Connect with us

Washington

If Joe Biden drops out, Dem replacement may not be on WA ballot

Published

on

If Joe Biden drops out, Dem replacement may not be on WA ballot


If President Joe Biden drops out of his troubled re-election campaign, no Democrat candidate for president may end up on the Washington ballot in November. That would cost Democrats 12 Electoral College votes and likely hand the win to former president Donald Trump. And it all comes down to a difficult decision Biden has to make.

After Biden’s disastrous debate performance highlighting his clear and obvious age-related cognitive struggles, Democrats and left-wing media sounded alarms. An interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos last week did little to calm the frayed nerves of Democrats who now see Donald Trump as the likely winner in the November election. Panicked Democrats are now privately and publicly calling for Biden to end his re-election campaign. Concurrently, a Trump-hating media is amplifying the messages, hoping there will be another candidate who can step up in Biden’s place.

The prospects for a Democrat open convention in late August have never seemed more real. But if they get to that point, Washington’s loyal Democrat voters will be unlikely to have a like-minded candidate to support. Washington may not be the only state without a Democrat candidate either, depending on deadlines to appear on ballots.

Jason Rantz Exclusive: Soldiers who researched Semi Bird detail what led to reprimand for ‘fraud,’ wearing awards and badges he did not earn

Advertisement

Is there a chance no Democrat nominee for president ends up on the Washington Ballot? Yes

Under Washington law, deadlines require a nomination certification no later than August 20, 2024. This is two days before the Democratic National Convention concludes. If there’s an open convention where various candidates duke it out for the nomination, it would not happen by the Washington deadline.

“In the unlikely event that the Democrat National Committee does not submit nominations for president and vice president, no one would be listed for that party,” a spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s office explained to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH after being asked what would happen in an open convention where a provisional certification was not offered by August 20.

The timing of the DNC nomination was always a hurdle for Biden and Democrats.

Even if there wasn’t the prospect of an open convention, the state’s deadline was still in place. But Democrat Secretary of State Steve Hobbes agreed to accept a provisional nomination from the Democratic National Committee by August 20. It would attest that Biden will be the party’s nominee after the convention. This move is not unprecedented. It was done for both Democrats and Republicans (including Trump) in 2020.

“Anything past the August 20 deadline puts the ballot preparation process into turmoil,” former Republican Secretary of State Kim Wyman exclusively explained to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

Advertisement

The deadline and Democrat drama opens up several scenarios that could impact the presidential election.

What different scenarios could happen if Joe Biden drops out?

If Biden stays in the race, Hobbes’ office expects the provisional certification on August 20. It would be followed by an official certification by August 23 that matches the provisional one.

Biden said he’s not dropping out of the race, despite the collective Democrat freakout playing out in front of cameras and behind the scenes. Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) is reportedly assembling Democrat senators to demand Biden step aside and allow another candidate to run for president. A spokesperson for the senator neither confirmed nor denied to reports. Instead, a spokesperson offered the Washington Post the statement, “Like many other people in Washington and across the country, Senator Warner believes these are critical days for the president’s campaign, and he has made that clear to the White House.”

If Biden drops out, and there is no singular candidate to step up, such as a deeply unpopular Vice President Kamala Harris, there would be no provisional certification by the deadline.

More from Jason Rantz: Tree Equity job lands you $60.83 an hour from city of Seattle

Advertisement

What if the certifications don’t match?

It’s possible that Democrats supply a provisional Biden certification but then party drama during the convention convinces Biden to drop out. Only the president can release his delegates to vote for other candidates. Assuming he didn’t drop out before the convention, the delegates wouldn’t be free for other candidates until day two.

Hobbes’ office is giving itself some wiggle room on how to move forward if the provisional certification doesn’t match an official one.

“If the provisional certification submitted on August 20 is different than the certification submitted on August 23, we would consult with our attorneys before making any decision,” Hobbes’ spokesperson explained to “The Jason Rantz Show” on KTTH.

But to have a Democrat on the ballot in this scenario, it would appear that state attorneys would have to council Hobbes to simply ignore the law and his own rules.

The laws governing nomination certifications are clear, giving Hobbes the legal framework for the August 20 deadline. The intent of this administrative rule is to give the state enough time to print the ballots, particularly for military voters serving overseas. Federal law requires they be mailed 45 days before the election. Depending on how extensive and complicated the county ballots are, the process can take at least six weeks.

Advertisement

‘Unchartered territory’

Former Secretary of State Wyman is watching the drama unfold from a different position now. No longer subject to the deadlines as Secretary of State, the Republican who left her role to work under the Biden administration in election security before ultimately stepping aside, warned Hobbes and other secretaries of state better start planning “what if” scenarios.

“This is all unchartered territory,” Wyman explained. “There is a point where you have to move ahead with the ballot process. That’s true across the country. Litigation will ensure, no matter what happens, every day that goes past that deadline, there will be a challenge. Even Democrats might challenge if they don’t like the results of the convention.”

Wyman said election officials across the country should be looking to their existing laws and regulations to game plan next steps.

“Hobbes really should be making contingency plans. What if the nominee is different than what was on the provision certification? What if they don’t select a nominee?” she asked.

She even thinks Hobbes and others should plan for next steps “if the nominee changes between the convention and election day.”

Advertisement

All of this assumes that Democrats don’t hold their mid- or late-July digital roll call vote nominating Biden as the candidate, which was planned as the Ohio legislature considered legislation changing their certification deadline of August 6.

There would be a legal challenge over ballot access

If Hobbes was effectively forced to keep a Democrat nominee off the ballot, it would undoubtedly trigger a legal challenge. But it’s unclear how it would go, though you’d expect judges to err on the side of voters’ access to a major party candidate. But the timing is important. The longer the legal challenges, the tighter it could be for the state to meet printing deadlines.

There was a potential legal challenge to Trump appearing on the Washington ballot that earned some traction courtesy of cheerleading by the Seattle Times.

In a dramatically titled column, “Plot twist: WA has a law against felons running for office,” writer Danny Westneat cited a local activist lawyer who said he had clients ready to keep Trump off the ballot. The columnist cites RCW 29A.68.020 as providing registered voters the right to “challenge the right of a candidate to appear on the general election ballot after a primary.” This could apply to a candidate who was “convicted of a felony by a court of competent jurisdiction, the conviction not having been reversed nor the person’s civil rights restored after the conviction” prior to the election. Though Hobbes eventually denied this could keep Trump off the ballot, a judge would ultimately decide, possibly using the same justification to keep him on the ballot as he would with any challenge against a Democrat candidate.

It’s not necessarily clear how a judge would decide — assuming Joe Biden drops out of the race too late

Federal elections are governed primarily by the U.S. Constitution and federal laws, as established in Supreme Court decisions in Powell v. McCormack (1969) and U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995). However, states are responsible for administering federal elections.

Advertisement

States are responsible for administrative tasks, such as managing voter registration, the design of ballots, and election procedures. If state law forced Hobbes to abide by the state’s law and regulations, this would be well within the state’s administrative role in administering federal elections.

If, due to the timing of certification by Democrats, ballots were not guaranteed to be ready to comply with federal law, how would a judge justify a decision in favor of Democrats? You cannot argue that it’s better to deprive voters of their right to vote than it is to keep one candidate from a ballot because of their own incompetence and in-fighting.

Jason Rantz Exclusive: Semi Bird reprimanded for fraud against US Army, after ‘stolen valor’ claims

Washington in play for Trump

Though it wouldn’t be easy for Trump to face any Democrat nominee in Washington, new polling shows his support steady and loyal. Biden’s support, however, is soft.

According to a May Cascade PBS/Elway poll, Biden had only 42% support (31% certain, 11% inclined to support the president but could change their minds). Trump had 34% support (25% certain, 9% inclined to support the former president but could change their minds). With media coverage so positively skewed toward Biden and against Trump, both results are surprising for voters in this deeply blue state. After Biden’s debate debacle, it’s hard to imagine support skyrocketing. With 13% of Washington voters undecided, Trump theoretically has a shot at taking the state.

Advertisement

Trump senior campaign adviser and Seattle native Jason Miller explained to sister station KIRO Newsradio, immediately after the presidential debate, that, “Washington state may now be in play.”

“President Trump delivered the greatest performance in debate history,” Miller said in a text message sent to KIRO Newsradio. “Millions of Americans have now been reminded what a real leader looks like, and have had their hope restored that we can turn around our economy and secure our southern border.”

Listen to “The Jason Rantz Show” on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason on X, formerly known as TwitterInstagram, and Facebook.

Advertisement





Source link

Washington

Washington passes new AI laws to crack down on misinformation, protect minors

Published

on

Washington passes new AI laws to crack down on misinformation, protect minors


Washington just became the latest state to regulate artificial intelligence.

Under a pair of bills signed by Gov. Bob Ferguson Tuesday, companies like OpenAI and Anthropic will have to include new disclosures in their popular chatbots for Washington users.

Ferguson asked legislators to craft House Bill 1170 to crack down on AI-generated misinformation. When content is substantially modified using generative AI, that information will now have to be traceable using watermarks or metadata. The new law applies to large AI companies more than 1 million monthly subscribers.

Advertisement

“ I’m confident I’m not the only Washingtonian who often sees something on my phone and wondering to myself, ‘Is that AI or is it real?’ And I feel like I’m a reasonably discerning person,” Ferguson said during the bill signing. “It is virtually impossible these days.”

RELATED: WA Gov. Bob Ferguson calls for regulations on AI chatbot companions

House Bill 2225 establishes new guard rails for AI chatbots that act like friends or companions. It applies to services like ChatGPT and Claude, but excludes more narrowly tailored chatbots, like the customer service windows that pop up when visiting a corporate website.

Chatbots that fit the bill will have to disclose to users that they are not human at the start of every conversation, and every three hours in an ongoing chat. The tools will also be barred from pretending to be human in conversation with users.

Advertisement

The rules go further if the user is a minor. Companies that operate chatbots will have to disclose that the tools are not human every hour, rather than every three hours, if the user is under 18. The bill forbids AI companions from having sexually explicit conversations with underage users. It also bans “manipulative engagement techniques.” For example, a chatbot is not allowed to guilt or pressure a minor into staying in a conversation or keeping information from parents.

“AI has incredible potential to transform society,” Ferguson said. “At the same time, of course, there are risks that we must mitigate as a state, especially to young people. So I speak partly as a governor, but also as the father of teenage twins who grapple with this as a lot of parents do every single day.”

Under the law, AI chatbots will not be allowed to encourage or provide information on suicide or self-harm, including eating disorders. The companies behind these tools will be required to come up with a protocol for flagging conversations that reference self-harm and connecting users with mental health services.

The regulations come in the wake of several high-profile instances of teenage suicide following prolonged interactions with AI companions that showed warning signs. Many more AI users of all ages have reported mental health issues and psychosis after heavy use of the technology.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Washington faces Utah, aims to stop 16-game skid

Published

on

Washington faces Utah, aims to stop 16-game skid


Washington Wizards (16-55, 14th in the Eastern Conference) vs. Utah Jazz (21-51, 14th in the Western Conference)

Salt Lake City; Wednesday, 9 p.m. EDT

BOTTOM LINE: Washington heads into the matchup with Utah after losing 16 in a row.

Advertisement

The Jazz have gone 13-24 in home games. Utah ranks second in the Western Conference with 16.6 fast break points per game led by Lauri Markkanen averaging 3.3.

The Wizards are 5-29 in road games. Washington is 9-10 when it has fewer turnovers than its opponents and averages 15.3 turnovers per game.

The Jazz score 117.4 points per game, 6.7 fewer points than the 124.1 the Wizards give up. The Wizards’ 46.1% shooting percentage from the field this season is 2.9 percentage points lower than the Jazz have allowed to their opponents (49.0%).

The teams square off for the second time this season. The Jazz won the last meeting 122-112 on March 6, with Ace Bailey scoring 32 points in the victory.

TOP PERFORMERS: Kyle Filipowski is averaging 10.5 points and 6.9 rebounds for the Jazz. Brice Sensabaugh is averaging 19.9 points over the last 10 games.

Advertisement

Alex Sarr is averaging 16.5 points, 7.4 rebounds and two blocks for the Wizards. Will Riley is averaging 14.4 points over the past 10 games.

LAST 10 GAMES: Jazz: 3-7, averaging 116.4 points, 43.3 rebounds, 27.7 assists, 9.9 steals and 4.4 blocks per game while shooting 45.9% from the field. Their opponents have averaged 122.7 points per game.

Wizards: 0-10, averaging 114.3 points, 37.4 rebounds, 24.5 assists, 6.9 steals and 4.5 blocks per game while shooting 47.1% from the field. Their opponents have averaged 130.6 points.

INJURIES: Jazz: Lauri Markkanen: out (hip), Isaiah Collier: out (hamstring), Keyonte George: out (leg), Cody Williams: out (shoulder), Walker Kessler: out for season (shoulder), Jusuf Nurkic: out for season (nose), Jaren Jackson Jr.: out for season (knee).

Wizards: Anthony Davis: out (finger), Tristan Vukcevic: day to day (back), Cam Whitmore: out for season (shoulder), Alex Sarr: day to day (toe), Tre Johnson: day to day (foot), Kyshawn George: out (elbow), D’Angelo Russell: out (not injury related), Trae Young: out (quad).

Advertisement

___

The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar.



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Washington sues USDA, alleging billions in funds illegally withheld

Published

on

Washington sues USDA, alleging billions in funds illegally withheld


Washington Attorney General Nick Brown has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture, alleging the federal agency is illegally withholding billions of dollars in funding and attempting to force states into compliance with unlawful demands.

The complaint, filed as part of a multistate effort, argues the USDA has threatened to cut off critical funding tied to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, unless states agree to federal conditions that exceed the agency’s authority, according to the Washington State Office of the Attorney General.

Other critical programs that would be affected include the school lunch program; Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC); The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP); and the Volunteer Fire Capacity Program.

Brown’s office said the funding at stake supports the administration of SNAP, a federally funded, state-run program that provides food assistance to millions of low-income Americans. Washington alone receives about $129.5 million annually to administer the program, and disruptions could have “catastrophic” consequences for residents who rely on it, according to the attorney general’s office.

Advertisement

In the lawsuit, the state alleges the USDA is effectively holding those funds “hostage” to compel states to comply with federal directives, including demands tied to program data and administration, according to the complaint and accompanying news release from Brown’s office.

The legal challenge contends the USDA’s actions violate federal law, including constitutional limits and statutory authority governing the SNAP program. The coalition of states argues the federal government cannot condition funding on requirements that were not authorized by Congress, according to the complaint.

Brown said the lawsuit is aimed at protecting both funding and the people who depend on it.

“The rule of law is on our side,” Brown said in a statement, adding that the state is seeking to ensure continued support for vulnerable residents and prevent federal overreach.

According to the attorney general’s office, SNAP serves as a key safety net nationwide, delivering billions of dollars in food assistance. States administer the program but rely on federal funding to operate it.

Advertisement

The lawsuit asks the court to declare the USDA’s actions unlawful and block the agency from withholding funds or imposing conditions the states argue are illegal.

The case is the latest in a series of legal challenges involving SNAP, as states push back on what they describe as unprecedented federal demands tied to the program’s operation and funding, according to the Washington attorney general’s office.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending