(WASHINGTON) — Republican Rep. James Comer, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said Friday he is launching an investigation into what he says is Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s “extensive engagement with China.”
The probe into Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate is a sign of what the House Republican majority will focus its attention on regarding the new Democratic presidential ticket in the months leading up to Election Day.
Walz was a former public school teacher and served in the Army National Guard before being elected to Congress in 2005 and later becoming Minnesota’s governor.
Comer, in his announcement on Friday, cited recent articles from the New York Post and Newsweek examining ties between Walz and China — including comments he made about visiting the nation 30 times, some of which were teaching trips, and a 2016 interview where he said he didn’t “fall into the category that China necessarily needs to be an adversarial relationship.”
“The CCP has sought to destroy the United States through coordinated influence and infiltration campaigns that target every aspect of American life, including our own elected officials,” Comer wrote.
“Walz’s connections to China raise questions about possible CCP [Chinese Communist Party] influence in his decision-making as governor — and should he be elected, as vice president,” he said.
A Walz spokesman shot back.
“Throughout his career, Governor Walz has stood up to the CCP, fought for human rights rights and democracy, and always put American jobs and manufacturing first. Republicans are twisting basic facts and desperately lying to distract from the Trump-Vance agenda: praising dictators, and sending American jobs to China. Vice President Harris and Governor Walz will ensure we win the competition with China, and will always stand up for our values and interests in the face of China’s threats,” said Teddy Tschann, a spokesperson for Walz.
Comer sent a letter to FBI director Christopher Wray requesting documents and information no later than Aug. 30.
A spokeswoman for Democrats on the Oversight committee also criticized Comer, calling his action “nothing more than a political stunt.”
“For the umpteenth time, Chairman Comer shows the American people that his only real priority in Congress is doing Donald Trump’s bidding. Rather than tackling issues that matter to Americans—like protecting our children from the epidemic of gun violence, holding the perpetrators of the climate crisis accountable, or even investigating Donald Trump for his own record of selling out the White House to foreign autocrats and turning the presidency into a corrupt money-making enterprise — Chairman Comer is doing his part to ensure that the 118th Congress will go down as the least productive in history,” the spokesperson said.
Previously, Comer took the reins of House Republicans’ impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. The probe stalled as lawmakers failed to substantiate their allegations that Biden used his office to participate in and profit from his family’s foreign business dealings — which Biden adamantly denied.
As a congressman, Walz served on Congressional-Executive Commission on China, which was responsible for monitoring whether acts of the People’s Republic of China violated human rights.
Walz, in the 2016 interview that’s been a focus of recent news coverage, said the commission came to be after the U.S. normalized trade relations with China to “try to keep a focus that we’ll trade with China but they have to play by the rules both from an environmental, fair trade but also human rights perspective.”
The FBI did not immediately respond to an ABC News request for comment on Comer’s request.
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Friday signed a proclamation establishing the Springfield 1908 Race Riot Monument, located on the site of a deadly attack on a Black community by a white mob 116 years ago.
By establishing the monument, the White House said in a statement, the president is “recognizing the significance of these events and the broader history of Black community resilience in the face of violent oppression.”
Biden was joined by civil rights leaders, community members and elected officials in the Oval Office.
“What I’m excited about, beyond the specifics of this, we’re rewriting history,” Biden said. “So our children, our grandchildren – everybody understands what happened, and what can still happen.”
Just before signing the proclamation, he explained how “a mob not far from Lincoln’s home unleashed a race riot in Springfield.”
Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin elaborated on what he called the “national significance” of the attack’s ties to Abraham Lincoln.
“It was the connection with Lincoln that really drove home the point that racism has to end in America,” he said at the signing ceremony. “And we’re still fighting that battle now.”
The monument will protect 1.57 acres of federal land in Springfield, Illinois, and will include the foundations of five houses that were destroyed in the violence.
“I know this may not seem significant to you, to most Americans, but it’s important. It’s important, important, important,” Biden said.
The White House added that this incident was representative of the “racism, intimidation, and violence that Black Americans experienced across the country.”
Biden emphasized the need for generations of Americans to understand such history. “As a matter of fact something happened here similar, recently,” he said.
He also noted how the horrific attack “sparked the creation of the NAACP,” which he views as “one of the most important organizations” in America.
“I’m so proud that Springfield, Illinois, is home to the beginning of the NAACP,” Illinois Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth added. “Good things can come out of bad things, as long as you don’t forget what happened.”
Lawmakers have been calling on Biden to use his authority under the Antiquities Act to designate the site as a national monument.
Although legislation had been introduced seeking to advance this goal, Duckworth explained how “it’s been stuck in the House.”
As a result, they believed executive action was the “best chance to protect this area and mark this part of our history.”
This effort marks the eighth addition to the national park system during the Biden-Harris administration.
(PHILIDELPHIA) — The presidential debate set to be held by ABC News will take place at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, the network announced on Friday.
Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump had previously committed to attending.
The Sept. 10 debate will be moderated by “World News Tonight” anchor and managing editor David Muir and ABC News Live “Prime” anchor Linsey Davis.
It will be produced in conjunction with ABC station WPVI-TV/6abc, and will air live at 9 p.m. ET on the network and on the ABC News Live 24/7 streaming network, Disney+, and Hulu.
ABC News will also air a pre-debate special, “Race for the White House,” at 8 p.m. ET, anchored by chief global affairs correspondent and “This Week” co-anchor Martha Raddatz, chief Washington correspondent and “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl, chief White House correspondent Mary Bruce and senior congressional correspondent Rachel Scott.
As previously announced by ABC News, to formally qualify, presidential candidates will need to hit various qualification requirements, including in polling thresholds and in appearing on enough state ballots to theoretically be able to get a majority (270) of electoral votes in the presidential election.
The National Constitution Center, which hosts exhibits and events about the U.S. Constitution and about civic engagement, is right by Philadelphia’s Independence Hall, where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were both signed.
ABC News hosted town halls at the National Constitution Center with then-candidate President Joe Biden and then-incumbent President Donald Trump in 2020.
Republican presidential candidate, former U.S. President Donald Trump holds a fighting anti-semitism event with Miriam Adelson at the Trump National Golf Club Bedminster on August 15, 2024 in Bedminster, New Jersey. Trump’s campaign leaders announced they were expanding his staff as the reelection campaign heads into its final few months. (Photo by Adam Gray/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump sparked criticism when he said the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian award, is “much better” than the Medal of Honor, the nation’s highest military honor, because soldiers are in “bad shape” or dead when they receive it – comments the former president’s campaign suggested were misinterpreted.
During an event at his Bedminster, NJ estate Thursday night, which was about antisemitism, Trump called attention to a major donor, Miriam Adelson – the widow of his friend and business mogul Sheldon Adelson – upon whom he bestowed the Medal of Freedom in 2018.
“Sheldon and Miriam were best friends together, and I was in their group. And we just had always a great relationship, known her for a long time,” Trump said. “Sheldon was one of the greatest businessmen in the world, and she’s turning out to be one of the greatest businesswomen of the world.”
Trump then recalled the moment Miriam Adelson received the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
“But I really, I watched Sheldon sitting so proud in the White House when we gave Miriam the Presidential Medal of Freedom,” he said. “That’s the highest award you can get as a civilian. It’s the equivalent of the Congressional Medal of Honor, but civilian version, it’s actually much better, because everyone gets the Congressional Medal of Honor, they’re soldiers. They’re either in very bad shape because they’ve been hit so many times by bullets, or they’re dead. She gets it and she’s healthy, beautiful woman.”
Miriam Adelson was awarded the Medal of Freedom as a “committed doctor, philanthropist, and humanitarian.” “As a committed member of the American Jewish community, she has supported Jewish schools, Holocaust memorial organizations, Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, and Birthright Israel, among other causes,” the Trump White House wrote in part.
The Kamala Harris campaign pounced on Trump’s words, saying he “knows nothing about service to anyone or anything but himself.”
And progressive veterans group VoteVets said in a statement: “It isn’t just that Donald Trump doesn’t respect Veterans and their sacrifice. It’s that Donald Trump hates Veterans and their sacrifice, because he looks so small in comparison to them.”
In a statement, the Trump campaign said the former president was referring to the experience of giving the award, not denigrating the Medal of Honor or the actions of servicemembers.
“President Trump was simply saying how it can be an emotionally difficult experience to give the Congressional Medal of Honor to veterans who have been wounded or tragically killed defending our country, as he proudly did when he was Commander in Chief,” said campaign spokesperson Brian Hughes.
Trump, who holds himself up as a champion of the military and regularly discusses his record of rebuilding the military while in office, has drawn fire for swipes at servicemembers.
One of the most notable examples was when he criticized another Republican, John McCain — the late Arizona senator and former presidential candidate — who spent five years as a POW during the Vietnam War, casting doubt on his status as a war hero.
“I like people who weren’t captured,” Trump said in 2015. At the time, the remarks set off a firestorm, including from members of the Republican party, who called for him to drop out of the 2016 presidential race.
More recently, Trump came under scrutiny when The Atlantic reported in 2020 that he had called those who died in war “suckers” and “losers.” Trump has vehemently denied the reported remarks, which President Biden repeated on the campaign trail before he dropped out of the race. ABC News has not independently confirmed the story.
During the Bedminster event, Trump highlighted the importance of the Jewish vote, while also making false claims about various Democrats, including Harris.
“We’re here tonight because we believe that this vicious outbreak of militant and antisemitism is very militant. Must be given no quarter, no safe harbor, no place in a civilized society. We must reject it in our schools, reject it in our foreign policy, reject it in our immigration system and reject it at the ballot box,” Trump told the crowd.
Trump then repeated a dual loyalty trope – that itself has been criticized as antisemitic – that American Jews owe a dual loyalty to Israel or having two separate interests that conflict, telling the audience, “Jewish people have to not vote by habit. You vote by habit for Democrats, and the Democrats are really against you.”
Trump continued to make similar comments, suggesting that Jewish people need to “stop” voting for Democrats. “You have to be smart,” Trump said, before discussing his list of accomplishments such as the Abraham Accords and withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal.
(MADISON, WI) — A Democratic Party staffer has filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Elections Commission saying that the Green Party, which had achieved ballot access in the key battleground state this past year, should not be on the ballot.
In the complaint, Democratic National Committee Deputy Operations Director in Wisconsin David Strange alleges that the Green Party does not have anyone who would be allowed by state law to be a nominator for the Green Party’s presidential electors — meaning they cannot give a valid list of presidential electors, voiding their eligibility on the ticket.
It could make a difference if the Green Party can’t appear on the ballot in Wisconsin, a crucial battleground state that both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump will look to win in November. Jill Stein is expected to become the party’s formal nominee at its virtual convention, which began Thursday, and will be announcing her running mate on Friday.
In the complaint, Strange writes that Wisconsin law requires the people nominating electors to be the political party’s state legislative candidates or legislators of the party. There are no Green Party legislators in Wisconsin.
“The August 13, 2024 primary was the last opportunity for [Wisconsin Green Party] to nominate a candidate for Wisconsin Senate or Assembly before the 2024 general election. But, WGP failed to nominate any candidates for Wisconsin Senate or Assembly, and a sufficient number of electors did not nominate a candidate by writing in any WGP candidate for Wisconsin Senate or Assembly,” Strange wrote in the complaint.
The complaint was first reported by the Associated Press and was provided to ABC News by the DNC. It has also since been posted on the Wisconsin Elections Commission website, which logs every complaint filed with that body.
“We take the nomination process for President and Vice President very seriously and believe every candidate should follow the rules,” senior adviser to the DNC Adrienne Watson said in a statement to ABC News.
“Because the Wisconsin Green Party hasn’t fielded candidates for legislative or statewide office and doesn’t have any current incumbent legislative or statewide office holders, it cannot nominate candidates and should not be on the ballot in November.”
ABC News reached out to the Wisconsin Elections Commission for more details about its timeline for making a decision about the complaint, but didn’t hear back by the time this story was published.
Jason Call, campaign manager for Stein’s campaign, told ABC News by email, “This is a fishing expedition conjured up by the DNC, and is in line with their statements back in March that they will hire an army of lawyers and infiltrators to find any angle of attack to prevent Green Party ballot access.”
Call said that the campaign “absolutely will be hiring counsel to defend our ballot line in Wisconsin.”
The national Green Party, when contacted for comment, deferred to Stein’s campaign.
The Green Party has ballot access in at least 20 states, according to ABC News’s current reporting, and both the party and Stein herself have been filing to get on the ballot in others.
The DNC, state Democratic parties and Democratic-aligned groups have separately filed various challenges or complaints across the country challenging ballot access petitions from some independent or third-party candidates such as Stein, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Cornel West. The challenges allege either missteps, fraudulent actions or legal reasons that should disqualify those candidates from getting on the ballot.
The campaigns have denied allegations of misconduct and have said they should legally qualify for the ballot.
The Nevada Democratic Party filed a lawsuit in June to the Green Party’s ballot access filing in Nevada, which a judge has since dismissed, the Nevada Independent reported on Monday.
Stein, a physician and environmentalist, has campaigned on climate issues, a “Green New Deal,” and housing and workers’ rights; she has also been sharply critical of President Joe Biden on the Israel-Hamas war.
She has pushed back in the past against claims that her campaign could be seen as a “spoiler” for either major party candidate — allegations she also faced in 2016 during a previous presidential run.
In an interview in June, Stein told ABC News, “Just because the two major parties have thrown workers under the bus; have really made a mess out of our climate; and embroiled us in endless wars that are endangering the whole world … Just because those two parties have basically overseen that process of screwing the American electorate. I don’t think that entitles them to your vote.”
(WASHINGTON) — A highly-anticipated economic agenda to be unveiled by Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday will include a federal ban on price gouging for food and groceries, the Harris campaign announced.
The proposal will be presented to voters alongside other plans to address elevated inflation, such as bolstered antitrust enforcement in the grocery sector and greater latitude to investigate corporate practices, the campaign said in a press release.
A ban on price gouging would in theory disallow food and grocery companies from hiking prices an excessive amount over a set period of time, economists told ABC News. They disagreed, however, on whether the measure could control the rise of food prices or if such an outcome is desirable.
Inflation remains a top issue for voters and a potential vulnerability for Harris, since rapid price increases emerged during the Biden administration. While inflation has fallen dramatically from its peak, consumers still face prices roughly 20% higher than where they stood before Biden took office.
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Harris campaign provided a statement outlining its economic proposals.
“Vice President Harris knows that rising food prices remain a top concern for American families. Many big grocery chains that have seen production costs level off have nevertheless kept prices high and have seen their highest profits in two decades. While some food companies have passed along these savings, others still have not,” the statement said.
Here’s what to know about how this federal ban on price gouging would operate and whether it would be effective:
How would a federal price-gouging ban work?
The Harris campaign said the measure would set “clear rules of the road to make clear that big corporations can’t unfairly exploit consumers to run up excessive corporate profits on food and groceries.”
Details on the policy remain limited, however. Economists told ABC News that the Harris proposal may end up resembling similar bans currently on the books in 37 states. Those bans prohibit companies from exploiting a sudden imbalance between supply and demand by significantly hiking prices.
“The typical example is a natural disaster. If a water company comes and sells water at double, triple or five times the price of what people can get it at five miles away, just to be able to take advantage of the situation – that’s price gouging,” Niko Lusiani, director of the corporate power program at progressive advocacy group Roosevelt Forward, told ABC News.
State bans define “price gouging” in various ways. Some measures establish a subjective set of criteria, such as a sudden and significant spike in prices; while others detail a specific numerical amount of price growth necessary to violate the law, Luis Cabral, a professor of economics at New York University who studies price gouging, told ABC News.
“It’s not easy to measure,” Cabral said, noting that qualitative definitions risk being overly vague while quantitative ones struggle to set the boundaries around what constitutes price gouging.
Many of the state-level bans on this practice set a condition that an emergency is necessary to trigger application of the law. The Harris proposal would likely omit such a stipulation, Lusiani said, since we are years removed from the outbreak of COVID-19.
“It’ll clearly be different because now we’re on the other side of the pandemic,” Lusiani added, but he noted that current price hikes could be viewed as a result of that disruption.
The Harris campaign said it would enforce a ban by slapping offenders with financial penalties.
Most state price-gouging bans punish violators with civil penalties enforced by the state attorney general, while other measures impose criminal penalties, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, a group that tracks state laws.
“Enforcement will be critical,” Lusiani said. “A ban by itself won’t stand on its own legs.”
Would this type of ban help control inflation?
Economists disagreed sharply about whether a federal price-gouging ban would help control price increases and, if so, to what extent that outcome would benefit the economy.
The stark divide owed in part to a difference of opinion about the role of corporate profiteering in the pandemic-era bout of inflation, as well as a clash over the effectiveness of government intervention in addressing it.
Experts who faulted corporate price gouging for a portion of the price increases said it arose from market concentration that allowed a handful of dominant companies in a given industry, including the food and grocery sector, to raise prices without fear of competitors undercutting them with lower-priced alternatives.
Grocery retailer profit margins surged in 2021 and rose even higher two years later, even after price increases had begun to cool, a Federal Trade Commission study in March showed.
A price-gouging ban would help police corporations that otherwise would be tempted to leverage their market power by excessively raising prices, the experts said.
“Large, incumbent corporations that control a large share of a sector, including grocery companies, have way too much power to control prices,” Lusiani said. “That’s an underlying cause of the inflation.”
Some economists who spoke to ABC News attributed the acceleration of price increases over recent years to a textbook example of imbalance between supply and demand. The pandemic snarled global supply chains and triggered lockdowns, causing shortages of goods and workers. Meanwhile, government stimulus boosted demand, sending too many dollars after too few products.
“It’s economics 101 that if you stimulate demand while simultaneously deterring supply, your equilibrium will be significantly higher prices,” Michael Faulkender, a professor of finance at the University of Maryland’s Robert H. Smith School of Business, told ABC News.
In turn, Faulkender dismissed any potential benefit from a federal price-gouging ban. “It just sounds to me that we’re creating even more burdensome regulations that will actually raise prices for consumers,” Faulkender said.
Joe Brusuelas, chief economist for the accounting firm RSM US, said he opposes an outright ban but supports moderate measures that could deter price hikes, such as expanded government oversight of corporate practices.
Bruseulas pointed to data released this week showing food prices had risen 2.2% in July compared to a year ago. That level of inflation essentially stands at normal levels, Brusuelas said, suggesting that price increases had been reined in without a federal price-gouging ban in place.
“I’m concerned when I hear the federal government use the word ‘ban,’ but I’m not concerned about an exercise in oversight,” Brusuelas said.
(WASHINGTON) — Sen. JD Vance and Gov. Tim Walz both claim to be champions of gun rights for law-abiding citizens and have touted personal stories of growing up in households where firearms were commonplace, but the vice presidential candidates have vastly different views on how to curb America’s gun violence epidemic.
As the Democratic National Convention begins Monday in Chicago, Vice President Kamala Harris has made gun control a top priority.
“We who believe that every person should have the freedom to live safe from the terror of gun violence, will finally pass red flag laws, universal background checks and an assault weapons ban,” Harris said at her first presidential campaign rally in Milwaukee.
Harris was appointed in September 2023 by President Joe Biden to oversee the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.
Meanwhile, there was little acknowledgment of the nation’s gun violence scourge at the Republican National Convention last month, despite GOP presidential nominee former President Donald Trump being the victim of a would-be assassin wielding an AR-15-style rifle.
In the 2024 GOP convention platform, there was no mention of firearm violence or gun control, while in 2020, the party’s platform contained three paragraphs supporting reciprocity legislation allowing Americans to carry firearms in all 50 states regardless of which state they received a carry permit, and opposing an assault weapons ban, “frivolous” lawsuits against gun manufacturers and “any effort to deprive individuals of their right to keep and bear arms without due process of law.”
While Harris and Trump’s polarizing stances on gun control are well documented, the positions of their running mates are emerging for the first time on a national level.
Vance, the 40-year-old Ohio U.S. senator and Marine veteran, and Walz, the 60-year-old Minnesota governor and Army National Guard veteran, have portrayed themselves as strong Second Amendment advocates. But they have voiced starkly different views on gun control.
Vance’s stand on gun control
“I’m a big pro-Second Amendment guy and I know a lot of people who will strongly, stridently defend the Second Amendment. None of them think convicted felons, who have been afforded their due process rights should be able to buy firearms and then kill people,” Vance said during a June 2022 U.S. Senate election debate against his Democratic opponent, former Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan.
In a 2022 federal candidate survey for the Ohio Gun Owners and the American Firearms Association, Vance said he opposes “red flag” gun laws, legislation to ban certain semiautomatic rifles, including AR-15s; supports abolishing the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and establishing a national stand-your-ground law giving individuals the right to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to protect themselves.
Vance also checked yes on voting to repeal the 1994 Gun-Free Schools Act and supported a national Second Amendment Preservation Act that prohibits the use of federal funds to enforce gun control laws, regulations and executive orders.
“We need to fix the system we have that has problems as opposed to layering on a bunch of new regulations and laws on top of it,” Vance said during the debate against Ryan. “The thing that I don’t like is when you create a new background check system with new sets of regulations that go after law-abiding citizens.”
The National Rifle Association — which according to OpenSecrets, a nonprofit research and government transparency group that tracks money in politics and its effect on elections and policy — contributed nearly $500,000 to Vance’s senate campaign. The NRA has also endorsed the Trump-Vance ticket.
“Now, more than ever, freedom and liberty need courageous and virtuous defenders,” Doug Hamlin, executive vice president and CEO of the NRA, said in a statement in July. “President Trump and Senator Vance have the guts and the grit to stand steadfast for the Second Amendment.”
In June 2024, Vance called efforts by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to ban bump stocks, a device that enables semiautomatic rifles to fire almost like machine guns, a “huge distraction.”
The gunman who committed the 2017 mass shooting at the Route 91 Harvest Festival concert in Las Vegas that killed 58 people and left more than 800 injured, used guns fitted with bump stocks, according to investigators.
“I think that we have to ask ourselves: ‘What is the real gun violence problem in this country?’ and are we legislating in a way that solves fake problems? Or solves real problems?” Vance told reporters in June as his name was then being floated as Trump’s running mate. “And my very strong suspicion is that the Schumer legislation is aimed at a PR problem, not something that’s going to meaningfully reduce gun violence in this country.”
While he wasn’t a member of the U.S. Senate at the time, Vance said he would have voted against the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the first major gun safety law enacted in 30 years that Biden signed in June 2022, about a month after a teenage gunman killed 19 students and two teachers at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.
The law enhances background checks for gun buyers under 21, closes the so-called “boyfriend loophole” to prevent people convicted of domestic abuse from purchasing guns, and allocates $750 million to help states implement “red flag laws” to remove firearms from people deemed to be dangerous to themselves and others.
“First of all, from what I’ve seen of this bill, I would not support it. I think red flag laws, in particular, they certainly are a slippery slope. They also don’t solve the problem of gun violence,” Vance said in a 2022 interview with the Breitbart News Daily podcast.
During his RNC acceptance speech, Vance — author of the bestselling memoir “Hillbilly Elegy” — told the story of how after the death of his beloved grandmother, whom he called Mamaw, his family found 19 loaded guns in her house.
“The thing is, they were stashed all over her house — under her bed, in her closet, in the silverware drawer, and we wondered what was going on,” Vance said. “It occurred to us that toward the end of her life, Mamaw couldn’t get around so well, so she was sure that no matter where she was, she was within arm’s length of whatever she needed to protect her family. That’s who we fight for. That’s the American spirit.”
Walz’s stand on gun control
Walz, a former high school geography teacher and football coach, has proudly proclaimed being an avid hunter who once received an A-rating and an endorsement from the National Rifle Association while a five-term Congressman from rural Minnesota. As a member of Congress, Walz sponsored the Sportsman’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act, which expanded access to public lands for hunting and supported legislation to reform the ATF.
“I’m proud to stand with the NRA to protect our Second Amendment rights, and I’m truly grateful for their endorsement,” Walz said in a 2010 statement.
In 2016, Guns & Ammo magazine praised Walz’s record on protecting gun rights and put him on a list of top 20 politicians for gun owners.
“While most congressional Democrats have jumped on the gun control train with both feet, Tim Walz and a few others have stuck to their guns,” Guns & Ammo wrote.
But Walz said his NRA rating fell to an F-rating when his stance on gun control dramatically changed following the Feb. 14, 2018, mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, that left 15 students and two adults, including a football coach, dead.
“My job today is to be dad to a 17-year-old daughter,” Walz said during a 2018 community meeting in Minnesota while running for governor in the aftermath of the Parkland massacre. “Hope woke up as many of you did five weeks ago and said, ‘Dad, you’re the only person I know who’s in elected office. You need to stop what’s happening with this.'”
In an editorial he wrote that was published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune in February 2018 — which was titled “Tim Walz: Please understand my full record on guns” — Walz explained how the Parkland shooting forced him to reevaluate his positions on gun control.
“We all put ourselves in the place of a loved one or someone who faced that terror. It hits me as the dad of a fifth-grader and a high-school student. It hits me as a former high school geography teacher and football coach, when I think about the geography teacher and the coach at that school who gave their lives so that their students could keep theirs.”
Walz said he donated the $18,000 campaign contribution he received in his 2018 gubernatorial run from the NRA, to a charity that helps families of military personnel killed or injured while serving and came out in favor of an assault weapons ban.
In a Star Tribune editorial, he also said that during his time in Congress, he supported “common-sense” gun-control reform laws, repeatedly voted in favor of universal background checks and preventing people on no-fly lists from purchasing firearms. He also said he supported legislation to fund gun violence research by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was a co-sponsor of a bill to ban bump stocks and voted against concealed-carry reciprocity.
Walz also confronted the NRA, writing in the editorial that the organization is “the biggest single obstacle to passing the most basic measures to prevent gun violence in America — including common-sense solutions that the majority of NRA members support.”
As governor, Walz signed in May 2023 a historic suite of gun-safety measures that created red flag laws, extended the waiting period for gun transfers between parties from 7 to 10 days and expanded background checks to include private purchases between individuals, including those made at gun shows. The laws also require anyone buying a pistol or “semiautomatic military-style assault weapons” to apply for a permit to purchase or carry such guns from their local police agency or sheriff’s department.
“As a veteran, gun-owner, hunter, and dad, I know basic gun safety isn’t a threat to the Second Amendment — it’s about keeping our kids safe,” Walz said during a ceremony to sign the gun legislation. “There’s no place for weapons of war in our schools, churches, banks, or anywhere else people are just trying to live their lives. Today is about taking meaningful action to create a safer future for our kids, and I am proud to sign this commonsense, life-saving legislation into law.”
‘The number one killer of our generation’
Timberlyn Mazeikis, who endured a Feb. 13, 2023, mass shooting at Michigan State University that left three of her classmates dead and five others injured, told ABC News that for her and many other Gen Z members the choice in this election “is simple.”
“Gun violence is the leading cause of death in our generation, and for a lot of us, we can no longer sit by and continue to watch this happen and just wait for the next massacre to occur. Because of that, we are showing up to vote,” said 21-year-old Mazeikis, now a senior at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities.
Mazeikis, who will be voting in her first presidential election in November, said the MSU mass shooting “took a toll on me” as she recounted being barricaded in the school gym for hours, terrified that the shooter would burst through the doors at any minute.
After the shooting, she became a volunteer leader for Students Demand Action, an organization that fights for gun control legislation.
“I felt that I could no longer sit back and watch as further communities were destroyed by gun violence,” Mazeikis said. “And that experience of being on campus and the fear that I felt that day and losing my classmates and my sense of security has really worked as a catalyst to push me in this movement and to realize that we can no longer live this way.”
She said that while she views Trump and Vance as a “gun extremist dream ticket,” she said Harris and Walz have given her “hope.”
“The choice is simple. Our lives are on the line,” Mazeikis said. “We either go back with Trump and Vance or we go forward with Harris and Walz.”
Mazeikis also said Walz’s transformation from a strong pro-gun politician into one who now favors sensible gun regulations doesn’t concern her, saying, “his stance on gun violence prevention is one of strength and one of courage to change.”
“He is living proof that the gun lobby and the gun industry are lying to us, that you can be a responsible gun owner and still want to keep your community safe and believe in gun safety,” Mazeikis said.
However, Rob Doar, vice president of the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus — the largest gun rights group in Minnesota with more than 10,000 dues-paying members — told ABC News that he’s been following Walz’s policies and actions on guns for about a decade and was surprised he was picked to be Harris’ running mate.
“Initially, my thought was that it was not a good pick if the goal of the campaign was to try to appeal to maybe disaffected Republicans and moderates, just because he has had some flip-flopping on contentious issues like firearms,” Doar said. “But then as I saw more of the campaign strategy roll out, it seems like the goal has been to more highlight him as an example of what progressive leaders can do. In that vein, I think that he’s probably serving the campaign very well, given the high number of progressive policies that Minnesota’s passed recently.”
Doar said his organization does not endorse presidential candidates and noted that his members don’t necessarily like Trump.
“I think both tickets have problematic histories as far as a Second Amendment standpoint goes. Donald Trump was a huge advocate for the bump stock ban. Donald Trump made quotes like, ‘to take the guns first and then get due process second,’ and he’s made some other statements that have been fairly anti-Second Amendment,” Doar said. “On the other hand, you’ve got Kamala Harris, who is talking about, initially, mandatory gun buybacks for certain types of firearms. She has walked that back a little bit, but I think both tickets, as far as somebody who looks at the Second Amendment as their primary issue at the polls, have some problems.”
He said Vance’s “posturing” on gun rights is something a lot of Second Amendment supporters like.
“But these are the same kind of things that we heard out of Tim Walz when he was a representative in the first district [of Minnesota],” Doar said. “Unfortunately, JD Vance just doesn’t have the longevity of a political career to be able to back up the words that he’s saying, but I do think the way that he’s positioning himself is a way that might appeal to those who value the Second Amendment when they go to the polls.”
He said many of his group’s members have expressed concern about keeping the current conservative majority of the Supreme Court intact.
“I do hear a lot from our members that they don’t like Trump, but the sole reason they’re voting for him is because of the Supreme Court and for federal judicial nominations. So that’s not an unpopular sentiment among gun rights advocates,” Doar said. “I do think that the general consensus is that Trump would be much more favorable from a Second Amendment jurisprudence standpoint in his judicial appointments.”
Democratic vice presidential candidate Minnesota Governor Tim Walz speaks at the 46th International Convention of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) at the Los Angeles Convention Center on Aug. 13, 2024 in Los Angeles. — Mario Tama/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Democratic vice-presidential candidate Tim Walz is getting a more positive public reception than his Republican counterpart: More Americans see Walz favorably than unfavorably, contrary to JD Vance, and more approve of Walz’s selection for the nation’s No. 2 job, according to new ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll.
Thirty-nine percent in the poll have a favorable impression of Walz as a person, while 30% see him unfavorably. That compares with an underwater favorable-unfavorable rating for Vance, 32%-42%.
There is room to move. Sizable shares in this poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates with fieldwork by Ipsos, have no opinion of either candidate — 31% for Walz, the governor of Minnesota, and 26% for Vance, a U.S. senator from Ohio.
By another measure, 52% approve of Vice President Kamala Harris’ choice of Walz, compared with 45% who approve of former President Donald Trump’s selection of Vance. Forty-four percent disapprove of the Walz pick, compared with 50% disapproval for Trump’s choice.
Other vice-presidential candidates have been better received. While available data are spotty, approval reached 67% (among registered voters) for the selection of Jack Kemp (who ran with Bob Dole) in 1996 and was an initial 60% for John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin in 2008, although she later widely was seen as a liability for his campaign. For Harris, in 2020, 54% approved.
Groups
In their native Midwest, more approve of the selection of Walz than of Vance by a substantial 15 percentage points, 55% vs. 40%, and more see Walz favorably, 39% vs. 29%. That’s even though Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents and Republicans and GOP leaners are evenly matched in the region, with 46% in each group.
Despite a dispute over Walz’s characterization of his military service, his favorability rating is similar from veterans (41%) and non-veterans (39%) alike. Vance’s favorability rating is 48% among veterans, and 56% of veterans approve of his selection, as do 50% for Walz (not a significant difference given the sample size). Veterans are 12 points more likely than non-veterans to be Republicans or Republican-leaning independents.
Approval of the vice presidential picks breaks along expected partisan and ideological lines. Eighty-two percent of Republicans and 77% of conservatives approve of the Vance pick. For Walz, it’s a rosier 92% approval among Democrats and 87% among liberals.
Approval of Vance for vice president drops to 42% among independents, potential swing voters in presidential elections, compared with 49% for Walz.
On favorability, Vance’s rating peaks among those who voted for Trump in 2020 (75%), Republicans (68%) and conservatives (65%). It’s also higher among white evangelical Protestants (59%), military veterans (48%, as noted) and rural residents (45%), all groups Trump won by double-digit margins in 2020, than among their counterparts.
Walz, for his part, is seen most favorably by 2020 Biden voters (82%), Democrats (77%) and liberals (78%). He’s also seen favorably by 53% of college graduates and 50% of Black people.
Methodology
This ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll was conducted online via the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel® Aug. 9-13, 2024, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 2,336 adults. Partisan divisions are 29%-29%-29%, Democrats-Republicans-independents. Results have a margin of sampling error of 2 percentage points, including the design effect, for the full sample. Sampling error is not the only source of differences in polls.
(WASHINGTON) — When Vice President Kamala Harris unveils her economic policy proposals in North Carolina on Friday, it will include a proposal to provide up to $25,000 in down payment support for first-time homeowners, according to a campaign official.
The campaign is vowing that during its first term, the Harris-Walz administration would provide working families who have paid their rent on time for two years and are buying their first home up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance, with more generous support for first-generation homeowners.
In a preview statement obtained by ABC News, the campaign says, “Many Americans work hard at their jobs, save, and pay their rent on time month after month. But they can’t save enough after paying their rent and other bills to save for a down payment — denying them a shot at owning a home and building wealth. As the Harris-Walz plan starts to expand the supply of entry-level homes, they will, during their first term, provide working families who have paid their rent on time for two years and are buying their first home up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance, with more generous support for first-generation homeowners.”
“The Biden-Harris administration proposed providing $25,000 in downpayment assistance for 400,000 first-generation home buyers — or homebuyers whose parents don’t own a home — and a $10,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers. This plan will significantly simplify and expand the reach of down-payment assistance, allowing over 1 million first time-buyers per year – including first-generation home buyers – to get the funds they need to buy a house when they are ready to buy it,” the campaign said.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump is holding a news conference Thursday afternoon at his Bedminster golf club — his second in a week — as the campaign continues to pressure Vice President Kamala Harris to do interviews and answer reporter questions.
Trump began by highlighting inflation and hitting Harris on the cost of grocery prices as he stood between two tables full of food store items such as cereal, deli meat, milk, eggs, baby formula and bread with a sign saying, “Price Increases since Kamala Harris took office.”
“Harris has just declared that tackling inflation will be a Day 1 priority for her. It’s going to be Day 1. But Day 1, really, for Kamala was three and a half years ago. Where has she been?” Trump said.
He ticked off a long list of what he said were higher costs for a variety of common grocery items but offered no sourcing, other than claiming they came from “the government.”
Inflation peaked at 9.1% during the Biden-Harris administration but since cooled to 2.9% in July compared to a year ago — the lowest inflation reading since March 2021.
He eventually started veered off into talking about immigration, energy and other favorite topics, including attacks on Harris, speaking for more than 30 minutes without taking any questions.
Thursday’s news conference follows one that Trump held at his Mar-a-Lago estate last Thursday, fielding questions for more than an hour on a range of topics including his recent attacks on Harris, immigration and reproductive rights.
During the long and, at times, rambling exchange with reporters, Trump often pushed false claims on several topics, including the outcome of the 2020 election and size of the crowd at his Jan. 6, 2021, rally before the attacks on the U.S. Capitol by a pro-Trump mob.
“She refuses to do any interviews or press conferences, almost 30 days now, she has not done an interview,” Trump said of Harris on Wednesday in North Carolina. “You know why she hasn’t done an interview? Because she’s not smart. She’s not intelligent,” he said.
His campaign says she’s trying to “duck and hide” from the news media.
Trump’s recent news conferences appear to be part of the campaign’s attempt to draw a contrast between the two candidates.
“She hasn’t done an interview — she can’t do an interview,” Trump claimed during his Mar-a-Lago press conference last week.
He added that he “look[s] forward to the debates” as a way to “set the record straight.”
The Harris campaign has been using Trump’s news conferences to highlight flubs he has made and criticize policies he advocates.
“Trump did the only thing he knows how to do — he went out and lied, made up stories, mixed up dates, attacked the media, and, overall, reminded Americans that he is a deeply unwell man,” the Harris campaign said in a statement reacting to Trump’s news conference.
During her time out on the campaign trail since announcing her White House bid, Harris has held a few exchanges with reporters aboard Air Force Two and answered a few shouted questions; however, her campaign says she will participate in a sit-down interview before the end of the month.
“We will commit to directly engage with the voters that are actually gonna decide this election and that is gonna be complete with rallies, with sit-down interviews, with press conferences, with all the digital assets we have at our disposal,” Michael Tyler, communications director for the Harris-Walz campaign, said on CNN Wednesday when pressed multiple times to commit to press conferences and media interviews.
Though she hasn’t made herself as available to the media as the former president, Harris did spend the week with her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, crisscrossing the country visiting battleground states.
Trump just visited the solidly conservative state of Montana to stump for GOP Senate candidate Tim Sheehy last week, and is holding a rally in battleground Pennsylvania over the weekend.
