Mediaboss Marketing

Republicans mounting a long-shot bid to unseat Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York selected Mike Sapraicone, a wealthy private security executive, as their preferred nominee at a party convention on Thursday.

Mr. Sapraicone, 67, has fashioned himself as an affable moderate, vowing to outwork Ms. Gillibrand and find solutions to the migrant and affordability crises that the states ruling Democrats have struggled to combat.

Its about time we had a voice in New York we havent had, he said in an interview, accusing Ms. Gillibrand of having not been seen or heard since her unsuccessful run for president in 2020.

The message easily won over the states political establishment, which believes Mr. Sapraicone represents Republicans best chance to compete in New York. Eighty-four percent of delegates voted in his favor on Thursday at the convention in Binghamton.

But the show of support apparently failed to clear his path. Rather than drop out, two conservative Republican runners-up, Josh Eisen and Cara Castronuova, signaled their intent to petition onto the ballot and allow primary voters to have the final say in June.

That would set up a potentially messy fight that could expose the deep ideological fissures dividing the party. It threatens to force Mr. Sapraicone not only to tap his campaign treasury but also to adopt more conservative positions on subjects like abortion and former President Donald J. Trump that could hurt the party in November.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

Read the original post:
N.Y. Republicans Pick a Former Police Detective to Challenge Gillibrand - The New York Times

The split over how states should handle fertility treatments could force some abortion opponents in Congress to reckon with their support of long-standing abortion bills.

The Alabama Supreme Courts Feb. 16 ruling that frozen embryos used in in vitro fertilization or IVF are humans has ignited a firestorm over how to address personhood laws in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Courts Dobbs decision, and pushed Republicans to move quickly to keep the issue from spurring a maelstrom.

Alabama officials have since said they intend to act to protect the procedure. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, a Republican, said she would support state measures aimed at protecting access to the procedure, and Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said the decision would not be used to prosecute families or IVF providers.

On Friday, former President Donald Trump echoed their sentiments andcalled onAlabama legislators to protect IVF access. He also backed IVF access in every State in America.

On the federal level, IVF and other fertility treatments have received less attention than the debate over regulating abortion or contraception. But as recently as last year, 124 House Republicans including Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., co-sponsored a bill that would define life as beginning at conception.

The bill from Rep. Alex X. Mooney, R-W.Va., would grant equal protection under the 14th Amendment at fertilization or the union of a sperm and egg.

Traditionally, pregnancy has been considered as beginning at the point when the fertilized egg has been implanted in the uterus. In IVF, fertilization occurs outside of the human body.

The Senate version of this legislation, last introduced by Rand Paul, R-Ky., specifically includes a clause specifying that the bill should not be construed as a prohibition on in vitro fertilization. Paul has not reintroduced the bill since January 2021, prior to the June 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade.

Versions of the bill have been regularly introduced since 2004, when it was first introduced by former Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla. Prior versions of the Senate bill did not include the IVF language until 2016.

The House versions have never included IVF provisions.

Polling has widely been supportive of IVF even among those who identify as evangelical Christian or pro-life.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee issued a memo Friday telling candidates that when responding to the Alabama Supreme Court ruling, it is imperative that our candidates align with the publics overwhelming support for IVF and fertility treatments.

The memo states none of their Senate candidates support restricting fertility treatments.

In the House, some Republicans have alsobegun to distance themselves from IVF critiques including those that back the House conception bill in its current form without language protecting the right to have IVF.

Rep. Michelle Steel, R-Calif., who co-sponsors the House bill, tweeted her support for protecting IVF on Thursday.

As someone who struggled to get pregnant, I believe all life is a gift. IVF allowed me, as it has so many others, to start my family. I believe there is nothing more pro-life than helping families have children, and I do not support federal restrictions on IVF, she wrote.

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., and David Schweikert, R-Ariz., who co-sponsored previous versions of the bill, also issued support for protecting the procedure.

Democrats have capitalized on the ruling. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have bashed the ruling from both the White House and through their reelection campaign, and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre issued a memo Monday highlighting House Republicans support for the bill.

Meanwhile, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Suzan DelBene told press Monday that House Republicans have continued to sign on to the bill as recently as two weeks ago.

Speaking on the same call, Reproductive Freedom for All President and CEO Mini Timmaraju said her group is pleased with Bidens response and expects to hear something in the State of the Union on the issue.

This is a mainstream position of the GOP, no matter how much they try to hide that, she said. This is in so much of the work and the background work of the allies and the leaders of these states.

The House Majority PAC, which supports Democrats, issued a memo Friday calling out 11 vulnerable Republicans who supported the House bill, saying it can guarantee that their support will be used against them over paid media in competitive House districts across the country this fall.

House Republicans have made clear they will stop at nothing including outlawing in vitro fertilization to reach their ultimate goal: banning abortion and restricting reproductive rights nationwide, DCCC spokesperson Courtney Rice told CQ Roll Call Friday.

Their anti-family agenda, which elevates these dangerously out-of-touch positions into the mainstream, will cost them their majority this fall.

Visit link:
Alabama IVF ruling spurs a GOP reckoning on conception bills - Roll Call

The House Republican leaderships Medicaid expansion bill, House Bill 1725, was made public early Monday and assigned to the Medicaid Committee.

The bill, authored by House Speaker Jason White, R-West, and Medicaid Chairwoman Missy McGee, R-Hattiesburg, is a mostly-traditional expansion bill with the addition of a work requirement, as well as several other services aimed at enhancing workforce opportunities.

Those services include skills-building training and appointing a special case liaison to enrollees incarcerated in the last three years to help with finding housing, food, health care and workforce training.

The work requirement mandates Mississippians be employed for at least 20 hours a week to be covered by expansion but it would be subject to approval by the federal government. The Biden administration has rescinded such waivers granted previously and rejected new requests for work requirements.

If a work requirement is not approved by CMS before Sept. 30, 2024, Mississippi under the House plan would have the option to either pursue litigation as Georgia has done or adopt traditional Medicaid expansion without a work requirement.

Regardless of whether or not the federal government approves the waiver, this bill would mandate a $10 copayment for nonemergency use of the emergency room.

The bill would increase eligibility to those making up to 138% of the federal poverty level, and would not include a private-care option.

Earlier this year, House Democrats introduced an expansion plan including a private-care option that would allow Mississippians who make up to twice the federal poverty level to qualify for Medicaid. Some conservatives who are open to expansion have said in the past they would favor such a private insurance option, and Democrats hoped that by including this expansion would gain more traction this session.

Including a private care option, first modeled in Arkansas version of expansion, is generally considered a more pragmatic approach because more people are paying into the system and utilizing private insurance when possible.

Many Capitol observers expected Republicans to come back with a proposal even more austere than the Democrats bill. But the GOP leaderships bill, with the exception of a work requirement which likely will not be approved is more of a traditional expansion bill.

Senate Bill 2735, authored by Kevin Blackwell, R-Southaven, is the third major expansion bill this session. The bill is structured so as to only bring forth the necessary code sections for expansion with details to be hammered out through the legislative session.

According to Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann, the Senate expansion bill will contain a work requirement and a private premiums plan.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

See original here:
What's in the House Republican Mississippi Medicaid expansion bill? - Mississippi Today

For months, Senate Republicans have been working with Democrats on a deal they have described as a once-in-a-generation opportunity for a conservative border security bill, and for weeks, they have hinted that they are tantalizingly close to an agreement.

Their timing could not be worse.

As former President Donald J. Trump moves closer to becoming his partys presidential nominee and Republican lawmakers consolidate behind him, he is wielding a heavier hand than any time since leaving office over his partys agenda in Congress. His vocal opposition to the emerging border compromise has all but killed the measures chances in a divided Congress as he puts his own hard-line immigration policies once again at the center of his presidential campaign.

His shadow has always loomed large over the Republican-controlled House, which has opened congressional investigations to defend him, launched an impeachment inquiry into his chief rival and approved legislation to reinstate the hard-line immigration policies he imposed. But as Mr. Trump barrels toward the partys 2024 nomination, his influence on the legislative agenda on Capitol Hill is expanding.

His America First approach to foreign policy already helped to sap G.O.P. support for sending aid to Ukraine for its war against Russian aggression, placing the fate of that money in doubt. That led Republicans to demand a border crackdown in exchange for any further funding for Kyiv, a compromise that Mr. Trump has now repudiated. He frequently consults with the inexperienced Speaker Mike Johnson, weighing in on policy and politics. And his uncompromising approach has emboldened copycat politicians in Congress, like Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Matt Gaetz of Florida, who are helping to drive an ongoing impasse over government spending.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in .

Want all of The Times?Subscribe .

Read more here:
Trump Strengthens Grip on Capitol Hill as He Presses Toward Nomination - The New York Times

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks at a primary election night party after his win in the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday. Matt Rourke/AP hide caption

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks at a primary election night party after his win in the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday.

Nikki Haley is continuing to lean hard into one particular argument in her stump speech: electability.

"Republicans have lost the last seven out of eight popular votes for president. That's nothing to be proud of," the former U.N. ambassador has told crowds in Iowa, New Hampshire and now South Carolina, before boasting of a December Wall Street Journal poll that found her 17 points ahead of Joe Biden in a head-to-head matchup.

The argument failed in the first two voting contests, now that Haley has lost to Trump by more than 30 points in Iowa and, a smaller margin, but still double-digits in New Hampshire.

Moreover, polls show that voters just don't care that much about electability. Entrance polls showed that only 14% of Iowa GOP caucusgoers said a candidate's ability to defeat Biden was their top factor in choosing. Meanwhile, 41% chose someone who "shared their values."

Similarly, in New Hampshire exit polls, the same percentage of Republican primary voters, 14%, ranked the ability to defeat Joe Biden as their top priority. Choosing a candidate who "fights for people like me" garnered the top choice of 31% of those voters, while shared values was most important to another 30%.

All of this might surprise anyone who paid attention to the last presidential election. In 2020, Democratic voters badly wanted Trump out of office and were therefore obsessed with nominating a presidential candidate who was electable someone who could defeat Trump.

This year, Republican voters also badly want to defeat Joe Biden, but many say electability isn't a big factor for them. And the reasons for that are complicated.

Concerns about electability vary greatly by election. For example, voters who want to move on from a two-term presidency in the opposing party as with Democrats in 2008 might about something other than electability (in the case of 2008 Democrats, that something was "change").

Similarly, voting a sitting president out of office can raise the salience of electability. In 2012, when Republicans were eager to vote Obama out of office, a plurality of both Iowa Republican caucusgoers and New Hampshire Republican primary voters said electability was their top concern.

Still, the parties generally have different attitudes toward electability, says Matt Grossmann, a political scientist at Michigan State University.

"Republicans do not perceive a tradeoff between rallying the base and winning a general election, whereas Democrats do perceive that tradeoff," he said.

One possible reason why, Grossmann said, is that Republicans correctly perceive America's conservative bent more Americans consider themselves conservative than liberal.

But Grossmann adds that the cause and effect of electability is complicated.

"The candidate that you support influences who you think is electable. So most people will choose their candidate and then say that candidate is more electable."

Similarly, a candidate who works hard to bill themselves as electable will attract voters who care about that quality.

Republican presidential candidate former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley speaks at a New Hampshire primary night rally, in Concord, N.H., on Tuesday. Steven Senne/AP hide caption

Republican presidential candidate former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley speaks at a New Hampshire primary night rally, in Concord, N.H., on Tuesday.

Barbara Grieb is one of those voters. She went to see Haley last week in Rochester, N.H.

"I think that even Democrats, women Democrats, are ready for a woman in the White House," she said. She added: "A win is important. And I think that's why I am eliminating President Trump because. I just don't think he's got the likability, obviously, from Democrats."

One complicating factor this year is that many Republicans see Joe Biden as a particularly weak candidate, so they don't need to worry about electability.

It is true that Biden is unpopular his net approval is at around negative 16 points. But he's not at all sure to lose.

Many head-to-head polls show Trump and Biden about even with each other, or Trump with a slight advantage. Head-to-head polls between Haley and Biden also don't show either with a clear lead.

Which reveals another important point: neither Haley nor Trump appears to have a clear electability advantage right now.

Trump introduces two potential other confounding factors to the electability equation this year. One is that as the last Republican president, he's essentially running as a Republican incumbent.

And along with that, he brings his feverishly devoted followers. And even if some of them briefly glanced at other candidates, many came home to Trump in the end. Peggy Hutchison is one she went to a Trump rally the day before the Iowa caucuses in bitterly cold weather. She was wearing a Trump t-shirt more specifically, a shirt emblazoned with the Punisher logo wearing Trump's distinctive yellow coif. She said she had been to eight Trump rallies. And also...

"I was at January sixth also. But I didn't go in [to the Capitol]. I was there," she said.

"I left when I could tell it was getting out of hand," she added with a laugh.

Hutchison had gone to events for two other Republican candidates Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy. But she explained why she decided on Trump.

"His platform," she said. "I haven't heard anything that he stands for that I don't stand for."

I asked her specifically about electability. She said that while she thinks Trump will defeat Biden, that didn't play into her decision at all. She simply has liked Trump since 2015.

In addition, Trump's lie that he won the 2020 election also plays into how Trump voters think about electability this year. Pat McGee went out to see Trump in Portsmouth. Why did she plan to vote for him?

"He knows what to do and he knows who to do it to," she said. "He knows which people to trust and which people are RINOs which people to pick that would be in his cabinet and support."

I asked her: is she confident that if he's the nominee, Trump can defeat Biden?

"He will. Yeah," she said.

I pointed out that Trump lost to Biden in 2020. McGee made a skeptical face.

"He didn't lose."

To the degree that Trump voters think he's electable, that perception is fueled by Trump's lie about the 2020 election. Convince voters you've never lost, and you might sound like the most electable candidate around.

Excerpt from:
Electability is all Democrats discussed in 2020. In 2024, Republicans don't care - NPR