(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden, highlighting his administration’s war on rising costs less than two weeks ahead of the midterm elections, announced new initiatives Wednesday he said will provide “a little breathing room” for American families.
Speaking at the White House, Biden said the initiatives on what he called “junk fees” aim to “lower the cost of everyday living for American families, to put more money in the pockets of middle-income and working- class Americans and to hold big corporations accountable.”
“These steps will immediately start saving Americans collectively billions of dollars in unfair fees,” he said.
The administration’s actions to provide financial relief come amid steep inflation. Republicans have seized on high prices ahead of the midterms, arguing Democrats’ policies are to blame for surging costs.
Polling shows the GOP has an edge on the issue. A new ABC News/Ipsos survey found 36% of Americans trust Republicans to handle inflation while 21% trust Democrats.
On the state of the economy overall, 36% of Americans trust Republicans to do a better job while 24% trust Democrats on the issue.
Biden announced Wednesday that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued guidance effectively banning two popular “junk fee” practices: surprise overdraft fees or depositor fees. Those actions will save consumers more than $1 billion per year, according to the White House.
“This is real money back in the pockets of American families,” said Rohit Chopra, the director of the CFPB. “It’s good for them, and it’s good for businesses that follow the law.”
The CFPB will also develop guidance on other bank and credit card fees that currently cost consumers more than $24 billion per year, the White House said.
Biden said his administration’s looking to take action on other charges, including processing fees for concert tickets or resort fees. The Federal Trade Commission announced last week it would be launching a rule-making process to reduce such fee practices across the economy.
Such fees, Biden said, “hit marginalized Americans the hardest, especially low-income folks and people of color.”
Biden, speaking just 13 days before Election Day, also took the opportunity to tout other moves his administration made to lower costs, including making hearing aids available over-the-counter and a program to lower Americans’ monthly broadband bills.
He again blamed high prices, particularly energy prices, on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ongoing war in Ukraine. Biden also repeated his call on gas companies to pass savings down to consumers, and predicted gas prices will continue to fall.
“I’m optimistic,” Biden said. “It’s gonna take some time, and I appreciate the frustration and American people.”
(WASHINGTON) — Georgia Senate candidate Herschel Walker on Wednesday denied an unnamed woman’s new claim that in Dallas in 1993 he paid for and strongly encouraged her to have an abortion that she did not want.
The woman, only identified as Jane Doe, made her accusation at a video news conference hosted from Los Angeles by her attorney, Gloria Allred. The woman was not shown on camera and said that she feared reprisal if she revealed her true name or her face.
In a statement issued later Wednesday, Walker said, “I’m done with this foolishness. This is all a lie, and I will not entertain any of it.”
“I also did not kill JFK. This is pitiful,” he added. “The media should not be so foolish as to think I will spend any time talking about these lies.”
That statement echoed one he gave earlier Wednesday, shortly before the woman’s news conference. A reporter asked him then if he wanted to “unequivocally deny” paying any women for abortions, but he did not answer.
Walker previously denied an ex-girlfriend’s claim to various news outlets that he paid for her to have an abortion in 2009. That woman told The Daily Beast that she had documents supporting her allegation: a receipt from an abortion clinic, a bank deposit receipt with an image of a $700 check that she said was signed by Walker sent within a week of the abortion and also a “get well” card that she said was signed by Walker.
ABC News has not independently confirmed either woman’s claim.
Walker is running against Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock as staunchly anti-abortion rights.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, who has been campaigning with Walker, also issued a statement on Wednesday supporting him and labeling Allred, the woman’s attorney, an “activist” and a Democrat.
Graham and Walker suggested the new allegation was a coordinated political attack to upend a race that has also focused on public safety and the economy as well as abortion rights.
Leading Republicans including former President Donald Trump have rallied around Walker, citing his denials.
“Democrats will say and do anything to hang on to power. Well, I’m Herschel Walker, and they picked the wrong Georgian to mess with. I’m not backing down the stakes are too high,” Walker said in his statement.
The new woman’s allegations
The unnamed woman who spoke at the video news conference with Allred said that in April 1993, she became pregnant after having been intimate with Walker.
“After discussing the pregnancy with Herschel several times, he encouraged me to have an abortion and gave me the money to do so,” the woman claimed.
She said she then went for the procedure in Dallas but did not go through with it. She said Walker allegedly pressured her, though, and ultimately drove her back to the abortion clinic the next day and waited outside until it was done, then drove her to a pharmacy for medication.
The woman did not provide any documentation in support of her alleged abortion.
Warnock’s response to Walker abortion claim
In a statement on Wednesday, Warnock’s deputy campaign manager, Rachel Petri, said that “we know Herschel Walker has a problem with the truth, a problem answering questions, and a problem taking responsibility for his actions.”
“Today’s new report is just the latest example of a troubling pattern we have seen play out again and again and again. Herschel Walker shouldn’t be representing Georgians in the U.S. Senate,” Petri said.
Earlier this month, Warnock commented on the first woman’s abortion claim against Walker.
He said then, at a campaign event, that “what we’re hearing about my opponent is disturbing. I think the people of Georgia have a real choice about who they think is ready to represent them in the United States Senate.”
(WAUKESHA, Wis.) — Darrell Brooks has been found guilty of intentional homicide for barreling his SUV into a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin.
Six people were killed and dozens were injured when Brooks’ car plowed into paradegoers on Nov. 21, 2021. The victims killed ranged in age from 8 to 81.
Brooks faced dozens of charges, including six counts of first-degree intentional homicide.
Witnesses took the stand for the prosecution, recounting the screaming and crying as victims were struck by the fast-moving car.
“After the vehicle had come through … I looked back and saw all the carnage behind us. My thought then was that we were involved in some sort of terrorist act,” Detective Lukas Hallark said on the stand, according to Milwaukee ABC affiliate WISN-TV. “[There was] overwhelming fear and overwhelming panic amongst everyone in downtown Waukesha.”
Brooks, 40, dismissed his public defenders during the trial and went on to represent himself.
“This incident was not planned, not intentional. This incident was never even thought about,” Brooks told the jury in his opening statement, according to WISN.
Brooks had multiple outbursts during the trial. At one point, he was moved to an auxiliary courtroom due to disruptive behavior. Judge Jennifer Dorow said Brooks was “having a stare down with me, it’s very disrespectful. He pounded his fist. Frankly, it’s making me scared,” reported WISN.
The city of Waukesha had always held its Christmas parade before Thanksgiving. But this year the parade will take place on Dec. 4.
“By adjusting the Christmas Parade date, more resources are available for staffing in cases of unplanned emergencies which includes Police and Fire Department resources, hospital staff, and many others,” the city said in a statement.
(ST. LOUIS) — St. Louis, Missouri, is in mourning after student Alexzandria Bell and teacher Jean Kuczka were gunned down at the Central Visual and Performing Arts High School on Monday.
Several others were injured in the shooting, allegedly carried out by a former student.
Here’s what we know about the lives lost:
Jean Kuczka, 61
Jean Kuczka was a beloved physical education teacher and cross-country coach.
She was also a wife, mom of five and grandmother of seven.
She loved to bike ride and participated each year in a ride that raises money for juvenile diabetes, in honor of her son who has the disease, according to her school biography.
Her bio says she loves “guiding students to make wise decisions.”
“My mom was my best friend,” her daughter, Abbey Kuczka, told ABC News.
“I think we’re all still in shock,” she said, adding, “I think it brings peace of mind hearing all of these stories from her students, and to know how much she was loved.”
Alexzandria Bell, 15
Alexzandria Bell was a sophomore who loved to dance and planned to start culinary school while still in high school, her father, Andre Bell, told ABC Los Angeles station KABC-TV.
“She put a lot of thought into her plan, so I was behind her,” he said.
The teen, bright and charismatic, was a dance major who had also attended a performing arts middle school, Principal Kacy Seals-Shahid told the St. Louis Post Dispatch.
(NEW YORK) — As the midterm elections approach, sky-high prices for essentials like gas and groceries continue to weigh on U.S. consumers. The price of eggs stands about 30% higher than it did a year ago, while the cost at the pump has spiked 11% over that same period.
In turn, polls show economic concerns remain top of mind for voters, who on this issue tend to distrust the Democratic Party, which has held the White House and Congress as inflation has spiked.
The share of likely voters who say economic issues are the most important concerns facing America stands at 44%, a jump from 36% who said so in July, according to a New York Times/Siena poll released last week. Those economy-focused voters overwhelmingly preferred Republicans, by more than a two-to-one margin, the poll said.
In a similar poll, released by NBC News last month, voters favored Republicans by nearly 20 percentage points on the issue of the economy.
While eye-popping price hikes appear a key driver behind voter preferences for Republicans, the party’s proposals for how to address the rising costs have garnered less attention.
Republican policy ideas for attacking inflation — such as a spending cut and an increase of U.S. oil output — could help reduce inflation, but face difficulty doing so in the short term, economists told ABC News. In some cases, the proposals do not differ significantly from solutions put forward by Democrats, the economists added.
The Federal Reserve, the economists said, plays a more immediate role than Congress in addressing inflation. They also noted that price hikes have pummeled countries across the world, even as they have pursued different policy measures.
Here’s what Republicans say they will do to address inflation, and how economists assess the proposals:
Slash spending
On the campaign trail, many Republican candidates have criticized President Joe Biden and Congressional Democrats for expansive spending, which Republicans say directly led to the spike in prices. Specifically, the Democrats have faced criticism for the American Rescue Plan, a $1.9 trillion economic stimulus measure signed into law by Biden in March 2021 in response to the pandemic.
While the Biden measure comprised a major spending package, former President Donald Trump backed even greater coronavirus-related spending, signing into law a package in December 2020 worth $2.3 trillion.
Pandemic-era spending likely did contribute to the current price spike, juicing demand for goods and services while the country faced a shortage of supply, economists said. A spending cut could alleviate some of the pressure on prices and help ensure that it doesn’t get worse, they added.
Democratic leaders have warned that Republican spending cuts could shrink social welfare programs like Medicare and Social Security, which Biden has vowed to preserve.
Maya MacGuineas, the president of the nonprofit Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said the government’s borrowing to pay for the spending increase made up the key driver of inflation.
“We’re spending so much and not paying for it — that additional money in the economy has driven inflation,” she said. “Cutting spending is a very desirable way to improve the inflation government that we’re currently in.”
While the Republican Party traditionally touts fiscal responsibility, its recent record on the issue belies that reputation, economists said.
The federal debt grew by almost $7.8 trillion over the course of the Trump administration, the third-largest increase, relative to the size of the economy, of any U.S. presidential administration, according to a calculation by Eugene Steuerle, co-founder of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, ProPublica reported.
As of last month, Biden had added $4.8 trillion to the federal debt, which outpaces the $2.5 trillion that Trump had incurred at this point in his term, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Ease supply chain bottleneck
In addition to federal spending that has bolstered consumer demand, Republican candidates have targeted a supply chain bottleneck that has curtailed supply.
During the pandemic, COVID-related bottlenecks slowed delivery times and infection fears kept workers on the sidelines, leading to a shortage of goods and workers.
Commitment to America, a plan put forward by Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, laments the “broken supply chain that has increased costs and left store shelves empty.” The plan vows to fix the supply chain issues, including a transfer of additional productive capacity to the U.S. in order to alleviate reliance on China.
The supply chain bottleneck has improved since the height of the pandemic, but remains a driver of high costs, economists said.
Efforts to ease the supply chain blockage and bring more production to the U.S. — which have drawn support from Democrats and Republicans alike — could help lower prices, though in the short term progress on the issue will depend in part on decisions made in other countries, the economists added.
Giacomo Santangelo, an economist at Fordham University, compared the supply chain bottleneck to an air bubble that blocks water from flowing through a pipe. Initially, the blockage stood close to the source of goods, effectively halting the freight ships that transport products, the port workers and truckers who deliver them, and the retail stores that sell them.
Now, that air bubble has moved closer to the mouth of the pipe, as shipping wait times have decreased and retail stores have reopened, Santangelo added.
But ongoing coronavirus-related shutdowns in China remain a key sticking point for the supply chain, spurring bipartisan calls for more production on U.S. soil, the economists said. The CHIPS and Science Act, a measure supported by members of both parties and signed by Biden in August, provides funding for domestic semiconductor manufacturing.
Additional measures pushed by a Republican Congress could help alleviate inflation in the long term, but will not address the role that supply chain bottlenecks in China have played in elevating current prices, John Horn, a professor of practice in economics at Washington University in St. Louis, told ABC News.
“Those changes take a long time to put in place,” Horn said. “To change China’s COVID policy to ramp up production in China — a Republican Congress won’t help with that.”
“A lot of these supply chain bottlenecks elsewhere in the world won’t be able to be affected by Congress,” he added.
Expand U.S. oil and gas production
A major source of frustration over inflation centers on gas prices, which crunch budgets and appear on roadside signs nationwide.
The high prices are due to a shortage of crude oil supply amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as well as a cut in production imposed by an alliance of oil-producing countries called OPEC+. Meanwhile, a longstanding oil supply shortage endures from a pandemic-induced production slowdown that hasn’t caught up with a bounce back in demand.
For context, the world consumed nearly 100 million barrels of oil each day in August, the most recent month on record, according to the EIA.
The U.S. is set to produce an average of 11.8 million barrels oil per day in 2022, which stands 500,000 barrels short of a record set in 2019, EIA data showed.
“We can attempt to influence gas prices, but gas prices are determined by global markets, which are affected by geopolitical changes,” Santangelo said.
(WASHINGTON) — As Democrats and Republicans wage electoral war for control of Congress and 36 governors’ mansions as well as victory in numerous state and local races, voter ticket-splitting — a trend operatives thought to be nearing its political death or to already be buried — is reemerging in polls as a potential curveball in close races.
In at least 10 states hosting Senate and gubernatorial contests, surveys have for several weeks indicated a sliver of voters bucking the growing trend of party-line ballots. That could prove decisive in narrow elections to determine control in Washington next year and to choose state leaders who’ll shape policy on abortion access, voting rights and more.
Analyses from the Pew Research Center and others had suggested that ticket-splitting, especially in top-ballot races, was on the decline in recent cycles.
“Back in the old days, normally it was 40-40 [percent each] and then the 20% of middle that you’re fighting over. I think that middle area there, where technically you think of ticket-splitters, is substantially less than it used to be. I think it’s probably 92% are pretty predetermined, and then you have probably that 6%, 8%,” said one Ohio GOP strategist.
But amid a confluence of factors, from massive gobs of money thrown into campaigns to fractured party bases to incumbent advantages to candidate quality and more, strategists from both sides of the aisle are forecasting that more voters this cycle than in previous midterms, including in 2018, will choose a Democrat for one race on their ballot and a Republican for another.
“I think that if we are comparing governors’ races to Senate races or to congressional races, you can expect to see a pretty good amount of ticket-splitting,” said Molly Murphy, a Democratic pollster working on several midterm campaigns.
Murphy believes it’s because people want different things out of different offices: “When it comes to … an executive versus a legislator, voters are able to use more varied criteria.”
One study of decades of voting data by the Brookings Institution showed that the correlation is growing stronger between which parties voters choose in congressional races and in presidential contests — meaning voters usually pick the same party. The percent of ticket-splitting, according to this analysis, began to decline into the single digits in 2012.
Yet if the trend returns in November, matching the expectations from swing state polls — a big if, though experts say it’s possible — it would mark a comeback for what had been a somewhat common practice.
FiveThirtyEight’s polling average shows Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania’s attorney general and the Democratic gubernatorial nominee, leading Republican Doug Mastriano by nearly 9 points. Meanwhile, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, the Democratic Senate candidate, is leading GOP rival Mehmet Oz by less than 3 points.
Georgia features a similar dynamic, where FiveThirty Eight polling averages show GOP Gov. Brian Kemp up over Stacey Abrams by more than 6 points but Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock leading in his reelection bid by 3 points against Republican hopeful Herschel Walker.
In Ohio, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine is coasting in his campaign against Nan Whaley, with a nearly 20-point lead in polling averages, while Republican Senate candidate J.D. Vance is only ahead of Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan by under 2 points.
And in Arizona, GOP firebrand Kari Lake has a slim 1-point edge in the governor’s race against Democratic Secretary of State Katie Hobbs while Sen. Mark Kelly is up by roughly 5 points against the GOP’s Blake Masters.
Ticket-splitting still occurs in modern politics. For instance, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, handily won reelection in 2020 even as Joe Biden romped there. But it is a far cry from the 2000 election cycle, for example, when 10 senators won in states that their parties’ presidential candidates lost.
This year, various themes are at play and none is identical to any other. However, one common thread strategists say is contributing to ticket-splitting is the surge in money being spent on midterm races, leading to heightened awareness of candidates beyond just their party affiliation.
“Voters get to know those candidates and who they are and, therefore, they’re not going to vote party line. They’re gonna vote as to which candidate they prefer,” argues veteran GOP strategist Bob Heckman.
Conversely, however, some Democrats said that in cases of their own ticket-splitting woes — like Whaley lagging Ryan in Ohio — it’s because the entire ticket didn’t fundraise enough to build a profile with voters separate from the party.
“You have Senate races and governors’ races where the Senate race does better than the governor’s race for the Democrats. And what seems to be happening is, overwhelmingly, the governors’ races just don’t raise the same kind of money and they don’t have the same kind of ability to reach voters,” one Democratic strategist said.
“And that disparity means that in Senate races, you can inspire people at the local level all over the country to give $20, $30 to your campaign. But it’s very hard to persuade someone in New York that what happens in the Oregon governor’s race matters to them,” this person added.
The midterms are also taking place as both parties’ bases continue to transform and, especially among Republicans, fracture further.
Democrats’ years-long divide between moderates and progressives has played out for several cycles. Now, GOP politicians in swing states are choosing how to angle their appeals — either to Donald Trump-aligned voters or to more centrist suburbanites who used to make up the GOP’s core and who have been key in some past races.
In several states, Republicans like DeWine, Kemp and Oz, whose brands are somewhat removed from the former president, are outpacing their more populist counterparts. And while some MAGA candidates like Lake are still polling strongly, surveys indicate the need for a broad appeal in a statewide race.
“What you’re looking at as far as tickets-splitters, [they] are probably going to come from the suburbs … those folks that voted Republican but weren’t all that keen on Trump,” one Ohio GOP strategist said. “That’s where you see DeWine with anywhere from a 15-19-point lead right now, and then the race for the U.S. Senate is much smaller.”
“I think there will be a lot more Shapiro-Oz voters than there will be Mastriano-Fetterman voters. And there’s starting to be a little bit more of a separation between Mastriano and Oz. I think they’ll do pretty much the same with Republicans, maybe Mastriano a little bit better than Oz. But then I think among independents and Democrats, you’ll see Oz doing better than Mastriano,” a Pennsylvania Republican strategist added.
Beyond ticket-splitting, the diverging party bases could also lead to what Jarrod Loadholt, a partner in the Ice Miller law firm’s public affairs branch who lives in Georgia, dubbed “ticket sitting.”
“I feel like there are very strong views of Brian Kemp in certain corners of the state, just like I think there are very strong views of Stacey Abrams. There are strong views of Herschel Walker, but I think there are strong views on both sides such that Republicans may skip that race altogether, and they just vote for Brian Kemp,” Loadholt, who supports Warnock and Abrams, told ABC News.
“I do think the combination of ticket-splitters and ‘ticket sitters’ will play a role in the ultimate outcome of this race, absolutely. And yes, there is a Warnock-Kemp voter,” he said.
Election cycle fundamentals are also certainly influencing the potential for ticket-splitting, strategists insist.
Incumbents often have an advantage owing to higher name identification, more well-known records and beefier war chests that make it easier to reach voters — a dynamic that could help explain polling leads for both Kemp and Warnock. And, some of the operatives note, female candidates often get examined under a different set of standards than their male counterparts, which could be hurting Abrams.
And while subjective opinions like on “candidate quality” are often made in the eye of the beholder, such judgements are still set to play a role — however unquantifiable — in November, the race experts said.
“I think ultimately there are gonna be some people who voted for Trump in ’16 and ’20 and they’ll go vote for Warnock because they may like him for X number of reasons around insulin, like he’s made a big deal about [the cost of] insulin at rural hospitals. But they may be Trump people, so they’re not Kemp people,” said Loadholt.
“Voters themselves can be far more candidate-driven and less ‘ideological’ than hardcore observers of politics and hardcore ideological folks,” he said. “There are lots of voters who are ‘feel voters,’ they vote based on what they feel.”
(NEW YORK) — When Adidas announced on Tuesday that it had terminated its relationship with Ye, the rapper formerly known as Kanye West, the company put a price tag on how much the move would cost: Up to $246 million in profits this year.
Yeezy, a footwear and apparel partnership between Ye and Adidas that launched in 2015, will end its business immediately over hateful speech and actions undertaken by the rapper, Adidas said in a statement on Tuesday. The company will stop production of all Adidas Yeezy products and halt payments to Ye, the statement added.
The costs could reach in the hundreds of millions in part because Adidas could pull Yeezy products from shelves in brick-and-mortar stores and online, losing revenue from potential sales, apparel industry experts told ABC News.
Moreover, the severing of ties coincides with the holiday season, when companies carry a large amount of inventory in anticipation of busy end-of-year traffic, Bob Antoshak, a consultant and 30-year industry veteran, told ABC News.
“If they pull products from shelves, they’ll have a lot more product to write off than they would for other quarters,” he said “If it was the first quarter of next year, it wouldn’t be anywhere near that.”
Adidas faced increasing pressure to cut ties with Ye in recent weeks after the rapper made antisemitic comments on Twitter, podcasts and interviews.
Earlier this month, Ye also stoked controversy after appearing at a surprise show in Paris wearing a T-shirt bearing the phrase “White Lives Matter,” which the Anti-Defamation League has labeled as hate speech and has been promoted by white supremacist groups.
“Adidas does not tolerate antisemitism and any other sort of hate speech,” the company said in a press release. “Ye’s recent comments and actions have been unacceptable, hateful and dangerous, and they violate the company’s values of diversity and inclusion, mutual respect and fairness.”
The company declined to respond to ABC News’ request for more details about costs incurred by the business split.
Clothing retailer Gap, which also retained a partnership with Yeezy, ended that arrangement in September, the company said in a statement on Tuesday, adding that it is taking immediate steps to remove Yeezy Gap products from its stores.
“Antisemitism, racism and hate in any form are inexcusable and not tolerated in accordance with our values,” Gap said in the statement.
Last year, Yeezy was valued at between $3.2 billion and $4.7 billion by Switzerland-based investment bank UBS, Bloomberg reported.
The Yeezy line accounts for roughly $1 billion to $2 billion in annual sales for Adidas, according to Evercore ISI analyst Omar Saad.
The financial losses incurred by Adidas also owe to ongoing projects that must be scrapped, which likely include arrangements already established with manufacturers, Saheli Goswami, a professor of textiles, fashion merchandising and design at Rhode Island University, told ABC News.
“If Adidas was working with a supplier to get products developed for next season, now that existing business tie needs to be stopped,” she said. “The question becomes: Who will bear the cost?”
Despite the financial hit incurred by a potential loss of merchandise, Adidas minimized the damage to its reputation by severing ties with Ye, said Antoshak, the industry consultant.
“From the business perspective, the longer the relationship continued — and it was a toxic relationship — it would end up costing the company more,” he said.
Adidas, a German company, faced added scrutiny because of heightened concern over antisemitism in its home country, Goswami said. In Germany, individuals who make antisemitic comments online can face prosecution.
Goswami applauded the move by Adidas but said the company shouldn’t expect consumers to grant the decision similar acclaim.
“You don’t get a medal for doing the right thing but you can be harshly criticized if you don’t,” she said. “It matters to your future business relationship around how consumers perceive you.”
(WASHINGTON) — While a federal appeals court decision Friday opened the door to a potential setback for President Joe Biden’s student debt relief program, legal experts and advocates for loan forgiveness tell ABC News they’re not overly concerned, urging people to keep applying.
But borrowers are worried, regardless.
A stay granted by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals put a temporary pause on discharging loan relief, expected to begin as soon as this week, until judges review a challenge by six GOP-led states to stop the program.
Another ruling, after more detailed hearings, expected later this week, could bring the program to a longer halt and be a big political loss for Biden just before the midterm elections. He’s campaigned on his plan that calls for between $10,000 and $20,000 in debt forgiveness for Americans who make below $125,000 a year, or $250,000 as a married couple.
Remaining optimistic, advocates for student debt relief point to other legal challenges thrown out by the courts — including that a lower court had dismissed this particular lawsuit just before the appeals court issued the temporary stay.
“The most important thing is that people apply for debt relief. Nothing has changed,” Mike Pierce, executive director and co-founder of the Student Borrower Protection Center, told ABC News.
“The fact that the application is open, it is simple, it works, it is easy, and the administration is putting the building blocks in place to be able to press the button and cancel everybody’s debts as soon as they’re able to do so? That was true a week ago. That was true on Friday, and that is true today,” he said.
And while Pierce and others are pushing people to apply because there’s a fast-approaching deadline of Dec. 31 when the current payment pause ends, it’s also a strategy: Advocates hope that the more people who display an interest in the program, the harder it will be for courts to take it away.
“I think it’s very important for people to take all the steps they’re able to because it does show that people are starting to rely on these promises that the president has made to be able to cancel their debts,” Pierce said.
John Brooks, a law professor at Fordham University who focuses on federal fiscal policy, called that more of a political strategy than a legal one, but said it could potentially sway judges.
Brooks predicts the appeals court will focus on whether the GOP-led states have legal standing to claim the harm they allege they’d suffer — and said the Republican argument on that point is weak.
Based on that, he said, he thinks the Friday stay was only a temporary win and downplays the possibility the appeals court will deal the Biden administration a blow.
Put simply, for opponents of the debt relief program, the stay was “the biggest win so far — but it’s still not much of a win,” Brooks said.
The Biden administration, for its part, is pushing full speed ahead. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre wouldn’t entertain the idea that the administration might not be able to deliver on this promise, pushed by ABC News in a press briefing.
“It’s not going to stop our message. We know that there are opponents out there who don’t want us to help middle-class Americans. But it’s not going to stop us,” Jean-Pierre said.
That’s not to say there haven’t already been political implications, though.
The legal back-and-forth has made the process confusing and emotionally draining for hopeful borrowers who want their debt relieved, like Cleopatra Melton, a borrower with roughly $50,000 in student loan debt.
Melton could see 40% of that debt wiped out by the program, which cancels up to $20,000 in additional loan forgiveness for those who are also Pell Grant recipients. (Pell Grants themselves usually do not have to be repaid.)
But the stay imposed by the appeals court has poured cold water on her optimism.
“This was just too good to be true because it never has been done,” she told ABC News.
“As long as that lawsuit was out there, I didn’t want to get too celebratory about it. You know what I mean? So, I’m extremely worried that it’s not going to go through,” she said.
And though the current challenge was brought by Republicans, it still looks like a setback to Melton — who said it has political ramifications for Biden.
Melton said she voted for him in 2020 because of his campaign promise of $10,000 in student loan forgiveness for American borrowers, she said. Now, she sees this as yet another example of people of color — who make up a large percentage of borrowers — being left behind.
“I feel like no one is worthy of my vote. Honestly speaking, everyone makes all these campaign promises to the Black and the brown and I don’t feel like anyone has ever really did anything for me,” Melton said.
“I felt like finally someone’s doing something that will directly affect me and my children with their campaigning, with the laws, with the rules. And now for this to be blocked there’s just — it’s more of the same, to me,” she said.
Others, like Brea Govan, 29, feel more hopeful that the court will throw out the lawsuit, as other courts have done over the last few weeks.
Govan, who qualifies for $10,000 in debt relief, recently applied online so her remaining debt of $9,400 would be wiped completely.
“I wish that they wouldn’t block it,” Govan told ABC News.
“Twenty-two million people have already applied to this and that’s almost half of who needs the support. That says a lot,” she said.
Of course, even if the Biden administration is victorious, the lawsuit could also slow down the debt relief process, since the administration was expected to start doing so this week but has been put on pause.
That’s led advocates to challenge the Biden administration to be open to the idea of extending the moratorium on loan payments once more, past Jan. 1, in order to avoid a messy situation where people need to start making payments on debts again even though their debts should be forgiven.
On Monday, Jean-Pierre wouldn’t say whether that’s on the table, instead arguing that the Biden administration could still stay on schedule despite the current lawsuit.
(HARRISBURG, Pa.) — The highly anticipated Pennsylvania Senate debate on Tuesday night was a fast-paced affair focused on policy questions interspersed with — and sometimes interrupted by — the candidates’ attacks, which have defined a key race for who controls Congress’ evenly split upper chamber.
The faceoff also put Democratic Lt. Gov. John Fetterman’s stroke symptoms back in the spotlight as well as what he said was his resilience and recovery from, as he put it, a notable but not disqualifying challenge.
Many eyes were on Fetterman’s health as he took the stage. He spoke haltingly and sometimes inconsistently throughout the debate, even more so than he has at campaign events since returning to the trail in August, three months after his stroke. At times he seemed to struggle to complete his answers.
Two monitors were hung above the heads of the moderators to transcribe both the questions and Republican Mehmet Oz’s answers in real time as an aid for Fetterman’s auditory processing issues, which outside neurologists have said are no indication of cognitive issues for stroke survivors.
Fetterman has worked with a speech therapist; his doctor said last week he was ready for “full duty” in office, though he has declined to release his medical records.
Several times on Tuesday, but not often, there was a pause before Fetterman answered a question as he read the transcription.
Soon after the debate began, he invoked his stroke and the sometimes-mocking criticism he has faced because of it from his rival’s campaign team.
“Let’s talk about the elephant in the room: I had a stroke. He’s never let me forget that,” Fetterman said in his opening remarks, teeing up a line he would repeat over the course of the hour. “It knocked me down, but I’m going to keep coming back up.”
Oz, a former surgeon and popular TV host who described himself as “a living embodiment of the American dream,” did not mention his opponent’s health on stage.
Both candidates were forced to answer for inconsistent views on policies: For example, each was presented with past comments on fracking that contradicted what they’ve said on the issue on the trail.
“I strongly support fracking,” said Oz when asked about comments he made in 2014 arguing against the industry, which employs thousands of Pennsylvanians but draws scrutiny over its environmental effects.
Fetterman, too, was asked by moderators to square his recent public support for fracking with comments he made in 2018 sharply criticizing it.
“I’ve always supported fracking,” he insisted.
Of the discrepancy, Fetterman said awkwardly: “I do support fracking … I do support fracking.”
He and Oz also tried to take advantage when asked about the issues on which they have hinged their candidacies.
“I want to look into the face of every woman in Pennsylvania,” said Fetterman when the debate shifted to abortion access.
“If you believe that the choice of your reproductive freedom belongs to Dr. Oz, then you have a choice,” Fetterman said, contrasting his views with his opponent, who opposes abortion except in cases of rape, incest or the mother’s health and has said he wants it restricted but not criminalized.
“Roe v. Wade, for me, should be the law,” Fetterman added, referring to the national guarantee to abortion rights that was overturned by the Supreme Court this summer.
Fetterman, however, dodged questions on whether he would support any restrictions on abortion, including in later trimesters.
The moderators continually followed up with Oz on whether he would support South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham’s proposal to institute a nationwide ban on abortion, with limited exceptions, after 15 weeks.
Oz, as he has done with reporters, declined to answer yes or no, instead saying he was against federal control of the issue and preferred it be left up to the states — to women, their doctors and local politicians, he said.
“Any bill that violates what I said, which is the federal government interfering with a state rule on abortion, I would vote against,” Oz eventually acknowledged.
On crime, meanwhile — an issue he has leveraged as he has closed his yawning polling gap — Oz touted his endorsements by multiple police unions in the state while Fetterman defended himself against soft-on-crime allegations. He claimed Oz, who said he had a lax record granting parole to convicts, had “no experience” with public safety.
Fetterman said that as a mayor of Braddock, Pennsylvania, he had successfully worked to curb gun violence and had a track record of addressing such problems.
“We should be talking about crime and inflation — the issues that are hurting Pennsylvanians,” said Oz, who at multiple points in the debate touted a plan to “unleash” the state’s energy industry to, as he envisioned, raise wages, bolster businesses and help lower high prices.
Oz cited one example of a woman who could no longer afford her groceries given the rising cost of living — a dismaying problem, he said.
Fetterman, he said, was a “radical” who wouldn’t be budget conscious and would raise taxes. On the other hand, he would promote “balance” in Washington.
“I’m a surgeon, not a politician. We take big problems, we focus on them and we fix them,” Oz said late into the debate. “And we do it by uniting, by coming together — not dividing — and by doing that, we get ahead.”
Fetterman said Oz — whom he frequently tried to paint as a liar — wouldn’t have voted for Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act in Congress, which allows Medicare to negotiate some prescription drug prices, and he invoked Oz’s wealth and relative lack of roots in Pennsylvania. He repeatedly claimed Oz wanted to cut Social Security and Medicare, which Oz said was a baseless allegation. Oz said one of Fetterman’s ads had been pulled for being “dishonest.”
“He has 10 gigantic mansions,” Fetterman said. “We must push back against corporate greed. We must also make sure that we’re also pushing back against price gouging.”
When asked to explain his plan to attack price-gouging corporations, Fetterman did not answer, speaking more broadly about how “inflation is hurting Americans” and how Oz “has never been able to stand up for working families all across America.”
Elsewhere, Fetterman said he supported a law to raise the state minimum wage to $15 an hour, more than double its current rate. Oz said he wanted the minimum wage even higher than that but driven by market forces, not a law, via his plan for the state’s energy companies.
The two candidates split on the value of federal student loan forgiveness — which Fetterman supports — while Oz argued he had a more defined plan for lowering the price of college including offering online instruction.
The campaigns react post-debate
Tuesday was the only event Fetterman agreed to after Oz’s entreaties and criticism — “this is the only debate I could get you to come to talk to me on,” Oz said on stage — and ahead of it, Fetterman’s campaign attempted to lower expectations for his performance, with two top aides telling reporters in a memo on Monday that debating “isn’t John’s format” and citing Oz’s years on television.
In the minutes right after the faceoff ended Tuesday night, his campaign team mobilized to — in their words — tout how he had performed.
“We are thrilled with John’s performance,” spokesman Joe Calvello told reporters.
The campaign announced late Tuesday that it planned to run an ad targeting Oz for one of his answers on abortion access, in which he said policy should be democratically decided by states but more specifically involve “a woman, a doctor and local political leaders.”
The Oz camp, meanwhile, declared victory.
“We saw tonight a debate that was a complete disaster for John Fetterman,” adviser Barney Keller told reporters. “He wasn’t able to defend any of his radical positions, and it really showed.”
Both candidates will be back on the stump Wednesday, with Election Day in less than two weeks and early voting well underway.
Heading into Tuesday, Polls had narrowed considerably, with FiveThirtyEight’s average now showing Fetterman ahead by less than 3 points, down from nearly 11 points six weeks ago.
(NEW YORK) — A whopping $700 million is up for grabs in the next Powerball drawing on Wednesday night, lottery officials said.
The estimated jackpot increased from $680 million after no ticket matched all six numbers drawn on Monday night, the 35th consecutive drawing. Wednesday’s jackpot is Powerball’s largest prize so far this year, the fifth-largest in the American lottery game’s 30-year history and the eighth-largest U.S. lottery jackpot ever, according to a press release from Powerball.
If a player wins Wednesday’s grand prize, it will be the sixth Powerball jackpot won this year. Jackpot winners can either take the money as an immediate cash lump sum or in 30 annual payments over 29 years. The cash value of Wednesday’s $700 million jackpot is $335.7 million, Powerball said.
Tickets cost $2 and are sold in 45 U.S. states as well as Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. More than half of all proceeds remain in the jurisdiction where the ticket was purchased, according to Powerball.
The jackpot grows based on game sales and interest rates. But the odds of winning the big prize stays the same — 1 in 292.2 million, Powerball said.
Powerball drawings are broadcast live every Monday, Wednesday and Saturday at 10:59 p.m. ET from the Florida Lottery draw studio in Tallahassee. The drawings are also live streamed online at Powerball.com.
