Now a senator, Laphonza Butler makes a proud return to EMILY’s List

NEW YORK — Laphonza Butler, the country’s newest U.S. senator, spoke in front of a familiar crowd Friday at a fundraising luncheon for EMILY’s List, the pro-abortion rights group supporting Democratic women candidates.

She led the group for two years before being appointed to fill the late Dianne Feinstein’s seat earlier this week.

It was a homecoming for Butler, who was met with a roaring round of applause as she spoke to hundreds of EMILY’s List supporters. Butler was already scheduled to speak at the event as the organization’s president. But her circumstances changed in the last week when she was sworn into her new role in Washington on Tuesday. On Thursday, she was in San Francisco for Feinstein’s memorial.

Butler acknowledged her whirlwind week, paying homage to Feinstein, saying she paved the way so it “would be normal for women to be at whatever seat of power that they chose.”

When Newsom called up Butler on Saturday to tell her about the appointment, she hesitated before she answered, she told the luncheon crowd. She said she thought about her responsibility to the organization, especially at this important juncture of the 2024 election cycle.

“I decided I wouldn’t let myself down by choosing to miss another opportunity to serve at my greatest potential,” Butler said. “To lead and deliver at my highest impact. To raise my voice to its highest volume on behalf of creating a better, stronger, more equitable future.”

It’s still unclear if Butler will run for the special election to complete the final weeks of Feinstein’s term, or the full six-year term beginning in 2025. She did not take any questions after the event. The three members of Congress running in 2024 to succeed Feinstein — Democratic Reps. Barbara Lee, Adam Schiff and Katie Porter — have all indicated that they are running for the special election as well.

EMILY’s List has already been involved in a number of races, issuing endorsements for candidates in Senate contests across the country, including Rep. Elissa Slotkin in Michigan, former Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell in Florida, Rep. Lisa Blunt-Rochester in Delaware and Prince George’s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks in Maryland. The group has not endorsed in the California Senate race, and said it is waiting until the primary plays out next year — a stance it had taken even before Butler became a senator.

Attendees at the luncheon at an event space on Manhattan’s Upper East Side were starstruck. “It was incredibly inspiring and empowering,” said Julie Shiroishi, executive director of Eleanor’s Legacy, a New York organization backing Democratic women candidates who support abortion rights. “There could not be a more inspiring choice to follow in Senator Feinstein’s footsteps than Laphonza Butler.”

Dawn Smalls, an attorney and EMILY’s List donor, called it “a moment of coming full circle.”

“It was great to be here for this goodbye to the organization to which she had devoted so much,” Smalls said.

With her appointment, Butler became the only Black woman in the Senate, and one of just three out LGBTQ members in the upper chamber. Her identity wasn’t lost on Smalls, who is also a Black woman.

“I think it’s really important to have a Black woman’s voice in the Senate,” she said. “So I’m very, very excited to see her there. And would love to continue to hear her voice.”

Blunt-Rochester, who is also hoping to grow the ranks of Black women in the Senate in her race next year, stressed the importance of Butler’s appointment.

“Everyone’s talking about how there’s no Black women in the Senate,” Blunt-Rochester said at the event. “Now there is one. But there needs to be two, three, four, five more.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/4dQ0qFG
via IFTTT

Read More

UAW holds off on widening strike citing 'significant progress' in talks

The United Auto Workers will not expand its strike against the Big Three auto manufacturers for the time being, union President Shawn Fain said Friday, since contract talks have made "significant progress" in recent days.

Fain said the union was poised to strike some of General Motors’ most-profitable product lines, but that the company made a major concession on bringing electric vehicle production under its master agreement with the UAW.

“We were about to shut down GM’s biggest moneymaker in Arlington, Texas,” Fain said in an afternoon livestream, referring to an assembly plant that makes popular SUVs. "GM has now agreed in writing to place their electric battery manufacturing under our master agreement. We were told for months this was impossible.”

Securing some guarantees amid the ongoing transformation from internal combustion engines to electric ones has been a top priority for the UAW in its negotiations with GM, Stellantis and Ford, and the concession will likely add pressure on the other two to follow suit.

It also is likely to be welcome news at the White House, which has been fending off union criticism of the EV transition President Joe Biden has been promoting.

"Because of our power GM has agreed to lay the foundation for a just transition," Fain said.

The UAW's announcement serves as an olive branch of sorts to the automakers, as well as at least a momentary respite for the White House and Democrats representing auto-producing regions, who support the workers’ demands while quietly fearing that an extended strike could hurt the economy and their political prospects heading into 2024.

Still, Fain cautioned that the union could reverse course and resume escalating its strike — which stands at 25,000 of the UAW’s nearly 150,000 members across the Big Three — if negotiations hit speed bumps.

“We don't strike for the hell of it,” he said. “The Big Three know we are not messing around and they know if they want to avoid more strikes, they will have to pony up.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/vPF5apR
via IFTTT

Read More

New front opens in abortion wars as pharmacies begin dispensing pills

A handful of independent pharmacies across the country have quietly begun dispensing the abortion pill mifepristone under new rules created by the Biden administration earlier this year, even as a looming Supreme Court case could reimpose restrictions or ban the drugs entirely.

Thousands of branches of major pharmacy chains are poised to join them — making the drugs more accessible to millions of people nationwide and kicking off a new phase of the legal and political battle over the most popular method of ending a pregnancy.

GenBioPro, the maker of generic mifepristone, published a list this week of 19 pharmacies in nine states certified to dispense the drug. The list, according to the company, only represents places that agreed to be named. The locations include independent community pharmacies, university-affiliated outlets and compounders, plus a mail-order pharmacy filling prescriptions in several states.

GenBioPro’s list, which has not been previously reported, offers an early look at one of the Biden administration’s most significant steps to expand abortion access post-Roe. Though the rollout has been slower and more limited than abortion-rights supporters have wanted, they say it still has the potential to radically alter the landscape, because most people live much closer to their local pharmacy than a doctor’s office or hospital.

“I’m sure everybody’s got their opinion, but we’re health care professionals who are here to help people get the medication they need when they need it,” said Steve Moore, the owner of Condo Pharmacy in Plattsburgh, N.Y., which was recently certified to stock mifepristone, but has not had a patient request it. Moore added that he hasn’t received any backlash.

But anti-abortion groups pledged earlier this year to picket, boycott and organize pressure campaigns targeting pharmacies that dispense the pills, and reiterated that they will do so as more obtain certification.

“We are hoping abortion becomes unthinkable and are working towards that in our country, but in the meantime we want people to know that chemical abortion is not like getting a wart removed or taking an aspirin,” Jeanne Mancini, the president of March for Life, said in an interview on Friday.

Evan Masingill, the CEO of GenBioPro, said pharmacy fulfillment offers patients another option for accessing abortion.

"At GenBioPro, we firmly believe everyone has a right to access evidence-based health care and safe and effective medicines, and that includes medical abortion," he said in a statement.

Danco, the pharmaceutical company that makes the brand-name version of mifepristone, told POLITICO it has certified many of the same pharmacies as GenBioPro as well as others, but is not making its directory public until it has the pharmacies’ permission.

A spokesperson said the company is "very excited about expanding access to Mifeprex so more patients are able to access the abortion care they need.”

Mifepristone, along with another drug, misoprostol, is approved through 10 weeks of pregnancy, and is used in more than half of abortions nationwide. The Biden administration in January announced that retail pharmacies could dispense the pills — part of a broader push to preserve and expand access to abortion as more states prohibited the procedure. Previously, pregnant people had to get the drugs directly from their doctor or have it prescribed via telemedicine and sent by mail, depending on the laws in their state.

Most of the first pharmacies certified to dispense the drug are in states with legal protections for abortion in general and the pills in particular, including California, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington. But some are in states with near-total bans, like Texas, and in states that cut off access early in pregnancy, including South Carolina, which has a six-week prohibition, and Arizona, which has a 15-week ban. The abortion laws in Wisconsin, where one pharmacy is certified to dispense, remain in legal limbo.

Several factors, however, are likely to keep the pills out of reach for many.

The country’s largest pharmacy chains told POLITICO that they will not sell the drugs, for now, in states where GOP attorneys general have threatened legal action, or in states where abortion is legal but pharmacists’ ability to dispense the pills falls into a legal gray area.

Many conservative-led states have also banned or placed curbs on the pills, and efforts by doctors and drugmakers to topple those restrictions have, so far, failed in court.

And in states with legal protections, many individual pharmacies and pharmacists are refusing to dispense because of personal objections to abortion, a desire to avoid protesters, or the hoops they must jump through to become eligible to dole out the medication.

Kirsten Moore, director of the Expanding Medication Abortion Access Project, known as EMAA, said the drug companies have had to tread carefully in disclosing which pharmacies are dispensing because of threats from GOP state officials and anti-abortion advocates.

“The opposition — they really want to put this medication back under lock and key,” said Moore, no relation to Steve Moore. “Making that information available basically ends up just putting a ‘Kick Me’ sign on the pharmacy.”

CVS and Walgreens pledged in January to dispense the drugs in some states, after the FDA gave them the green light. Fraser Engerman, a spokesperson for Walgreens, told POLITICO the company is “in the last stages of finalizing certification,” while CVS’ Amy Thibault said its officials will “continue to work through the steps” of obtaining certification to dispense the drug. Those steps include securing an adequate supply of the pills, building a system that protects the privacy of patients, and verifying that only certified doctors are sending prescriptions to certified pharmacists.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians and other medical and advocacy groups have called on the Biden administration to drop the certification requirement on the pills, which would have allowed pharmacies to begin dispensing them like any other prescription drug earlier this year.

A spokesperson for the White House said the administration is focused on ensuring access to mifepristone, which the FDA approved as safe and effective more than 20-years ago, and stands by current policy.

The January memo directing agencies to loosen restrictions on the pills, the spokesperson said, “was issued in the face of attacks by state officials to prevent women from accessing mifepristone and discourage pharmacies from becoming certified to dispense the medication.”

In the months since that memo, abortion-rights supporters have also taken steps to increase access to pills beyond brick-and-mortar pharmacies.

A wave of recent shield laws allow doctors in California and other blue states to prescribe and mail the drugs to patients in states with anti-abortion laws, and more virtual clinics have opened since Roe fell — some of which will mail the medication anywhere in the U.S. regardless of state restrictions.

“I suspect, over the long run, that a lot of this will be by mail,” said Alina Salganicoff, the director of the Women's Health Policy Program at KFF, a health policy think tank. “There's a stigma we still have around going into a pharmacy. Some patients may be uncomfortable, especially if you live in a rural area where you may know the clerks and the people working there, so it may not be an option for you.”

But supporters of broader access argue pharmacies still have a crucial role to play, particularly because abortions can be time-sensitive.

People might not be able to wait for the drugs to arrive by mail, either because they are experiencing a miscarriage, their pregnancy is threatening their health, or because they’re in a state that bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Others may not have a reliable mailing address or may live with an abusive partner.

Also hanging over the rollout of the drugs to pharmacy shelves is a court case that could reinstate previous rules that only doctors can dispense the pills or strip FDA approval of the medication altogether. The Biden administration and Danco recently appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling that would ban pharmacy dispensing and mail delivery of mifepristone and impose other restrictions. The Supreme Court is expected to hear the case in 2024 or 2025.

Rachel Rebouché, a reproductive health law expert and dean of Temple University’s Beasley School of Law, questioned whether the ongoing legal morass surrounding the pills’ regulation has spooked pharmacists who might otherwise get certified to dispense them.

“Why would you go to the administrative expense and logistical hassle of seeking certification and then stocking mifepristone — with all of the reporting and storage and ID numbers and the like that come with it — if the Supreme Court is essentially going to say, ‘We rewind the clock to before 2016’?” she said, referring to the year when the FDA updated the drug’s label sanctioning its use up to 10 weeks of pregnancy and lowering the dosage.

Yet the large pharmacy chains confirmed they have not been deterred by the possibility of such a ruling and will soon begin dispensing despite the threat of a future national rollback of the drugs.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/IZr7x6w
via IFTTT

Read More

Georgia prosecutors seek trial testimony from top Trump adviser

Georgia prosecutors intend to call Boris Epshteyn, a top lawyer and adviser to former President Donald Trump, as a witness in the upcoming trial of Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell, two of Trump’s co-defendants in a sprawling racketeering case related to Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election.

Epshteyn is one of six witnesses who reside outside of Georgia that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is attempting to summon to the state for the Oct. 23 trial, the first for any of the 19 co-defendants charged in the alleged conspiracy. Compelling his testimony may be a challenge in such a short timeframe, particularly given his attorney-client relationship with Trump.

Other witnesses include three Republican activists who were involved in the Trump campaign’s efforts to send false slates of electors to Washington. They are Arizona’s Greg Safsten, Nevada’s Jim DeGraffenreid — who signed false documents claiming to be presidential electors from their states — and Pennsylvania’s Lawrence Tabas, a former head of the Pennsylvania GOP who dropped out before signing the false documents. Willis indicated she anticipates their testimony to reveal concerns about the legality of Chesebro’s proposals to send the “contingent” slates and sign documents claiming to be legitimate electors despite Biden’s win in their states.

Willis’ requests, unveiled in court documents made public Thursday, provide some of the clearest insight yet into her trial strategy and the case she intends to lay out against Trump and his co-defendants.

For example, she says Epshteyn can testify about his contacts with Powell related to a November 2020 press conference in which Powell alleged that the “algorithm” used by Dominion Voting Systems machines could flip votes from Trump to Joe Biden. Willis also noted that Epshteyn was in touch with key lawyers orchestrating Trump’s last-ditch bid to stay in power, including Chesebro and John Eastman.

Willis is also seeking testimony from Lin Wood, an attorney who aligned with Powell and some of her discredited efforts to claim that Dominion machines had been manipulated to deliver the election to Biden. Wood hosted Powell and other allies, like former Trump national security adviser Mike Flynn, at his South Carolina estate, and Willis indicated it was there that Powell drafted a plan to seize Dominion voting machines. A second witness related to that meeting, Aaron Vick, is also on Willis’ list.

Prosecutors have charged Powell with overseeing an effort to illegally access voting equipment in Coffee County, Ga. as part of that larger plan. Powell has argued that she had no role in orchestrating the effort.

Chesebro and Powell elected to have speedy trials, which under Georgia law required them to face a jury by early November. Prosecutors have said they intend to offer the full suite of evidence that they intend to bring out against all 19 defendants, including Trump, in the trial, which they say could last months.

To compel the attendance of witnesses from out of state, Willis must secure a court order from their home districts — a process similar to what she undertook to demand their testimony during her investigation. Some of her efforts met resistance from witnesses who challenged her authority to compel testimony, but courts — from local and state all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court — largely backed her efforts.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/egSFxJc
via IFTTT

Read More

Biden team weighs using State Department grants to fund weapons for Ukraine

The Biden administration is considering using a State Department grant program to send additional military aid to Ukraine as Congress continues to battle over weapons funding, according to two U.S. officials with knowledge of the discussions.

The White House is weighing a range of options as it scrambles to find additional money to support Ukraine after lawmakers stripped funding in a last-minute deal to avert a government shutdown, said the officials, who like others interviewed for this story were granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

President Joe Biden hinted at this strategy on Wednesday, saying “there is another means by which we may be able to find funding for that.” He declined to comment further.

One of the officials said the president’s comments referred to “existing funding authorities” Congress previously gave the administration “that allow us to provide additional support to Ukraine for a bit longer if Congress doesn’t act.”

One option under consideration is using foreign military financing — a program run by the State Department that provides grants or loans to help partner countries purchase weapons and defense equipment — intended for Ukraine and other countries impacted by Russia’s full-scale invasion, said the two officials.

As of Sept. 21, the U.S. had roughly $650 million remaining out of $4.6 billion in foreign military financing that Congress appropriated across two supplemental packages for Ukraine and “countries impacted by the situation in Ukraine,” according to the State Department.

Even if the U.S. uses the financing authority to purchase weapons, Congress still needs to authorize additional funding to support Ukraine, the U.S. official said.

The administration could also potentially ask Congress to redirect funding from elsewhere in the Pentagon budget to support Ukraine, according to a Defense Department official familiar with the discussions. However, this route would require approval from lawmakers.

A top Pentagon spokesperson said no decision had been made on what route the department will take.

“Reprogramming is always an option for urgent needs. At this time right now, though, to my knowledge, no decision has been made on using reprogramming as a way to support Ukraine security assistance,” said Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder. “We remain committed to working with Congress on the Ukraine supplemental and receiving a full budget.”

Pentagon leaders warned lawmakers last week that department’s portion of previous aid packages has nearly run out. Comptroller Mike McCord wrote in a letter to congressional leaders that the Defense Department “has exhausted nearly all available security assistance funding for Ukraine.” No money remains for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, the program used by the Pentagon to purchase new weapons and equipment for Kyiv, while $1.6 billion remains to replenish U.S. inventories.

Congress cleared a short-term funding patch to keep the government open last weekend without any new Ukraine money, sidelining Biden’s $24 billion emergency request.

While Biden said he was concerned about the possibility of running out of funding to support Ukraine, he had confidence “a majority of members of the House and Senate, in both parties” support funding the war.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said on Wednesday that he and GOP leader Mitch McConnell plan to “work together to get a big package done” for Ukraine. But its fate in the Republican-led House, where a majority of GOP lawmakers last week opposed more money, is less certain.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/gz8O0CM
via IFTTT

Read More

Massachusetts Democrats drag Biden over migrants

BOSTON — Top Massachusetts Democrats fed up with federal inaction on immigration are beginning to lash out at President Joe Biden.

“The guy’s running for president. He better start paying attention to this,” an audibly frustrated House Speaker Ron Mariano said Wednesday. He had just been asked by POLITICO whether the White House should designate a point person to coordinate states’ responses to the migrant surge, as Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker suggested in a letter to Biden this week.

“We need to put a framework around this from the feds,” Mariano told reporters. “We need someone to take charge of this and say ‘this is what you can expect.’”

Massachusetts Democrats used to be careful not to name-drop Biden when talking about immigration issues even as they publicly pleaded with his administration for more money for the state’s emergency shelter system and expedited work permits for migrants. They instead made nonspecific references to the federal government and directed their concerns toward Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

But Biden is safe no longer as frustrations with his administration’s response — or lack thereof — to the deluge of new arrivals overwhelming Democratic strongholds begin to outweigh the potential political consequences of publicly berating the president.

“We need two things from the Biden administration: We need federal funding and we need expedited work authorizations,” Gov. Maura Healey, a Democrat who sits on Biden’s national campaign advisory board, reiterated on Wednesday at the State House.

They’re not confident they’ll get it. Healey and top legislative leaders met with Massachusetts’ federal delegation Thursday morning to amplify their calls for help. Mariano walked away from the virtual confab just as frustrated as he was the day before.

“The hope is — and it’s only a prayer — that cold weather slows the flow of the families coming over the border. But we’re not even sure if that will work,” Mariano told reporters late Thursday morning. “Unless we get help, we are going to have some difficulties.”

Massachusetts Democrats’ exasperation with the Biden administration comes as state lawmakers weigh Healey’s request for $250 million in additional funding for the emergency shelter system that’s now housing more than 6,700 homeless families, about half of which the state estimates are migrants.

The Healey administration is burning through existing state money for the shelter program at a rapid clip. If families continue to flood the system at the current rate (about 25 per day), the Healey administration predicts it will exhaust the $325 million the state budgeted this fiscal year for the emergency shelter program in January — a full six months early.

Money could run out even sooner for the administration’s “family welcome centers” and temporary emergency shelters at Eastern Nazarene College and Joint Base Cape Cod, and to pay the state’s contracts with hotels housing homeless families. That’s all according to the administration’s responses to House leaders’ questions about the cost and mechanics of the shelter system that were provided to POLITICO.

The extra $250 million “would fund our current caseload through the end of the fiscal year,” the administration said. It includes $130 million for shelter and associated services, $33 million for the temporary emergency shelters and $87 million for “wraparound services and community supports” like school district reimbursements.

But lawmakers are taking their time with this one as they work to understand the scope of the rapidly worsening shelter crisis. And the process could be further dragged out if they separate out the shelter funding from the rest of the $2 billion supplemental spending bill Healey filed to close out the last fiscal year.

Shelter aid is “really not part of the closeout discussion, because that is fiscal ’24 dollars that we’re supplementing,” Senate Ways and Means Chair Michael Rodrigues said. “My first priority is closing the books on fiscal ’23.”

Kelly Garrity contributed to this report.

Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO’s Massachusetts Playbook newsletter.

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/iyf93RO
via IFTTT

Read More

Biden administration waives 26 federal laws to allow border wall construction in South Texas

McALLEN, Texas — The Biden administration announced on Wednesday that it had waived 26 federal laws in South Texas to allow border wall construction, marking the administration’s first use of a sweeping executive power employed often during the Trump presidency.

The Department of Homeland Security posted the announcement on the U.S. Federal Registry with few details outlining the construction in Starr County, Texas, which is part of a busy Border Patrol sector seeing “high illegal entry.” According to government data, about 245,000 illegal entries have been recorded in this region during the current fiscal year.

“There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries into the United States in the project areas,” Alejandro Mayorkas, the DHS secretary, stated in the notice.

The Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act and Endangered Species Act were some of the federal laws waived by DHS to make way for construction that will use funds from a congressional appropriation in 2019 for border wall construction. The waivers avoid time-consuming reviews and lawsuits challenging violation of environmental laws.

Starr County’s hilly ranchlands, sitting between Zapata and McAllen, Texas, is home to about 65,000 residents sparsely populating about 1,200 square miles (3,108 square kilometers) that form part of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge.

Although no maps were provided in the announcement, a previous map shared during the gathering of public comments shows the piecemeal construction will add up to an additional 20 miles to the existing border barrier system in the area. Starr County Judge Eloy Vera said it will start south of the Falcon Dam and go past Salineño, Texas.

“The other concern that we have is that area is highly erosive. There’s a lot of arroyos,” Eloy Vera, the county judge said, pointing out the creeks cutting through the ranchland and leading into the river.

Concern is shared with environmental advocates who say structures will run through public lands, habitats of endangered plants and species like the Ocelot, a spotted wild cat.

“A plan to build a wall through will bulldoze an impermeable barrier straight through the heart of that habitat. It will stop wildlife migrations dead in their tracks. It will destroy a huge amount of wildlife refuge land. And it’s a horrific step backwards for the borderlands,” Laiken Jordahl, a southwest conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity, said Wednesday afternoon.

During the Trump administration, about 450 miles of barriers were built along the southwest border between 2017 and January 2021. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott renewed those efforts after the Biden administration halted them at the start of his presidency.

The DHS decision on Wednesday contrasts the Biden administration’s posturing when a proclamation to end the construction on Jan. 20, 2021 stated, “building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border is not a serious policy solution.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection had no immediate comment.

The announcement prompted political debate by the Democratic administration facing an increase of migrants entering through the southern border in recent months, including thousands who entered the U.S. through Eagle Pass at the end of September.

“A border wall is a 14th century solution to a 21st century problem. It will not bolster border security in Starr County,” Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) said in a statement. “I continue to stand against the wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars on an ineffective border wall.”

Political proponents of the border wall said the waivers should be used as a launching pad for a shift in policy.

“After years of denying that a border wall and other physical barriers are effective, the DHS announcement represents a sea change in the administration’s thinking: A secure wall is an effective tool for maintaining control of our borders,” Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said in a statement. “Having made that concession, the administration needs to immediately begin construction of wall across the border to prevent the illegal traffic from simply moving to other areas of the border.”

from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/BTlf5iS
via IFTTT

Read More