif., and Donald Davis, D-N.C., led more than two dozen House members in demanding a specific accounting of how the Pentagon spent taxpayer money in this way.

At the same time, a spokesperson for the White Coat Waste Project (WCW), an organization dedicated to ending the taxpayer-funded experimentation on animals, said he hopes the new attention, as well as a rider in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), will make the Pentagon the second known federal agency to halt painful testing on animals. 

Justin Goodman, WCW’s vice president, said in addition to the experimentation highlighted in June, Pentagon-sanctioned testing has also reportedly been “electroshocking” cats to study erectile dysfunction.

PENTAGON’S ‘BARBARIC’ DRUG TESTING ON DOGS RAISES HACKLES WITH PET-LOVING LAWMAKERS

Advertisement

A beagle in snow (iStock)

He noted the exposure of the testing led House lawmakers to insert an amendment into the 2025 NDAA to ban the Pentagon from continuing with any biomedical pet testing. Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., a member of the Congressional Dog Caucus, drafted that particular amendment. 

The letter, addressed to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, demands information on the timeline for dog testing, the number of dogs who underwent experimentation, the USDA “pain category” of Pentagon animal tests and an explanation of the testing relative to the fact the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) does not mandate canine testing for human drugs.

“We are concerned by the DOD’s use of taxpayer dollars on inhumane dog experiments for human drugs and do not believe it is a prudent use of its resources,” the letter states.

It also asked for figures on current grants, contracts and expenditures related to testing at the present and within the last five years. Goodman noted the particular defense contract relating to the beagle testing revealed in June ended July 31.

Advertisement

FAUCI UNDER FIRE FOR REPORT ALLEGING NIAID SPENT $400K FOR RESEARCH INFECTING DOGS WITH PARASITES

A plane flies over the Pentagon Jan. 11, 2024.  (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)

“This new letter also follows and cites our successful effort in the NDAA to unite Democrats and Republicans to defund all the DOD use (of cat and dog testing).” Goodman, whose group helped draft the letter, said.

“We have obviously exposed drug testing on puppies and these kitten-crippling experiments, but we don’t know the full extent of this wasteful spending because there’s such a lack of transparency about it.

“We eliminated dog and cat testing at the VA in recent years. And now we are working to make the DOD follow suit. And, unfortunately, there are several other agencies, including the NIH and the USDA, which are also spending taxpayer dollars to experiment on pets.”

Advertisement

Kim, the main signatory on the letter, said the Pentagon spent nearly $1 million on beagle testing alone, and she called the practice “inhumane and cruel.”

“The fact that this study was conducted despite DOD’s policy banning the use of dogs and cats for medical or surgical training and weapons development research shows we must continue to hold the administration’s feet to the fire and demand accountability,” she said.

Davis added that public funds should never be used for such testing and that Congress must work to stop the practices.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., who signed the letter, called the practice “horrendous.”

“It must stop immediately,” she said. “As co-chair of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus, I’m proud to work across the aisle on efforts to stop DOD and other government agencies from abusing these innocent dogs and cats with cruel, costly and absolutely unnecessary experiments.”

Advertisement

Her fellow New York Republican, Michael Lawler, added that using taxpayer funds to experiment on animals is the “last thing” the Pentagon should be doing.

“Pet abuse is wrong, and we should all be working to end it. That must include the Biden administration, who have shown a propensity to testing on cats and dogs,” he said.

Two other signers offered similar takes, with Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, calling the practice taxpayer-funded “torture [of] animals,” and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., saying the Pentagon should look to proven, non-animal testing methods that are available.

In response, a Pentagon spokesperson said that, as with all congressional correspondence, the agency will “respond directly to the authors.”

Advertisement

“It wouldn’t be appropriate for the department to comment on proposed legislation,” the spokesperson said. 

In his interview with Fox News Digital, Goodman also discussed a 2022 letter from Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough to Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., regarding feline experimentation to benefit stroke survivors and vets who have undergone amputations.

McDonough wrote to Heinrich, chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the VA, telling him he approved of such a study and included a legally-mandated report on it.

Goodman said the VA has since been compelled by Congress to suspend any active testing on cats, dogs or primates by 2026 and took issue with any claim McDonough has been opposed to such testing.

A metal plaque on the facade of the Department of Veterans Affairs building in Washington, D.C. (Robert Alexander/Getty Images)

Advertisement

In response, a spokesperson for the VA said approval of a study does “not at all mean advocacy for the continuation of the policy” and suggested McDonough has been a bureaucratic leader in trying to halt such tests.

“Under Secretary McDonough’s leadership, we are no longer conducting any feline testing and are now bringing an end to animal research on sensitive species,” VA press secretary Terrence Hayes said.

“Historically, VA has conducted research using sensitive species only when absolutely necessary to care for those who have served in our military. Over the last 19 years, VA has proactively reduced the number of studies involving sensitive species, driving an over 90% decrease in these types of studies,” Hayes added.

“The allegation that Secretary McDonough was personally advocating for this research is false.

Asked about the matter, Kim said it makes her wonder where else such testing is happening in the federal government.

Advertisement

“Resorting to testing animals should never happen, especially as we advance technological innovation,” Kim said.

Politics

Supreme Court Expands Presidential Powers to Fire Independent Regulators

Published

on

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that President Trump could fire independent regulators for any reason. But the justices carved out an exception for the Federal Reserve, preventing the immediate removal of Lisa D. Cook, a Federal Reserve governor.

Continue Reading

Politics

Emotion and feelings: How Democratic Socialists’ congressional insurgency could come back to bite them

Published

on

Emotion and feelings: How Democratic Socialists’ congressional insurgency could come back to bite them

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Democratic Socialists of America are on the charge, running hot off their wins in the New York Democratic primaries last week. Their victories in multiple Congressional seats – felling both Reps. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., and Dan Goldman, D-N.Y. – signals that the party is ready to move on from the same old, same old.

Espaillat chaired the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Goldman was a key House staffer during the first impeachment of President Donald Trump.

“Even Dan Goldman’s not good enough for them,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Fox. “That is how radical it’s become.”

Some moderate Democrats are trying to distance themselves from the left.

Advertisement

MAMDANI-BACKED SOCIALISTS LOOK TO TAKE NEW YORK PLAYBOOK NATIONWIDE AFTER PRIMARY VICTORIES

The left flank of the Democratic Party has surged to the top of the nation’s most hotly-contested primaries. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

“That’s not the same brand of politics that we have. We’re not those type of Democrats,” said Rep. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., who represents a battleground district.

“There’s a new group of Democratic Socialists who are socialists who are not commonsense Democrats. Who are not interested in getting things done. They’re interested in throwing bombs. Not actually solving problems,” said Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J.

LURCHING LEFT: MAMDANI-BACKED CANDIDATES OUST ESTABLISHMENT DEMOCRATS

Advertisement

Some Democrats are worried how far left candidates command more attention than those in the middle. Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet, D-Mich., worries that the outsized attention garnered by the left sends the wrong impression to voters.

“What they don’t want is divisiveness. They don’t want screaming and yelling,” said McDonald Rivet.

Mainstream Democrats feel trapped in the middle as the left – specifically the New York City left – wields an outsized media and political megaphone.

“Those candidates would not have won in Virginia where I live,” said Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va.

Rep. Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., is among the moderate Democrats trying to distance themselves from the party’s insurgent wing. (Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Republicans believe they are primed to nationalize the midterms. Republicans can do that by highlighting the extreme views of Democratic Socialists who captured primary victories in New York City. The GOP wants to portray their opponents as veering left.

“These are board-certified communists, right?” asked Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan. “They want no police. They want no private property.”

President Trump capitalized on the Democratic outcomes in his home city.

“The Democrat party is in big trouble because this isn’t stopping with New York,” he forecast.

VICTORIES BY MAMDANI-BACKED CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES SPOTLIGHTS GROWING RIFT IN DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Advertisement

This shakeup has progressive leaders demanding transformation at the top.

“You’re going to see, I think, people voting for new leadership and to change their representation,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.

The Democratic Party tapped Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., to deliver their official response to President Trump’s 2025 State of the Union speech. Slotkin is a moderate who won in a battleground race in 2024 – even as the President prevailed in the Wolverine State. But during an appearance on SiriusXM, Slotkin insists on a Democratic Party management switch.

“If people can’t understand that the game has fundamentally changed and they can’t adapt, then they need to let others,” said Slotkin. “The old models do not work for people.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., is perceived by Republicans as vulnerable after his preferred candidates failed in their congressional primaries. (Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images)

Advertisement

Republicans believe House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., is vulnerable after the DSA elected their candidates over his preferred picks in New York City.

“I think Hakeem Jeffries’ friends and neighbors gave him a big middle finger,” said House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky. “If you lose three elections in your hometown, that’s a pretty big slap in the face.”

He added that Democrats “are going further and further to the left to the point where they are full-blown, card-carrying socialists.”

And then there is the anti-Israel, anti-Jewish, and in some cases, antisemitic take by some of these candidates. Rep. Greg Landsman, D-Ohio, is a moderate Democrat from a swing district. He’s Jewish and one of the most pro-Israel Democrats in the House.

“There are some on the left who use Israel the way that some on the right use immigrants or trans kids as a way to divide. And I think it’s terrible. It’s also just not what voters want us talking about,” said Landsman.

Advertisement

HOUSE DEMOCRAT LASHES OUT WHEN GRILLED ON WHETHER SOCIALIST VICTORIES WOULD THREATEN DEM UNITY

Yours truly tangled with Rep. John Larson, D-Conn. – who once chaired the House Democratic Caucus. I pressed him about what the party would do about some candidates “who are too far to the left.”

“What does that mean? That’s your statement. Did the people of New York vote?” queried Larson.

I assured him that they did.

“Is that democracy?” asked Larson.

Advertisement

“But if some of them are antisemitic,” I countered.

“Is that a democracy?” continued Larson.

“Will you stand by people if they have antisemitic views?” I followed up.

Larson finally addressed my inquiry. His answer crystallized the schism the Democratic Party now faces.

“I’m against antisemitism, if that’s your question,” Larson declared.

Advertisement

Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., got into a heated exchange with Fox News’ Chad Pergram over the views of some likely members of his party’s next freshman class. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

The fact that Democrats are now facing this debate robs them of valuable time on economic issues.

Landsman argued that voters would prefer candidates to stick to groceries and the price of gas.

Gottheimer echoed Landsman on kitchen table subjects.

“We should be focused on ways to actually solve problems like that. Not coming in here and using tea party tactics and trying to divide up the country and pray to socialist ideals,” said Gottheimer.

Advertisement

So what is the party to do?

DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB

“They’re our nominees. We’re going to support them. We’re going to welcome them. They’re going to be part of our caucus and we’re going to unite behind Leader Jeffries,” said Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Oversight panel.

But that doesn’t address the fissures. It doesn’t address how voters may perceive the party. And it doesn’t establish if these new Democratic nominees will work on behalf of the party to raise money and advocate for Democrats across the board. Or, will they become professional bomb throwers – ala what the right has endured for a while.

“It’s going to be a lot harder to get things done when you get more and more extreme candidates who are here because they’re interested in political celebrity. They are interested in fighting. They’re interested in making points,” asserted Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D.

Advertisement

Republicans have had an abysmal week themselves – President Donald Trump and Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., for instance, got into a shouting match over Iran. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images; Tyler Kaufman/Getty Images)

Republicans suffered through an absolutely abysmal week. House GOP leaders had to yank multiple bills off the floor and send lawmakers home early because of internal disputes. President Trump and Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., got into a shouting match about Iran. And the president even threatened to veto a bipartisan housing bill. President Trump then refused to sign the bill at the Capitol, despite his aides touting the bill and House Republicans tricking out Statuary Hall for a signing ceremony.

The President characterized the housing bill as “a yawn.”

But the Democrats’ internal fractures may have superseded any internecine fighting among Republicans.

“While it’s not been a great week for Republicans, I think it’s been a much worse week for Democrats because of these primary elections,” observed Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Democrats will certainly run on economic issues and capitalize on statements by the President about basic issues like housing. But will a genuine policy debate outweigh fears about progressives nationwide?

Emotion and feelings rule in politics. And it could be a problem for Democrats if Republicans appropriate what happened in New York and Xerox it onto battleground districts across the country.

Continue Reading

Politics

Anthropic partners with California to expand AI use by government workers

Published

on

Anthropic partners with California to expand AI use by government workers

Anthropic teamed up with California to get more state workers to use its artificial intelligence assistant Claude as part of an effort to leverage technology to make the government more efficient.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who announced the partnership on Monday, said state agencies will be able to access Claude at a 50% discount. Free training and other assistance will also be available to the workers. California’s local governments will also get the same discount under the agreement.

Government workers can use Claude to draft and summarize documents, analyze information and do other tasks.

Anthropic, an AI company based in San Francisco, has a version of its AI assistant for government clients that provides more security than what it provides other consumers.

The new partnership shows how AI is playing a bigger role at work as tech companies market their tools as ways to complete tasks more quickly. Last year, San Francisco made Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat, which is powered by OpenAI’s model, available to nearly 30,000 city employees.

Advertisement

Still, the rise of automation at work has heightened concerns that people will lose their jobs. There are also worries that there are not yet adequate guardrails in place to mitigate data privacy and security risks.

Anthropic and the governor said that they’re focused on the responsible use of AI.

“AI should not replace the human work of government; it should help our workers move faster, solve problems more effectively, and deliver better results for Californians,” Newsom said in a statement.

The remarks didn’t appear to comfort union leaders.

“Wow. Look local government, the Gov is giving you a 50% off coupon to give up your residents’ private data, outsource your jobs to big tech. Isn’t that cool? Because California basically invented AI slop!” said Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, AFL-CIO, in a post on X.

Advertisement

Anthropic has faced political hurdles as it pushes to get more companies and government agencies to use its products.

Most notable, it’s sparred publicly with the Trump administration, which ordered the company to cut off foreign access to its most powerful AI systems this month.

The Trump administration cited potential national security risks, but Anthropic disagreed with the findings. Last week, tensions decreased after the U.S. government gave Anthropic permission to restore access to its AI model Mythos to certain clients.

Valued at nearly $1 trillion, Anthropic has also signaled it plans to become a publicly traded company.

California has already started using Claude more in state government to develop tools to get the public to engage more in AI policy discussions and assist state workers, the governor’s office said in its news release.

Advertisement

State agencies, including the Department of Motor Vehicles, are also using AI to reduce wait times and improve customer service.

“As state employees, our goal is to provide our fellow Californians with the best possible service,” Government Operations Agency Secretary Nick Maduros said in a statement. “To do that, we need to make sure our teams have access to the best modern tools, including Claude and other emerging technologies.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending