Category: Election 2024

  • President-Elect Trump’s Day-One Promises

    President-Elect Trump’s Day-One Promises

    President-elect Donald Trump is set to take office Monday, January 20th for his non-consecutive second term. Along the campaign trail, Trump has made several promises that he plans to execute on his first day back in office. Such promises include initiating mass deportations, ending the war in Ukraine, combating inflation, and pardoning those who were charged for their participation in the January 6th insurrection.

    Mass Deportation

    While campaigning, President-elect Trump promised to carry out the country’s largest mass deportation program, stating that America must “make the border strong and powerful.” Trump’s appointed “border czar” Tom Homan explained that the Trump administration would implement a “Remain in Mexico” policy on Trump’s first day in office. This policy would force asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while waiting for their asylum status to be approved. Additionally, Homan expressed plans to deport all illegal immigrants even if their children are United States citizens, arguing, “having a U.S. citizen child doesn’t make you immune from our laws.” It is expected that these policies will be implemented through executive orders.

    Trump’s promised mass deportation program is estimated to cost around $86 billion. Without the guaranteed support of congressional funding, the budgets of executive agencies will need to be reworked in order to allocate enough funding to execute the policy. Given the impending increase in detained immigrants under his policy, the Trump administration is also preparing to work with county jails and private prisons to provide additional space for undocumented immigrants. In his Time Person of the Year interview, the president-elect also noted that he is prepared to call in the National Guard and local sheriffs to execute his deportation policies.

    Ukraine Russia War

    Donald Trump has repeatedly promised to take steps to end the war between Russia and Ukraine during his first days as president. In an interview with Fox news, Trump’s press secretary stated that on day one, Trump would bring “Ukraine and Russia to the negotiating table to end this war.” While Trump has not elaborated on the specifics of his plan to engage both nations in negotiations, his campaign’s communications director has noted that the war is a “top priority” of Trump’s second term and that “Trump believes European nations should be paying more of the cost of the conflict.” Despite Trump’s promises, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations has argued that the conflict cannot be solved in “one day.”

    Economy and Inflation

    During his campaign for president, Trump promised to increase tariffs on foreign imports with the aim of decreasing costs for American consumers. In late November, Trump announced that he would implement a 25% tariff on all products coming into the United States from Mexico and China on his first day in office. Trump plans to keep the tariffs in place until illegal immigrants stop entering the United States. Moreover, Trump promised that he would leverage an “additional 10% tariff” against China until it stops the flow of drugs, particularly Fentanyl, from entering the U.S.

    China, Canada, and Mexico have all denied their alleged involvement in the flow of drugs across U.S. borders, reiterating their commitment to border security in statements to the press. Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum stated that “neither threats nor tariffs will solve the issue of migration or drug consumption,” arguing that Trump’s proposed day-one tariffs do not address the root issues underlying migration and the drug trade. 

    Despite promising to “bring [grocery] prices way down” during an interview with NBC in early December, Trump has also faced pushback from economists who warn that his proposed tariffs will instead increase the cost of goods for the American consumer. Chief market strategist at Corpay Cross-Border Solutions, Karl Schamotta, argues that the tariffs will “add approximately $272 billion a year to tax burdens, raise goods prices, [and] lift interest rates.” Trump recently backpedaled on his promise to lower grocery prices in his Time Person of the Year interview, stating that it would be “very hard” to bring down grocery prices due to broken supply chains. In the interview, Trump did not clarify his plans to fix the supply chain issue, but stressed that his day-one tariffs would strengthen the economy.

    January 6th Pardons

    On the campaign trail, Trump announced a plan to pardon all individuals charged for their actions related to the capitol insurrection on January 6th, 2021. In mid-December, Trump stated that he plans to issue pardons on a “case-by-case” basis, promising to look over each case within the “first hour that [he] gets into that office” to determine if the insurrectionists “actually caused death and destruction”. In the same interview, Trump claimed that most of the insurrectionists “should not be in jail” and have “suffered greatly.” At least 1,500 people have been charged or plead guilty to the attack on the capitol, and at least 645 people have been sentenced to jail time. 

    As January 20th approaches, critics and supporters alike wait intently to see whether the President-elect will follow through on his day-one policy promises.

  • Key Trump Administration Cabinet Picks

    Key Trump Administration Cabinet Picks

    What is the Presidential Cabinet?

    The President’s Cabinet serves as an advisory board for the President. It is made up of the heads of the 15 executive departments. These members are appointed by the President and must be approved by the Senate by a majority vote to confirm the nomination. 

    Trump is currently in the process of announcing his cabinet nominations. Some of the major positions he has announced so far include Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Homeland Security, Director of National Intelligence, and Attorney General.

    Secretary of State

    The Secretary of State is the head of the Department of State, whose role is to develop and implement foreign policy. The Secretary serves the President as their top foreign policy advisor and executes the President’s foreign policy. This department represents the United States in communications with foreign nations, develops foreign assistance and military training programs, works to combat international crime, and negotiates and interprets treaties and agreements.

    Marco Rubio was announced as Trump’s nominee for Secretary of State. In response to his nomination, Rubio promised to “deliver peace through strength” and to place the “interest of Americans and America above all else.” Rubio currently serves as a Senator from Florida and previously served as a member of Florida’s House of Representatives. He currently serves on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Rubio has taken hard-line stances against China, stating in a Washington Post op-ed that China is the “largest, most advanced adversary America has ever faced.” He has promoted tariffs, technology restriction requirements, and trade barriers against China. On Gaza, Rubio has consistently supported “Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas” and denied support for a ceasefire. On immigration, Rubio supports strong border protections and the deportation of illegal immigrants, claiming that America is being “invaded.”

    Secretary of Defense 

    The Secretary of Defense is the head of the Department of Defense, whose role within the Executive Branch is to bolster national security. The Department of Defense aims to protect national interest through war-fighting, humanitarian aid, and disaster relief services. The Army, Air Force, Navy, and the Pentagon all fall under the Department’s purview. The Defense Secretary is the President’s top advisor, and oversees the nation’s armed forces as. Their authority is second only to the Commander in Chief (President).

    Trump named political commentator and Fox News Anchor Pete Hegseth as his nominee for Secretary of Defense. Hegseth currently hosts the show Fox and Friends Weekend and has appeared on other Fox News daytime and primetime shows. He previously served in the Army as an Infantry Officer in the National Guard. Additionally, Hegseth formerly served as CEO of the veterans advocacy group Concerned Veterans for America. When speaking on the podcast The Shawn Ryan Show, Hegseth stated his belief that “[America] should not have women in combat roles” as he believes men are “more capable.” Additionally, he stated that he wanted to fire army generals who support “any of the DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion]” and he supports a “frontal assault” on DEI policies. He has also stated that the U.S. military would be more effective if it were to create a “real threat of violence.”

    Secretary of Homeland Security 

    As the head of the Department of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Homeland Security advises the President on how to protect the American people from foreign and domestic threats. This department is responsible for preventing terrorist attacks, protecting infrastructure, facilitating trade and travel, responding to natural disasters, and regulating the migration of people in and out of the country. Agencies under the department include U.S Customs and Border Protection, Citizenship and Immigration Services, FEMA, and Cybersecurity. 

    Kristi Noem was recently named the nominee for Secretary of Homeland Security. She currently serves as the Governor of South Dakota and previously served as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives and the South Dakota House of Representatives. In his statement announcing Noem’s nomination, Trump stated that Noem “has been very strong on border security” and will protect America “from our adversaries.” In response to her nomination, Noem issued a statement promising to “secure our homeland” and falsely condemned illegal immigration alone for “[driving] up crime in the country” and increasing “drugs and human trafficking.”

    Director of National Intelligence 

    The role of the Director of National Intelligence is to advise the President, the National Security Council, and the Homeland Security Council on national security matters. Additionally, the Director oversees the Intelligence Community’s 18 agencies including the CIA and NSA.

    Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s nominee for Director of National Intelligence, previously served in the U.S. House of Representatives and ran for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2020 before leaving the party in 2022 to become independent and joining the Republican Party in 2024. Gabbard currently serves in the U.S. Army Reserve as Lieutenant Colonel. 

    Attorney General 

    The Attorney General serves as the head of the Department of Justice and acts as the chief law enforcement officer for the federal government. The Attorney General represents the U.S. in all legal matters.

    President-Elect Trump recently nominated Pam Bondi for Attorney General, praising her for work to “stop the trafficking of deadly drugs” and “reduce the tragedy of Fentanyl Overdose Deaths.” Bondi previously served as Florida’s first woman attorney general. She also worked as a defense lawyer for Trump in 2020 during his first impeachment trial. She currently serves as the Chair of the Center for Litigation for America First Policy Institute, a conservative nonprofit think tank. In November, she filed an amicus curiae brief to appeal the special counsel’s classified documents case against Trump, arguing that the special counsel was unlawfully appointed. 
    Before nominating Bondi, Trump had first nominated Florida Representative Matt Gaetz. Upon the news of his initial nomination, Gaetz announced his resignation from the House effective immediately. Since 2021, Gaetz has been under investigation by the House Ethics Committee on allegations that he “engaged in sexual misconduct and/or illicit drug use,” used campaign funds for personal use, and accepted bribes. Gaetz has denied all allegations. This past Wednesday, the bi-partisan ethics committee met to discuss whether or not the investigation report should be released to the public. The ethics committee could not come to an agreement about releasing the report, which may force the House to vote on its release. In light of the controversy, Gaetz withdrew from the Attorney General nomination on November 21st. He has since clarified that he does not plan on re-joining Congress.

  • What is the Department of Government Efficiency? 

    What is the Department of Government Efficiency? 

    President-Elect Donald Trump recently began announcing his presidential cabinet nominations, tapping Congresspeople, former Republican presidential nominees, and close allies. As the leader of the executive branch, the President must appoint about 4,000 officials, including the members of his cabinet, who serve as heads of executive departments. Some cabinet positions, including UN Ambassador, require confirmation by the Senate and typically involve confirmation hearings. In the midst of his cabinet nominations, Trump introduced an idea for a new executive department that has caused debates about executive power. 

    The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

    On Tuesday, November 12th, 2024, Trump announced that he would be creating a new executive department, the Department of Government Efficiency, led by billionaire businessmen Elon Musk and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he is creating the new department to “dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies.” Also known as DOGE, the department aims to provide “outside guidance” to the government and foster “an entrepreneurial approach” to government spending. The department is slated to last until July 4th, 2026, giving it a deadline to accomplish its objective of cutting government spending. It is still unclear as to how the department will officially be created or funded, as creating new federal departments requires congressional approval. If Congress does not move forward with establishing DOGE, Musk and Ramaswamy may act as advisors to the President rather than as leaders of an official executive department.  

    Who are the proposed heads of the Department of Government Efficiency?

    • Elon Musk: Musk is a businessman worth over 303 billion dollars and the co-founder of over seven companies, some of the most notable being Tesla and SpaceX. Throughout Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, Musk has been a staunch supporter, attending rallies, giving at least $130 million in campaign donations, and hosting a $1 million raffle in the swing state of Pennsylvania for those who registered to vote. At Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally in October, Musk stated that he wanted to reduce the federal budget by “at least $2 trillion,” about 30% of the federal government’s total fiscal spending in 2024. 
    • Vivek Ramaswamy: Ramaswamy made political news in early 2023 when he ran for the Republican presidential nomination. His policy positions included militarizing the southern border, ending the funding of sanctuary cities, diversifying healthcare insurance options, abolishing the Department of Education, and increasing the voting age to 25. Ramaswamy founded Roivant Sciences, a biotech company focused on applying technology to drug development. He previously signaled support for cutting government spending when he announced his plans to cut the number of federal workers through “reduction of force” regulations when he was campaigning for president in 2023.

    Your opinion matters! Click Here to let us know how you feel about the issues discussed in this brief!

  • How News Organizations “Call” the Presidential Election

    How News Organizations “Call” the Presidential Election

    Tuesday, November 5th marks Election Day in the United States. As millions of voters cast their ballots, news organizations carefully analyze incoming voting data to determine the winner in several races, including the presidency. But even though news organizations such as the Associated Press can “call” a presidential election, their projections do not constitute official election results. Election results are instead certified by the government. However, due to the fragmented and often slow-moving design of the Electoral College, the official Electoral College vote does not usually occur until December. In order to fill the time gap between Election Day and the Electoral College vote, news organizations analyze vote count data from each state to determine state-level results, predict state Electoral votes, and ultimately declare one candidate the next President.

    The Long Road to Official Election Results

    Presidential election results in the U.S. are not determined by the popular vote, but instead by the Electoral College vote. As specified in the Constitution, each state receives a number of Electoral College representatives proportional to the state’s congressional delegation size. For example, Vermont has three electors since the state has two Senators and one Representative in Congress. As populations shift, census-based redistricting can cause states to gain or lose electors. However, Electoral College votes are not proportional to population size; for example, one Electoral College vote in Wyoming accounts for 195,000 people, while one Electoral College vote in Texas accounts for 700,000 people. 

    Before the November election date, each presidential party chooses its slate of electors for each state. There are few criteria to be an elector other than not having engaged in insurrection and not holding national Congressional office. Currently, all but two states operate under a “winner takes all” system in which all of that state’s electors are sworn to cast their Electoral College vote for the presidential candidate who won the majority of votes in their state. Faithless electors, or electors who cast their Electoral College vote for someone other than the candidate they swore to vote for, complicate the predictability of this system and are not currently regulated consistently across states. 

    After November votes are tallied and the winner in each state is made evident, electors meet in their respective states to cast their votes in mid-December. The results of the Electoral College vote are then sent to the newly-elected national Congress which meets to declare official election results on January 6th. 

    How News Organizations Calculate Timely Results

    In order to calculate the results of the presidential election on or soon after Election Day, the media tabulates votes as they are cast. Media organizations will typically use two methods to determine votes: national polls or data collected from local officials such as county clerks. Since 2003, news networks have worked together to create an organization called the National Election Pool to create exit polls that more accurately capture voting choices. After the 2016 presidential election results differed widely from polling projections, the Associated Press left this consortium of news networks in favor of conducting its own online polling. The Associated Press determined that because voting on Election Day is no longer more common than voting early or by mail, Election Day exit polls are disproportionate to the larger electorate. Thus, the Associated Press created its own polling methodology, AP VoteCast, to attempt to provide polling methods that better accounted for the votes casted prior to Election Day. 

    Through a combination of polling and collecting voting results, news organizations are tasked with determining the President-elect in real time. News organizations analyze incoming votes to determine if the trailing candidate can achieve the number of votes needed to catch up to the current polling leader based on the number of votes a county or state has historically received in previous elections, the demographics of the area, and past voting history. Based on this analysis, if a news organization determines that there is no chance the trailing candidate will achieve the number of votes necessary to overtake their opponent, the news organization will call the race. 
    In states where the race is close, news organizations may not call a clear winner until days after Election Day. This is because states have different voting laws. Some states do not start counting votes until Election Day, causing a delay in results compared to other states. Additionally, in some states, mail-in ballots received within a certain period after Election Day are counted as long as they are postmarked by Election Day. These discrepancies can cause delays in news media tabulations, as organizations wait for official state vote tallies. For example, the 2020 presidential election was called by most media outlets four days after Election Day due to the steep increase of mail-in ballots during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated delays in vote counting.

  • Protecting Our Democracy Act: Weighing the Pros and Cons

    Protecting Our Democracy Act: Weighing the Pros and Cons

    Background

    The Protecting Our Democracy Act (PODA) is a bill under consideration in Congress that aims to protect the integrity of the democratic process. The bill was originally passed in the House in 2021. It was received in the Senate in late 2021, where it failed to pass due to the use of a filibuster. It was reintroduced to the House in 2023, where it remains.

    PODA’s provisions center around three main goals:

    • Shifting power from the executive to the legislative branch: PODA would limit presidential powers, reassert Congress’s constitutional authority over federal spending decisions, and require congressional approval of presidential emergency declarations. PODA would also codify Congress’s subpoena and investigatory power, giving the legislative branch greater oversight of the executive branch.
    • Preventing corruption: PODA would require greater presidential transparency, enact new protections for both inspectors general and whistleblowers, and codify the Constitution’s Emoluments Clauses, which prevent government officials from receiving profits from foreign officials or states. It would also reinforce the Hatch Act of 1939, which limits the political activities of federal employees and other government officials involved with federally-funded programs.
    • Strengthening election integrity laws: PODA also prohibits foreign election assistance in the form of donations and would require greater transparency in digital political advertisements.

    Arguments in Favor of the Protecting Our Democracy Act

    One of the main arguments in support of PODA is that gradual institutional decay has undermined congressional authority. PODA’s proponents point to resistance to congressional oversight by former Presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama as evidence of this phenomenon. They argue that the recent growth of the executive branch at the expense of the legislative branch can be mitigated through PODA’s provisions, which give Congress clear authority to enforce subpoenas, reassert congressional power over federal spending, and restrict a president’s use of emergency declarations. Proponents believe that this would effectively reform the balance of power between the two branches and restore the democratic process to the federal government.

    PODA’s supporters also emphasize a need for greater defenses against corruption and abuses of power. They point to the Trump administration’s refusal to disclose tax returns, dismissals of inspectors general, and issuance of pardons for corruption charges against close associates as evidence of the need for greater oversight of the executive branch. They believe that reinforcing the Hatch Act would keep federal programs fair and non-partisan, reduce corruption, and prevent political patronage. Supporters also believe that government whistleblowers need greater protections. A poll conducted by Marist in 2020 found that 86% of American voters agree that there should be more legal protections for federal employees who report fraud. Whistleblower protections are also popular across party lines. Supporters of PODA believe that the bill would provide these popular protections by granting whistleblowers increased anonymity and a private right of action if outed by other government officials.

    Finally, proponents of PODA argue that the bill will prevent foreign interference in elections. The federal ban against foreign interference in national elections has not been updated since the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision, which allowed corporations and other organizations to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaigns and elections. PODA’s supporters believe that this outdated policy has allowed foreign interests to fund campaigns, pay for digital advertising, and conduct social media campaigns freely, potentially spending almost $1 billion total on U.S. elections in the past decade. If passed, the bill intends to decrease foreign influence by explicitly banning foreign assistance in elections and requiring political groups to report all attempts by foreign actors to influence campaigns or elections.

    Arguments Against the Protecting Our Democracy Act

    The main argument against PODA is that the bill interferes with the separation of power between the three branches of government. Opponents of PODA argue that its provisions diminish the executive branch by requiring congressional oversight of the presidential pardon, a constitutionally-granted presidential power. Critics also believe that PODA would diminish the judicial branch by attaching new definitions to constitutional language that courts have already ruled upon, overriding court decisions and further upsetting the balance of power. Specifically, they point to PODA’s new definition of emoluments, which expands the definition to include payments arising from commercial transactions at fair market value. In light of this, opponents believe that PODA’s passage would upset the American political system of checks and balances by tipping the scales too far in the direction of the legislative branch.

    Opponents of PODA also point to the bill’s protections for whistleblowers and inspectors general as a key reason to oppose the proposal. They believe that the increased protections and anonymity for whistleblowers make it difficult for the federal government to vet claims, shielding poorly-performing employees from scrutiny. They also believe that requiring congressional oversight for firing Inspectors General decreases government efficiency and intrudes on internal operations.

    Critics also believe that PODA is politically-motivated. They argue that the bill specifically targets former President Trump and his administration’s actions. As such, they believe that PODA’s proponents only support it with the intent of politically damaging Trump and that the bill’s provisions are unnecessary.

    Conclusion

    In summary, PODA supporters argue that the bill would restore congressional authority, defend against government corruption and abuses of power, and prevent foreign interference in elections. Critics argue that PODA is a politically-motivated bill that would interfere with the constitutional separation of powers, make it difficult to vet whistleblower claims, and decrease the efficiency of the federal government. 
    After its introduction to the Senate in December 2021, PODA entered committee, where it has remained for the last three years. Even with its recent reintroduction to the House, it is unlikely to pass the Senate in its entirety unless the filibuster is abolished.

  • Immigration Policies: Where Each Presidential Candidate Stands

    Immigration Policies: Where Each Presidential Candidate Stands

    As the upcoming election draws near, immigration remains a top issue of concern amongst voters. According to Pew Research, 61% of registered voters say immigration is a “very important” issue when considering their vote. Many presidential candidates have centered immigration reform in their platforms, addressing everything from the border wall to administrative reforms in immigration processing. 

    Donald Trump

    Throughout his campaign, Donald Trump has expressed the idea that there is a “massive invasion at our southern border that has spread misery, crime, poverty, disease, and destruction.” He plans to deputize the National Guard and local law enforcement to remove illegal immigrants and create a merit-based immigration system to limit the number of migrants entering the country. Additionally, in his keynote speech at the Republican National Convention, Trump promised to “close the border” and finish constructing his border wall with Mexico. He has also promised to apprehend and deport all illegal immigrants, arguing that their presence is “unfair” to those who entered the country legally. Trump also plans to reinstate policies from his previous term in office such as his “Remain in Mexico” policy which would force migrants seeking asylum to remain in Mexico until their court date with a U.S. immigration judge. Under his presidency, Trump promised to create the “most secure border in U.S. history” and to carry out the “largest domestic deportation operation in American history.”

    Kamala Harris

    Throughout her campaign, Kamala Harris has promised to secure the Southern border and to “reform our broken immigration system.” During her time as Vice President, she supported the bipartisan border security bill that, if it had passed, would have imposed limits on asylum eligibility, added over 1,500 new Customs and Border Protection personnel, and increased funding for cities and states to provide support for immigrants. She has promised to reintroduce that bill and sign it into law if elected President. As Vice President, she was also tasked with “dealing with the root causes of immigration” in Latin American countries, working with various nations to mitigate poverty and lower the number of migrants leaving those countries. In her speech at the Democratic National Convention this past August, she stated that she wants to create an “earned pathway to citizenship and secure our border.”

    Jill Stein 

    Jill Stein aims to overhaul the immigration system in the United States. She believes that border policy should shift from focusing on detention and enforcement to humane and effective asylum processing. She believes that migrants should initially be screened for criminal records before being granted entrance into the country. Stein’s reform policies include abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), constructing an Office of Citizenship under the Department of Labor, granting amnesty to every undocumented person in America, expanding refugee programs, and increasing the number of visas available to immigrants. Stein believes that immigrants’ rights are human rights that America has the duty to protect. 

    Cornel WestCornel West’s immigration policies aim to uphold principles of “dignity, respect, and human rights.” West wants to create clear and broad legal pathways for immigrants to seek residency within the country and dismantle the bureaucratic barriers that prevent immigrants from obtaining status. West also seeks to abolish ICE, demilitarize the border, and create a more humane path to seeking legal status. Additionally, West hopes to uphold asylum laws to ensure that those who flee persecution and violence have the opportunity to find safety within American borders so that America remains a “refuge for the oppressed.”

  • Podcasting for the Presidency: Candidate Interview Recaps

    Podcasting for the Presidency: Candidate Interview Recaps

    As Kamala Harris and Donald Trump continue on the campaign trail, both presidential candidates have attempted to reach new audiences of potential voters. In recent months, both candidates have tapped into the expanding podcast industry, appearing on popular shows to speak on political issues and encourage the expanding base of podcast listeners to vote. 

    Recap: Harris’ Interview with Call Her Daddy

    On October 6th, Alex Cooper, podcaster and co-creator of the Call Her Daddy podcast, released her interview with Vice President Harris. The Call Her Daddy podcast is Spotify’s second-largest podcast and attracts a predominantly female audience. Cooper, who interviewed Harris, stated that she had also reached out to Donald Trump for an interview. 

    To begin the Call Her Daddy interview, Cooper first inquired why the Vice President chose to sit down for an interview with her in the first place. Harris noted that Cooper had built up an impressive community where her listeners felt seen and heard as women. Harris then spoke about her time serving as a prosecutor and how that career choice stemmed from her desire to help those who were left vulnerable by abuse. She emphasized that her work has been about restoring survivors’ voices and honoring their right to justice. 

    The conversation then shifted to reproductive freedoms and voting. Harris emphasized that both are fundamental rights for women, asserting, “No one should take your power from you.” When questioned about how to make this country safer for women, Harris emphasized economic autonomy, stating her desire to “uplift the ability of women to have economic health and wellbeing.” Harris expressed that women in abusive relationships often cannot leave because they lack access to the financial means to support themselves. 

    On the topic of women’s health and freedom, Copper asked for Harris’s thoughts on a statement Trump had directed at the women attending his rally in Pennsylvania. Trump had stated, “You will be protected and I will be your protector.” This led Harris to argue that Trump’s statement was hypocritical, given that he previously ran on and delivered a promise to elect Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade and remove the national right to abortion. Cooper then spoke on her perspective on post-Roe America, sharing an experience where she spoke to a woman who had experienced extreme harassment for trying to seek an abortion. Harris and Cooper both condoned the government’s authority over women’s bodies, calling the overturning of Roe “outrageous.” Harris also pointed out that many clinics that provide abortion, which have since been shut down, also provided access to other health services like pap smears and breast cancer screenings. She argued that abortion bans have therefore limited access to healthcare in general. 

    Harris then spoke on the practical applications of these abortion bans, arguing that abortion exceptions “if the life of the mother is at risk” do not actually protect women because they imply that the mother is “almost dead before you decide to give her care”. Harris cited the case of Amber Thurman, who died after doctors were prohibited from performing a life-saving procedure due to state abortion bans.

    Harris also shared her thoughts on Republican Vice Presidential nominee J.D. Vance’s comments about “childless cat ladies,” calling them  “mean spirited” and saying that the “strength of a leader is about who you lift up.”

    Harris wrapped up by addressing her plans to help young Americans. She shared that she wants to create tax incentives to build 3 million more housing units and provide $25,000 in down payment assistance for first-time home buyers. She also wants to give young parents a “$6,000 tax cut for the first year of their child’s life.” Harris then reiterated her commitment to relieving student loan debt and preventing medical debt from impacting credit scores. Finally, when asked why people should trust her, Kamala Harris stated that she “believes in the promise of America” and that leadership is about “investing in the people” to lift up the whole.

    Recap: Trump’s Interview with This Past Weekend

    On August 20th, comedian and podcaster Theo Von interviewed former president Trump on his podcast This Past Weekend. The comedian interviewed Trump at the former President’s country club in New Jersey and discussed a variety of topics such as healthcare and border security. Notable past guests on This Past Weekend include Mark Cuban, Bernie Sanders, and Tucker Carlson.

    Theo Von began the interview by inquiring about Donald Trump’s sons, seeing as Barron Trump is a fan of the podcast. Trump spoke about all of his sons’ various ventures before the conversation shifted to Trump’s abstinence from substance use. Trump stated that he does not drink or do drugs because of his brother, Frank Trump Jr., who struggled with an addiction that eventually led to his death. Von and Trump bonded over their shared avoidance of substances, as Von had previously struggled with substance use himself but has been sober for two years. 

    The conversation then pivoted to a discussion of the opioid crisis. Trump shared his thoughts on allowing pharmaceutical companies to advertise on television and his plans to curtail opioid-related deaths. Trump stated that during his time in office, he formed committees to attempt to combat the opioid crisis. Trump also claimed that “the establishment” is trying to “sink” him, which he claimed is part of the reason why so many of his supporters continue to back him. Trump claimed that he had prepared an executive order that would have “forced hospitals and insurers to publish all their prices”, and blamed Biden and Harris for not continuing the order during their administration. Trump also accused democratic Senator and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of keeping medical prices high and taking financial contributions from healthcare lobbyists.

    Von then asked Trump if he ever considered having Robert F. Kennedy as a potential running mate, an idea which Trump shut down immediately. Trump shared that though he liked the guy, he firmly believes that the American electoral system is a two-party system, and Kennedy is a third-party candidate. Von and Trump also discussed Biden’s performance in the first presidential debate and Kamala Harris’ subsequent rise to Presidential nominee. Trump speculated that the Democratic leaders forced Biden out of the race, calling the debate “a good debate for me and a bad debate for him.” He then went on to label Harris the “worst Vice President in history.” 

    Discussing border security, Trump brought back the idea of his border wall, arguing that the wall “works” and provides a rest stop for border security agents. He then claimed that Harris wanted open borders and that other countries’ crime rates were lower because they are “sending all their criminals here.” In closing, Trump stated that he would seal the border and that the border was safest under his previous administration. 

  • A Guide to Candidate Positions: Abortion Rights in the 2024 Election

    A Guide to Candidate Positions: Abortion Rights in the 2024 Election

    Abortion, defined as a medical intervention to end a pregnancy, has remained a contentious issue in American politics and the judicial system for decades. The right to an abortion was first granted in the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment right to personal privacy” included the right to an abortion without “extreme” government restriction. After the ruling, some areas of the country remained “resistant to abortion”, and legislators tested the extent of the ruling via state-level restrictions on abortion access. One such abortion restriction law was appealed to the Supreme Court in 2022, leading to the monumental Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision which overturned the right to abortion established in Roe. The Dobbs ruling asserted that the Constitution does not guarantee the right to an abortion, thereby leaving the regulation of abortion to individual states. As the 2024 presidential election approaches, abortion rights have become a pivotal issue, with measures related to abortion appearing on ballots in 10 states

    Kamala Harris: Harris has strongly urged Congress to pass legislation that would federally codify the right to an abortion. During the past presidential debate, she promised to sign such a bill into law if it crossed her desk as President. Harris has stated that she supports the abortion limitations set in Roe. Wade, which protect abortion up until the point of fetal viability. As Senator, Harris cosponsored legislation that would ban states from imposing restrictions on abortion access. During her time as Vice President, Harris worked to protect access to FDA-approved abortion medication, promote reliable sources of information on abortion, and support those who must travel to seek reproductive health care.

    Donald Trump: Throughout his political career, Trump has vocally opposed abortion. In 2016, he ran on the promise that he would appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade. Trump kept that promise, nominating three Supreme Court justices who gave the court a 6-3 conservative majority that later overturned the right to an abortion in the Dobbs decision. More recently, Trump’s outward stance on abortion has become less staunch. In March, Trump suggested that he would support a federal abortion ban after 15 weeks gestation. However, in October, he tweeted that he would “not support a federal abortion ban under any circumstances.” When questioned on his abortion stance during the last presidential debate, Trump refused to answer whether or not he would sign a federal abortion ban, stating that abortion restrictions should be left to the states to decide. 

    Jill Stein: Stein strongly supports restoring abortion access nationally, stating “reproductive care should be part of a comprehensive system of healthcare” in an August interview. In an Instagram post on September 21st, she stated that “safe abortion access is a human right” and that abortion bans are “killing women.” In the same post, she criticized Democrats for failing to codify Roe v. Wade

    Cornel West: West is an advocate for “unfettered access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare,” including “safe and legal abortion.” In 2022, West participated in Rise Up 4 Abortion Rights protests for abortion access in front of the Supreme Court. West also strongly supports the national codification of abortion rights.

  • Candidate Positions on Abortion Policy

    Abortion, defined as a medical intervention to end a pregnancy, has remained a contentious issue in American politics and the judicial system for decades. The right to an abortion was first granted in the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment right to personal privacy” included the right to an abortion without “extreme” government restriction. After the ruling, some areas of the country remained “resistant to abortion”, and legislators tested the extent of the ruling via state-level restrictions on abortion access. One such abortion restriction law was appealed to the Supreme Court in 2022, leading to the monumental Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision which overturned the right to abortion established in Roe. The Dobbs ruling asserted that the Constitution does not guarantee the right to an abortion, thereby leaving the regulation of abortion to individual states. As the 2024 presidential election approaches, abortion rights have become a pivotal issue, with measures related to abortion appearing on ballots in 10 states

    Kamala Harris: Harris has strongly urged Congress to pass legislation that would federally codify the right to an abortion. During the past presidential debate, she promised to sign such a bill into law if it crossed her desk as President. Harris has stated that she supports the abortion limitations set in Roe. Wade, which protect abortion up until the point of fetal viability. As Senator, Harris cosponsored legislation that would ban states from imposing restrictions on abortion access. During her time as Vice President, Harris worked to protect access to FDA-approved abortion medication, promote reliable sources of information on abortion, and support those who must travel to seek reproductive health care.

    Donald Trump: Throughout his political career, Trump has vocally opposed abortion. In 2016, he ran on the promise that he would appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade. Trump kept that promise, nominating three Supreme Court justices who gave the court a 6-3 conservative majority that later overturned the right to an abortion in the Dobbs decision. More recently, Trump’s outward stance on abortion has become less staunch. In March, Trump suggested that he would support a federal abortion ban after 15 weeks gestation. However, in October, he tweeted that he would “not support a federal abortion ban under any circumstances.” When questioned on his abortion stance during the last presidential debate, Trump refused to answer whether or not he would sign a federal abortion ban, stating that abortion restrictions should be left to the states to decide. 

    Jill Stein: Stein strongly supports restoring abortion access nationally, stating “reproductive care should be part of a comprehensive system of healthcare” in an August interview. In an Instagram post on September 21st, she stated that “safe abortion access is a human right” and that abortion bans are “killing women.” In the same post, she criticized Democrats for failing to codify Roe v. Wade

    Cornel West: West is an advocate for “unfettered access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare,” including “safe and legal abortion.” In 2022, West participated in Rise Up 4 Abortion Rights protests for abortion access in front of the Supreme Court. West also strongly supports the national codification of abortion rights.

  • Showdown in New York: Tim Walz and JD Vance Face Off in a High-Stakes Vice Presidential Debate

    Showdown in New York: Tim Walz and JD Vance Face Off in a High-Stakes Vice Presidential Debate

    Tuesday, October 1st marked the first and only Vice Presidental debate between Democratic candidate Governor Tim Walz and Republican candidate Senator JD Vance. Hosted by CBS, the debate took place a the CBS Broadcast Center in New York City. Like the Presidential debate, this debate had no audience. Additionally, candidates were not allowed to bring pre-written notes or props on stage. Candidates were granted two minutes to answer a question, two minutes to respond, and one minute for rebuttals. Finally, unlike the Presidential debate, the candidates’ microphones will not be muted during their opponent’s speaking time. 

    With the rules set and the candidates behind their podiums, the debate began.

    Middle East

    Hosts Nora O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan directed the first question to Governor Walz. On the topic of the Middle East, Brennan asked if Walz would support a preemptive strike by Israel on Iran. Walz responded by addressing the October 7th terrorist attacks of Hamas on Isreal, stating that it is fundamental that Israel has the right to defend itself and seek the safe return of its hostages, while also “ending the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.” He also called the expansion of Isreal and its proxies a fundamental necessity for the United States before addressing the importance of “steady leadership” and attacking Donald Trump’s leadership skills and his discussion of “crowd sizes” during the Presidential debate. 

    Senator Vance was given the same question. He first introduced himself as a “middle-class” citizen, providing background on himself and his history. He claimed that Trump established “effective deterrents” that made people afraid of stepping out of line with “peace through strength.” When addressing whether or not he would support a preemptive strike, he responded that the decision is up to Israel and that the United States should support its allies. Walz criticized Trump’s “fickle leadership” when handling Iran, addressing Trump’s withdrawal from a deal with Iran that would have temporarily paused its nuclear program. Vance responded that Hamas attacked Israel during the Biden-Harris administration’s time in office, therefore their administration has caused more conflict than stability.

    Climate Change

    O’Donnell questioned Vance on the Trump administration’s responsibility to reduce climate change. Vance answered by stating that he and Trump support “clean air and clean water” before criticizing Harris’s climate policies and arguing that her policies do not actually reduce the amount of carbon emission being released into the air. He argued that instead, the answer is to invest in American-made businesses and the American people. Walz highlighted Trump’s past statements on climate change, noting how the former president called it a “hoax.” He then moved to praise the Biden-Harris administration for its investments in EV technology, which have created 200,000 jobs in the country with the Inflation Reduction Act. 

    Immigration 

    Vance was questioned on the specifics of the Trump administration’s plans to mass deport immigrants at the border using the military. He attacked Harris’s stance on the immigration issue, claiming that under Biden’s Immigration Policies, she has suspended deportations, decriminalized illegal aliens, and increased the asylum fraud which has “opened the floodgates” and allowed fentanyl to enter the country. Vance wants to start deportations with illegal aliens who have committed a crime and then protect US workers by preventing illegal aliens from getting jobs. When addressing the issue of separating parents from their children, he called the “real family separation policy” Harris’s “wide open border policy.” Walz cited that, in the past year, the nation saw the largest decrease in opioid deaths in history. He then highlighted Harris’s background as a prosecutor and her work prosecuting transnational gangs from “sex trafficking and drug interventions. He then referenced a bi-partisan border patrol bill that failed in the Senate. Walz attributes this failure to Trump, arguing that Trump told Republican Senators not to vote for the bill for his own political gain. When questioned again on whether or not Vance would separate parents from their children, he refused to answer the question, reiterating that Harris’s policies allow children to be used as “drug mules.” Walz criticized Vance’s narration of immigrants, arguing that it has only led to the vilification of legal immigrants, citing the threats Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio have received since Trump and Vance brought attention to the false rumor that the Haitian immigrants were eating pets.

    Vance was then questioned on whether the presidential administration has the power to accomplish Trump’s immigration plans or whether that power lies in Congress with the power of the purse, Vance responded that the President just needs to “empower border patrol.” Vance criticized the “blaming migrants for everything” rhetoric, arguing that it does not deal with the actual immigration problem.

    Economy

    When addressing their administration’s economic plans, Walz was questioned on his plan to pay for the 1.2 trillion dollar deficit that would result from the tax credits laid out in the Harris economic plan. He reiterated Harris and his own commitment to the middle class and stated that they would increase taxes on the wealthy, asking them to “pay their fair share.” Trump’s economic plan was stated to increase the nation’s deficit by 5.8 trillion dollars. Vance was similarly questioned on his plans to pay for that deficit. He states that Trump’s tax cuts gave more take-home pay to middle-class families and created an economic boom in 2017. In response, Walz claimed that Trump has not paid “any federal taxes in the past 15 years.” Therefore, Trump does not care about lowering taxes for middle-class workers such as truck drivers. Walz agreed with Vance that jobs should be brought back to the United States but argued that the difference between Harris and Trump is that Harris created 200,000 more jobs.

    Past Statements

    The hosts addressed Vance’s past remarks about his current running mate. He has previously called Trump “unfit for the presidency” and “America’s Hitler,” and more recently in 2020 stated that “Trump failed to deliver his economic populism.” Vance was then questioned on whether he would give Trump the “advice he needs to hear” rather than the “advice he wants to hear.” He clearly backtracked his previous statements, saying that he was “clearly wrong about the president” by believing the media. He then states that his more recent criticisms were about Trump’s first term in office. He then pivoted to attacking Congress’s ability to pass laws, claiming that instead of passing laws, they were “too busy impeaching Trump.” 

    Reproductive Rights

    Walz was asked to address Trump’s claims from the Presidential debate in which Trump claimed that Walz supports abortion up to the 9th month. Walz denied supporting abortion to the 9th month before moving to tell the stories of women who wanted to seek an abortion in cases of saving the mother’s life and in rape and incest. He then attacked Project 2025, claiming that the policy plan would create a pregnancy registry and that in Minnesota “we trust women and we trust doctors.” Vance admits that the people do not necessarily trust Republicans on this issue but promise to be pro-family. He reiterated Trump’s belief to leave abortion up to the states. Vance was later questioned on his previous support for a 15-week national abortion ban. He denied supporting a national ban and reiterated his commitment to “pro-family policies.”

    Gun Violence

    Vance was asked if he believed that parents of school shooters should be convicted for their child’s actions. In response, Vance stated that it depends on the circumstance, but he trusts local law enforcement to make those distinctions. He then blamed Harris for opening the southern border, which he claimed led to “a massive influx of firearms” into the country. He wants to increase security and police officers in schools. Walz states that he is a hunter and owns a gun but he believes in common sense gun laws such as red flag laws. He emphasized his commitment to the Second Amendment and stated that he, nor Harris, is coming for anyone’s gun. Walz also pushed back on the claim that gun violence is a mental health issue, stating that sometimes “it’s just the guns.”

    Housing Crisis

    Harris’ economic plan gives a $25,000 down payment assistance to first-time home buyers, a $10,000 tax credit, and promises to build 3 million new homes. Walz was asked where the administration plans to build these new homes and if the tax credit would only increase the price of homes. Walz responded by arguing that the problem with housing is that it is viewed as a commodity to be bought and sold around. He states that this program is being implemented in Minnesota, and thus has been shown to create stable housing which leads to stable jobs. Vance’s campaign’s position is to seize federal land to build homes, create tax breaks, and cut back on immigration. He was questioned about where he would build these new homes and if the plans would create any immediate relief for homeowners. In response, Vance blamed Harris’s policies for causing an increase in immigration and therefore housing. He then claimed that the Vice President should use her current position to act on these policies instead of campaigning on them. Vance wants to open up American energy to get “immediate pricing relief” in housing. Vance was then asked to explain what evidence showed the immigrants were raising housing prices. To support his claim, Vance cited a Federal Reserve study that he claims shows a relationship between illegal immigration and increased housing prices. 

    Healthcare

    Vance was asked to clarify Trump’s statements in the Presidential debate regarding his healthcare plan in which Trump stated that he had “concepts of a plan” and Vance’s own statements on how he would protect Americans with pre-existing conditions. Vance defended Trump’s statement by asserting that if Trump were to list out a 900-page bill on a debate stage it would only bore the audience. Vance then argues that during Trump’s previous time in office, the price of prescription drugs did not increase as much as it did under the Biden administration. He also claimed that Trump supports price transparency and reassurance regulations. Walz argued that Trump has never tried to save or improve Obamacare. He cites that in Trump’s early days in office, he tried to sign an executive order to repeal Obamacare and signed on to a lawsuit against Obamacare that lost to the Supreme Court. Walz argued that eliminating Obamacare would end coverage for pre-existing conditions and that Obamacare increases the number of people who can afford healthcare at an older age or when they develop health conditions.

    Childcare

    Walz was questioned on how long he believes employers should be required to pay workers while home taking care of their newborn. Walz argued that paid leave increases the health of workers and the benefits of employers because it allows the child to get “off to a better start, the family works better” which increases employee consistency. He believes that a paid federal family leave will “enhance our workforce and families.” Vance was asked the same question. He used his wife as an example to speak on the pressures and difficulties women experience taking maternity leave and deciding when to return to work. He stated that he believed there should be a choice model to allow women to decide when to return to work after taking maternity leave. He admitted that they would have to increase spending and funding to encourage more people to provide childcare services. Walz was then asked if he believed that Congress would agree to the child tax credits laid out in Harris’s economic plan. Walz insisted that potentially hesitant members of Congress would support this tax credit because it would encourage the workforce.

    Democracy 

    On the topic of maintaining democracy and a free and fair election, Vance was asked if he would seek to challenge this year’s election results, even if every governor certifies the election results. Vance refused to answer the question, instead focusing on debating the “election issues” in 2020. He expresses that the actual threat to democracy is censorship, arguing that “big technologies are silencing citizens” and “Kamala Harris is censoring people who engage in misinformation.” Walz highlighted the events of January 6th at the nation’s capital and Minnisota’s capital, telling a story of a group who gathered on state capital grounds to march toward the state capital with the threat of casualties that caused his son to be rushed out the Capitol by state police. He then addresses Trump’s threats to imprison his political opponents He proclaimed that in this election “we need to shake hands and the winner needs to be the winner.” During this topic, Walz directly questioned Vance on whether Trump lost the 2020 election. Vance responded that “we are focused on the future,” refusing to admit Trump’s defeat. 

    Closing Statements

    Governor Walz had the first closing statements in which he first shouted out some of Harris’s mt most popular endorsements like Dick Cheney and Taylor Swift. He stressed Donald Trump’s threat to democracy and the fear he instills. Walz then contrasted that imagery with Kamala Harris’s “politics of joy,” where everyone gets an opportunity to be heard and a “chance to thrive.”  

    Senator Vance criticized Kamala Harris’s policies, arguing that she has made it harder to buy food, turn on the heat, and buy a house. He then goes on to praise the nation and the people in the nation, citing the current administration as the problem. Lastly, he called for a change to a “president who has already done this once before.”