The U.S. Senate remains divided over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh has denied an allegation by Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her when they were teenagers in the 1980s. Ford and Democrats are seeking an FBI investigation into the alleged assault before she would testify at the Senate Judiciary Committee, while President Donald Trump and Republicans are so far resisting. More on the battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination from VOA national correspondent Jim Malone.
…

The U.S. Senate remains divided over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh has denied an allegation by Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her when they were teenagers in the 1980s. Ford and Democrats are seeking an FBI investigation into the alleged assault before she would testify at the Senate Judiciary Committee, while President Donald Trump and Republicans are so far resisting. More on the battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination from VOA national correspondent Jim Malone.
…

Foreign government hackers continue to target the personal email accounts of U.S. senators and their aides – and the Senate’s security office has refused to defend them, a lawmaker says.

Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said in a Wednesday letter to Senate leaders that his office discovered that “at least one major technology company” has warned an unspecified number of senators and aides that their personal email accounts were “targeted by foreign government hackers.” Similar methods were employed by Russian military agents who leaked the contents of private email inboxes to influence the 2016 elections.

Wyden did not specify the timing of the notifications, but a Senate staffer said they occurred “in the last few weeks or months.” The aide spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly.

But the senator said the Office of the Sergeant at Arms , which oversees Senate security, informed legislators and staffers that it has no authority to help secure personal, rather than official, accounts. 

“This must change,” Wyden wrote in the letter. “The November election grows ever closer, Russia continues its attacks on our democracy, and the Senate simply does not have the luxury of further delays.” A spokeswoman for the security office said it would have no comment.

Wyden has proposed legislation that would allow the security office to offer digital protection for personal accounts and devices, the same way it does with official ones. His letter did not provide additional details of the attempts to pry into the lawmakers’ digital lives, including whether lawmakers of both parties are still being targeted.

Google and Microsoft, which offer popular private email accounts, declined to comment.

The Wyden letter cites previous Associated Press reporting on the Russian hacking group known as Fancy Bear and how it targeted the personal accounts of congressional aides between 2015 and 2016. The group’s prolific cyberspying targeted the Gmail accounts of current and former Senate staffers, including Robert Zarate, now national security adviser to Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, and Jason Thielman, chief of staff to Montana Sen. Steve Daines, the AP found.

The same group also spent the second half of 2017 laying digital traps intended to look like portals where Senate officials enter their work email credentials, the Tokyo-based cybersecurity firm TrendMicro has reported.

Microsoft seized some of those traps, and in September 2017 apparently thwarted an attempt to steal login credentials of a policy aide to Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill , the Daily Beast discovered in July. Last month, Microsoft made news again when it seized several internet domains linked to Fancy Bear , including two apparently aimed at conservative think tanks in Washington.

Such incidents “only scratch the surface” of advanced cyberthreats faced by U.S. officials in the administration and Congress, according to Thomas Rid, a cybersecurity expert at Johns Hopkins University. Rid made the statement in a letter to Wyden last week .

“The personal accounts of senators and their staff are high-value, low-hanging targets,” Rid wrote. “No rules, no regulations, no funding streams, no mandatory training, no systematic security support is available to secure these resources.” 

Attempts to breach such accounts were a major feature of the yearlong AP investigation into Fancy Bear that identified hundreds of senior officials and politicians – including former secretaries of state, top generals and intelligence chiefs – whose Gmail accounts were targeted. 

The Kremlin is by no means the only source of worry, said Matt Tait, a University of Texas cybersecurity fellow and former British intelligence official. 

“There are lots of countries that are interested in what legislators are thinking, what they’re doing, how to influence them, and it’s not just for purposes of dumping their information online,” Tait said.

In an April 12 letter released by Wyden’s office, Adm. Michael Rogers – then director of the National Security Agency – acknowledged that personal accounts of senior government officials “remain prime targets for exploitation” and said that officials at the NSA and Department for Homeland Security were discussing ways to better protect them. The NSA and DHS declined to offer further details.

Guarding personal accounts is a complex, many-layered challenge.

Rid believes tech companies have a sudden responsibility to nudge high-profile political targets into better digital hygiene. He said he did not believe much as been done, although Facebook announced a pilot program Monday to help political campaigns protect their accounts, including monitoring for potential hacking threats for those that sign up.

Boosting protection in the Senate could begin with the distribution of small chip-based security devices such as the YubiKey, which are already used in many secure corporate and government environments, Tait said. Such keys supplement passwords to authenticate legitimate users, potentially frustrating distant hackers.

Cybersecurity experts also recommend them for high-value cyber-espionage targets including human rights workers and journalists. 

“In an ideal world, the Sergeant at Arms could just have a pile of YubiKeys,” said Tait. “When legislators or staff come in they can (get) a quick cybersecurity briefing and pick up a couple of these for their personal accounts and their official accounts.” 
…

The U.S. State Department says it is scheduling meetings with members of Congress, after the country’s top diplomat this week proposed a record-low cap on refugees coming to the United States in the next year.

When Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday told reporters the “proposed” cap would be 30,000 refugees for Fiscal Year 2019, lawmakers and refugee advocates swiftly criticized the announcement.

What Pompeo did not explain — and it took the State Department a day to clarify in a news conference with the agency’s chief spokesperson Heather Nauert — is that Pompeo’s announcement was a proposal included in an annual report submitted to Congress, not the final number.

A State Department spokesperson told VOA on Wednesday that the agency sent the report, with the proposed refugee ceiling, to Congress on Sept. 17, the same day as Pompeo’s announcement.

“We are working to schedule an in person consultation with Members and a briefing for their staffs as soon as possible,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement to VOA.

The report is created by the Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, and Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of the president.

Every year, the president sets the so-called “ceiling” on refugees — the maximum number that will be allowed in over the 12-month period starting Oct. 1 — by a “presidential determination.” Part of the process is a consultation with Congress before the figure can be finalized.

The president has until the end of the month to make the presidential determination on the refugee ceiling. The full report is expected to be made public in the coming days, the State Department spokesperson added.

If the president sticks to the 30,000-refugee cap for FY2019, it will be the lowest ceiling on record since the U.S. refugee program began in the early 1980s.

The decision will come after a series of Trump administration decisions that have whittled down the program, citing unproven national security concerns.
…

The U.S. State Department says it is scheduling meetings with members of Congress, after the country’s top diplomat this week proposed a record-low cap on refugees coming to the United States in the next year.

When Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday told reporters the “proposed” cap would be 30,000 refugees for Fiscal Year 2019, lawmakers and refugee advocates swiftly criticized the announcement.

What Pompeo did not explain — and it took the State Department a day to clarify in a news conference with the agency’s chief spokesperson Heather Nauert — is that Pompeo’s announcement was a proposal included in an annual report submitted to Congress, not the final number.

A State Department spokesperson told VOA on Wednesday that the agency sent the report, with the proposed refugee ceiling, to Congress on Sept. 17, the same day as Pompeo’s announcement.

“We are working to schedule an in person consultation with Members and a briefing for their staffs as soon as possible,” the spokesperson said in an emailed statement to VOA.

The report is created by the Department of State, Department of Homeland Security, and Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of the president.

Every year, the president sets the so-called “ceiling” on refugees — the maximum number that will be allowed in over the 12-month period starting Oct. 1 — by a “presidential determination.” Part of the process is a consultation with Congress before the figure can be finalized.

The president has until the end of the month to make the presidential determination on the refugee ceiling. The full report is expected to be made public in the coming days, the State Department spokesperson added.

If the president sticks to the 30,000-refugee cap for FY2019, it will be the lowest ceiling on record since the U.S. refugee program began in the early 1980s.

The decision will come after a series of Trump administration decisions that have whittled down the program, citing unproven national security concerns.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump launched an array of attacks Wednesday on Attorney General Jeff Sessions, disparaging Sessions’ performance as the country’s top law enforcement official.

“I’m disappointed in the attorney general for many reasons,” Trump told reporters at the White House. His remark came hours after a television interview with HillTV aired in which Trump declared, “I don’t have an attorney general. It’s very sad.”

Trump for more than a year has railed against Sessions, the first senator to declare his support for then-candidate Trump in 2016. Trump continues to vent his anger at Sessions for removing himself from oversight of the long-running investigation of Russia links to Trump’s campaign and whether, as president, Trump obstructed justice by trying to thwart the probe.

Sessions has said that he was required by Justice Department dictates to recuse himself from overseeing the probe because he staunchly backed Trump’s campaign and also had two contacts in 2016, when he was a senator from Alabama, with Russia’s then-ambassador to Washington. Oversight of the Russia probe then fell to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who in turn, over Trump’s objections, appointed Robert Mueller, a former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as special counsel to head the investigation.

Mueller has now won several convictions of top Trump aides and continues to investigate Trump’s campaign and his actions as president.

In the television interview, Trump attacked Sessions on a range of issues. The Justice Department, which Sessions heads, declined to comment. But Sessions, after another Trump attack on him last month, pushed back, saying, “While I am attorney general, the actions of the Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.”

‘We’ll see how it goes’

Even though Sessions has proved to be a hardline foe of illegal immigration into the U.S., Trump said, “I’m not happy at the border, I’m not happy with numerous things, not just” Sessions’s removal of himself from oversight of the Russia investigation.

Trump suggested he did not foresee what would happen when he named Sessions as attorney general.

“I’m so sad over Jeff Sessions because he came to me. He was the first senator that endorsed me. And he wanted to be attorney general, and I didn’t see it,” he said.

“And then he went through the nominating process and he did very poorly,” Trump recalled. “I mean, he was mixed up and confused, and people that worked with him for, you know, a long time in the Senate were not nice to him, but he was giving very confusing answers. Answers that should have been easily answered. And that was a rough time for him.”

Despite his frequent complaints about Sessions, Trump has refrained from firing him, warned by Republican lawmakers that Trump would have great difficulty winning Senate confirmation for any replacement who did not pledge to allow Mueller to complete the Russia probe, an investigation that Trump derides on almost a daily basis.

Some Republican lawmakers have said they might be open to Trump replacing Sessions after the November 6 national congressional elections.

One Republican lawmaker who talks frequently with Trump, Senator Lindsey Graham, said recently, “The president’s entitled to having an attorney general he has faith in, somebody that is qualified for the job, and I think there will come a time sooner rather than later where it will be time to have a new face and a fresh voice at the Department of Justice. Clearly, Attorney General Sessions doesn’t have the confidence of the president.”

Trump recently said Sessions was safe in his job until after the elections.

In the television interview, he said, “We’ll see what happens. A lot of people have asked me to [fire him]. And I guess I study history, and I say I just want to leave things alone, but it was very unfair what he did.”

“And my worst enemies, I mean, people that, you know, are on the other side of me in a lot of ways, including politically, have said that was a very unfair thing he did,” Trump said.

“We’ll see how it goes with Jeff,” Trump concluded. “I’m very disappointed in Jeff. Very disappointed.”

 
…

U.S. President Donald Trump launched an array of attacks Wednesday on Attorney General Jeff Sessions, disparaging Sessions’ performance as the country’s top law enforcement official.

“I’m disappointed in the attorney general for many reasons,” Trump told reporters at the White House. His remark came hours after a television interview with HillTV aired in which Trump declared, “I don’t have an attorney general. It’s very sad.”

Trump for more than a year has railed against Sessions, the first senator to declare his support for then-candidate Trump in 2016. Trump continues to vent his anger at Sessions for removing himself from oversight of the long-running investigation of Russia links to Trump’s campaign and whether, as president, Trump obstructed justice by trying to thwart the probe.

Sessions has said that he was required by Justice Department dictates to recuse himself from overseeing the probe because he staunchly backed Trump’s campaign and also had two contacts in 2016, when he was a senator from Alabama, with Russia’s then-ambassador to Washington. Oversight of the Russia probe then fell to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who in turn, over Trump’s objections, appointed Robert Mueller, a former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as special counsel to head the investigation.

Mueller has now won several convictions of top Trump aides and continues to investigate Trump’s campaign and his actions as president.

In the television interview, Trump attacked Sessions on a range of issues. The Justice Department, which Sessions heads, declined to comment. But Sessions, after another Trump attack on him last month, pushed back, saying, “While I am attorney general, the actions of the Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.”

‘We’ll see how it goes’

Even though Sessions has proved to be a hardline foe of illegal immigration into the U.S., Trump said, “I’m not happy at the border, I’m not happy with numerous things, not just” Sessions’s removal of himself from oversight of the Russia investigation.

Trump suggested he did not foresee what would happen when he named Sessions as attorney general.

“I’m so sad over Jeff Sessions because he came to me. He was the first senator that endorsed me. And he wanted to be attorney general, and I didn’t see it,” he said.

“And then he went through the nominating process and he did very poorly,” Trump recalled. “I mean, he was mixed up and confused, and people that worked with him for, you know, a long time in the Senate were not nice to him, but he was giving very confusing answers. Answers that should have been easily answered. And that was a rough time for him.”

Despite his frequent complaints about Sessions, Trump has refrained from firing him, warned by Republican lawmakers that Trump would have great difficulty winning Senate confirmation for any replacement who did not pledge to allow Mueller to complete the Russia probe, an investigation that Trump derides on almost a daily basis.

Some Republican lawmakers have said they might be open to Trump replacing Sessions after the November 6 national congressional elections.

One Republican lawmaker who talks frequently with Trump, Senator Lindsey Graham, said recently, “The president’s entitled to having an attorney general he has faith in, somebody that is qualified for the job, and I think there will come a time sooner rather than later where it will be time to have a new face and a fresh voice at the Department of Justice. Clearly, Attorney General Sessions doesn’t have the confidence of the president.”

Trump recently said Sessions was safe in his job until after the elections.

In the television interview, he said, “We’ll see what happens. A lot of people have asked me to [fire him]. And I guess I study history, and I say I just want to leave things alone, but it was very unfair what he did.”

“And my worst enemies, I mean, people that, you know, are on the other side of me in a lot of ways, including politically, have said that was a very unfair thing he did,” Trump said.

“We’ll see how it goes with Jeff,” Trump concluded. “I’m very disappointed in Jeff. Very disappointed.”

 
…

U.S. President Donald Trump said Wednesday that “it’s very hard for me to imagine” that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a teenage girl 36 years ago when both were in high school, an alleged attack the woman says left her fearful for her life.

Trump said he hopes Kavanaugh’s accuser, California psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford, testifies at a hearing next Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is considering Kavanaugh’s nomination for a life-time seat on the country’s highest court.

“I really want to see her, to see what she has to say,” Trump said of Ford, now 51. The U.S. leader said it “would be unfortunate” if she does not appear.

Ford’s lawyers late Tuesday called for an FBI probe of her claims before she testifies, but Trump and Republicans that control the Senate panel say an FBI investigation is unnecessary. Kavanaugh, who says he will appear at the Senate panel’s hearing, has adamantly denied knowledge of the purported 1982 party at a suburban Washington home and said he has never attacked any woman.

Trump, speaking to reporters at the White House as he headed to North Carolina to view vast flood damage from Hurricane Florence, praised the 53-year-old Kavanaugh as “an extraordinary man.” But Trump said “it’s really up to the Senate” to decide how to proceed with the confirmation process.

Meanwhile, Anita Hill, the law professor at the center of lurid 1991 confirmation hearings involving Clarence Thomas as a U.S. Supreme Court justice, supported Ford’s call for an FBI investigation of her claims.

Hill told ABC’s “Good Morning America” show, “The American public really is expecting something more. They want to know that the Senate takes this seriously.”

Hill, now a law professor at Brandeis University, said Republican leaders are in an unnecessary rush to confirm Kavanaugh.

“Either they don’t take this seriously,” she said, “or … they just want to get it over. I’m not sure which is in play. Maybe they’re not concerned, or maybe they don’t know how to handle this kind of situation.”

The specter of Hill’s allegations 27 years ago that Thomas often sexually harassed her when they both worked for a federal government agency hangs heavy over the current Kavanaugh confirmation proceedings.

 Hill’s accusations were largely dismissed then by the all-male Senate committee, but many American women sympathized with her claims against Thomas, saying they resonated with their own experiences in the workplace. Thomas was confirmed on a narrow Senate vote and remains a conservative stalwart on the court to this day.

The chairman of the Senate panel, Republican Senator Charles Grassley, said, “The invitation for Monday still stands” for both Ford and Kavanaugh to testify.

“Dr. Ford’s testimony would reflect her personal knowledge and memory of events,” Grassley said. “Nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr. Ford tells the committee, so there is no reason for any further delay.”

Republican lawmakers are trying to win Senate confirmation for Kavanaugh ahead of the court’s start of a new term on October 1, or if not by then, ahead of the November 6 nationwide congressional elections, to show Republican voters they have made good on campaign promises to place conservative judges like Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.

Ford’s lawyers told Grassley in a letter late Tuesday that some of the senators on the committee “appear to have made up their minds” and believe Kavanaugh.

“A full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a nonpartisan manner and that the committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions,” the letter said.

Death threats

The lawyers also said Ford has become the subject of death threats and harassment, and expressed fears that the committee planned to have her “relive this traumatic and harrowing incident” while testifying at the same table as Kavanaugh and in front of national television cameras.

“Nobody should be subject to threats and intimidation, and Dr. Ford is no exception,” Grassley said in a statement later Tuesday.

The Republican senator said there were no plans to have Ford and Kavanaugh appear at the same time, and that the committee had offered her the opportunity to appear before a private hearing.

Ford alleged in a Washington Post interview that Kavanaugh groped her at the house party when she was 15 and he was 17. 

She said Kavanaugh, “stumbling drunk,” threw her down on a bed, grinding his body against hers and trying to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she was wearing over it. Ford said when she tried to scream, he put his hand over her mouth.

She said she feared Kavanaugh might inadvertently kill her before she managed to flee.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump said Wednesday that “it’s very hard for me to imagine” that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a teenage girl 36 years ago when both were in high school, an alleged attack the woman says left her fearful for her life.

Trump said he hopes Kavanaugh’s accuser, California psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford, testifies at a hearing next Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is considering Kavanaugh’s nomination for a life-time seat on the country’s highest court.

“I really want to see her, to see what she has to say,” Trump said of Ford, now 51. The U.S. leader said it “would be unfortunate” if she does not appear.

Ford’s lawyers late Tuesday called for an FBI probe of her claims before she testifies, but Trump and Republicans that control the Senate panel say an FBI investigation is unnecessary. Kavanaugh, who says he will appear at the Senate panel’s hearing, has adamantly denied knowledge of the purported 1982 party at a suburban Washington home and said he has never attacked any woman.

Trump, speaking to reporters at the White House as he headed to North Carolina to view vast flood damage from Hurricane Florence, praised the 53-year-old Kavanaugh as “an extraordinary man.” But Trump said “it’s really up to the Senate” to decide how to proceed with the confirmation process.

Meanwhile, Anita Hill, the law professor at the center of lurid 1991 confirmation hearings involving Clarence Thomas as a U.S. Supreme Court justice, supported Ford’s call for an FBI investigation of her claims.

Hill told ABC’s “Good Morning America” show, “The American public really is expecting something more. They want to know that the Senate takes this seriously.”

Hill, now a law professor at Brandeis University, said Republican leaders are in an unnecessary rush to confirm Kavanaugh.

“Either they don’t take this seriously,” she said, “or … they just want to get it over. I’m not sure which is in play. Maybe they’re not concerned, or maybe they don’t know how to handle this kind of situation.”

The specter of Hill’s allegations 27 years ago that Thomas often sexually harassed her when they both worked for a federal government agency hangs heavy over the current Kavanaugh confirmation proceedings.

 Hill’s accusations were largely dismissed then by the all-male Senate committee, but many American women sympathized with her claims against Thomas, saying they resonated with their own experiences in the workplace. Thomas was confirmed on a narrow Senate vote and remains a conservative stalwart on the court to this day.

The chairman of the Senate panel, Republican Senator Charles Grassley, said, “The invitation for Monday still stands” for both Ford and Kavanaugh to testify.

“Dr. Ford’s testimony would reflect her personal knowledge and memory of events,” Grassley said. “Nothing the FBI or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what Dr. Ford tells the committee, so there is no reason for any further delay.”

Republican lawmakers are trying to win Senate confirmation for Kavanaugh ahead of the court’s start of a new term on October 1, or if not by then, ahead of the November 6 nationwide congressional elections, to show Republican voters they have made good on campaign promises to place conservative judges like Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.

Ford’s lawyers told Grassley in a letter late Tuesday that some of the senators on the committee “appear to have made up their minds” and believe Kavanaugh.

“A full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a nonpartisan manner and that the committee is fully informed before conducting any hearing or making any decisions,” the letter said.

Death threats

The lawyers also said Ford has become the subject of death threats and harassment, and expressed fears that the committee planned to have her “relive this traumatic and harrowing incident” while testifying at the same table as Kavanaugh and in front of national television cameras.

“Nobody should be subject to threats and intimidation, and Dr. Ford is no exception,” Grassley said in a statement later Tuesday.

The Republican senator said there were no plans to have Ford and Kavanaugh appear at the same time, and that the committee had offered her the opportunity to appear before a private hearing.

Ford alleged in a Washington Post interview that Kavanaugh groped her at the house party when she was 15 and he was 17. 

She said Kavanaugh, “stumbling drunk,” threw her down on a bed, grinding his body against hers and trying to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she was wearing over it. Ford said when she tried to scream, he put his hand over her mouth.

She said she feared Kavanaugh might inadvertently kill her before she managed to flee.
…

In this era of manipulators using social media to interfere in elections, Oregon officials moved Tuesday to use Facebook to bolster participation by reminding as many as hundreds of thousands of inactive voters to update their registration.

“Utilizing cutting-edge technologies to empower eligible voters isn’t just something we can do — it’s something we must do if we’re serious about outreach,” Oregon Secretary of State Dennis Richardson said in announcing what he called the first-of-its-kind program.

The initiative comes as Facebook tries to recover from a privacy scandal in which a political consulting firm with ties to President Donald Trump improperly accessed the data of tens millions of Facebook users.

In addition, California-based Facebook stepped up policing of its social network after authorities said Russian agents ran political influence operations on its platform aimed at swaying the 2016 presidential election.

Facebook applauded the Oregon initiative.

“We’re glad the Oregon Secretary of State’s office is able to use Facebook to help reach inactive voters and let them know how they can cast a ballot this fall,” said Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesman.

Oregon law

Oregonians can become inactive voters after being mailed a ballot or other election material that is returned as undeliverable; not voting or registering in 10 years or as few as five years in some counties; if their ballot has been challenged; or if they’re imprisoned on a felony conviction.

Under Oregon law, the right to vote is restored upon release from incarceration. Oregonians receive ballots by mail and can either mail them back completed or deposit them in drop boxes.

Richardson’s chief of staff Deb Royal said the inactive voter list was cross-referenced with Facebook users who are Oregon residents.

“Facebook users who meet those two criteria will see the placement,” Royal said in an email. Oregon has 447,000 inactive voters, Royal said.

Having inactive status means a person is still registered to vote but won’t receive a ballot unless he or she provides a county with updated registration information to return their registration status to active. An inactive-status voter can also complete an online voter registration form at OregonVotes.gov to become active again.

Video outreach

As of August, 2.7 million people were registered to vote in Oregon — a 3 percent increase over 2017, according to elections division statistics. Oregon’s total population is around 4.1 million.

The video outreach features Richardson speaking directly to voters who have been listed as inactive, encouraging them to update their registration to receive a ballot in the mail. A link will be included for voters to take care of their registration, Royal said.

“Recent digital advances have created voter outreach opportunities never previously imagined,” Richardson said. A Republican, he holds the second-highest state office, second only to Democratic Governor Kate Brown in this predominantly blue state.

The outreach will run until the voter registration deadline on Oct. 16, his office said.
…

In this era of manipulators using social media to interfere in elections, Oregon officials moved Tuesday to use Facebook to bolster participation by reminding as many as hundreds of thousands of inactive voters to update their registration.

“Utilizing cutting-edge technologies to empower eligible voters isn’t just something we can do — it’s something we must do if we’re serious about outreach,” Oregon Secretary of State Dennis Richardson said in announcing what he called the first-of-its-kind program.

The initiative comes as Facebook tries to recover from a privacy scandal in which a political consulting firm with ties to President Donald Trump improperly accessed the data of tens millions of Facebook users.

In addition, California-based Facebook stepped up policing of its social network after authorities said Russian agents ran political influence operations on its platform aimed at swaying the 2016 presidential election.

Facebook applauded the Oregon initiative.

“We’re glad the Oregon Secretary of State’s office is able to use Facebook to help reach inactive voters and let them know how they can cast a ballot this fall,” said Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesman.

Oregon law

Oregonians can become inactive voters after being mailed a ballot or other election material that is returned as undeliverable; not voting or registering in 10 years or as few as five years in some counties; if their ballot has been challenged; or if they’re imprisoned on a felony conviction.

Under Oregon law, the right to vote is restored upon release from incarceration. Oregonians receive ballots by mail and can either mail them back completed or deposit them in drop boxes.

Richardson’s chief of staff Deb Royal said the inactive voter list was cross-referenced with Facebook users who are Oregon residents.

“Facebook users who meet those two criteria will see the placement,” Royal said in an email. Oregon has 447,000 inactive voters, Royal said.

Having inactive status means a person is still registered to vote but won’t receive a ballot unless he or she provides a county with updated registration information to return their registration status to active. An inactive-status voter can also complete an online voter registration form at OregonVotes.gov to become active again.

Video outreach

As of August, 2.7 million people were registered to vote in Oregon — a 3 percent increase over 2017, according to elections division statistics. Oregon’s total population is around 4.1 million.

The video outreach features Richardson speaking directly to voters who have been listed as inactive, encouraging them to update their registration to receive a ballot in the mail. A link will be included for voters to take care of their registration, Royal said.

“Recent digital advances have created voter outreach opportunities never previously imagined,” Richardson said. A Republican, he holds the second-highest state office, second only to Democratic Governor Kate Brown in this predominantly blue state.

The outreach will run until the voter registration deadline on Oct. 16, his office said.
…

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Tuesday flatly dismissed reports suggesting he may be leaving President Donald Trump’s  administration in the coming months, saying flatly: “I wouldn’t take it seriously at all.”

“How many times have we been through this, now, just since I’ve been here? It will die down soon, and the people who started the rumor will be allowed to write the next rumor, too,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon.

“Just the way the town is,” he added. “Keep a sense of humor about it.”

The remarks were the most direct by Mattis to date about intensifying rumors about his future as Trump approaches the half-way mark of his four-year term amid speculation about changes to his cabinet after upcoming November mid-term elections.

Mattis has become a focus in media stories in recent weeks about the Trump administration, particularly after the release of a book this month by Watergate reporter Bob Woodward that portrayed Mattis privately disparaging Trump to associates.

Mattis strongly denied making any such remarks. Trump on Sept. 5 said he defense chief would remain in his job, adding: “He’ll stay right there. We’re very happy with him. We’re having a lot of victories.”

But a New York Times report on Sept. 15 said Trump had “soured on his defense secretary, weary of unfavorable comparisons to Mattis as the adult in the room.”

It also noted this year’s arrival in the White House of Mira Ricardel, who now has the powerful post of deputy national security adviser and who current and former officials tell Reuters is believed to dislike Mattis.

Western officials privately extol Mattis, whose standing among NATO allies has risen as they become increasingly bewildered by Trump’s policies on trade and Iran and disoriented by his outreach to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Inside-The-Beltway Journalism

Mattis has a dim view of journalism about inside-the-beltway politics in Washington, using the word “fiction” to describe Woodward’s book and similar reporting about closed-door conversations among U.S. national security leaders.

Asked about the recent reports speculating about his departure, Mattis said: “It’s like most of those kinds of things in this town.

“Somebody cooks up a headline. They then call to a normally chatty class of people. They find a couple of other things to put in. They add the rumors… Next thing you know, you’ve got a story,” he said.

Still, Mattis is not political by nature, and previously made no secret of the fact that he was not looking to become secretary of defense – or even return to Washington – when Trump was elected.

The retired Marine general had stepped down from the military in 2013 and taken a job at Stanford University. He told his Senate confirmation hearing last year he was “enjoying a full life west of the Rockies” when the call came about the position.

After answering questions about his future, Mattis was asked whether he never considered life after the Pentagon. Mattis joked: “Of course I don’t think about leaving.”

“I love it here,” he said with a smile. “I’m thinking about retiring right here. I’ll get a little place here down on the Potomac.”
…

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Tuesday flatly dismissed reports suggesting he may be leaving President Donald Trump’s  administration in the coming months, saying flatly: “I wouldn’t take it seriously at all.”

“How many times have we been through this, now, just since I’ve been here? It will die down soon, and the people who started the rumor will be allowed to write the next rumor, too,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon.

“Just the way the town is,” he added. “Keep a sense of humor about it.”

The remarks were the most direct by Mattis to date about intensifying rumors about his future as Trump approaches the half-way mark of his four-year term amid speculation about changes to his cabinet after upcoming November mid-term elections.

Mattis has become a focus in media stories in recent weeks about the Trump administration, particularly after the release of a book this month by Watergate reporter Bob Woodward that portrayed Mattis privately disparaging Trump to associates.

Mattis strongly denied making any such remarks. Trump on Sept. 5 said he defense chief would remain in his job, adding: “He’ll stay right there. We’re very happy with him. We’re having a lot of victories.”

But a New York Times report on Sept. 15 said Trump had “soured on his defense secretary, weary of unfavorable comparisons to Mattis as the adult in the room.”

It also noted this year’s arrival in the White House of Mira Ricardel, who now has the powerful post of deputy national security adviser and who current and former officials tell Reuters is believed to dislike Mattis.

Western officials privately extol Mattis, whose standing among NATO allies has risen as they become increasingly bewildered by Trump’s policies on trade and Iran and disoriented by his outreach to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Inside-The-Beltway Journalism

Mattis has a dim view of journalism about inside-the-beltway politics in Washington, using the word “fiction” to describe Woodward’s book and similar reporting about closed-door conversations among U.S. national security leaders.

Asked about the recent reports speculating about his departure, Mattis said: “It’s like most of those kinds of things in this town.

“Somebody cooks up a headline. They then call to a normally chatty class of people. They find a couple of other things to put in. They add the rumors… Next thing you know, you’ve got a story,” he said.

Still, Mattis is not political by nature, and previously made no secret of the fact that he was not looking to become secretary of defense – or even return to Washington – when Trump was elected.

The retired Marine general had stepped down from the military in 2013 and taken a job at Stanford University. He told his Senate confirmation hearing last year he was “enjoying a full life west of the Rockies” when the call came about the position.

After answering questions about his future, Mattis was asked whether he never considered life after the Pentagon. Mattis joked: “Of course I don’t think about leaving.”

“I love it here,” he said with a smile. “I’m thinking about retiring right here. I’ll get a little place here down on the Potomac.”
…

Former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe said Tuesday in Iowa that he’s not ruling out a 2020 Democratic campaign for president, as he took his national campaign to promote Democratic candidates for governor to the early presidential testing ground. 

And while he said a decision remained months away, the former Democratic National Committee chairman touted his term as governor as a model for his party nationally.

“We took a red state and made it a blue state,” McAuliffe said in an Associated Press interview during a day of meetings with Democratic Party officials and activists in Des Moines.

McAuliffe was adamant that his chief purpose for visiting Iowa was to promote candidates running in the November midterm elections, chiefly Democratic nominee for governor Fred Hubbell. The governorship is among roughly 10 in states now occupied by Republicans that McAuliffe said are within reach of Democrats. Democrats occupy only 16 governorships.

Iowa is among 19 states McAuliffe has visited since leaving office this year, though none of the others come with the same potential implications as Iowa, host of the leadoff 2020 presidential caucuses.

McAuliffe is viewed as a moderate prospect in an emerging field that could include progressives such as Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Civil rights, fiscal policies

During the interview, he promoted civil rights policy such as his executive order to restore voting rights for felons, a move that reinstated roughly 173,000 people — disproportionately African-Americans — to the voter rolls in Virginia. Likewise, he cast himself as a fiscal steward, taking office with a budget deficit and leaving with a surplus.

Though Democrat Barack Obama carried Virginia twice as a candidate for president, it has been an emerging swing state over the past decade. Last year, Democrats achieved sweeping gains in legislative elections, a feather for McAuliffe as he tests his profile nationally.

“Clearly Terry’s looking hard at it,” said veteran Democratic strategist Jim Margolis, a top adviser to Obama’s 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns. “If he decided to, he could credibly make a run.”

McAuliffe also has influential friends in Iowa. He is in touch with Des Moines lawyer Jerry Crawford, a veteran operative and past campaign chairman for Hillary Clinton.

McAuliffe said he also plans to campaign for Democrats this fall in New Hampshire, home of the first-in-the-nation presidential primary, and this month held a fundraiser in Washington for Rep. James Smith, the Democratic nominee for South Carolina governor. South Carolina hosts the first Southern primary in 2020.

“I don’t rule anything out,” McAuliffe said, though insisting his focus would remain on 2018 until after the election. “Then you have to make some decisions through the end of the year and into the first quarter of next year.”
…

Former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe said Tuesday in Iowa that he’s not ruling out a 2020 Democratic campaign for president, as he took his national campaign to promote Democratic candidates for governor to the early presidential testing ground. 

And while he said a decision remained months away, the former Democratic National Committee chairman touted his term as governor as a model for his party nationally.

“We took a red state and made it a blue state,” McAuliffe said in an Associated Press interview during a day of meetings with Democratic Party officials and activists in Des Moines.

McAuliffe was adamant that his chief purpose for visiting Iowa was to promote candidates running in the November midterm elections, chiefly Democratic nominee for governor Fred Hubbell. The governorship is among roughly 10 in states now occupied by Republicans that McAuliffe said are within reach of Democrats. Democrats occupy only 16 governorships.

Iowa is among 19 states McAuliffe has visited since leaving office this year, though none of the others come with the same potential implications as Iowa, host of the leadoff 2020 presidential caucuses.

McAuliffe is viewed as a moderate prospect in an emerging field that could include progressives such as Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Civil rights, fiscal policies

During the interview, he promoted civil rights policy such as his executive order to restore voting rights for felons, a move that reinstated roughly 173,000 people — disproportionately African-Americans — to the voter rolls in Virginia. Likewise, he cast himself as a fiscal steward, taking office with a budget deficit and leaving with a surplus.

Though Democrat Barack Obama carried Virginia twice as a candidate for president, it has been an emerging swing state over the past decade. Last year, Democrats achieved sweeping gains in legislative elections, a feather for McAuliffe as he tests his profile nationally.

“Clearly Terry’s looking hard at it,” said veteran Democratic strategist Jim Margolis, a top adviser to Obama’s 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns. “If he decided to, he could credibly make a run.”

McAuliffe also has influential friends in Iowa. He is in touch with Des Moines lawyer Jerry Crawford, a veteran operative and past campaign chairman for Hillary Clinton.

McAuliffe said he also plans to campaign for Democrats this fall in New Hampshire, home of the first-in-the-nation presidential primary, and this month held a fundraiser in Washington for Rep. James Smith, the Democratic nominee for South Carolina governor. South Carolina hosts the first Southern primary in 2020.

“I don’t rule anything out,” McAuliffe said, though insisting his focus would remain on 2018 until after the election. “Then you have to make some decisions through the end of the year and into the first quarter of next year.”
…

Republicans and Democrats joined forces to speed legislation combating the misuse of opioids and other addictive drugs toward Senate passage Monday, a rare campaign-season show of unity against a growing and deadly health care crisis. 

The measure takes wide aim at the problem, including increasing scrutiny of arriving international mail that may include illegal drugs and making it easier for the National Institutes of Health to approve research on finding nonaddictive painkillers and for pharmaceutical companies to conduct that research. The Food and Drug Administration would be allowed to require drug makers to package smaller quantities of drugs like opioids and there would be new federal grants for treatment centers, training emergency workers and research on prevention methods.

Lawmakers’ focus on combating opioids comes amid alarming increases in drug overdose deaths, with the government estimating more than 72,000 of them last year. That figure has grown annually and is double the 36,000 who died in 2008.

Besides the sheer numbers, Congress has been drawn to the problem because of its broad impact on Republican, Democratic and swing states alike.

California, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania each had more than 4,000 people die from drug overdoses in 2016, while seven other states each lost more than 2,000 people from drugs, according to the most recent figures available. The states with the highest death rates per resident include West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Hampshire, along with the District of Columbia.

West Virginia’s Sen. Joe Manchin and Florida’s Sen. Bill Nelson, both Democrats, are among those facing competitive re-election races in November’s midterm elections. Republicans are trying to deflect a Democratic effort to capture Senate control. 

Money for much of the federal spending the legislation envisions would have to be provided in separate spending bills.

The House approved its own drug misuse legislation this summer. Congressional leaders hope the two chambers will produce compromise legislation and send it to President Donald Trump for his signature by year’s end.
…

Republicans and Democrats joined forces to speed legislation combating the misuse of opioids and other addictive drugs toward Senate passage Monday, a rare campaign-season show of unity against a growing and deadly health care crisis. 

The measure takes wide aim at the problem, including increasing scrutiny of arriving international mail that may include illegal drugs and making it easier for the National Institutes of Health to approve research on finding nonaddictive painkillers and for pharmaceutical companies to conduct that research. The Food and Drug Administration would be allowed to require drug makers to package smaller quantities of drugs like opioids and there would be new federal grants for treatment centers, training emergency workers and research on prevention methods.

Lawmakers’ focus on combating opioids comes amid alarming increases in drug overdose deaths, with the government estimating more than 72,000 of them last year. That figure has grown annually and is double the 36,000 who died in 2008.

Besides the sheer numbers, Congress has been drawn to the problem because of its broad impact on Republican, Democratic and swing states alike.

California, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania each had more than 4,000 people die from drug overdoses in 2016, while seven other states each lost more than 2,000 people from drugs, according to the most recent figures available. The states with the highest death rates per resident include West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Hampshire, along with the District of Columbia.

West Virginia’s Sen. Joe Manchin and Florida’s Sen. Bill Nelson, both Democrats, are among those facing competitive re-election races in November’s midterm elections. Republicans are trying to deflect a Democratic effort to capture Senate control. 

Money for much of the federal spending the legislation envisions would have to be provided in separate spending bills.

The House approved its own drug misuse legislation this summer. Congressional leaders hope the two chambers will produce compromise legislation and send it to President Donald Trump for his signature by year’s end.
…

Farmers worry about falling crop prices and lost sales overseas. Manufacturers fear rising costs and new foreign taxes on their exports. American allies overseas are furious.

By any conventional gauge, President Donald Trump’s uncompromising stance toward tariffs and the pain they’ve begun to cause U.S. individuals and companies so close to midterm elections would seem politically reckless. Yet Trump appears to be betting that his combative actions will soon benefit the country and prove a political winner.

Ditching decades of U.S. trade policy that he says swindled America and robbed its workers, Trump insists he can save U.S. jobs and factories by abandoning or rewriting trade deals, slapping taxes on imports and waging a brutal tariff war with China, America’s biggest trading partner.

“Prior presidents in both political parties have never really moved to try to help and protect the American economy and its workforce, its farmers, its manufacturing workers, in a way of creating a level playing field,” Larry Kudlow, the top White House economic adviser, told reporters last week. “They give it lip service, and then they back off. This president has no intention of backing off. None. Zero.”

Trump’s apparent belief is that he and congressional Republicans can rely on the unswerving support of core GOP voters — even in rural areas that have been economically hurt by his trade disputes — and maybe succeed in delivering better trade deals before Election Day. Still, as an insurance policy against failure, the administration is providing $12 billion in farm aid to soothe trade-war wounds in rural America.

All told, it’s a high-risk political gamble.

“It’s still unclear ultimately how the issue plays in November,” said Nathan Gonzales, publisher of Inside Elections, a nonpartisan newsletter.

The U.S. and China have imposed import taxes on $50 billion worth of each other’s products in a rumble over American allegations that Beijing uses predatory tactics to acquire foreign trade secrets and to try to overtake America’s global supremacy in high technology. Over the weekend, news reports indicated that the administration is set to announce tariffs on $200 billion more in Chinese imports — a step that that would significantly escalate the trade war between the world’s two largest economies. Beijing has said it would swiftly retaliate against additional U.S. tariffs.

Caught in the crossfire are U.S. soybean farmers, a prime target of Beijing’s retaliatory tariffs, whose exports to China account for about 60 percent of their overseas sales. These tariffs make U.S. soybeans prohibitively expensive in China. That means lost sales for American farmers.

Separately Trump has enraged U.S. allies like Canada and the European Union by declaring their steel and aluminum a threat to America’s national security as justification for slapping taxes on them.

On yet another trade front, the president would raise the stakes considerably if he carries out a threat to tax $340 billion in imported cars, trucks and auto parts — action that would raise prices for vehicles Americans buy.

What’s more, Trump has threatened to kick Canada out of a North American trade bloc if it doesn’t cave in to pressure to open its dairy market, among other things.

Trump is running into resistance in pockets across the country. American farmers who rely on exports are facing retaliation from U.S. trading partners, which depresses export sales and prices of agricultural commodities. Manufacturers that buy steel and aluminum are being hurt by higher prices and supply shortages resulting from the tariffs on imported metals.

Corporations fear that Trump’s drive to rewrite the North American Free Trade Agreement will disrupt the supply chains that they’ve spent the past 24 years building across the United States, Canada and Mexico. If the trade war with China further escalates, consumers would face higher prices at the mall and online. The affected imports would range from handbags, luggage and textiles to a range of consumer electronics, including the Apple Watch and adapters, cables and chargers.

On the basis of public opinion surveys, at least, the president’s approach poses political risks. A poll released Aug. 24 by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 61 percent of Americans disapproved of the president’s handling of trade negotiations.

“The Trump administration has handed Democrats in the midterms at least a talking point, not just with farmers but with consumers,” said Mickey Kantor, the top American trade negotiator under President Bill Clinton.

Missouri’s embattled Democratic senator, Claire McCaskill, is trying to link her Republican challenger, Trump ally Josh Hawley, to a nail manufacturing plant that says it might have to close because the Trump steel tariffs have driven up its costs.

Likewise in North Dakota, Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp is running ads tying her Republican challenger, Rep. Kevin Cramer, to Trump’s “reckless trade war.”

Besides unveiling $12 billion in aid to farmers hurt by the conflicts, Trump is seeking to reach trade deals to show that his brass-knuckles approach will succeed in the end. He has said he expects to sign a deal with South Korea later this month during the United Nations General Assembly. Earlier this month, he announced an agreement with Mexico to replace NAFTA — a move intended to pressure Canada to embrace a new North American accord on terms favorable to the United States.

Plans are underway for a delegation from China to resume trade discussions with the Trump team as early as this week. In addition, Trump says his team has started trade discussions with Japan and has received interest from India.

For the president, the bet is that America’s trading partners will capitulate promptly to his demands, rather than delay negotiations in the hope that Democrats will take control of the House and possibly the Senate and leave the president in a weaker bargaining position.

“There is some pressure to get results,” said Philip Levy, senior fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and a White House economist under President George W. Bush. “They need to do something where they can say, `Hey, this different approach actually works.'”

Trump is also relying on the loyalty of his supporters in rural America. He has called farmers “patriots” who are willing to absorb economic pain in the short run to buy time for him to negotiate trade deals more advantageous to the United States.

Approval for Trump’s performance is still running at 53 percent in rural areas, compared with 39 percent overall, according to an NPR/Marist poll released last week. Even if they’re worried about the trade disputes, many rural Americans support Trump’s stands on social issues such as immigration — a sign that the president may have enough political leeway to drive forward with his hard line on trade.

“Trump,” said chief global strategist Greg Valliere of Horizon Investments, “has a lot of Teflon in the farm belt.”
…

Billionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is actively thinking of running for president in 2020 as a Democrat.

“It’s impossible to conceive that I could run as a Republican – things like choice, so many of the issues, I’m just way away from where the Republican Party is today,” Mr. Bloomberg said in a New York Times report Monday.

“That’s not to say I’m with the Democratic Party on everything, but I don’t see how you could possibly run as a Republican,” Bloomberg said. “So if you ran, yeah, you’d have to run as a Democrat.”

Bloomberg served three terms as New York City mayor and has variously been a Democrat, Republican and independent. He twice flirted with running for president as an independent candidate, but ruled it out.

The 76-year-old founder and CEO of Bloomberg L.P., a global media company, has already lined up behind Democrats in the midterm elections and is using his money to attack Republicans on gun control, abortion and environmental issues.

Bloomberg did not say when he would make a decision on whether to run for president.

“I’m working on this Nov. 6 election, and after that I’ll take a look at it,” Bloomberg said.
…

Residents of the small city of Hazleton, PA, face deeply personal choices in this November’s election which features a homegrown candidate with hardline-immigrant views in a city that has been changed in deep-rooted ways by… an influx of immigrants.

Hazleton’s “transformative decade,” is how former police chief Frank DeAndrea puts it.

And transformative it has been. About 130 kilometers (80 miles) northwest of Philadelphia, at the intersection of two major highways, Hazleton has some 25,000 residents. In 2000, 5 percent of them were Hispanic. Today, 50 percent of them are.

This remarkable surge of immigrants, mostly from the Dominican Republic, came to Hazleton after they discovered that both the cost of living and crime rate were lower in the former coal town.

“If a man and his wife both work, which they generally do here, if they’re both working in a plant… Where would you be better served for that $11, $12 an hour?” posits Bob Curry with the Hazleton Integration Project. “You want to try and do that in Newark? You want to try to do that in the Bronx? You want to try to do it anywhere near New York City? … Can’t do it.”

“It was a quiet, quiet town,” recalls Amilcar Arroyo, who moved to Hazleton from Peru 30 years ago. “Most people living here at that time were elderly people. At 6 o’clock [p.m.], it was quiet and during the day too.” Arroyo owns El Mensajero International, Hazelton’s Spanish language newspaper.

Yet, says former chief DeAndrea, who observed Hazleton’s transformation as a Pennsylvania state trooper, the influx sparked fear – fear of crime, fear of overrun schools and social services and simply, fear of the unknown. 

“And fear is an ugly thing. …it doesn’t only happen to a human being, it happens to a community. A community becomes so afraid they can’t move forward,” he said.

Hometown candidate

Challenging incumbent Bob Casey (D) for one of Pennsylvania’s two Senate seats, Hazleton native Congressman Lou Barletta is, according to his own website, “a national figure in the fight against illegal immigration.” He was an early supporter of President Donald Trump, who encouraged him to run for the Senate.

“We need Lou Barletta,” President Donald Trump told a packed arena in Wilkes Barre, PA, in early August.

Barletta is well known in Hazleton where he owned the largest pavement marking company in Pennsylvania before selling it in 2000 after he became Hazleton’s mayor.

During his time as mayor in 2006, he introduced the Illegal Immigration Relief Act after two undocumented immigrants from the Dominican Republic were charged with murdering a Hazleton father of three.

The act penalized and fined employers and landlords for hiring and renting to illegal immigrants. 

Arroyo recalls it as a dark time. “In one of the rallies of Mr. Lou Barletta, people were attacking me. Verbally attacking me. They called me traitor. They called me ‘Go back to your country,’ ‘Go back to Mexico,’ ‘Illegal,’ and I was an American citizen.” 

The ordinance was quickly challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The suit went up to the Supreme Court, which in 2014 refused to take the case, letting stand lower court decisions that struck down the measure.

Dorothy George is a longtime Hazleton resident who won’t reveal how she will vote. “When I look back 50 years ago, it was a safer community, and not necessarily that is caused by the Hispanic influx, but just I think the whole United States has changed in that respect,” she said when VOA caught up with her at her workplace.

Hazleton 

After the coal economy bottomed out in Hazleton, local lawmakers offered tax incentives hoping to attract manufacturing companies, distribution centers and warehouses. They began to set up plants near Hazleton and the warehouse economy was launched. 

“The new economy is based on warehousing because of the great dot com. All of the big major players selling things have warehouses and they want to ship it the most efficient way possible. Trucking is the way they do it. And we’re at an ideal location.” says Curry referring to Hazleton’s location at the intersection of interstates 80 and 81. 

At the same time, dozens of Latino-owned businesses have opened along the streets of Hazleton from restaurants selling homemade Mexican and Dominican food to small grocery stores. 

“My newspaper exists based on two kind of businesses: Latino businesses and American businesses, American businesses that want to get to that growing market, which is a Latino market,” Arroyo says. 

To Curry, whose Integration Project provides after school care for 1,000 children each week, the two communities are like a pair of railroad tracks, extending into the distance without ever meeting. The children, he thinks, might bring them together.

“And when Johnny goes to his little league baseball game and Jose gets a homerun and your team goes to the championship, you’re not so anxious to see Jose sent back to that ‘whatever he came from’ story. Life happens and when life happens, people’s mentality, their worldview, their outlook will change.” 

Referendum on immigration

“A lot of ethnic people don’t like Lou Barletta,” said Barry Chaskin from behind the counter of his retail establishment. He is a white Republican voter. “I think that everybody had a wrong concept of what he was trying to do. It wasn’t immigration. It was illegal immigration that he fought.”

Connie Cramey, a “Republican conservative Latina,” does like Barletta. VOA caught up with her as she was knocking on doors for her candidate. “I’m pro-America first and I believe that he’s too,” Cramey said.

Cramey says she moved to the U.S. at the age of 15 from El Salvador. 

“Nobody is closing the doors to diverse communities, different nationalities. I believe if the latino or the Hispanic community wants to be part of America, first of all, you’ve got to come here legally and then … learn English, and I don’t see that as anything discriminatory or racist,” she said.

Arroyo says that if the Latino population got more engaged in the political life of the city, a “sleeping giant,” would wake up. For now small percentages of the Latino community vote.

“We have to get more involved in local politics,” he says. 

Barletta is trailing Casey in the polls. Real Clear Politics’ average of polls gives Casey a comfortable 14.8% margin statewide. But how the vote will go in Hazleton, part of Luzerne County that went for Trump in 2016, is anyone’s guess. 

“I know them both,” Chaskin said of the two Senate candidates. “I would hope [Barletta] does have a chance and some people in town would agree with me. Others would not…” 

As much as anywhere in the country, the vote in Hazleton is also about President Trump’s unbending immigration policies – including his short-lived “zero tolerance” policy that separated immigrant families at the border. 

“I don’t know who’s right. That’s why we do these things,” Chaskin continued. “That’s why we vote – to see what the people really want.”
…

Residents of the small city of Hazleton, PA, face deeply personal choices in this November’s election which features a homegrown candidate with hardline-immigrant views in a city that has been changed in deep-rooted ways by… an influx of immigrants.

Hazleton’s “transformative decade,” is how former police chief Frank DeAndrea puts it.

And transformative it has been. About 130 kilometers (80 miles) northwest of Philadelphia, at the intersection of two major highways, Hazleton has some 25,000 residents. In 2000, 5 percent of them were Hispanic. Today, 50 percent of them are.

This remarkable surge of immigrants, mostly from the Dominican Republic, came to Hazleton after they discovered that both the cost of living and crime rate were lower in the former coal town.

“If a man and his wife both work, which they generally do here, if they’re both working in a plant… Where would you be better served for that $11, $12 an hour?” posits Bob Curry with the Hazleton Integration Project. “You want to try and do that in Newark? You want to try to do that in the Bronx? You want to try to do it anywhere near New York City? … Can’t do it.”

“It was a quiet, quiet town,” recalls Amilcar Arroyo, who moved to Hazleton from Peru 30 years ago. “Most people living here at that time were elderly people. At 6 o’clock [p.m.], it was quiet and during the day too.” Arroyo owns El Mensajero International, Hazelton’s Spanish language newspaper.

Yet, says former chief DeAndrea, who observed Hazleton’s transformation as a Pennsylvania state trooper, the influx sparked fear – fear of crime, fear of overrun schools and social services and simply, fear of the unknown. 

“And fear is an ugly thing. …it doesn’t only happen to a human being, it happens to a community. A community becomes so afraid they can’t move forward,” he said.

Hometown candidate

Challenging incumbent Bob Casey (D) for one of Pennsylvania’s two Senate seats, Hazleton native Congressman Lou Barletta is, according to his own website, “a national figure in the fight against illegal immigration.” He was an early supporter of President Donald Trump, who encouraged him to run for the Senate.

“We need Lou Barletta,” President Donald Trump told a packed arena in Wilkes Barre, PA, in early August.

Barletta is well known in Hazleton where he owned the largest pavement marking company in Pennsylvania before selling it in 2000 after he became Hazleton’s mayor.

During his time as mayor in 2006, he introduced the Illegal Immigration Relief Act after two undocumented immigrants from the Dominican Republic were charged with murdering a Hazleton father of three.

The act penalized and fined employers and landlords for hiring and renting to illegal immigrants. 

Arroyo recalls it as a dark time. “In one of the rallies of Mr. Lou Barletta, people were attacking me. Verbally attacking me. They called me traitor. They called me ‘Go back to your country,’ ‘Go back to Mexico,’ ‘Illegal,’ and I was an American citizen.” 

The ordinance was quickly challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The suit went up to the Supreme Court, which in 2014 refused to take the case, letting stand lower court decisions that struck down the measure.

Dorothy George is a longtime Hazleton resident who won’t reveal how she will vote. “When I look back 50 years ago, it was a safer community, and not necessarily that is caused by the Hispanic influx, but just I think the whole United States has changed in that respect,” she said when VOA caught up with her at her workplace.

Hazleton 

After the coal economy bottomed out in Hazleton, local lawmakers offered tax incentives hoping to attract manufacturing companies, distribution centers and warehouses. They began to set up plants near Hazleton and the warehouse economy was launched. 

“The new economy is based on warehousing because of the great dot com. All of the big major players selling things have warehouses and they want to ship it the most efficient way possible. Trucking is the way they do it. And we’re at an ideal location.” says Curry referring to Hazleton’s location at the intersection of interstates 80 and 81. 

At the same time, dozens of Latino-owned businesses have opened along the streets of Hazleton from restaurants selling homemade Mexican and Dominican food to small grocery stores. 

“My newspaper exists based on two kind of businesses: Latino businesses and American businesses, American businesses that want to get to that growing market, which is a Latino market,” Arroyo says. 

To Curry, whose Integration Project provides after school care for 1,000 children each week, the two communities are like a pair of railroad tracks, extending into the distance without ever meeting. The children, he thinks, might bring them together.

“And when Johnny goes to his little league baseball game and Jose gets a homerun and your team goes to the championship, you’re not so anxious to see Jose sent back to that ‘whatever he came from’ story. Life happens and when life happens, people’s mentality, their worldview, their outlook will change.” 

Referendum on immigration

“A lot of ethnic people don’t like Lou Barletta,” said Barry Chaskin from behind the counter of his retail establishment. He is a white Republican voter. “I think that everybody had a wrong concept of what he was trying to do. It wasn’t immigration. It was illegal immigration that he fought.”

Connie Cramey, a “Republican conservative Latina,” does like Barletta. VOA caught up with her as she was knocking on doors for her candidate. “I’m pro-America first and I believe that he’s too,” Cramey said.

Cramey says she moved to the U.S. at the age of 15 from El Salvador. 

“Nobody is closing the doors to diverse communities, different nationalities. I believe if the latino or the Hispanic community wants to be part of America, first of all, you’ve got to come here legally and then … learn English, and I don’t see that as anything discriminatory or racist,” she said.

Arroyo says that if the Latino population got more engaged in the political life of the city, a “sleeping giant,” would wake up. For now small percentages of the Latino community vote.

“We have to get more involved in local politics,” he says. 

Barletta is trailing Casey in the polls. Real Clear Politics’ average of polls gives Casey a comfortable 14.8% margin statewide. But how the vote will go in Hazleton, part of Luzerne County that went for Trump in 2016, is anyone’s guess. 

“I know them both,” Chaskin said of the two Senate candidates. “I would hope [Barletta] does have a chance and some people in town would agree with me. Others would not…” 

As much as anywhere in the country, the vote in Hazleton is also about President Trump’s unbending immigration policies – including his short-lived “zero tolerance” policy that separated immigrant families at the border. 

“I don’t know who’s right. That’s why we do these things,” Chaskin continued. “That’s why we vote – to see what the people really want.”
…

In rural Pennsylvania, the small city of Hazleton has come out of a “transformative decade,” the former police chief says. In the early 2000s, a wave of immigrants and first generation Americans moved to the area, seeking jobs and a better way of life. In the 2016 election, Donald Trump narrowly edged out Hilary Clinton. Now, a native son is Trump’s hand-picked candidate to challenge Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey. VOA’s immigration reporter Aline Barros has more.
…

In rural Pennsylvania, the small city of Hazleton has come out of a “transformative decade,” the former police chief says. In the early 2000s, a wave of immigrants and first generation Americans moved to the area, seeking jobs and a better way of life. In the 2016 election, Donald Trump narrowly edged out Hilary Clinton. Now, a native son is Trump’s hand-picked candidate to challenge Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey. VOA’s immigration reporter Aline Barros has more.
…

The prognosis for President Donald Trump and his party was grim.

In a post-Labor Day briefing at the White House, a top Republican pollster told senior staff that the determining factor in the election wouldn’t be the improving economy or the steady increase in job creation. It would be how voters feel about Trump. And the majority of the electorate, including a sizeable percentage of Republican-leaning voters, doesn’t feel good about the president, according to a presentation from pollster Neil Newhouse that spanned dozens of pages.

Newhouse’s briefing came amid a darkening mood among Republican officials as the November election nears. Party leaders were already worried that a surge in enthusiasm among Democrats and disdain for Trump by moderate Republicans would put the House out of reach. But some Republicans now fear their Senate majority is also in peril — a scenario that was unthinkable a few months ago given the favorable Senate map for the GOP.

“For Republican candidates to win in swing states, they need all of the voters who support President Trump, plus a chunk of those who do not,” said Whit Ayres, a GOP pollster. “That is threading a very narrow strategic needle.”

Operatives in both parties say Republicans still have the edge in the fight for control of the Senate. But GOP officials are increasingly worried that nominees in conservative-leaning states like Missouri and Indiana are underperforming, while races in Tennessee and Texas that should be slam-dunks for Republicans are close.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell raised an alarm last week, warning that each of the competitive Senate races would be “like a knife fight in an alley.”

Some of the public fretting among Republicans appears to be strategic, as party officials try to motivate both voters and donors. Many moderate Republican voters “don’t believe there is anything at stake in this election,” according to the documents Newhouse presented to White House officials. He attributed that belief in part to a disregard for public polling, given that most surveys showed Democrat Hillary Clinton defeating Trump in the 2016 presidential election.

Newhouse and the White House would not comment on the early September meeting. The Associated Press obtained a copy of Newhouse’s presentation, and two Republicans with knowledge of the briefing discussed the details on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the matter publicly.

At the White House, anxiety over the midterms has been on the rise for months as polls increasingly show a challenging environment for the GOP and heightened Democratic enthusiasm. The sheer number of competitive races in both the House and Senate is stretching cash reserves and forcing tough calculations about where to deploy resources and surrogates. And there are growing fears that the coalition of voters that delivered Trump to the White House will not come out for midterms.

Even if those voters do show up in large numbers, Republicans could still come up short. The polling presented to White House officials, which was commissioned by the Republican National Committee, showed that Trump’s loyal supporters make up about one-quarter of the electorate. Another quarter is comprised of Republicans who like Trump’s policies but not the president himself and do not appear motivated to back GOP candidates. And roughly half of expected midterm voters are Democrats who are energized by their opposition to the president.

White House aides say Trump is getting regular briefings on the political landscape and is aware of the increasingly grim polling, even though he’s predicted a “red wave” for Republicans on Twitter and at campaign rallies. Aides say Trump’s sober briefings from GOP officials are sometimes offset by the frequent conversations he has with a cadre of outside advisers who paint a sunnier picture of the electoral landscape and remind the president of his upset victory in 2016.

The paradox for Republicans is that most Americans are largely satisfied with the economy, according to numerous surveys. But the party has struggled to keep the economy centered at the center of the election debate. Trump keeps thrusting other issues to the forefront, including his frustration with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and his intense anger with unflattering portrayals of his presidency in a book by journalist Bob Woodward and an anonymous editorial from a senior administration official that was published in the New York Times. He stunned some backers Thursday when he disputed the death toll in Puerto Rico from last year’s Hurricane Maria, just as another storm was barreling toward the East Coast.

Newhouse told White House officials that Trump could appeal to moderates and independents by emphasizing that a Democratic majority would be outside the mainstream on issues like abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and government-funded health care. Other Republican strategists have offered candidates similar advice.

Karl Rove, who served as chief political strategist to President George W. Bush, said that if Republicans cast their Democratic rivals as soft on immigration or in favor of high-dollar government spending on health care, “that’s a toxic mix to the soft Republicans and Republican-leaning independents.”

In his most recent campaign appearances, Trump soft-peddled his predictions for a Republican wave and warned supporters that a Democratic congressional majority would have consequences. But he focused less on the policy implications of Democrats regaining control of Congress and more on the impact on his presidency, including the prospect of impeachment.

“If it does happen, it’s your fault, because you didn’t go out to vote,” Trump said of the prospect of getting impeached. “You didn’t go out to vote — that’s the only way it could happen.”
…