(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Friday attended the dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base of the three U.S. Army reservists killed Sunday in a drone strike in Jordan.
Accompanying him were first lady Jill Biden, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. CQ Brown and other top military officials.
At the beginning of the solemn movement, Biden, the first lady and other military officials walked up to the plane and stood with their heads bowed down as a chaplain offered prayers.
With a dreary gray sky above, Biden stood as the transfer cases containing the remains of the three U.S. Army reservists were slowly taken out of a plane one at a time.
The first lady appeared teary-eyed and Biden emotional with his head bowed and at times with his eyes closed, looking up to place his hand on his heart as the cases were brought out.
Each transfer case was draped in the American flag and then placed inside a black vehicle as fellow service members saluted to pay final respects before the car was driven way.
The families of the fallen watched the solemn event from a small area out of view from the cameras, where seats were arranged for them.
The Bidens met with the families privately before receiving the remains, the White House said.
The Pentagon announced on Monday that Sgt. William Jerome Rivers, 46, of Carrollton, Georgia; Spc. Kennedy Ladon Sanders, 24, of Waycross, Georgia; and Spc. Breonna Alexsondria Moffett, 23, of Savannah, Georgia, were killed in a drone attack over the weekend on the U.S. base in Jordan near the border with Syria and Iraq.
In a press briefing on Tuesday, National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby confirmed that Biden had spoken with families of the fallen.
“He expressed to them how proud we all are of their service, how we mourn and feel sorrow over their loss, made sure that those families knew that, not only was that service and sacrifice, going to be honored and respected, but that they would continue to get the support that they need as they work through what no family wants to have to go through,” he said.
Kirby said that during those phone calls Biden gauged the families’ feelings about his attending the dignified transfer at Dover.
In a phone call with the parents of Spc. Sanders, Biden informed them of Sanders being posthumously promoted to the rank of sergeant and sought their permission to attend the dignified transfer.
Hearing the news of the promotion left Shawn Sanders and Oneida Oliver-Sanders in tears.
“With your permission, I’d like to be there with you if that’s OK,” Biden is heard asking on the call. “We would love for you to be there. Sir we would be honored,” they told him.
“All of them supported his presence there and so the president will be going to the dignified transfer on Friday,” Kirby said.
In a press briefing on Tuesday, Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder announced that both Kennedy Sanders and Breonna Moffett had been posthumously promoted to the rank of sergeant.
Deputy press secretary Olivia Dalton said Thursday that it is protocol for the president to ask Gold Star families for their permission to attend a dignified transfer.
This was Biden’s second time attending the solemn occasion since taking office.
He last attended a dignified transfer in August 2021 to receive the remains of service members killed in the Kabul airport bombing in Afghanistan.
ABC News’ Justin Gomez contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — The House Judiciary Committee has issued a subpoena to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for documents related to her office’s use of federal funds intended to support at-risk youth, according to a copy of the subpoena obtained by ABC News.
The subpoena comes as Willis faces unrelated scrutiny over her relationship with one of her top prosecutors in the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump and 18 others.
Friday’s subpoena requests documents and communications related to her office’s receipt of federal funds and any documents and communications relating to any allegations of the misuse of those funds by the office.
“According to a recent report, your office unlawfully ‘planned to use part of a $488,000 federal grant — earmarked for the creation of a Center of Youth Empowerment and Gang Prevention” — to cover frivolous, unrelated expenses,” the subpoena said.
In a statement responding to the subpoena, Willis defended her use of federal funds against allegations of wrongdoing.
“Our federal grant programs are focused on helping at-risk youth and seeking justice for sexual assault victims who were too long ignored,” Willis said. “Our federal grant-funded Sexual Assault Kit Initiative has been cited by the United States Attorney General as a model program.”
Willis said her grant programs are “highly effective” and that any examination would find that they were “conducted in cooperation with the Department of Justice and in compliance with all Department of Justice requirements.”
Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan sent Willis two previous requests for documents that he said she ignored.
The committee, in its subpoena, asked that documents be produced by Feb. 23.
The Judiciary Committee has been conducting a broader probe into Willis’ use of federal funds in her investigation of the former president. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges in the election probe.
(NEW YORK) — The head of the Bureau of Prisons union has written to President Joe Biden asking him to seriously consider the impact staffing shortages are having on the nation’s federal prisons.
“The current staffing shortage within our agency have reached a critical level, placing an unsustainable burden on our existing workforce, and compromising the safety and security of both staff and inmates,” president of the Council of Prison Locals 33, Brandy Moore-White wrote to Biden in a letter obtained by ABC News.
Moore-White represents nearly 30,000 federal corrections employees.
BOP has lost 9,000 staff members since 2016, which “has raised serious concerns about our ability to effectively carry out our responsibilities,” the letter said.
“These shortages have resulted in increased workloads, mandatory overtime, a practice called augmentation or reassignment (where non-correctional officers are assigned to perform the duties of a correctional officer and vacate their positions), and heightened stress levels for our staff, ultimately jeopardizing the well-being of all involved,” it said.
Moore-White says in addition to the staffing levels, pay “insufficiency” has become a “significant concern” for officers.
“The current pay structure within the Bureau is significantly lower than that of other Federal Law Enforcement Agencies, including the US Marshals, Immigration and Customs (ICE) and Border Patrol,” she said.
She said the pay scale doesn’t compare to state and local law enforcement jobs or jobs in the private sector.
This concern has been confirmed by the director of the Bureau of Prisons, who said one of the main competitors for BOP recruitment is often times the local big box store.
“I urge you to prioritize and address these pressing issues within the Federal Bureau of Prisons,” Moore-White wrote to Biden. “By investing in our personnel, you will not only improve the working conditions of thousands of public servants, but also enhance the integrity and effectiveness of our nation’s federal correctional system.”
In an interview done for the CBS News program “60 Minutes,” BOP Director Collette Peters said she is aware of the staffing issues in the federal prison system and is working to address it.
“We respect and acknowledge the significant contributions of the Council of Prison Locals 33,” the Bureau of Prisons said to ABC News in a statement. “While we will decline to comment on the letter, as a general matter, FBOP has been transparent that staffing across the agency remains a challenge, as the FBOP is faced with the same worker shortage experienced by employers throughout the country.”
“The work to address these challenges is ongoing and includes a robust national recruitment strategy with the assistance of an external contract consultant,” BOP said. “Prior year data and analytics show a significant increase in public engagement and an increase in applicant numbers in priority regions.”
The White House referred ABC News to the Justice Department.
(DETROIT) — Pro-Palestinian protesters had a tense standoff with riot police outside U.S. President Joe Biden’s campaign event near Detroit on Thursday afternoon.
The standoff lasted more than 30 minutes as dozens of demonstrators stood within inches of local law enforcement officers. Teams of riot police wearing helmets and wielding sticks were brought in for reinforcement.
Some organizers repeatedly told the crowd to lock arms and push toward the police line, forcing officers to take a few steps back.
The demonstration remained peaceful and the riot police walked away about 20 minutes after they had arrived on scene. The president’s motorcade did not pass by the protesters when he departed.
Biden, who is seeking a second four-year term in office, has faced fierce criticism in recent months from Arab and Muslim Americans over his response to the latest outbreak of war between Israel, a close U.S. ally, and Hamas, the Palestinian militant group that rules the Gaza Strip. Michigan could be critical to Biden’s chances of getting reelected this year as it is home to the largest number of Arab Americans of any battleground state.
On Thursday, the protesters were chanting “Genocide Joe” and “Hey Joe, hear our demand, you have blood on your hands” as the president held a campaign event at a United Auto Workers union facility near Michigan’s largest city. They were calling for people to vote “uncommitted” in the state’s Democratic presidential primary on Feb. 27 and to vote against Biden in the country’s presidential election on Nov. 5.
Amir Naddal, a 34-year-old Palestinian American who works in the tech industry, said he voted for Biden in the 2020 presidential election but “absolutely will not” in 2024.
“We need to send a clear message to Joe, and to this administration, that this is unacceptable,” Naddal told ABC News.
Salma Hamamy, a 22-year-old Palestinian American who studies at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, said the Biden administration’s policies on the ongoing Israel-Hamas war prompted her to take part in Thursday’s demonstration.
“Joe Biden brought me out here today. He thinks that he is welcomed in the one of the largest Arab American communities in the United States,” Hamamy told ABC News. “We are here to tell him that he is not going to be our primary choice at all for when we vote in November for the elections, so long as he has blood on his hands.”
(WASHINGTON) — President Joe Biden on Friday will attend the dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base of the three U.S. Army reservists killed Sunday in a drone strike in Jordan.
Accompanying him will be first lady Jill Biden, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. CQ Brown.
They will meet with the families privately before receiving the remains, the White House said.
The Pentagon announced on Monday that Sgt. William Jerome Rivers, 46, of Carrollton, Georgia; Spc. Kennedy Ladon Sanders, 24, of Waycross, Georgia; and Spc. Breonna Alexsondria Moffett, 23, of Savannah, Georgia, were killed in a drone attack over the weekend on the U.S. base in Jordan near the border with Syria and Iraq.
In a press briefing on Tuesday, National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby confirmed that Biden had spoken with families of the fallen.
“He expressed to them how proud we all are of their service, how we mourn and feel sorrow over their loss, made sure that those families knew that, not only was that service and sacrifice, going to be honored and respected, but that they would continue to get the support that they need as they work through what no family wants to have to go through,” he said.
Kirby said that during those phone calls Biden gauged the families’ feelings about his attending the dignified transfer at Dover.
“All of them supported his presence there and so the president will be going to the dignified transfer on Friday,” he said.
Deputy press secretary Olivia Dalton said Thursday that it is protocol for the president to ask Gold Star families for their permission to attend a dignified transfer.
This will be Biden’s second time attending the somber occasion since taking office.
He last attended a dignified transfer in August 2021 to receive the remains of service members killed in the Kabul airport bombing in Afghanistan.
(WASHINGTON) — The 2024 presidential election is likely to face a complicated array of threats, from voter manipulation to physical violence, according to a new federal assessment — and authorities are already trying to figure out how to handle them.
The confidential analysis, compiled by the Department of Homeland Security, outlines concerns about online activity that could threaten the election’s legitimacy, potential real-world plots that could result in attacks — and the urgent need to thwart them in time.
“Threat actors intent on harming Americans through the use of violence may become more aggressive as Election Day approaches and may seek to engage in or provoke violence at voting locations, government facilities, public meetings, ballot drop box locations, or private-sector vendor locations that support elections,” according to the Jan. 2 DHS bulletin, obtained by ABC News.
The risk looms far beyond the security at local polling places, the document notes, from attempts to “intimidate election workers or election officials,” to potential cyber attacks on “election infrastructure, campaigns, candidates, public officials or political organizations,” to foreign influence operations “designed to undermine” the democratic “processes and institutions, steer policy, sway public opinion or sow division.”
The new assessment comes more than nine months before Election Day, as partisan tensions at home are already at a fever pitch, multiple wars are being waged abroad and political violence has already broken out overseas.
“We are heading into a highly dangerous, perfect storm,” said John Cohen, the former intelligence chief at the Department of Homeland Security, now an ABC News contributor.
“It’s not simply due to the fact that foreign and domestic threat actors will seek to exploit this election to achieve their ideological and geopolitical objectives. We can also expect the political discourse associated with this election will become even more polarized, more angry and more divisive. And all those factors together is what has law enforcement concerned.”
The 2024 race has been marked by increasingly toxic rhetoric, the intermingling of inflammatory campaign trail hyperbole and courtroom theatrics as former President Donald Trump faces four criminal trials, and the continued conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine. In addition, hate speech, misinformation and disinformation are running rampant on social media, and rapidly evolving technology remains vulnerable, experts say.
Domestic extremists “likely remain emboldened” following the last presidential election, which was punctuated on Jan. 6, 2021, with the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, the bulletin notes.
And on both sides of the aisle, leading candidates are running on some of the most divisive issues – from abortion, to culture wars, to immigration at the Southern border – which authorities note could prove to be flashpoints.
“Elections that involve candidates connected to issues that historically have prompted violence — including COVID-19 mandates, firearms restrictions, or abortion access — face a heightened threat environment,” the analysis said. “DHS is concerned with identifying and disrupting possible violent acts perpetrated by entities or individuals as retribution for perceived unfavorable outcomes before or following the elections.”
Election officials like Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, as well as the head of the federal government’s election security agency, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Director Jen Easterly, have already been victims of swatting incidents, as have some officials overseeing and involved in Trump’s cases. Separately, the FBI fielded “numerous” fake bomb threats in early January sent to various secretaries of state and state legislatures.
“We’re constantly being vigilant for – what’s the tipping point?” said Elizabeth Neumann, who was a DHS assistant secretary during the first years of Trump’s presidency and is now an ABC News contributor. “There are barrages of threats coming from multiple vectors – and multiple components of election infrastructure. It’s not just the voting machine – there’s multiple pieces that you’re worried about.”
The complex interplay of state and local election systems also means “different potential threat vectors and areas for protection,” the DHS bulletin said.
Online threat actors “seek to undermine the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of US election infrastructure,” the bulletin said – through phishing, IT disruptions, credential harvesting, supply chain compromise or brute force attacks.
Cyber attacks on local election infrastructure “have the potential for the greatest impact on the ability of jurisdictions to conduct elections,” the document said – attacks “on the integrity of state-level voter registration, poll books, and election websites, as well as on the preparation of ballots, voting machines, and tabulation systems.”
Threats may also target “agencies or civic organizations responsible for registering voters” or whose “infrastructure may feed into” those systems, the analysis said.
“These threats are not hypothetical. We’ve seen them occur. It may not have been such that it disrupted the election. But they still can have deep impacts,” Neumann said.
During the 2022 election cycle, the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center received at least 85 reports of malicious cyber activity from election offices across 56 state, local, tribal and territorial entities, attempting to “find and exploit cybersecurity vulnerabilities,” the bulletin said.
“Just because we’ve shored up important vulnerabilities doesn’t mean new vulnerabilities can’t be introduced,” Neumann said. “The spectrum here is wide, and exponentially expanding.”
Would-be hackers’ incursion into election infrastructure is not the only threat lurking online: the mushrooming influence of false and misleading information on the internet could sway voters’ minds even before they reach the ballot box, the document warns.
Foreign governments could attempt “to influence US policy, distort political sentiment and public discourse, sow division, or undermine confidence in democratic processes and values to achieve strategic objectives,” the bulletin said – advising to look out for “indications that entities are producing or amplifying misleading information about the time, manner, or place of voting, including providing inaccurate election dates or false claims about voting qualifications or methods.”
Foreign actors could try to “influence US voters through psychological operations, the infiltration of political parties, or the covert dissemination of false or misleading information through social media or other means,” the document said.
Just before New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary earlier this month, a fake robocall appearing to impersonate the voice of President Joe Biden began circulating, encouraging voters not to go to the primary polls and to “save your vote” for the general election.
“Your vote makes a difference in November, not this Tuesday,” the recording said – prompting a criminal investigation by New Hampshire’s Attorney General.
“You don’t have to hack into voter tabulation systems to disrupt an election,” Cohen said. “If a foreign adversary, or a terrorist group, can misinform voters, in a way that influences their opinions and decision-making before they enter or as they enter the ballot box, then these adversaries can influence the outcome of the election.”
(WASHINGTON) — Warning that the Middle East is facing a “dangerous moment” in time, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Thursday defended America’s seeming delay in responding to Sunday’s enemy drone attack that killed three American service members four days ago.
The remains of three Army reservists killed in the base attack were expected to arrive stateside on Friday, with Austin joining President Joe Biden and the families at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.
In a press briefing, Austin said the U.S. is preparing a “multi-tiered response” to the attack that also minimizes collateral damage.
The goal, he said, would be to degrade the capabilities of Iran-backed militants without plunging the region into a broader war.
“There are ways to manage this so it doesn’t spiral out of control. And that’s been our focus throughout,” he said.
The Pentagon has declined to discuss operational details of the pending strikes, citing security concerns. A U.S. official familiar with the plan, but speaking on condition of anonymity, said the strikes will unfold across several days and hit multiple countries including Iraq and Syria and possibly Yemen.
Since the start of the Israeli-Gaza war, the U.S. has found itself under near-constant attack from Iran-backed militants targeting commercial ships along the Red Sea and U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria. The tit-for-tat attacks have dragged on since fall, and U.S. officials say Iran is supplying the groups targeting U.S. assets.
On Wednesday, U.S. Central Command said it stuck down a ground-based drone control station and 10 one-way attack drones in Yemen.
Hours later, on Thursday, Houthi rebels launched two missiles but missed a nearby cargo ship, according to Central Command. The U.S. also reported striking down a drone and an explosive uncrewed surface vehicle.
According to a U.S. official, the drone that successfully hit a U.S. base in Jordan last weekend was an Iranian-made Shahed drone, similar to those used by the Russians on the battlefield in Ukraine.
Reuters first reported that the drone that killed the Americans was Iranian made. Austin confirmed that most of the drones used in the region come from Iran.
When asked why the U.S. is pursuing a multi-tiered response, Austin said U.S. adversaries don’t have a “one-and-done mindset.”
He noted, “they have a lot of capability.” He added: “I have a lot more.”
(WASHINGTON) — Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley insisted on Thursday that she won’t actually have to win in her home state in order to achieve victory there — after two huge losses in the first two states to vote in the race for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
Speaking with reporters after a campaign event in South Carolina, Haley was asked what winning looks like for her in the state’s Republican primary on Feb. 24.
“I think making sure it’s a competitive race, making sure that it looks close. If we do that — that’ll head us on into Michigan and Super Tuesday and that’s what we’re looking at,” she said.
Asked if she would stay in the race with a second-place finish, she asserted that she’s “not going anywhere.”
“This is about just closing that gap,” she said.
Her campaign was not, she said, “an anti-Trump movement.”
“At the end of the day, I’m doing this because the party that comes out with a new generational leader is the party that’s gonna win,” she said. “I’m doing this because I don’t want my kids to live like this.”
Haley has emerged as the last remaining major alternative to former President Donald Trump in the GOP’s nominating race after rival Ron DeSantis ended his campaign in January in the wake of a distant second-place finish in the Iowa caucuses.
Haley came in third in Iowa, just behind DeSantis, but quickly celebrated a stronger showing in the New Hampshire primary where she trailed Trump by roughly 11 points.
She has argued, as she did again on Thursday, that her strategy is to lose by less and less to Trump and then, at some point around Super Tuesday in March, when many states vote at once, begin to overtake him.
“We went from 2% to 20% in Iowa. Then we went, we got 43% [in] New Hampshire. But you know what the tall tale of that is? Donald Trump didn’t get 43% of the vote. That should scare you,” Haley told voters in Columbia, South Carolina, on Thursday.
She currently trails Trump by about 31 points in the polling in South Carolina, according to 538. While her support has recently increased, so has Trump’s.
Trump has targeted her for not leaving the race after her initial defeats in the first two states to vote in the race.
“Who the hell was the imposter that went up on the stage before and like claimed a victory? She did very poorly,” Trump said on primary night in New Hampshire.
“She’s doing like a speech like she won,” Trump said then. “She didn’t win. She lost.”
(NEW YORK) — Prescription drug prices have long been a back-and-forth issue between insurers and pharmaceutical companies.
Those who aren’t covered by insurance are usually left with a high bill for much-needed medicines.
The Biden administration has pushed a solution through the Inflation Reduction Act and gave Medicare the power to negotiate prescription drug prices directly with drug companies.
ABC News’ “Start Here” spoke with United States Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra about the negotiations, which started Thursday.
START HERE: Secretary Becerra, thanks for being with us. How is this about to work?
HHS SEC. XAVIER BECERRA: Brad, you hit it right on the money. It’s incredible to believe that for 65 million Americans, we could not try to get the best price. It’s one of those, take it or leave it. The drug company sets the price. And lo and behold, Americans today pay two or three times more than they probably should for those prescription drugs that folks around the world are paying so much less for. So it is now time. And the Inflation Reduction Act, as you said, now gives us a chance.
The president fought for that law and now we’re going to start negotiations. We have submitted our offer to the nine companies that have the 10 drugs that are the first to be negotiated, and we’ll have an out now have a chance to have a back and forth and negotiations.
START HERE: What types of drugs are we talking about?
BECERRA: These are drugs that cover cancer, diabetes, [and] heart disease. [They are] the types of chronic conditions that you and I know that affect so many Americans and cost us so much. These drugs, these 10 drugs alone cost us, the federal government, [and] taxpayers $46 billion in 2022, and they cost folks on Medicare, who are the ones that are getting the drugs, about $3.5 billion out of their own pocket.
START HERE: And these are, like you said, like the 10 most-used drugs in the Medicare system. What is the timeline for how this actually plays out? You guys start talking today. You said you submit your offers today; then what happens?
BECERRA: So the companies have about a month to give us a counteroffer. We then engage them as well and respond to what they’ve said. But by August 1, we have to finish the negotiations and have a price, a negotiated price. That price will then take effect the beginning of January 2026.
START HERE: You mentioned how expensive our drugs are compared to other countries; two and three times higher. Why is that? Is it just because the government can’t negotiate via Medicare, that’s the reason?
BECERRA: Well, I think of it this way. You go into a car dealership to buy a car. Do you pay the price you see on the sticker? Right? Of course, you don’t. You go in there saying, “That sticker price. I know you paid a lot less. Hey. And I also read Consumer Reports. I know that [it] really only costs you this much. And I know that the actual manufacturer gave you, the dealer, a further discount the more you sell, etc., etc. So this is the price I’ll offer you.” Then of course they go into that back room and they come back, and then they offer you a different price and you haggle back and forth until you get a price that you’re willing to live with. And if you say, “I don’t like the price, I’m going to go to the dealer down, down the street.” You try to get the best bargain you can. We could not do that. By law, we were restricted. Now we can do it. That’s why we think we’re going to drive the prices down.
START HERE: By the way, in any real negotiation, like the one you just mentioned, you have to be willing to get up and walk away, right? Is that, is that the case with drugs, though? I mean, is there a chance that there’s going to be a drug no longer covered by Medicare because you guys couldn’t agree on a price?
BECERRA: Well, see, that’s the interesting part. Up until the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, we didn’t have a choice. We had to accept the price that those manufacturers put on the drug, or we wouldn’t have access to it for the millions of Americans who get Medicare. And so now we have a chance to try to negotiate, to get the best price. And by the way, the drug companies aren’t forced to negotiate. They have a choice.
If they want to participate in the Medicare program, they get to continue to sell the drug to anyone they’d like. But if they want to do it through the Medicare program, they have to engage in negotiations with us now on these ten drugs.
START HERE: No, I get it. But say they’re like, it’s this much. And you guys are like, “Well, we’re not paying that.” Is there a chance drugs stop getting covered because you guys didn’t get the deal you wanted?
BECERRA: Well, we believe that by engaging in good faith upfront, negotiations will settle on a good price.
START HERE: Who saves money at the end of all this? This is not the average consumer, right? I’m not on Medicare. Uncle Sam’s not going to negotiate on my behalf. I assume Medicare folks would pay the same amount, maybe out of pocket. They don’t see a sticker price difference. So who actually saves money? Is it taxpayers writ large or something?
BECERRA: So, directly, folks who are on Medicare will benefit by Medicare being able to negotiate for the best fair price, on these drugs. The lower the price is, the more that the Medicare program and many Medicare beneficiaries spend. When the Medicare program saves money, taxpayers save money because taxpayers help cover the cost of the Medicare program for Medicare beneficiaries.
And so at the end of the day, all Americans will benefit by having lower cost on drugs under Medicare. But remember what happened with insulin, which was part of the Inflation Reduction Act, efforts. It has now been lowered to $35 at most per month for the insulin that a Medicare beneficiary needs. It could have been three or four times that amount before Jan. 1 of this year.
Now that the law has kicked in, it’s only $35 a month. But guess what? The manufacturers of insulin have also now moved to reduce the price of insulin for people who aren’t on Medicare, for whom the law didn’t reach.
START HERE: Oh so it changes the ecosystem kind of changes the expectation?
BECERRA: That’s right, that’s right.
START HERE: When do you see that happening? When would the average American actually see a difference? If you think.
BECERRA: Well, they’re already beginning to see the difference right now on insulin. While the price on these drugs that we’re negotiating now won’t actually take effect until the beginning of 2026, everyone will see what happens as of August of this year. And so we’ll see what goes on, but negotiation competition that’s as American as apple pie. And who would be against you trying to negotiate for the best price for your vehicle that you’re going to buy from that dealer?
START HERE: Who would argue with that? Maybe the pharma companies, right? They have said that this will hurt their chances to be competitive. They said it could hurt them having medical breakthroughs. They’ve sued the Biden administration to say that this is unconstitutional. You’ve got GOP, you got Republicans saying that this should not be the way the U.S. does business. What’s your response to that?
BECERRA: You know, I used to be the attorney general of California. I’d say that the fact that I’m being sued probably means I’m doing something right.
START HERE: So you don’t think it’s unconstitutional, though?
BECERRA: Oh, not at all. No, no, no, We see negotiations occurring in the federal government already. The Veterans Administration negotiates drug prices already. Indian Health Services, which is under the Department of Health and Human Services and provides direct care and also purchases drugs, goes through the same process of negotiating for prices. This is not new.
START HERE: And you don’t think that hurts the ability to innovate and be competitive and create the next new huge cancer drug that could affect millions of lives, that this doesn’t actually hinder companies from doing that.
BECERRA: Think of it this way: If we’re now negotiating to get the best price, there will be companies who know they’ll be able to compete with some of the brand-name pharma companies who are able to somehow muscle everyone out of the market. The more competition, the more innovation. The more innovation, the better the price for everyone.
U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin meets with the U.K. Secretary of State for Defense Grant Shapps at the Pentagon on Jan. 31, 2024 in Arlington, Virginia. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is holding a press conference at the Pentagon podium, his first media briefing since his surgery and subsequent hospitalization — both of which were kept secret from the public and White House.
“We did not handle this right. I did not handle this right,” Austin said.
“I should have told the president about my cancer diagnosis, and should also have told my team and the American public,” he continued. “I take full responsibility. I apologize to my teammates and to the American people.”
It is also the first time the public is seeing him standing. He continues to undergo physical therapy.
The defense secretary underwent a minimally invasive surgical procedure for prostate cancer Dec. 22, which led to a urinary tract infection and serious intestinal complications. He was hospitalized again on Jan. 1, but the White House didn’t learn of it for three days.
The delay in informing President Joe Biden and top administration officials of his hospitalization prompted intense scrutiny and is under investigation by lawmakers and the Pentagon.
Austin said he never “directed anyone” to keep his Jan. 1 hospitalization from the White House, and also denied creating a “culture of secrecy.”
Austin also said he directly apologized to Biden, and told him he was “deeply sorry” for not letting him know of his diagnosis immediately.
Austin spoke frankly about his first response after learning about his cancer diagnosis.
“The news shook me, as I know that it shakes so many others, especially in the Black community. It was a gut punch,” he said. “And frankly, my first instinct was to keep it private. I don’t think it’s news that I’m a pretty private guy. I never like burdening others with my problems. It’s just not my way.”
“But I’ve learned from this experience,” he continued. “Taking this kind of job means losing some of the privacy that most of us expect. The American people have a right to know if their leaders are facing health challenges that might affect their ability to perform their duties — even temporarily. So a wider circle should have been notified, especially the president.”
On Jan. 12, Biden publicly faulted Austin for not informing him earlier that he was hospitalized for complications from cancer treatment.
When a reporter asked Biden whether it was “a lapse in judgment for him not to tell you earlier,” Biden replied, “Yes.”
At the same time, when asked by a reporter if he still had confidence in Austin, Biden replied he did.
