Connect with us

Politics

What Candidates in Tight House Races Are Saying About Abortion

Published

on

What Candidates in Tight House Races Are Saying About Abortion

22 Democrats say

restore Roe v. Wade.

4 Democrats say

it’s no place for government.

9 Democrats say

it’s between a woman and her doctor.

21 Republicans say

no federal ban.

10 Republicans say

it’s best left up to the states.

Advertisement

5 Republicans say

they’re pro-life.

Josh Riley, the Democratic challenger running for Congress in New York’s 19th District, has a clear message on abortion: “I believe that women’s health care decisions are women’s health care decisions and that politicians should stay the hell out of it.”

And his Republican opponent, the incumbent Representative Marc Molinaro, is saying nearly the same thing: “I believe health care decisions should be between a woman and her doctor, not Washington.”

Across the country’s most competitive House races, Republicans have spent months trying to redefine themselves on abortion, going so far as to borrow language that would not feel out of place at a rally of Vice President Kamala Harris. Many Republicans who until recently backed federal abortion restrictions are now saying the issue should be left to the states.

At least a half-dozen Republican candidates have put out direct-to-camera ads declaring their opposition to a federal abortion ban. Instead, they say, they support exceptions to existing state laws and back protections for reproductive health care, such as I.V.F.

Advertisement

Republican candidates address abortion head-on in campaign videos

Click on any video in the grid to play it.

Anthony D’Esposito

Republican, N.Y. 4

Advertisement

Mike Lawler

Republican, N.Y. 17

Advertisement

Marc Molinaro

Republican, N.Y. 19

Joe Kent

Advertisement

Republican, Wash. 3

Michelle Steel

Republican, C.A. 45

Advertisement

Juan Ciscomani

Republican, Ariz. 6

Advertisement

Democrats have raised the possibility of a nationwide abortion ban should Republicans win in November, and they are framing the campaign as another referendum on the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade. They are hoping to continue their run of electoral successes since the 2022 decision to win back control of the House.

Any new federal legislation on abortion would have to pass both the House and the Senate and be signed by the president to become law. But whichever party emerges with a majority in the House will have the ability to dictate the legislative agenda, including whether measures to restrict or expand abortion access have the chance to pass.

Republicans in California and New York in particular, who are running in swing districts in blue states that favor abortion rights, have felt the most pressure to address the issue directly. “If we don’t talk about the issue, we become whatever the Democrats say we are,” said Will Reinert, the press secretary for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Advertisement

To better understand how abortion is playing a role in these campaigns, The New York Times surveyed candidates from both parties in the most competitive House races about their support for federal limits on abortion. The Times also looked at voting records, issues listed on campaign websites, debate and media coverage, and endorsements from major abortion rights and anti-abortion groups.

The Times survey showed that while Republicans are notably focused on what they will not do on abortion at the federal level, their Democratic opponents are talking about what they will do to protect abortion rights. Nearly all the Democratic candidates said they supported restoring the protections of Roe v. Wade, which would allow access to abortion until fetal viability, or around 24 weeks, in every state.

In attack ads, Democrats are pointing to their opponents’ voting records or past statements as evidence of extremism — despite what they may be saying now.

Democratic candidates highlight Republicans’ records on abortion in campaign videos

Click on any video in the grid to play it.

Advertisement

Josh Riley campaign

Democrat, N.Y. 19

Will Rollins campaign

Advertisement

Democrat, Calif. 41

More broadly, abortion rights groups said Republicans are misleading voters by claiming they do not support an outright abortion “ban,” when they might support a federal “limit” or “standard,” such as the 15-week proposal put forward by Senator Lindsey Graham in 2022.

Advertisement

“They are playing around with the semantics; they are clearly testing out different framing and messaging in an attempt to try and deceive voters because they realize how politically unpopular their policy stances are,” said Jessica Arons, a director of policy and government affairs at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Republicans in the Times survey almost universally declined to answer questions about gestational limits. Only one, Representative Don Bacon of Nebraska, said he supported a specific federal limit, in the third trimester.

What Republican candidates are saying about abortion

I do not support a federal abortion ban. The Dobbs decision decided this was an issue left to the states and that’s where I believe policy on the issue should be decided.

David Valadao Republican, Calif. 22

Advertisement

At the federal level, I would only support legislation to outlaw late-term abortion, with protections for the three exceptions. Otherwise, states must vote on this issue.

Don Bacon Republican, Neb. 2

I am pro-life, believe abortion stops a beating heart, and oppose taxpayer funded abortion. Since the U.S. Supreme Court has returned this issue to the states, I will not vote for a national abortion ban.

Gabe Evans Republican, Colo. 8

Advertisement

The Republican shift away from publicly supporting a federal ban follows the lead of former President Donald J. Trump, who has changed his own language on the issue after seeing the electoral backlash to the Dobbs decision.

As recently as 2021, a majority of House Republicans — including seven incumbents in this year’s tossup races — co-sponsored the Life at Conception Act, a bill that would have amounted to a nationwide abortion ban. This year, Representative Scott Perry of Pennsylvania’s 10th District was the only incumbent in a competitive race to stay on as a co-sponsor.

Two Republican incumbents who now say they oppose a national ban — Representatives Ken Calvert and David Valadao in California — voted in favor of a 20-week ban that passed the House in 2017. Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, an Iowa Republican, co-sponsored a 15-week ban on abortion in 2022. She did not respond to questions about whether she still supports it.

Other Republicans described themselves as personally “pro-life” but said they accepted the abortion laws in place in their states. Rob Bresnahan Jr., a challenger in Pennsylvania’s 8th District, said he supported the state’s current law, which allows abortion until 24 weeks.

Democrats, when they were not attacking Republicans, leaned into language about personal freedom, with many in the survey saying the government should not be involved in medical decisions.

Advertisement

Another common refrain was that the decision to have an abortion should be “between a woman and her doctor.” Two Democrats used similar language rather than explicitly calling for federal abortion protections.

What Democratic candidates are saying about abortion

Abortion is health care. This is not a place for government interference. I trust every person I know and love, and any New Mexican to make that decision for themselves.

Gabe Vasquez Democrat, N.M. 2

I have always believed that this decision should be left between a woman, her doctor and within her own faith.

Advertisement

Rudy Salas Democrat, Calif. 22

I believe the decisions a woman makes for her body and her family are deeply personal and politicians have no place telling her what she can and cannot do.

Tony Vargas Democrat, Neb. 2

By appearing to moderate their stance on abortion, candidates have risked losing the backing of prominent advocacy groups. Only three Republicans in the tossup races received an endorsement from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, and seven received one from National Right to Life.

Advertisement

Two major abortion rights groups, by contrast, endorsed nearly all the Democratic candidates. Planned Parenthood — whose political action fund is pouring $40 million into the campaign — endorsed all but six candidates, while Reproductive Freedom for All endorsed all but four.

Endorsements from major anti-abortion groups

Candidate District Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America National Right to Life

Anderson

Va. 7

Va. 7

Bacon*

Advertisement

Neb. 2

Neb. 2

Buckhout

N.C. 1

N.C. 1

Begich

Alaska At-Large

Advertisement
Alaska At-Large

Ciscomani*

Ariz. 6

Ariz. 6

Miller-Meeks*

Iowa 1

Iowa 1

Nunn*

Advertisement

Iowa 3

Iowa 3

Perry*

Pa. 10

Pa. 10

Schweikert*

Ariz. 1

Advertisement
Ariz. 1

Barrett

Mich. 7

Mich. 7

Bresnahan Jr.

Pa. 8

Pa. 8

Calvert*

Advertisement

Calif. 41

Calif. 41

Chavez-DeRemer*

Ore. 5

Ore. 5

Coughlin

Ohio 13

Advertisement
Ohio 13

D’Esposito*

N.Y. 4

N.Y. 4

Duarte*

Calif. 13

Calif. 13

Evans

Advertisement

Colo. 8

Colo. 8

Garcia*

Calif. 27

Calif. 27

Herrell

N.M. 2

Advertisement
N.M. 2

Junge

Mich. 8

Mich. 8

Kean Jr.*

N.J. 7

N.J. 7

Kent

Advertisement

Wash. 3

Wash. 3

Lawler*

N.Y. 17

N.Y. 17

Mackenzie

Pa. 7

Advertisement
Pa. 7

Molinaro*

N.Y. 19

N.Y. 19

Steel*

Calif. 45

Calif. 45

Theriault

Advertisement

Maine 2

Maine 2

Valadao*

Calif. 22

Calif. 22

Advertisement

Endorsements from major abortion rights groups

Candidate District Planned Parenthood Repro. Freedom for All

Altman

N.J. 7

N.J. 7

Baccam

Iowa 3

Advertisement
Iowa 3

Bohannan

Iowa 1

Iowa 1

Bynum

Ore. 5

Ore. 5

Caraveo*

Advertisement

Colo. 8

Colo. 8

Cartwright*

Pa. 8

Pa. 8

Davis*

N.C. 1

Advertisement
N.C. 1

Engel

Ariz. 6

Ariz. 6

Gillen

N.Y. 4

N.Y. 4

Gluesenkamp Perez*

Advertisement

Wash. 3

Wash. 3

Golden*

Maine 2

Maine 2

Gray

Calif. 13

Advertisement
Calif. 13

Hertel

Mich. 7

Mich. 7

Jones

N.Y. 17

N.Y. 17

McDonald Rivet

Advertisement

Mich. 8

Mich. 8

Peltola*

Alaska At-Large

Alaska At-Large

Riley

N.Y. 19

Advertisement
N.Y. 19

Rollins

Calif. 41

Calif. 41

Salas

Calif. 22

Calif. 22

Shah

Advertisement

Ariz. 1

Ariz. 1

Stelson

Pa. 10

Pa. 10

Sykes*

Ohio 13

Advertisement
Ohio 13

Tran

Calif. 45

Calif. 45

Vargas

Neb. 2

Neb. 2

Vasquez*

Advertisement

N.M. 2

N.M. 2

Vindman

Va. 7

Va. 7

Whitesides

Calif. 27

Advertisement
Calif. 27

Wild*

Pa. 7

Pa. 7

Representative Jared Golden, the Democratic incumbent in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District — an area Mr. Trump won by six points in 2020 — did not get Planned Parenthood’s endorsement this year. He said the reason was his vote for the 2024 defense policy bill, which included an amendment blocking reimbursement for abortion travel costs for service members.

Mr. Golden said he was not concerned about the lack of support from the group, pointing instead to his co-sponsorship of the Women’s Health Protection Act, a bill to restore the protections of Roe.

“I’m quite confident that voters in Maine know where I stand,” he said.

Advertisement

Compare statements from House candidates on abortion policy

The New York Times asked candidates and their campaigns about support for a federal minimum standard on abortion. Statements have been lightly edited for length and clarity.

District

Dem. position

Rep. position

Alaska At‑Large

Advertisement

Alaska At‑Large

Mary Peltola*

No response to survey.

“Roe v. Wade set a precedent that was the law of the land for 50 years. She believes that standard was the right one — furthermore we know the importance of having strong exceptions for rape, incest, life of mother and health of mother throughout.”

Advertisement

Nick Begich

No response to survey.

“While I strongly support efforts that defend the rights of those not yet born, the courts have made it clear, abortion is a state issue and not an issue for the federal government to decide.”

Ariz. 1

Advertisement

Ariz. 1

Amish Shah

No response to survey.

“As a doctor, I understand that these personal decisions should be made by women and their physicians. That’s why we need to codify Roe v. Wade and give women across the country the right to control their own bodies and health care.”

Advertisement

David Schweikert*

No response to survey.

“It’s pretty clear that it belongs to the states,” via Business Insider.

Ariz. 6

Advertisement

Ariz. 6

Kirsten Engel

No response to survey.

“Protecting women’s reproductive freedoms at the federal level will be one of my top priorities when elected to Congress. Women had those protections for over 50 years when Roe v. Wade was the law of the land, and that is what I will advocate for us to return to.”

Advertisement

Juan Ciscomani*

No response to survey.

“I’m pro-life, I reject the extremes, and I trust women. I’m against a federal ban on abortion. I’m for timetables and exceptions, including for rape, incest and the life of the mother,” via campaign site.

Calif. 13

Advertisement

Calif. 13

Adam Gray

No response to survey.

“What I support and will vote for is restoring Roe v. Wade into federal law so that women regain the federal rights they had for generations.”

Advertisement

John Duarte*

No response to survey.

“Congressman Duarte opposes federal abortion restrictions.”

Calif. 22

Advertisement

Calif. 22

Rudy Salas

No response to survey.

“I have always believed that this decision should be left between a woman, her doctor and within her own faith. Women should have the freedom to choose what happens with their own bodies and to determine their own health care.”

Advertisement

David Valadao*

No response to survey.

“I do not support a federal abortion ban. The Dobbs decision decided this was an issue left to the states and that’s where I believe policy on the issue should be decided.”

Calif. 27

Advertisement

Calif. 27

George Whitesides

No response to survey.

“I strongly support a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions, and if elected to Congress, I will vote to codify Roe v. Wade to ensure reproductive freedom for all Americans.”

Advertisement

Mike Garcia*

No response to survey.

“I oppose a national abortion ban — California’s law on abortion stays the law — and I support exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.”

Calif. 41

Advertisement

Calif. 41

Will Rollins

No response to survey.

“I support a federal minimum standard for abortion. In Congress, I will advocate for legislation that restores Roe v. Wade, which prohibits states from banning abortions before fetal viability. It’s critical that we protect a woman’s right to choose nationwide.”

Advertisement

Ken Calvert*

No response to survey.

“Congressman Calvert does not support a federal abortion ban and supports the right of Californians to determine this for themselves.”

Calif. 45

Advertisement

Calif. 45

Derek Tran

No response to survey.

“Derek Tran supports enshrining reproductive rights into law as California voters did through Proposition 1 in 2022.”

Advertisement

Michelle Steel*

No response to survey.

“Michelle’s position has always been, and remains, that this issue is best left up to the states, and she does not support a national ban on abortion.”

Colo. 8

Advertisement

Colo. 8

Yadira Caraveo*

No response to survey.

“Rep. Caraveo believes we need to codify Roe v. Wade. This was the law of the land for decades, and since the Dobbs decision, the lives of far too many women have been at risk.”

Advertisement

Gabe Evans

No response to survey.

“I am pro-life, believe abortion stops a beating heart, and oppose taxpayer-funded abortion. Since the U.S. Supreme Court has returned this issue to the states, I will not vote for a national abortion ban.”

Iowa 1

Advertisement

Iowa 1

Christina Bohannan

No response to survey.

“On Day 1 in Congress, I will work to codify Roe v. Wade and ensure women in Iowa and across the country once again have the freedom to make their own health care decisions.”

Advertisement

Mariannette Miller-Meeks*

No response to survey.

“The congresswoman has been clear that she is pro-life with the exceptions of rape, incest, and life of the mother.”

Iowa 3

Advertisement

Iowa 3

Lanon Baccam

No response to survey.

“It’s more important than ever to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade, and that’s why I’ll support the Women’s Health Protection Act in Congress. I believe women’s health care decisions should be between her and her doctor — not politicians.”

Advertisement

Zach Nunn*

No response to survey.

“He is pro-life, but has voted for exceptions. He opposes a national abortion ban.”

Maine 2

Advertisement

Maine 2

Jared Golden*

No response to survey.

“I’m a cosponsor of the Women’s Health Protection Act, to restore Roe, and I would vote for it if it came to the floor again.”

Advertisement

Austin Theriault

No response to survey.

“Austin opposes and will vote against a national abortion ban.”

Mich. 7

Advertisement

Mich. 7

Curtis Hertel

No response to survey.

“When Roe was overturned and abortion rights came under attack in our state, I worked across the aisle to get rid of the 1931 abortion ban and fought to enshrine abortion rights in Michigan’s constitution. I’m running to make Roe the law of the land and protect reproductive freedom.”

Advertisement

Tom Barrett

No response to survey.

“Tom does not support a federal ban. He has consistently argued this is a decision for the states and while he disagrees with Prop. 3, Michigan voters have made that decision.”

Mich. 8

Advertisement

Mich. 8

Kristen McDonald Rivet

No response to survey.

“After Roe was overturned, I protected abortion rights in Michigan by helping to repeal our state’s 1931 ban without exceptions for rape or incest. In Congress, I’ll fight for a federal law restoring the Roe standard across America.”

Advertisement

Paul Junge

No response to survey.

“I would never and have never supported a national abortion ban.”

Neb. 2

Advertisement

Neb. 2

Tony Vargas

No response to survey.

“I believe the decisions a woman makes for her body, and her family, are deeply personal and politicians have no place telling her what she can and cannot do. In Congress, I’ll vote to codify the protections earned from the Roe v. Wade decision into federal law.”

Advertisement

Don Bacon*

No response to survey.

“I support the Nebraska law that puts a reasonable three-month restriction on abortions with exceptions for rape, incest and the health of the mother. At the federal level, I would only support legislation to outlaw late-term abortion, with protections for the three exceptions. Otherwise, states must vote on this issue.”

N.M. 2

Advertisement

N.M. 2

Gabe Vasquez*

No response to survey.

“Abortion is health care. This is not a place for government interference. I trust every person I know and love, and any New Mexican, to make that decision for themselves.”

Advertisement

Yvette Herrell

No response to survey.

“Yvette has been clear that since the Dobbs decision returned abortion policy to the states, she does not support a federal ban.”

N.J. 7

Advertisement

N.J. 7

Sue Altman

No response to survey.

“Sue will work to protect access to contraception, reproductive choice, and women’s health,” via campaign site.

Advertisement

Thomas Kean Jr.*

No response to survey.

“Tom is opposed to a national abortion ban. He has voted to protect access to mifepristone and believes any legislation should be left to the voters of each state to advocate for their positions to their legislatures.”

N.Y. 17

Advertisement

N.Y. 17

Mondaire Jones

No response to survey.

“We must enshrine protections for abortion into federal law.”

Advertisement

Mike Lawler*

No response to survey.

“He does not and never will support a national abortion ban.”

N.Y. 19

Advertisement

N.Y. 19

Josh Riley

No response to survey.

“I believe that women’s health care decisions are women’s health care decisions and that politicians should stay the hell out of it. In Congress, I will codify the right to abortion as it existed under Roe v. Wade into law.”

Advertisement

Marc Molinaro*

No response to survey.

“I believe health care decisions should be between a woman and her doctor, not Washington. I kept my promise to reject a national abortion ban — keeping New York’s laws in place.”

N.Y. 4

Advertisement

N.Y. 4

Laura Gillen

No response to survey.

“The standard should be the same as it was the day before the disastrous Dobbs decision. It worked for a half a century, and we should return to it.”

Advertisement

Anthony D’Esposito*

No response to survey.

“Congressman D’Esposito does not support a nationwide abortion ban and believes legislating on abortion should fall under the purview of state governments.”

N.C. 1

Advertisement

N.C. 1

Don Davis*

No response to survey.

“Congress must take action and codify Roe v. Wade. He firmly believes that a woman’s health decisions should remain private between her and her doctor,” via campaign site.

Advertisement

Laurie Buckhout

No response to survey.

“As the only candidate to be endorsed by the pro-life SBA (Susan B. Anthony) List, I believe every life is precious and would vote to preserve life, including the mother’s,” via The Perquimans Weekly.

Ohio 13

Advertisement

Ohio 13

Emilia Sykes*

No response to survey.

“Congresswoman Sykes has a strong record of supporting the protections provided under Roe that give women across the country the right to make decisions about what is best for their bodies.”

Advertisement

Kevin Coughlin

No response to survey.

“Issues related to abortion are best left to the states, and there should be no federal ban.”

Ore. 5

Advertisement

Ore. 5

Janelle Bynum

No response to survey.

“Rep. Bynum supports codifying Roe v. Wade into federal law so that women across the country can have those rights back. This is a decision that should be kept between a woman and her doctors.”

Advertisement

Lori Chavez-DeRemer*

No response to survey.

“The congresswoman doesn’t support any federal standard limiting Oregonians’ access to abortion.”

Pa. 7

Advertisement

Pa. 7

Susan Wild*

No response to survey.

“I have always believed that private medical decisions, including whether or not to receive abortion care, should be made by a woman, her doctor, her partner and her faith if she so chooses.”

Advertisement

Ryan Mackenzie

No response to survey.

“He’s opposed to a national abortion ban; he supports exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.”

Pa. 8

Advertisement

Pa. 8

Matt Cartwright*

No response to survey.

“I strongly support the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would restore Roe’s protections into federal law. We should trust women with their health care decisions, not politicians.”

Advertisement

Rob Bresnahan Jr.

No response to survey.

“Rob Bresnahan does not support a national abortion ban and does support the current Pennsylvania protections of 24 weeks and exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. ”

Pa. 10

Advertisement

Pa. 10

Janelle Stelson

No response to survey.

“I think these most intimate health care decisions should be made by women and their doctors … If elected, I will put those decisions back in the hands of women, where they belong.”

Advertisement

Scott Perry*

No response to survey.

“Scott Perry believes firmly in the sanctity of Life — period. He makes exceptions for circumstances that involve rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother,” via campaign site.

Va. 7

Advertisement

Va. 7

Eugene Vindman

No response to survey.

“In Congress, I will fight to make sure that the rights of women and girls in Virginia are never dependent on politicians in Richmond or Washington by voting to restore the protections of Roe nationwide.”

Advertisement

Derrick Anderson

No response to survey.

“Derrick opposes and would vote against a national abortion ban.”

Wash. 3

Advertisement

Wash. 3

Marie Gluesenkamp Perez*

No response to survey.

“Marie is an original co-sponsor of the Women’s Health Protection Act and supports codifying the abortion protections of Roe v. Wade in federal law, as well as ensuring women have continued access to contraception and I.V.F.”

Advertisement

Joe Kent

No response to survey.

“Following the Supreme Court decision that made abortion a state issue, Joe Kent opposes any new federal legislation on the issue.”

Methodology

Advertisement

The New York Times survey asked candidates or their campaigns two questions: 1) Do you support any federal minimum standard on abortion? 2) If so, until how many weeks in pregnancy (i.e. 6 weeks, 15 weeks, viability, etc.)?

Those surveyed were major-party candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives whose races were rated “tossups” by the Cook Political Report at any point in October 2024. Alaska’s at-large congressional district includes four candidates and will be decided by ranked-choice voting; the two candidates who received the most votes in the primary were included in the survey. All but six candidates responded to emailed requests for comment. In these cases, position summaries were taken from campaign websites or from other public statements.

Note: Counts of candidate statements in the top graphic were taken from survey responses only.

Additional work by June Kim.

Advertisement

Politics

Rubio sanctions Cuban groups with ties to US nonprofit network funded by communist donor Neville Roy Singham

Published

on

Rubio sanctions Cuban groups with ties to US nonprofit network funded by communist donor Neville Roy Singham

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Secretary of State Marco Rubio put U.S. organizations on notice: they can no longer do business with a key Cuban organization that has spent over six decades – since the launch of Fidel Castro’s communist revolution in 1959 – cultivating relationships with U.S. activists and groups, many of them now funded by communist American tycoon Neville Roy Singham.

The sanctions target the Cuban Institute of Friendship with the Peoples, known by its Spanish acronym ICAP, an organization founded by Castro in 1960 to spread Marxist ideology and support for Cuba. Long ago, U.S. officials and intelligence assessments concluded ICAP is a key component of Cuba’s intelligence apparatus.

“For decades, Cuba has been the world capital for radical left-wing terrorism,” Rubio said. “The regime in Havana has recruited, trained and backed violent Marxist and third-worldist movements across our hemisphere and beyond.”

REVOLUTIONARY TOURISM: INSIDE THE $600M MARRIAGE OF DARK MONEY AND FAR-LEFT AGITPROP

Advertisement

Marco Rubio moves to put sanctions on a group that Fidel Castro established in 1960 to spread Cuba’s communist influence in the world. (Sven Creutzmann/Mambo Photography/Getty Images; Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Earlier this year, ICAP worked with U.S. nonprofits, including the People’s Forum, Progressive International and CodePink, to organize a March “convoy” that included controversial Marxist streamer Hasan Piker landing in Cuba to support Cuba’s communist party.

The trip has since attracted federal scrutiny, with CodePink co-founder Medea Benjamin confirming she received questions from federal officials about the trip, investigating whether she violated sanctions.

Late last month, Fox News Digital published a three-part series, reporting that federal investigators are examining Cuba’s alleged malign foreign influence operation in the U.S., investigating a network of 145 groups with collective revenues of about $1 billion, promoting Cuba’s agenda and communist ideology.

“Today, we are targeting the network that enables and funds Cuba’s subversive and radical operations,” Rubio said.

Advertisement

The groups working closely with ICAP include the People’s Forum, CodePink, BreakThrough News and Tricontinental, funded by Singham, a Marxist tech tycoon living in Shanghai. As reported, Singham has pumped $285 million into nonprofits since 2017 that have built very close relationships with ICAP and the communist government of Cuba.

Singham is married to CodePink co-founder Jodie Evans.

INSIDE CUBA’S FOREIGN INFLUENCE CAMPAIGN: FROM THE VENCEREMOS BRIGADE OF THE 1960S TO SATURDAY IN A UNION HALL

ICAP is today led by Fernando González Llort, one of five former Cuban intelligence officers, known as the “Cuban Five,” convicted in the U.S. years ago on espionage-related charges and released after spending time in jail. 

Critics say ICAP acts as a gateway for revolutionaries from around the world to get embedded in the propaganda, organizing tactics and strategic goals of the Communist Party of Cuba. ICAP has denied wrongdoing and says it’s a civil society organization.

Advertisement

ICAP was one of five entities that Rubio designated as off-limits under sanctions authorities established by President Donald Trump’s Cuba executive order. The sanctions also target Cuba’s Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (MINFAR), the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR), Minera La Victoria S.A. and the state-run tourism company Amistur Cuba S.A., which has arranged trips to Cuba with U.S. nonprofits in the Singham network.

Experts said the move signals that the Trump administration is focused not only on the Cuban government but also on U.S. institutions that U.S. officials believe help project Cuban influence internationally.

A declassified CIA report from the Cold War era, “Cuba: Castro’s Propaganda Apparatus and Foreign Policy,” described Cuba’s international propaganda and influence activities as a central component of Castro’s foreign policy strategy. The report named ICAP among organizations that act as important instruments for cultivating sympathetic political movements abroad and extending Cuban influence beyond the island.

DOJ, TREASURY INVESTIGATE NONPROFITS AND LEADERS ALLEGEDLY COORDINATING WITH CUBA IN INFLUENCE CAMPAIGN

One of the most notable examples was the Venceremos Brigade, a Cuba solidarity program established in 1969 that brought generations of American activists to the island through exchanges organized with Cuban authorities and institutions including ICAP.

Advertisement

The program became one of the most visible pipelines connecting American activists to the Cuban revolutionary government.

Today, the Venceremos Brigade operates as a fiscally-sponsored project of the People’s Forum.

Lawmakers and federal authorities are examining whether organizations funded by Singham have acted on behalf of foreign interests without properly registering and have helped amplify messaging favorable to the Chinese Communist Party and the Communist Party of Cuba.

Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canel (C) listens to Progressive International’s general coordinator, David Adler, during an event at the Cuban Institute for Friendship with the Peoples (ICAP) in Havana, on March 21, 2026. (Ernesto Mastrascusa/AFP via Getty Images)

HOW A RHODES SCHOLAR WITH TIES TO CUBA’S PRESIDENT ORGANIZED THE CONVOY THAT BROUGHT HASAN PIKER TO HAVANA

Advertisement

During the recent convoy in March, Progressive International co-founder David Adler appeared alongside Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel and ICAP President González at an official event hosted by ICAP.

Years ago, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass participated in Venceremos Brigade trips, a connection that her mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt resurfaced during her campaign. Bass has denied any wrongdoing.

Supporters of such exchanges describe them as educational and humanitarian programs intended to foster international understanding. Critics argue they function as political influence operations designed to build support for the Cuban regime and its ideological objectives.

The Cuban government condemned Rubio’s sanctions shortly after the announcement.

President Miguel Díaz-Canel accused the United States of escalating economic pressure against Cuba and attempting to intensify tensions between the two countries.

Advertisement

Hasan Piker, a Democratic Socialists of America member, and CodePink co-founder Jodie Evans meet in Havana, Cuba, as part of a “United Front” supporting the communist regime. (CodePink via Storyful)

“The Treasury Department has added new names of Cuban leaders, organizations and companies to an illegitimate sanctions list,” Díaz-Canel wrote on social media. “They are aimed at reinforcing the blockade measures and the scenario of conflict between Cuba and the United States.”

Rubio’s warning extended beyond the sanctioned entities.

The action signals that the administration is increasingly focused on the networks, partnerships and influence channels that U.S. officials believe have helped advance Cuban interests abroad long after the Cold War officially ended.

“Anyone providing services to these sanctioned actors is at risk of sanctions themselves,” he said. “Foreign banks and other companies that provide services to these entities should freeze those activities.”

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital’s Reagan Schroeder contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

Commentary: No, Mr. Hilton, our elections are not ‘a joke.’ It’s time for you to stand up to Trump

Published

on

Commentary: No, Mr. Hilton, our elections are not ‘a joke.’ It’s time for you to stand up to Trump

Well, that didn’t take long.

A day after California’s primary election, President Trump took to social media with baseless claims of election fraud — predictable, but also dangerous.

“Look what’s happening in California, the Dumocrats, right before our very eyes, are stealing the Vote,” Trump wrote in one post.

“There’s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,” he wrote in another, apparently enamored of his latest juvenile slur.

Advertisement

Never mind that his candidate, Steve Hilton, is in the lead — for now anyway.

California has once again become the main dish on Trump’s buffet of bull-hockey as he continues to undermine democracy and consolidate authoritarian power, using this disingenuous and patently untrue narrative that American elections are rigged by shadowy Democratic forces working in collusion with illegal immigrants.

That last part is called the Great Replacement Theory, the idea that “elites” are replacing white people — and white voters — with Black and brown immigrants in a bid to destroy white culture. It’s at the heart of Trump’s voter fraud allegations.

The twist this time is that Hilton, the man who wants to represent all Californians, seems to be jumping on the election fraud conspiracy train with the president. I get it, there’s the MAGA base to feed, and it’s a base that feasts on outrage and fakery. Serving up resentment glazed with lies and propaganda has been the MAGA playbook for years under Trump, a strategy that no one can deny has been heartbreakingly effective.

But Hilton is a smart man and must certainly know that voter fraud is rare, to the point of being inconsequential to election outcomes. Hilton by his own admission understands voting patterns, and that in this cycle, Republicans have voted early and often by mail, despite Trump’s claims that all vote-by-mail should be suspect. So Hilton understands that early votes have skewed his way, and that later vote tallies will likely favor Democrats.

Advertisement

And Hilton is definitely intelligent enough to expect that in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly three to one, he will not keep the top spot in this primary, and a slim chance remains that he will not make it into the top two. That’s just simple math.

So if Hilton truly seeks to represent this state as its top elected executive, now is the time to renounce election fraud myths and stand up to Trump’s lies. If Hilton can’t say that he believes our recent election was free and fair, then he has no business being our governor.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the path he’s taking, even as it seems increasingly likely that he will advance to the general election.

This week, speaking with far-right podcaster and former Turning Point USA creative director Benny Johnson (who was allegedly duped into working for a Russian influence operation), Hilton said that while “so far we’re not seeing any signs” of cheating, “we’re going to be all over it. We’re not going to let them do that.”

Hilton was responding to a question from Johnson on whether Hilton will sue over “cheating.”

Advertisement

On a post-election appearance with Laura Ingraham, the conservative Fox News host who has repeatedly promoted the Great Replacement Theory, Hilton delved into more conspiracy.

“Just to really underline the point that you made about the corruption,” he told Ingraham an anecdote about supposed fraud in a previous election cycle when a “whistleblower” at the post office told him that they were instructed that a handwritten postmark was acceptable when sorting ballots to deliver to the county registrar.

“It’s just unbelievable, and of course, that’s why so many people don’t believe the results, but it just undermines confidence,” he told Ingraham, certainly knowing that the post office forwarding a ballot on to a county registrar in no way means it will be certified or counted. Would we really want the USPS deciding which ballots to deliver? Disingenuous on Hilton’s part at best.

“The whole thing is a joke,” Hilton went on to say of California elections, which of course, is absurd.

Thursday, when I asked Hilton’s team to speak with him about his views on voter fraud, they sent back a response that focused on the slowness of the California vote count; voter rolls Hilton has described as “wildly inaccurate,” which is a wildly inaccurate claim; and two instances of actual fraud with voter registration — not examples of votes that were counted.

Advertisement

To be sure, all those items are important. Any malfeasance should be punished, and the system should always strive to improve.

But how hard is it to simply be against fraud, while accurately acknowledging that it is rare and our current system provides accurate results?

I am against voter registration fraud. I am against vote fraud. I am absolutely pro-democracy, including policies such as mail-in voting that increase participation.

I do not believe that there is widespread fraud in the California primary, or in American elections in general, because the evidence does not support that conspiracy. I do not believe that Democrats are running a decades-long, nationwide conspiracy to replace white voters with votes from Black and brown undocumented immigrants, because that is both false and racist.

Pretty basic stuff, and statements in line with the values and common sense of the majority of Californians Hilton says he will represent.

Advertisement

If Hilton can’t come out and clearly say that Trump is wrong — about fraud and about the Great Replacement Theory — can he really be trusted to represent the values of the Golden State?

Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

Published

on

Video: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

new video loaded: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

transcript

transcript

Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

Elias Irizarry, who pleaded guilty to climbing through a broken window at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, now works for an office responsible for uncovering and defending against terrorism plots at the Pentagon.

“Full pardon or commutation?” “Full pardon.”

Advertisement
Elias Irizarry, who pleaded guilty to climbing through a broken window at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, now works for an office responsible for uncovering and defending against terrorism plots at the Pentagon.

By Alisa Shodiyev Kaff

June 4, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending