Trump in debate again denies involvement in Project 2025
(PHILADELPHIA) — During Tuesday evening’s consequential ABC News presidential debate, Vice President Kamala Harris criticized former President Donald Trump for what she says is his involvement in Project 2025, a 922-page playbook of controversial policy proposals put together by the Heritage Foundation intended to guide the next conservative administration.
Trump denied involvement in Project 2025, saying he had “nothing to do with it” and that he has not read it, despite the playbook being authored by dozens of former members of his administration, including former cabinet secretaries and West Wing aides.
Speaking at a Heritage event in April 2022, Trump said: “This is a great group and they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do… when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America.”
In the debate, Trump said, “I have nothing to do as she knows better than anyone, I have nothing to do with Project 2025. That is out there. I have not read it. I don’t want to read it, purposely. I’m not going to read it.”
He attributed Project 2025 to a “group of people that got together.”
“They came up with some ideas, I guess, some good, some bad,” he said. “But it makes no difference. I have nothing to do. Everybody knows I’m an open book.”
Tying Trump to Project 2025 has been a big part of the Harris campaign strategy, and she’s already done so a few times during this debate. Polls have consistently shown the plan and its proposals are widely unpopular, so it’s no surprise that Trump is disavowing it yet again.
(WASHINGTON) — Against the backdrop of the U.S. Capitol at dusk, freed American Paul Whelan, who just completed a government resettlement program in Texas following his return from wrongful detainment in Russia, thanked the lawmakers who worked to help secure his release.
Whelan praised a “bipartisan effort that brought me home” after spending the day meeting with lawmakers who took up his case from his home state of Michigan and elsewhere.
“The Michigan delegation brought me home here,” he said.
“You know, it was five years, seven months and five days,” he added of his time in Russian custody. “I counted each one of them.”
The former Marine revealed he spent the final five days in the Russian prison in solitary confinement.
“I couldn’t leave my cell,” he said, “but I made it home.”
Whelan wouldn’t preview what’s next for him — offering only that he needs a new car and that suddenly he’s in a place with electric and driverless vehicles — but said he’s involved in discussions over how to support other wrongfully detained Americans around the world.
“We’re coming for you,” Whelan said to those Americans. “The United States is not going to let people like me, Marc [Fogel], Trevor [Reed], Brittney [Griner, who was released in December 2022] languish in foreign prisons. It might take time, but we’re coming for them and everybody else.”
Whelan acknowledged the reporters he recognized by name or face, recalling the precise month he spoke with them via a smuggled phone from prison. He thanked them for reporting on his case.
He also thanked “all of the people that work for agencies that I will never meet, people that I will never know, their staff members, everyone that’s been involved at every level.”
Rep. Haley Stevens, who represents Whelan’s district in Congress, told ABC News she expects to lean on him for the complex policymaking to mitigate foreign detentions like his.
“Well, he might not know it, but I plan to be in touch with him for a very long time to come, as long as he’ll welcome it, because there’s a lot to learn from his experience,” she said.
She noted that Whelan’s case was “the first one” of a series of high-profile detentions in Russia, including Griner and Evan Gershkovich, and it “certainly changed the relationship that the United States had with Russia, even before the war in Ukraine began.”
“Our message to Russia is that when it comes to your shenanigans and your illegal and unjust and unlawful behavior, we, as the United States of America, are united. We will fight for our people,” she said. “We will bring them home, and we will win.”
Whelan returned to the United States on Aug. 2 after five-and-a-half years in a Russian penal colony.
Russian authorities released Whelan, as well as American journalists Gershkovic and Alsu Kurmasheva, in a multi-country deal that freed eight Russian prisoners abroad. The 26-person swap was the largest between the U.S. and Russia since the Cold War.
Whelan was arrested in Moscow in 2019 on charges of espionage and sentenced to 16 years in prison. Whelan, who frequently visited the city, was deemed as wrongfully detained by the U.S. Department of State.
The former Marine wasn’t the only former Russian captive on Capitol Hill Tuesday. Vladimir Kara-Murza, a dual Russian-British national whose release was secured by the U.S., met with lawmakers. Kara-Murza was imprisoned in Russia for two years for his opposition to Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine.
(WASHINGTON) — Vice President Kamala Harris became the front-runner for the Democratic 2024 presidential nomination after President Joe Biden announced Sunday that he was dropping out of the race and endorsing her.
Harris has expressed many of the same views as Biden on health care issues, including access to abortion and lowering prescription drug prices, both while campaigning against Biden for their party’s presidential nomination during the last general election and as Biden’s vice president.
However, on the issue of health care, Harris has veered to the left of Biden and called for a transition to a single-payer system, something Biden has not endorsed.
“We can look back to 2019 and get an idea of what she views, but she also now has four years of being part of an administration,” Dan Mallinson, an associate professor of public policy and administration at Penn State Harrisburg, told ABC News. “So, she’s going to have to think about, how does she differentiate herself, right? As ‘This is who I’m going to be as president’ but also, she can’t kind of undermine the work that’s been done over the past administration, so she’s still connected to that.”
Here’s where Kamala Harris stands on various health care issues:
Single-payer health care system
Harris has previously expressed support for a single-payer health care system, sometimes referred to as “Medicare for All.”
Although she initially indicated during a 2019 presidential campaign debate that she would support eliminating private health insurance, Harris walked back her support and instead unveiled her own health care plan. It called for expanding Medicare access to all Americans and setting up a 10-year transition period that would automatically enroll newborns and the uninsured, allowing doctors time to enter the system and help employers choose from federally designated programs.
The plan also preserves a role for private insurance companies, allowing Americans the option to obtain health insurance through the public Medicare plan or through a Medicare plan offered by a private insurer.
“My understanding is this is another area where she is a bit more progressive than the president in that [she] is supportive of the Affordable Care Act and the expansion that occurred, but is among those who argue that a next step then would be to provide that kind of Medicare for All idea, or a public option,” Mallinson said. “Whether that has broad enough political support, even among and within the Democratic Party, is less clear.”
Biden has previously suggested he would veto a “Medicare for All” bill, arguing that it would raise taxes for the middle class. Instead, he has focused on strengthening the Affordable Care Act that was signed into law in 2010 by then-President Barack Obama, when Biden was his vice president.
Reproductive rights
Similar to the president, Harris has been an outspoken advocate for abortion rights and has criticized the U.S. Supreme Court for overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022, ending the federally protected right to abortion.
Both Biden and Harris have said they consider it a priority to protect reproductive freedoms, with Harris declaring, “To truly protect reproductive freedoms, we must restore the protections of Roe.”
However, Harris has been more amplified in her support for reproductive rights, becoming the first vice president to visit a clinic run by Planned Parenthood and criticizing Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance for seemingly backing a national abortion ban and blocking protections for in-vitro fertilization.
Additionally, Harris said during an MSNBC town hall in May 2019 that, if elected president, she would require any state-passed law limiting reproductive freedoms to undergo approval from the Department of Justice before being enacted.
“Biden, having a strong Catholic background, had been much more moderate on the issue of reproductive rights, but [he] has become much more vocal after the overturning of Roe versus Wade,” Mallinson said. “But Kamala Harris, on the other hand, [had a] much stronger profile on reproductive rights and [was] a much stronger vocal advocate, and I think will be on the campaign as well.”
Lowering prescription drug costs
Biden and Harris have also been aligned on lowering health care costs. Under the Biden-Harris administration, the cost of insulin has been capped at $35 per month for many Americans, and the federal government has begun direct price negotiations on 10 widely used drugs paid for by Medicare Part D, with plans to add more drugs to the list in the future.
As a candidate in 2019, Harris also supported a plan authorizing the Department of Health and Human Services to set new price caps for all drugs sold in the U.S., based on prices charged in other developed countries for the same medications.
Additionally, if Congress declined to pass legislation to lower prescription drug costs, Harris proposed a potential executive action that would ask for a report on which pharmaceutical companies have drugs being sold at high prices. A warning would then be issued for those companies to lower their prices and, if they don’t, a lower-priced competitor would be placed on the market.
Mallinson said that if Harris does become president, she would likely attempt to expand both the effort to lower prescription drug costs and the negotiations to cover more drugs. However, Mallinson said he’s unsure if Harris would be able to exercise the executive actions detailed in her 2019 plan.
“You’ve seen both former President Trump, as well as President Biden, make a lot of promises about executive action, and then it’s actually difficult to follow through on that,” he said. “And also, what a lot of people don’t understand, is the president just can’t change anything through an executive order. They’re not they’re not kings and queens. Those orders only allow them to make changes that are already within their authority as the executive in a certain area.”
(WASHINGTON) — While polling sites around the country are gearing up for huge voter turnout on Election Day, data and experts predict that a majority of the votes that will decide this year’s key races will be cast months before.
In fact, many of those votes could be cast in the next few weeks.
Analysts who have been studying early-voting trends say mail-in balloting and voting done at early opening polling sites will not only be a crucial indicator for this year’s races, but also future voting methods adopted by the country.
Early in-person voting options are available for almost all registered voters in 47 states with some allowing voters to cast their ballot as early as September, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which tracks election laws across the country.
Michael McDonald, a professor of political science at the University of Florida who helps run the school’s election lab, told ABC News that early voting exploded during the 2020 election and its effectiveness has reshaped the way the electorate and campaigns navigate the election.
“People find it easier to navigate and return the ballot at their convenience and it gives them more chances. They’re more likely to cast a ballot with those options,” he said.
How and where voters can cast a ballot early
In addition to offering voters a chance to cast their ballot through the mail, many states offer voters two ways of casting a ballot in person: either dropping off their absentee ballot at an election office or site, known as in-person absentee voting; or at a polling machine polling place that is open prior to Election Day.
As of 2024, 22 states offer all voters who vote via absentee the option to turn in their ballot in person early, according to NCSL data.
Alabama and New Hampshire offer no in-person early voting options — something the state’s election officials have not opted to do. Mississippi only offers in-person absentee to voters who meet specific criteria such as a physical disability, or proof that they will not be in the state on Election Day, such as military members.
Twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia give voters both in-person absentee and early in-person poll site options, NCSL data shows.
Eight states — California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Vermont and Hawaii — and D.C. have adopted all-mail ballots and allow voters to cast their ballots in person before Election Day. With this process, states mail ballots to all registered voters and they can send it back, drop it off in-person absentee or ballot box, or simply choose to vote in a polling site either early or on Election Day.
Some election offices will offer voters a chance to submit their paper ballots in person as early as mid-September.
In Pennsylvania, some voters may be able to cast absentee ballots in person at their county’s executive office starting Sept. 16, which is the date for when counties must begin processing applications for mail-in or absentee ballots. The Pennsylvania Department of State told ABC News, however, that counties might not necessarily have the ballots ready by that date.
Rise in popularity
Charles Stewart, the director of Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s election data science lab, told ABC News that voting data has shown a gradual increase in votes cast before Election Day over nearly three decades.
In fact, during the 2020 election, more than 69% of votes cast in the election were done through either mail-in ballots or early in-person voting, according to election data. By comparison, only 40% voted early in the 2016 election and 33% in the 2012 election, the data showed.
The data did not indicate how many mail ballots were turned in person.
Stewart noted that the pandemic was a factor behind the 2020 surge in early voting, and even though there was a decrease in early voting numbers during the 2022 midterms, there was still a jump in the number of people who cast their ballots either through the mail or at an early-voting site compared to previous midterms.
“If you extend the trend line and extend it to 2022, there is only a little bit more voting by mail,” he said. “That tells me that voters have, on aggregate, returned to patterns we saw before 2020, which is that of a slowly growing reliance on convenience voting methods.”
The extra convenience isn’t the only incentive that is moving more voters to early voting, particularly mail-in ballots, according to Stewart.
Stewart said that several studies that have been published about voting behaviors have shown that voters who cast their ballot through the mail are thinking about their choices “more deeply and thoroughly.”
“I heard it from a voter the other day who said they appreciate being able to lay the ballot on the table and do the research on the issues and the candidates,” he said.
The enthusiasm has also had ripple effects, according to research conducted by McDonald.
McDonald said that data has shown that the states that opted to give all registered voters their ballot in the mail, such as Colorado, Washington and Oregon, saw the highest turnout rates in the country in 2020.
“In the early states that opted [into] mail balloting, places like Oregon and Washington, they’ve done satisfaction surveys and voters there love it, both Democrats and Republicans,” he said.
A boon for voters, election offices and campaigns
Election experts said that 2020’s jump in early voting helped to decrease long lines on Election Day at a time when the pandemic required smaller indoor crowds and social distancing.
Even though the need to decrease crowds has lessened, McDonald stressed there is still a need for “safety valves” when it comes to Election Day lines.
“It means if someone has a problem … and they try to catch their problem earlier, they have more time to rectify that problem,” he said, citing examples such as an error on their form or improper voter ID.
McDonald also cited the sudden snowstorm that hit northern Arizona in November 2022 as a major obstacle that voters and election offices faced when it came to Election Day voting.
“These are the things that can happen and campaigns kind of know they shouldn’t rely too much on Election Day because there could be things that go wrong,” he said.
Christopher Mann, the research director for the non-profit group, The Center for Election Innovation & Research, told ABC News that early voting also gives election office teams, many of whom are understaffed and underfunded, extra time to handle the large number of ballots that come through during presidential cycles.
“They can move more people around during those early weeks, especially on the weekends,” he said.
At the same time, early voting has reshaped how campaigns are conducted.
Former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden pushed for their debates to take place prior to October because of early voting. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are scheduled to debate on Sept. 10 on ABC News.
Aside from the campaign trail, McDonald said that early voting also affects the campaign staffers on the ground who receive voter information from election offices.
“Then the campaigns can say, ‘OK this voter already voted, I don’t need to call them or mail them something. I can scratch them off the list,” he said.
Trump’s false claims on early voting shift dynamics
In both the 2020 election and in this year’s contest, Trump has been vocal about his distrust in early voting, falsely claiming it is not secure and pushed for only voting on Election Day.
Despite appearing in a video at the Republican National Convention encouraging Republicans to vote by mail or early if available, Trump has been criticizing early voting at his events.
“We should have one-day voting. We should have paper ballots, we should have voter ID, and we should have proof of citizenship,” he told reporters at a news conference last month.
McDonald said Trump’s rhetoric led to a major shift in the 2020 election as the number of Republicans who voted by mail dropped compared to Democrats. Prior to 2020, more Republicans cast their vote in the mail, according to McDonald.
“We can see that those patterns really haven’t restored themselves [to] pre-pandemic,” he said.
The election experts stressed that there is no evidence of fraud when it comes to mail-in ballots and, in fact, showed there is no correlation between the number of early votes cast and the outcome of the election.
“If you look at states where half of the ballots were issued before Election Day, Trump won half of that vote,” Mann said.
The experts say the election data is showing an upward trend of more voters opting to vote early versus on Election Day, with mail-in voting seeing the biggest increases, and they predict more states will expand those early voting offerings.
Stewart noted that the momentum is still there as several states failed to pass measures in the last four years that would have restricted early-voting options, specifically ending pandemic-era rules that allowed for no-excuse absentee.
Ultimately, Stewart contended that giving voters as many options to safely and properly cast their ballot leads not only to more convenience, but a stronger electorate.
“I would encourage voters to think about their own lives, their own habits, their own values and choose their mode that is keeping with all of those things,” he said.