Connect with us

California

What Blue States Can Do If Trump and Republicans Withhold Disaster Aid

Published

on

What Blue States Can Do If Trump and Republicans Withhold Disaster Aid


As fires continue to devastate Los Angeles County, a president will soon be inaugurated who has promised to withhold federal help from states like California if Democratic lawmakers there don’t sing to his tune. Donald Trump threatened to withhold federal disaster relief from the state just months ago, and he recently repeated that threat. 

There’s plenty of reason to believe Trump means it, too, considering he reportedly delayed or withheld disaster aid to blue states and Puerto Rico during his first term as president.

Republican lawmakers like Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) have also raised the idea in light of the California wildfires, while House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said on Monday that he believes federal aid should be conditional. “It appears to us that state and local leaders were derelict in their duty in many respects. So that’s something that has to be factored in,” Johnson said, echoing the larger right-wing response to the fires, which has been to blame Democrats.

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) chimed in later on Monday. “They don’t deserve anything, to be honest with you,” he said of the prospect of outside aid coming into California, citing “inner-city woke policies.”

Advertisement

The wildfires in California have burned roughly 40,000 acres of land — or about 62 square miles — which is nearly three times the size of Manhattan. The Santa Ana winds are expected to pick up and increase the risk of fires spreading further. If Trump were to deny a state like California federal aid during such a disaster, the consequences could be enormous.

“It would be unprecedented. The longstanding protocol among presidential administrations has been to leave any kind of electoral politics behind when it comes to any disaster declarations,” says Jesse Keenan, an associate professor and director of the Center on Climate Change and Urbanism at Tulane University. “The impacts would be devastating.”

In response to the Los Angeles fires, President Joe Biden on Jan. 8 approved a Major Disaster declaration that directed government funds to support the region’s recovery and help pay for the cost of fighting the fires. The administration also deployed large air tankers and federal firefighting helicopters operated by the U.S. Forest Service to help fight the fires. 

“There are different faces to federal involvement in disasters,” says Daniel Farber, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley. “There’s somebody that’s available beforehand to try to reduce risks of various kinds, there’s the immediate disaster response where you see the guys with the FEMA jackets on the ground, and then there’s this longer term rebuilding process, which can take years, and there’s federal aid for reconstruction.”

Advertisement

Beyond helping deal with the disaster initially, the most significant role of the federal government is to help the affected region recover. Keenan says that means helping to pay for debris removal and the repair of critical infrastructure. When necessary, it may also pay to upgrade infrastructure to help prepare for future threats. 

“These are very large upfront costs,” Keenan says. “The federal government, when they deploy this money for debris removal and for individual assistance and all of that money that floods in after a disaster, it really does a lot to stabilize the local economy. Without it — if you remove those federal dollars — you see a real delay in the return of what we call normal, stabilized economic outputs.”

Without that money, Keenan says, it would take these communities a lot longer to recover from a disaster. That might mean another disaster could strike while the recovery from the last one is still ongoing. Federal resources allow a community to recover as quickly as possible and hopefully prepare for the next disaster before it happens.

“You could see damage to the community for years or decades if the federal government sort of boycotted the disaster relief,” Farber adds.

Advertisement

Knowing that the Trump administration may be considering withholding federal aid from blue states in the future, governors and other leaders in these states may want to consider how to prepare for such an occasion. There are some things these lawmakers could do if help is denied, but they will never fully replace the impact of the federal government intervening.

“There is a compact between the states to help each other called EMAC,” Farber says. “That’s been used quite a number of times. That’s a possibility, to make preparations and think about what other states you might want to call on and what you would ask them to do.”

Keenan says he might recommend that blue states start to get financially prepared for disasters in ways they haven’t necessarily needed to in the past. That could involve putting money aside for future disasters and creating lines of credit for municipalities that could be affected.

“I would try to create budget line items where I start putting money away — where I have contingency funds, as well as opening pools for lines of credit for local governments,” Keenan says. “It’s not just the cash. It’s also creating credit facilities, which may mean lending pools, that local governments could borrow against for short-term credit needs.”

Farber says that if the federal government decides to deny aid for purely political reasons, states may want to be prepared to sue the government and see how that plays out in the courts.

Advertisement

“If the president just said ‘no’ without an explanation, then it would be really hard to sue,” Farber says. “If the president said it was because you voted against him, then there’s a chance of it succeeding in court.”

The federal government is typically expected to step in and help a community when it faces a natural disaster, the idea being that we’re all in this together, and we should help each other in times of need, regardless of political affiliation. The Biden administration sent federal help to red states that had been ravaged by hurricanes last year, even while Trump tried to claim he was withholding it for political reasons. 

“In moments like this, it’s time to put politics aside,” Biden said during a visit to Georgia following Hurricane Helene. “It’s not one state versus another — it’s the United States.”

It’s clear Trump doesn’t see it that way. The president-elect is transactional, and he is spiteful, so states may not be able to consistently rely on federal help going forward. However, Trump may find himself in a political bind if he starts threatening to withhold aid due to how the electoral map looks in this country.

“Disproportionately in this country, disaster declarations are made in red counties,” Keenan says. “You can pick on Nevada or California or Virginia or wherever, but it’s not going to be so easy politically,” he adds, noting that Trump could wind up hurting his own supporters by using disaster relief to carry out his political vendettas.

Advertisement

Perhaps, for this reason, he may be hesitant to do so. That being said, Trump has not always been known to let logic get in the way of his actions.



Source link

California

California man charged with bringing explosives to Sacramento airport after repeatedly calling FBI tip line | CNN

Published

on

California man charged with bringing explosives to Sacramento airport after repeatedly calling FBI tip line | CNN


A California man was charged Tuesday after authorities say he brought an explosive device and other weapons through a security checkpoint at Sacramento International Airport.

Kimani Osayande Jones, who also uses the last name Jackson, attempted to bring an improvised explosive device, a knife and other bladed weapons, a torch lighter and zip ties through a TSA security checkpoint on May 30, according to court documents filed Tuesday in the Eastern District of California.

Officials believe Jones, 49, repeatedly called the FBI tip line to report he was being threatened and intimidated in the months leading up to the incident.

Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office bomb technicians safely removed the explosive device and tested its powder and fuse, both of which were determined to be “viable and energetic,” officials say.

Advertisement

Investigators said the device had the potential to damage an aircraft and cause a loss of cabin pressure.

Jones’ other luggage, which had already been through security and loaded onto an American Airlines flight to Charlotte, North Carolina, was hand-searched and examined by a canine unit upon arrival, and investigators said nothing “illegal or concerning” was found.

Jones has been charged in federal court with unlawful possession of explosive material at an airport. He faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted.

His attorney, Meghan McLoughlin, told CNN in a statement: “There is often more to these cases than the government’s allegations, and that the criminal process will reveal Mr. Jones’ story as well.”

Multiple cell phones and repeated FBI tip line calls

The Sacramento resident went through security on May 30 wearing a face covering and blue latex gloves, court documents say.

Advertisement

When officers found the explosive device and other items in Jones’ carry-on bag, he told them he was unaware the items were in his possession and said “he would be okay with just discarding them.” When authorities informed him that explosive material could not simply be thrown away, he denied ownership of the backpack.

Jones also had five mobile phones in his possession. The cameras on each phone had been covered with painter’s tape, which authorities believe was intended to prevent his surroundings from being recorded.

One phone contained a 15-minute timer ready to start and another had a message from an unknown number on the screen stating, “we will be awaiting your call,” according to court documents.

An individual police believe to be Jones made approximately 13 calls to the FBI tip line leading up to the incident, beginning in March.

On May 24, the caller reported being followed to and from a doctor’s appointment and described what he said were threats and intimidation by another individual.

Advertisement

He said he was “being coerced in sleep to say certain phrases through digital media” and described “hearing sounds coming through walls, window panes, or even outside, attributing the outside sounds to drones,” court documents say. The call was ultimately terminated because of its “nonsensical nature.”

On the day of the incident, the same caller again contacted the FBI tip line, alleging that several individuals were threatening him throughout the past year through “cyber means.” He also referenced exercising his Second Amendment rights while denying any intention to harm others.

The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office also noted it had prior contact with Jones, “wherein he had a history of being paranoid.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

California may take weeks to finalize primary results. ‘This is normal’

Published

on

California may take weeks to finalize primary results. ‘This is normal’


play

Although results from California’s primary election began rolling in on Tuesday, June 2, it could take days or even weeks before the final counts are certified. 

“This is normal … We have a process that by law ensures both voting rights and the integrity of elections, so I would call on all Californians to be patient,” Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber said in a June 2 news release.

Advertisement

The Golden State’s lengthy vote-counting process has “become a national narrative about California elections,” according to Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego.

“In California, it takes a long time to certify votes, to verify the signatures, to then count the ballots; all of that process takes a while,” Kousser said in an interview last week. “It may take a while for us to learn who the top candidates who emerge are.”

Here are some factors behind California’s lengthy vote-counting process. 

Mail-in ballots come with added verification step 

With each mail-in ballot cast, elections officials must compare the signature on a returned vote-by-mail envelope to the voter’s signature on their voter registration card. Various factors go into determining whether the signatures match, including the slant of the signature, whether it is printed or written in cursive, and the size, proportions, or scale. 

Vote-by-mail ballots were Californians’ preferred voting method in both the 2024 primary and general elections, with drop-off locations — such as ballot drop boxes and voting centers — the most popular way to return mail-in ballots. 

Advertisement

During California’s 2024 primary, more than 7.7 million votes were cast statewide, and 90 percent of those were mail-in ballots. This means election officials had to verify the signatures on more than 6.8 million ballots before they could be counted. For the November 2024 general election, 80% of cast ballots, or about 13 million, were vote-by-mail. 

Reviewing conditional voter and provisional ballots 

California also allows for same-day voter registration, also known as conditional voter registration. Voters who need to register, or re-register, within 14 days of an election can do so at their county elections office, polling place, or vote center. These ballots will be processed and counted after the county elections office has completed the voter registration process. 

In addition to conditional voter ballots, there are provisional ballots that must be verified before they are counted. Voters cast provisional ballots for a wide array of reasons, including if their name does not appear at a polling place or if they’ve made a mistake on their ballot. After a voter casts a provisional ballot, it will not be counted until election officials have confirmed that the voter is registered to vote in that county and has not already voted in that election. 

Vote-by-mail ballots can be sent on Election Day 

Though state officials recommend voters mail their ballots sooner rather than later, state law allows vote-by-mail ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive within a specified window afterward, thereby extending the tallying process. 

Advertisement

For the primary, ballots needed to be postmarked on or before June 2 and received by county elections office no later than June 10.  

California is, well, big 

California is the most populous state in the nation. And, as of May 18, a record total of 23,155,447 Californians were registered to vote. 

While not all registered voters are expected to have voted, county election officials estimate that more than 5 million ballots were cast statewide. 

When to expect final results 

Under state law, county elections officials are required to report the results for most ballots by June 15, or 13 days after the election, according to Weber. However, some ballots can take counties up to 30 days to count every ballot and then conduct a post-election audit. 

State law requires county elections officials to report final official results to state officials July 3. State officials then have until July 10 to certify the results of the election.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California’s race for governor and other key primaries remain unsettled as vote count continues

Published

on

California’s race for governor and other key primaries remain unsettled as vote count continues


California’s crowded, protracted gubernatorial primary is going to take a little more time to settle.

The race remained too early to call Wednesday morning with 50% of the expected vote counted, according to NBC News’ Decision Desk. Three main candidates — former Fox News host Steve Hilton, a Republican, and two Democrats, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and billionaire activist Tom Steyer — are competing for two spots in the general election, with the candidate in fourth place, Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, running well behind.

Hilton had 27% support in the all-party primary with about half of votes still left to count, while Becerra had 26% and Steyer had 20%. Bianco was the only other candidate in double digits, at 11%.

In California, all candidates run on the same primary ballot in the primary and the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, move on to the general election.

It’s difficult to say when it will be clear which two candidates advance to the November general election, however, due to the state’s protracted vote counting.

And with millions of ballots left to count, other key races in California remain uncalled as well, including the second runoff spot to face Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass one on one in November, several House races that could help determine the majority next year, and more.

Advertisement

In the governor’s race, all three candidates rallied supporters around the state as the evening drew on.

“We’re not there yet, but it’s looking good,” Hilton told allies. “It looks very much as if Californians really will have the chance to vote for change in November and take our state in a new direction, a fresh start for our state, which is long overdue.”

But while Hilton was narrowly in first place when he spoke, Democratic candidates were capturing the majority of the votes.

Becerra looked back at his own “underdog story,” from his immigrant relatives to his bid for governor, which took some time to catch fire.

“Almost immediately, he’s counted out, an afterthought, overlooked by many, outspent by a ton, even called along the way to drop out and save us the trouble,” Becerra recounted to his supporters. “Well, guess what? The underdog stayed in the fight. Like my parents, I never gave up.”

Steyer struck a hopeful note in his election night speech despite a deficit in the vote count.

Advertisement

“It might take some time to figure out where this is going, we’re going to wait till every ballot is counted, we’re going to give democracy a time to work, and we know we finished really strong,” Steyer said.

Major battleground districts

GOP Rep. David Valadao’s district has been one of Democrats’ top targets for years, but two Democrats are locked in a close race for the second spot in the November general election against the incumbent.

School board member Randy Villegas, who won support from national progressives, has a slight lead over state legislator Jasmeet Bains, 30% to 26%, with less than half of the expected vote tallied in the 22nd District. Valadao is comfortably in first place.

And in Northern California’s 6th District, Rep. Kevin Kiley — who was elected as a Republican and switched to become an independent this election cycle, as he runs in another newly redrawn district — is bunched up in a tight race that includes Democrat Richard Pan, a former state legislator, and Republican Michael Stansfield. Currently, Stansfield is running ahead of Pan; they spent much of Tuesday night and Wednesday morning trading the lead, which could have significant general election implications.

Meanwhile, outside California, Democrats think they might be able to challenge for one of Montana’s red-tinted congressional districts this fall, after Rep. Ryan Zinke decided to retire. But less than 2 percentage points separate Democrats Sam Forstag and Ryan Busse with more than 85% of the expected vote tallied in their primary in Montana’s 1st District.

Advertisement

Read more about Tuesday’s House primaries here.

A safe seat battle to watch

Plenty of other House districts in California — and a few elsewhere — still have unsettled primaries, but one attracted particular attention due to how nasty the campaign got.

In Southern California, where two Republican incumbents are facing off in one district due to redistricting, Rep. Ken Calvert has advanced to the general election, but Rep. Young Kim is still battling for the second spot. She leads Democrat Esther Kim-Varet in the race for second, 22% to 16%, with about half of the vote in.

Who will face Bass in Los Angeles?

While Bass is projected to advance to a November runoff in Los Angeles, it’s not yet clear whether she’ll face Republican Spencer Pratt or Democrat Nithya Raman.

Bass has about 37% of the vote to 29% for Pratt and 21% for Raman so far, with approximately half of the expected vote tallied.

Advertisement

Speaking to supporters on election night, Raman, a member of the Los Angeles City Council, said that “tonight may not give us a final answer on this race.”

“Many thousands of votes will be counted in the days ahead, and we may not get an answer we like, but regardless of what happens next, nobody, nobody can take away what all of us have built together,” she continued.

Pratt, meanwhile, was looking ahead to a potential matchup with Bass when he spoke to reporters.

“Now I have five months to get deep into every community that hasn’t heard my message to make them safe,” said Pratt, a former reality TV star. “So I’m actually very excited, because I felt very rushed. It’s a big city, and I was not able to talk to as many people as I look forward to talking to.”

Bass also projected optimism, telling her backers, “We got a lot more to go, but so far it’s looking good.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending