(WASHINGTON) — The White House on Thursday hit back at Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis after he told President Joe Biden he will stand “in his way” while the country experiences an alarming surge of COVID-19 cases, with press secretary Jen Psaki saying the “facts” about hospitalizations in Florida speak for themselves.
At Thursday’s briefing with reporters, ABC News Correspondent Stephanie Ramos raised DeSantis’ latest fundraising push using the president’s comments from Tuesday urging DeSantis to help or “get out of the way,” and she asked whether Biden is considering reaching out to DeSantis.
“Well, first, from Day One, we’ve approached this not as a political issue but a public health issue,” Psaki began. “We remain in touch with officials in Florida, just like we’re in touch with officials from around the country about how we can provide assistance from the federal level to help address this public health crisis.”
Then, she turned up the heat.
“It is a fact — and data that you all are aware of — that 25% of hospitalizations in the country are in Florida. It is also a fact that the governor has taken steps that are counter to public health recommendations. So, we’re here to state the facts,” she said.
“Frankly our view is that this is too serious, deadly serious to be doing partisan name-calling,” she continued. “We’re focused on providing public health data information to the people of Florida to make sure they understand what steps they should be taking, even if those are not steps taken at the top of the leadership in that state.”
At least four school districts in Florida say they are pushing back against the governor’s mask ban.
In the last 24 hours, the country has seen 864,000 vaccinations in the last 24 hours, the highest daily number since July 3, White House coronavirus response coordinator Jeff Zients said Thursday.
Florida is among the seven states officials named that have some of the lowest vaccination rates and “account for about half of new cases and hospitalizations in the past week, despite making up less than a quarter of the U.S. population,” Zients said.
Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — The first woman to publicly accuse New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo of sexual harassment plans to sue him for allegedly retaliating against her after she came forward.
Lindsey Boylan, who formerly worked as an aide to the governor, spoke out in December in a series of tweets claiming Cuomo “sexually harassed me for years.”
“Our plan is to sue the governor and his and his coconspirators,” Boylan’s attorney, Jill Basinger, told ABC News’ “Good Morning America,” citing the retaliatory actions outlined in the New York attorney general’s scathing report published Tuesday.
The report substantiated sexual harassment claims of 11 women and found that he contributed to a hostile work environment. The report also found that Cuomo’s office retaliated against Boylan after she came forward.
Cuomo has denied the allegations raised by Boylan and all other accusations of sexual harassment and misconduct.
Basinger said the next step for her and Boylan is to file a lawsuit.
“There is no question that Lindsey was harassed, that she was subjected to a hostile work environment and that she was assaulted. But most problematically, she was retaliated against, not just by the governor, but by his inner circle, both inside the government and out,” Basinger said. “There was an entire conspiracy to diminish her and to hurt her credibility, and we find that to be the most offensive part of all this.”
When asked if she’s confident the suit will succeed, Basinger said she was.
“The attorney general and the investigators, after looking at all the facts, after doing an exhaustive examination, found with no ifs, ands or buts that Lindsey was 100% retaliated against,” Basinger said.
The report concluded that Cuomo allegedly violated federal and state law in retaliating against Boylan, and he and some senior staff in his office “actively engaged in an effort to discredit her.”
The report said that the executive chamber, along with a group of outside advisers, “engaged in a series of retaliatory actions” that included disseminating confidential and privileged files relating to complaints made against Boylan to the press, and drafting a proposed op-ed “that contained personal and professional attacks” on Boylan that was shared with current and former executive chamber employees. That draft was never published.
“The Governor and some of his senior staff questioned at the time (and continue to question) Ms. Boylan’s motivations, claiming that she made her allegations of sexual harassment for political reasons, i.e., to bolster her political campaign, or generally to be vindictive or retaliatory herself. But retaliation is unlawful regardless of whether the employer believes the complainant is acting with a good faith belief that she was harassed,” the report said.
Cuomo’s lawyer, Rita Glavin, denied Boylan’s sexual harassment allegations in a response released after Tuesday’s report. The response did not touch on the Cuomo’s alleged retaliation efforts.
“I want you to know directly from me that I never touched anyone inappropriately or made inappropriate sexual advances,” Cuomo said in a video statement following the report’s release Tuesday. “That’s not who I am.”
At the moment, the governor is facing investigations by multiple district attorney offices across New York that are looking into alleged incidents outlined in the report that possibly took place in those jurisdictions and could possibly lead to criminal charges. Experts have said the most serious accusations, if proven, could lead to misdemeanor charges.
At the same time, the New York State Assembly’s impeachment investigation into Cuomo is ongoing, and may ramp up soon.
The Assembly’s Judiciary Committee said Thursday the committee’s investigation “is nearing completion” and the Assembly “will soon consider potential articles of impeachment.” The Judiciary Committee requested the governor produce evidence or written submissions for consideration in the probe, due Aug. 13.
The Judiciary Committee is scheduled to meet in Albany on Monday at 9:30 a.m. to discuss the impeachment probe.
ABC News’ Aaron Katersky contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas said he regrets signing an April law banning mask mandates and is seeking to reverse it as coronavirus infections soar among unvaccinated youth, making him an outlier among some Republican governors who have doubled down on their anti-masking views.
Asked by ABC’s “Good Morning America” Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos on Thursday what changed his thinking, Hutchinson said, “The delta variant hit us hard.”
Arkansas has seen a 517% increase in the number of virus cases among people under 18 between April and July, according to an Associated Press report.
The state, like other hotspots in the country, is experiencing a frightening surge in COVID-19 with 3,000 new cases on Wednesday and 1,232 currently hospitalized, as the delta variant spreads.
So far, 42% of the state’s eligible population ages 12 and up has received at least one dose of a vaccine, according to state data, and a majority of adults 18 and over are also unvaccinated.
“There’s been a lot of distrust and we hope to overcome that because medical sciences, vaccines work, I believe, and we need to get those out — because that’s the way out of this,” Hutchinson said.
But the Arkansas governor, who is term-limited, is an outlier among Republican governors across the country who are doubling down on their own legislation banning mask mandates as the public policy measure continues to feed debate over personal liberties.
Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, a state which has become the epicenter of the virus, responded to President Joe Biden telling governors on Tuesday to help or “get out of the way” by making his defiance a rallying call — and a fundraising tool, sending out a letter with the subject line: “I’m Standing In Joe Biden’s Way.”
“I am standing in your way,” DeSantis said at a press conference Wednesday, declaring that Florida will remain a “free state” where children won’t be asked to wear masks.
DeSantis’s position is shared by Republican Govs. Greg Abbott of Texas, who he has said Texans should have the “right to choose,” as well as Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, Kim Reynolds of Iowa, Doug Ducey of Arizona and Kristi Noem of South Dakota, who have all ridiculed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s latest masking recommendation that everyone in areas with substantial or high levels of transmission — vaccinated or not — wear a mask in public, indoor settings.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the frontrunner to replace Hutchinson in the 2022 Arkansas governor race, has made clear she opposes all mask and vaccine mandates no matter the circumstances.
“If I am elected governor here in Arkansas we will not have mask mandates, we will not have mandates on the vaccine, we will not shut down churches and schools and other large gatherings, because we believe in personal freedom and responsibility,” she told Fox News last month.
Hutchinson, instead, after telling the public at a press conference Tuesday he wishes the mask ban wouldn’t have become law, called for a special legislative session asking lawmakers to reverse it, only so that public schools can have the flexibility to require masks for students.
It’s still not clear the GOP-led legislature in Arkansas will go along with Hutchinson’s request.
As the legislature met Wednesday, the Little Rock School District Board of Education voted to file a lawsuit against the state because of the anti-mask law. That follows another lawsuit filed Monday by parents also seeking to strike the law down, citing health concerns for their children at school.
The bill which might stave off those lawsuits, HB1003, failed to advance in public health panel Wednesday after GOP lawmakers pushed back.
But while the legislature continues to meet Thursday to work out the details, at least 730 students and staff from the Marion School District in Arkansas were under quarantine — just two weeks after classes started.
Presented with that number on “Good Morning America” and asked if he’s confident that it’s safe for kids to go back to school, Hutchinson said there would be challenges but said the state’s focus should be on vaccines over masks to prevent outbreaks.
“Our emphasis should be on the vaccines and not get sidetracked, in a minuta debate on masks, even though that is important for the 12 and under, and the flexibility we’re talking about,” he said.
ABC News’ Marlene Lenthang contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — As New York City turns to vaccine passports to help limit the spread of COVID-19, other cities have pushed back against similar measures, with leaders citing a wide range of concerns, from equity to security.
This week, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced the nation’s largest city would soon require proof of at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine for indoor dining, indoor fitness facilities and indoor entertainment facilities.
“This is crucial because we know that this will encourage a lot more vaccination,” de Blasio said Tuesday at a press briefing announcing the policy. “The goal here is to convince everyone that this is the time. If we’re going to stop the delta variant, the time is now. And that means getting vaccinated right now.”
New York City is the first U.S. city to announce such a measure as the highly contagious delta variant is driving up cases nationwide.
When asked this week if Boston would do the same, acting Mayor Kim Janey said the city is focusing on vaccine access, while likening the idea of vaccine passports to slave papers and birtherism.
“There’s a long history in this country of people needing to show their papers,” the Democrat told ABC Boston affiliate WCVB Tuesday. “During slavery, post-slavery, as recent as you know, what immigrant population has to go through here. We heard Trump with the birth certificate nonsense. Here we want to make sure that we are not doing anything that would further create a barrier for residents of Boston or disproportionally impact BIPOC [Black, Indigenous and people of color] communities.”
Disparities in vaccination rates have raised concerns about vaccine passports disproportionately impacting communities of color. Vaccination rates among Black and Latino residents in Suffolk County — where Boston sits — lag behind those of white residents, state data shows.
Janey’s comments were met with some criticism, though, particularly from fellow mayoral candidates. Boston city councilor Andrea Campbell tweeted that “this kind of rhetoric is dangerous.”
“The acting mayor’s comments yesterday put people’s health at risk, plain and simple,” Campbell said during a press briefing Wednesday while outlining her platform policies, which include requiring proof of vaccination for crowded public indoor spaces, like restaurants and gyms. “Boston has an opportunity frankly to be an example to the rest of the country when it comes to getting residents vaccinated and preventing the spread of the delta variant.”
Following Janey’s comments, Michelle Wu, another Boston mayoral candidate, said she supports requiring proof of vaccination at restaurants, shops and other indoor venues. “Our leaders need to build trust in vaccines,” she said on Twitter Tuesday.
Janey further clarified her comments regarding vaccination “hurdles,” saying on Twitter Tuesday that “we must consider our shared history as we work to ensure an equitable public health and economic recovery.”
“While there are no current plans for business sector vaccination mandates, we are using data to inform targeted public health strategies,” she said. This includes working with the hospitality sector to build on-site vaccination clinics.
The debate comes as other leaders have continued to push back against vaccine passports and other mandates on the grounds of personal liberty.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — one of several state leaders who have moved to ban vaccine passports — spoke out against the measure during a press briefing Wednesday.
“I think the question is, is we can either have a free society or we can have a biomedical security state,” the Republican governor said. “I can tell ya — Florida, we’re a free state.”
Other GOP leaders have used more inflammatory rhetoric throughout the vaccination campaign by likening vaccination requirements to the Holocaust — drawing condemnation from Jewish organizations and fellow members of their party.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene apologized for comments she made in June that compared being required to wear masks in the House to the Holocaust. Republican Washington state Rep. Jim Walsh also issued an apology last month after he donned a yellow Star of David to protest COVID-19 restrictions, saying it was “inappropriate and offensive.”
In the latest incident, John Bennett, the chairman of the Oklahoma Republican Party, recently took to Facebook to equate vaccine passports to the yellow Star of David that Nazis forced Jewish people to wear.
“It’s not about the star, what it’s about is a totalitarian government pushing a communist agenda on top of us and forcing people against their own liberties to get this vaccine,” Bennett said in a video message Sunday following criticism to an earlier post on the Oklahoma Republican Party’s Facebook page, which included an image of the yellow Star of David with the word “Unvaccinated” on it.
Following Bennett’s initial post, local GOP leaders spoke out against the analogy, which the Jewish Federation of Greater Oklahoma City called “ill-informed and inappropriate.”
“It is sad and ironic that anyone would draw an analogy from the largest recorded genocide in the 20th century with public health attempts to save lives,” the organization said in a statement.
New York City’s vaccine mandate follows in the footsteps of the “health passes” in France and Italy.
“We do want to make as many of these settings as safe as possible,” New York City Health Commissioner Dr. Dave Chokshi said during a press briefing Tuesday. “And that means having them be for people who are only fully vaccinated. That is the thrust of the policy.”
Vaccine mandates are a smart policy for a dense urban place like New York City to help encourage vaccination, Dr. John Brownstein, an epidemiologist at Boston Children’s Hospital and an ABC News contributor, said.
“We have to start to think about new ways to get the population to recognize the value of these vaccines,” he said. “Creating some level of requirement is important. Of course that is going to be especially important in areas of high transmission, like health care organizations, or nursing homes … but also places where there’s potentially a high risk of transmission.”
“A city like New York, which experienced the worst of the pandemic … has a lot of concerns about a potential new surge,” he said.
Each city will have its own context and “nuance in applying public health measures,” Brownstein said, and there may not be a “one-size-fits-all approach” to increasing vaccination rates.
Following New York City’s announcement, Dr. Allison Arwady, commissioner of the Chicago Department of Public Health, said during a news briefing Tuesday that the city is “interested” in the idea but there aren’t current plans to implement a similar plan.
“We’ll be watching to see how this plays out, but we don’t have a current plan to do something like that at the city level,” she said, noting that New Yorkers seem to have “embraced this vaccine passport idea a little bit more than has been embraced here in the Midwest and across Illinois.”
(NEW YORK) — Governor Andrew Cuomo is facing further scrutiny after the New York attorney general’s office concluded he violated state and federal law in sexually harassing at least 11 women.
While State Attorney General Letitia James’ civil probe didn’t include a criminal referral, several district attorney offices from across the New York area have asked to review the investigation’s materials to determine whether criminal charges could be filed.
James’ findings, released on Tuesday, concluded that Cuomo “sexually harassed current and former New York state employees by engaging in unwelcome and non-consensual touching and making numerous offensive comments of a sexually suggestive nature that created a hostile work environment for women.”
Cuomo has denied all allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct, including inappropriate touching and sexual advances.
The attorney general’s report also concluded that Cuomo may have violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws discrimination in the workplace on the basis of sex and prohibits gender-based harassment in the workplace. The report also cited the New York State Human Rights Law, which is similar to the federal law.
Under that law, an employee can be held liable if they engaged in conduct that violates those guidelines or if they aided and abet conduct that violates state laws. “Failure to investigate [discriminatory acts] can constitute ‘active participation’ to support an ‘aiding and abetting’ claim,” the report stated.
In 2019, Cuomo signed legislation, to much fanfare, to strengthen protections against discrimination and harassment under New York State Human Rights Law, including extending the statute of limitations for employment harassment claims to three years from one year.
James’ report also concluded that Cuomo allegedly violated federal and state law in retaliating against one of his accusers, Lindsey Boylan, who came forward with her allegations in December, by “actively engaged in an effort to discredit her,” the report stated.
“The Governor and some of his senior staff questioned at the time (and continue to question) Ms. Boylan’s motivations, claiming that she made her allegations of sexual harassment for political reasons, i.e., to bolster her political campaign, or generally to be vindictive or retaliatory herself. But retaliation is unlawful regardless of whether the employer believes the complainant is acting with a good faith belief that she was harassed,” the report stated.
Further, Cuomo and his office failed to report and investigate the allegations of sexual harassment, in violation of their own internal policies and procedures, the report found.
Karen Agnifilo, a lawyer at Geragos & Geragos and a former prosecutor with the Manhattan district attorney’s office, told ABC News the allegations contained in the report released on Tuesday “absolutely articulates criminal behavior in many of the instances.”
Whether charges are pursued depends largely on “if the victims are willing to come forward, if it’s within the statute of limitations for a misdemeanor, and if there’s jurisdiction,” Agnifilo added. “This report couldn’t have been clearer. It found over and over again, that the victims were credible and, stunningly, the governor was not credible.”
ABC News Legal Analyst Dan Abrams said it’s important to note the difference between potential civil and criminal charges.
“It’s very important to distinguish between sexual harassment, which is a civil law issue, meaning people can sue over it, but the remedy is money damages — it’s an individual suing him,” Abrams said. “A criminal case is the government saying, ‘We are going to seek to punish you and potentially take away your freedom,’ and in a criminal case, the legal standard is also higher. It’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Abrams said the strongest case is for a misdemeanor criminal charge in connection with the claim that Cuomo allegedly groped the breast of his executive assistant who worked at the executive chamber in 2020.
“The criminal law in New York that I think that most people will be focusing on is a law called ‘forcible touching’ — it’s a class A misdemeanor, it’s up to a year in prison,” Abrams explained. “And the definition of it is forcibly touching the sexual or other intimate parts of another person for the purpose of degrading or abusing such person, or for the purpose of gratifying the actor’s sexual desire.”
“I think we are still a ways away from criminal charges,” said Abrams, adding that even if Cuomo is charged with the misdemeanor “you still have to also prove that it’s for the purpose of gratifying the actor’s sexual desire. And that’s one of these legal things people don’t think about every day, but in the very definition of the statute makes it harder to prove.”
That woman came forward anonymously to the Albany Times-Union in April.
Cuomo’s lawyer, Rita Glavin, issued a denial after the report was released on Tuesday that Cuomo ever groped this anonymous assistant.
“The Governor was stunned by her claim made for the first time in early March 2021 that he groped her breast,” Glavin said in a statement. “This claim is false, as the Governor has stated repeatedly and unequivocally.”
(WASHINGTON) — Late last month Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, of Georgia, raised eyebrows around the country when she claimed that a reporter’s question about her COVID-19 vaccination status was a “violation of my HIPAA rights.”
Not even close, legal experts say.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), a 1996 federal law, is a widely cited and misunderstood privacy statutes. In the age of COVID and questions about the disease and vaccines in the workplace, schools and elsewhere, debate over and misinformation about the law, which “gives you rights over your health information and sets rules and limits on who can look at and receive your health information,” according to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has taken on a whole new life.
“HIPAA is the tool the government uses to try and protect some of your personal health care information,” explained Juan Morado, a health care regulatory and policy attorney at Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff, LLP. “It’s a rule that prevents hospitals, health insurance companies, pharmacies, and health care companies from sharing certain protected health information (PHI) you provide them with anyone else without your permission.”
In other words, the law primarily applies to health insurance companies and health care providers. Neither individual citizens nor most employers are considered “covered entities” under HIPAA, according to HHS.
“HIPAA’s protection is incomplete,” said Dr. M. Gregg Bloch, a professor of health law, policy and ethics at Georgetown Law. “The bottom line is that HIPAA is meant to provide some control for the consumer, for the patient, over how his or her information flows,” he added.
“Here’s the huge misunderstanding: What HIPAA does not do is stand in the way of anybody answering the question, ‘Have you been vaccinated?'”
When asked about Greene’s HIPPA comments, communications director Nick Dyer told ABC News, “It’s none of the media’s business. Privacy still exists in America, even though the fake news works every day to erode it.”
Who and what falls under HIPAA?
Three main entities are covered under HIPAA: health care providers, health plans and health care clearing houses. Health care providers include doctors, clinics, mental health providers, dentists, nursing homes and pharmacies. Health plans include health insurance companies, HMOs, company health plans and government health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Health care clearing houses process health information.
A few practical examples of when the law would come into play: “Your doctor can’t share your blood test results without your permission,” Morado said. “A pharmacist isn’t allowed to tell your employer if you’re on medication without your permission.”
Greene is far from the first to wildly misinterpret HIPAA.
Public relations departments and health care organizations are notorious for artfully misinterpreting the law, and claiming health information disclosures fall under HIPAA when they do not, in order to block information they’d prefer not to disclose to the public.
Bloch pointed to the early days of the pandemic, when U.S. nursing homes suffered major outbreaks. While nursing homes are covered entities under HIPAA, he explained, data needs to be identifiable in order to be protected for privacy reasons.
“The main misuse of HIPAA is by health care entities that want to hide the ball when they feel they have numbers that are going to make them look bad,” Bloch said. So when health care journalists, for example, ask a nursing home for de-identified data about people who died there during an outbreak, HIPAA is not a relevant factor.
“That’s utter nonsense,” Bloch said of health care firms blocking requests for de-identified data by citing HIPAA. “HIPAA does not stand in the way of sharing that kind of data.”
Widespread misinterpretations of HIPAA have also trickled down to ordinary citizens, who wind up thinking the law extends further than it does. “These things become on the surface, conventional wisdoms, and then people believe it,” Bloch explained.
“Maybe a doctor’s office doesn’t want to bother with sharing a medical record, and so some assistant up front says HIPAA,” he added. “He or she doesn’t know what they’re talking about. But the typical patient is not a lawyer, so the patient might not want to get into anything resembling a confrontational relationship with his or her doctor’s office.”
The result: The patient takes the incorrect information about HIPAA at face value and the myth proliferates. “Those are some of the ways that this mythology leeches into public space,” Bloch said.
Other everyday situations that aren’t covered under HIPAA: “If your boss/teacher asks if you’re vaccinated, that’s not covered by HIPAA,” Morado said. Neither is your step count or heart rate recorded by an Apple Watch or Fitbit, he added.
“The biggest misconception is HIPAA protects all of your personal health care Information and that it applies to all businesses,” Morado said. “HIPAA only protects information given to covered entities.”
A non-exhaustive list of entities that are NOT covered by HIPAA, according to HHS:
Life insurers
Employers
Workers compensation carriers
Most schools and school districts
Many state agencies like child protective service agencies
Most law enforcement agencies
Many municipal offices
At the end of the day, HIPAA is “porous, maybe even squishy,” according to Bloch. It’s also subject to politics and political interests. While the law was meant to protect patient privacy, “the players that saw their business strategies as vulnerable got into the game, and made sure that there was plenty of Swiss cheese,” he said of HIPAA. In addition to being misinterpreted, the law has many loopholes that benefit the marketing and the pharmaceutical industries, for whom health care data is extremely valuable.
Debates over masks and mandates might make it seem like 2020.
It might also well be a taste of 2024. President Joe Biden’s admonition that lawmakers who are blocking vaccine requirements should “get out of the way” accomplished nothing of the sort — and may have had the opposite reaction.
“I am standing in your way,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said Wednesday, declaring that Florida will remain a “free state” where no one will be required to show proof of vaccination or force children to wear masks.
DeSantis and other potential presidential contenders who are Republican governors — including Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem — have sought to one-up each other when it comes to establishing themselves as champions of personal liberty before and now during this troublesome period of the pandemic.
New polling shows Biden’s trust in handling the pandemic slipping among voters. Quinnipiac University numbers out Wednesday found the president’s approval on COVID at 53% of Americans — down a dozen points since May.
Biden aides, meanwhile, have begun calling out states, including Texas and Florida, where the delta variant is contributing to spikes in cases. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Wednesday “that’s not meant to be political,” and is simply “meant to convey that more action is needed in some part of the country.”
Of course, it is political. Republican leaders don’t need the contradictory messaging of former President Donald Trump to make resistance to vaccine and mask mandates a mantra, and skepticism of conflicting advice from scientists crosses party lines.
Now with the concept of “vaccine passports” gaining currency in some localities and businesses, partisan lines are hardening as quickly as campaign fundraising pitches can be written.
The RUNDOWN with Averi Harper
The walls are closing in on disgraced New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
After the announcement of the devastating findings in the state Attorney General’s report on Cuomo’s misconduct and an avalanche of calls for him to resign, state lawmakers could move toward impeachment.
The New York State Assembly, where Democrats hold a vast majority, needs 76 votes to proceed with impeachment. According to ABC News’ Aaron Katersky, at least 82 of the state Assembly’s 150 members are in favor authorizing an impeachment trial. This as Cuomo clings to power with no sign of voluntary resignation.
If impeached, Cuomo would be the second New York state executive to face impeachment. The first was William Sulzer who is the only New York governor to be impeached and convicted. His removal followed accusations of campaign finance fraud in 1913.
If Cuomo were to be removed from office, it would make way for the state’s first female governor. As laid out in the New York’s constitution, Lt. Gov. Kathy Hochul would immediately become the acting governor during an impeachment trial. If Cuomo is convicted, she would continue in that role through the end of his term.
The assembly’s judiciary committee is slated to meet Monday morning to discuss their impeachment investigation.
The TIP with Meg Cunningham
Four Republicans vying to oust California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom criticized his response to the coronavirus pandemic in a debate Wednesday night on some of the top issues facing the state.
The candidates who joined Newsom all opposed mask mandates, but their solutions to curbing the spread of the virus and its variants differed.
Former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer encouraged viewers to get the vaccine (he and his family got it) but said he does not support mask mandates in schools, which are currently in place ahead of the 2021 school year.
Businessman John Cox took a different approach, saying he doesn’t support mandates or believe that people who have had the coronavirus should get the vaccine, because they have antibodies that protect them against it.
Former Congressman Doug Ose and state Assemblyman Kevin Kiley both pushed back against mandates, saying they have faith that Californians can make the right decisions for themselves and their families. Kiley took the opportunity to call out Newsom’s response directly, saying the governor was “bright lights and cash giveaways,” in an attempt to conceal a broken state government.
(WASHINGTON) — The Biden administration will announce a set of actions on Thursday intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollution from cars and trucks, reducing planet-warming emissions from the No. 1 sector contributing to climate change in the U.S.
President Joe Biden is expected to sign an executive order on Thursday setting a goal that half of all new vehicles sold by 2030 are zero emissions vehicles, specifically electric vehicles powered by batteries or fuel cells or hybrid-electric vehicles. A senior administration official called it a “paradigm shift” for the country and the industry.
“A decade ago, we were talking about reaching around 50 miles per gallon of gasoline in 15 years. Today, for new autos we’re talking about reaching around 50% of vehicles that don’t require even one gallon of gasoline to go a mile in less than a decade,” the official said on a call with reporters, adding that automakers like Ford and GM are expected to be at the White House to support the executive order and announce their plans to meet Biden’s goal.
Automakers Ford, GM and Stellantis endorsed the move in a statement Wednesday night, saying they aim for 40-50% of all new vehicles sold by 2030 to be electric. They also said that goal can only be met with resources to expand electric charging stations that it part of Biden’s proposed Build Back Better plan.
“With the (United Auto Workers) at our side in transforming the workforce and partnering with us on this journey, we believe we can strengthen continued American leadership in clean transportation technology through electric vehicle innovation and manufacturing,” the companies said in a joint statement. “We look forward to working with the Biden Administration, Congress and state and local governments to enact policies that will enable these ambitious objectives.”
The administration will also announce fuel efficiency standards that will more than reverse the rollback of the clean car standards under former President Donald Trump. A senior administration official said the administration will build on higher fuel efficiency standards set by California the senior official said will ultimately save 200 billion gallons of gasoline and reduce 2 billion metric tons of carbon pollution, according to the senior official. Those rules will still need to go through a formal rule-making process at Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation.
“What we’re hearing across the board is a consensus about the direction where this industry is going. And a coming together around the recognition that this is the moment of truth, not just for climate action for economic action as well,” the official said.
Former President Barack Obama issued similar fuel efficiency standards meant to require new gas-powered vehicles to use less gasoline, which would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollution from cars and trucks. Under Trump the EPA relaxed those standards, prompted a legal battle between the administration and California over more stringent goals set by the state.
(WASHINGTON) — At the dawn of the COVID-19 pandemic, when offices and restaurants began shuttering, the federal government scrambled to keep small businesses afloat — ultimately spending over a trillion dollars to help protect the American Dream for millions of workers and business owners.
But even before the first checks went out, alarm bells went off.
The person ringing those bells the loudest was Hannibal “Mike” Ware, the inspector general of the Small Business Administration. The veteran internal watchdog says he participated in a series of meetings with Trump administration officials and SBA program analysts that were laced with “testy exchanges” about how to expeditiously dispense funds without leaving them vulnerable to fraudulent claims.
His warnings went unheeded, Ware said, and the fallout has taken him “from a black-haired guy to a gray-haired guy.”
“My frustration level was extremely high,” Ware told ABC News in a recent interview. And now, a year and half later, he said “the magnitude of the fraud we are seeing is unheard of — unprecedented.”
As small businesses emerge from the pandemic, the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and the Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL), two key relief programs passed as part of the congressional CARES Act, are winding down. But for all the jobs they’ve rescued, their legacies may be tarnished by unprecedented amounts of fraud — a reality that experts fear may impair efforts to pass future emergency relief programs.
“In terms of the monetary value, the amount of fraud in these COVID relief programs is going to be larger than any government program that came before it,” Ware said.
All government programs suffer some amount of fraud, experts say. And emergency programs are even more susceptible, due to the inherent tension between the pressure to approve loans quickly and the need to screen applications and maintain other fraud-prevention measures that may prolong the process.
In an October 2020 report, Ware’s office found that “to expedite the process, SBA ‘lowered the guardrails’ or relaxed internal controls, which significantly increased the risk of program fraud.”
A senior SBA official in the Biden administration agreed with Ware’s analysis, noting that “it should not be an expectation that we need to sacrifice speed for certainty — you can do both.”
“The story of 2020 for both PPP and EIDL is the fact that the previous administration’s leadership did not have sufficient controls in place for determining individual identity or business identity,” the official said. “Different choices could have absolutely been made to limit fraud vulnerabilities.”
“With limited staff, few technological tools to conduct prepayment verification, and crushing need, SBA and other agencies abandoned many traditional controls and simply approved applicants with little or no verification of self-reported information,” according to Linda Miller, the former deputy executive director of the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, a government task force established as part of the CARES Act.
“Best practice calls for due diligence at the front end to avoid making the fraudulent or improper payment in the first place,” Miller wrote in June, after leaving PRAC. “But in the rush to quickly distribute pandemic relief, we failed to do that and so now we are chasing [funds that were fraudulently granted] … but the recovered funds will be a fraction of what was stolen.”
Ware said this is precisely what his office sought to avoid. Before PPP and EIDL were even finalized, the SBA inspector general’s office submitted three reports to the SBA “detailing the importance of up-front controls,” according to Ware. During the testy exchanges in the spring of 2020, he said he warned the SBA to “pump the brakes” on the process.
“Fraudsters are going to do what fraudsters are going to do,” Ware said. “But the upfront controls mitigate exposure to fraud, and doing so would have saved taxpayers a whole lot of heartache on the back end. Unfortunately, the heartache was not avoided because of the way these programs were implemented up front.”
Jovita Carranza, the former SBA administrator who resigned when President Trump left office, could not be reached by ABC News for comment. Last October, in a letter responding to Ware’s report, Carranza wrote that the inspector general “failed to acknowledge the enhanced and effective system controls and validations that SBA is using” to weed out fraudulent applications and “grossly overstates the risk of fraud, waste and abuse.”
Carranza’s successor as SBA administrator — Biden nominee Isabella Casillas Guzman — has said that “reducing the risks of fraud and waste and abuse” in the distribution of relief loans and grants is a top priority. She said a series of steps implemented in December — including up-front verifications and tax information from applicants — has already produced “a sharp decline” in fraud, and that she is working closely with Ware to further improve safeguards and vigorously track down and recover prior fraudulent dispersals.
Ware agreed that controls put in place late last year helped curb fraud, but said the efforts were too little, too late.
“By then, well, you already know how much money was gone,” he said. “A lot of money was out.”
Among the relief programs, the previous administration’s EIDL rollout has attracted particular scrutiny. James W. Connor, a former federal prosecutor who is now with the law firm Arnold & Porter, called the program a “fraud magnet,” citing a provision that allowed recipients to receive up to $10,000 up front “with essentially no strings attached.”
“That money is gone,” Connor said.
But that hasn’t kept Ware from trying to recover it. His investigative efforts have resulted in 307 indictments, 205 arrests, and 69 convictions tied to PPP and EIDL fraud, resulting in the recovery of more than $600 million so far.
(WASHINGTON) — Donald Trump may be out of office, but political donor money continues to pour into his properties across the country.
In just the first six months of this year, dozens of Republican campaigns and political groups have together spent at least $750,000 at Trump properties, with nearly half of that coming from fundraising committees directly affiliated with or linked to Trump himself, according to federal and state campaign disclosure reports.
Of that $750,000, the largest chunk was spent by the Make America Great Again PAC, Trump’s presidential campaign committee-turned political action committee, which paid the former president’s businesses more than $210,000 from January through June.
Much of that came from five monthly rent payments of $40,000 each for office space at Trump Tower in New York City, while the rest came from nearly $8,000 in lodging expenses at Trump hotels.
Trump’s new PAC, Save America, also reported paying nearly $80,000 to the “Trump Hotel Collection” for lodging and meals over the six months since Trump left the White House.
Trump properties have also continued to serve as a favorite venue for high-dollar fundraisers for his political committees.
His joint fundraising committee with South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham spent more than $22,000 for a golf tournament hosted at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida, in May, which reportedly cost participants $25,000 each. Make America Great Again Action, a new pro-Trump super PAC led by former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, spent about the same amount at a fundraiser at Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey. The committee’s disclosure filing doesn’t show how much it raised from the fundraiser, but overall it reported raising roughly $705,000 in April and May.
The Republican National Committee, which continues to raise money off Trump’s name in fundraising emails and messages, spent at least $191,000 at various Trump properties over the last six months, including $176,000 at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club for a spring GOP donor retreat earlier this year.
On the Trump campaign’s spending at Trump’s properties, former Trump campaign spokesperson Tim Murtaugh previously said that “the campaign pays fair market value and abides by all FEC laws and regulations.”
Since leaving the White House in January, the former president has settled in Florida, bringing dozens of his close allies and other Republicans to his properties in the Sunshine State.
A number of Republican politicians and political hopefuls have visited his Mar-a-Lago Club over the last six months for fundraisers, photo ops and other political events in the hope of appealing to Trump’s loyal supporters or netting an endorsement from the former president himself.
Two Republicans who earlier this year voted to overturn the 2020 election results, Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks — who is vying for an open Senate sit in 2022 — and Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, spent $26,000 and $32,000, respectively, at Mar-a-Lago.
Another Alabama Senate hopeful competing for Trump’s endorsement, Lynda Blanchard, also spent close to $25,000 hosting a fundraiser there.
And at least a dozen other GOP campaigns together spent tens of thousands of dollars at various Trump properties in Florida, including Trump National Doral and the Trump Golf Club in Palm Beach, during the first half of the year.
While Trump associates and supporters have long flocked to his properties in Florida and New Jersey, their preferred Washington, D.C., destination while Trump was president was the Trump International Hotel, on the site of the city’s historic Old Post Office. Since opening in late 2016, shortly before Trump took office, the D.C. hotel has raked in millions of dollars hosting numerous fundraisers for various campaigns and political groups, as well as serving as his supporters’ favorite place to gather, lodge and dine in the capital.
But so far this year, it appears that the action — and the money — has followed Trump from D.C. to Florida. Trump’s D.C. hotel hasn’t hosted many big events, with several congressional campaigns reporting smaller-scale meal and lodging expenditures that total only $15,000.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee and Florida Sen. Rick Scott held a fundraiser featuring Newt Gingrich at the D.C. hotel in late June, but that expenditure has yet to be reported.
In total, since Trump began his run for president in 2015, his political operation and various other federal campaigns have paid Trump’s businesses $20 million, including more than $7 million during the 2020 election cycle, according to ProPublica’s analysis of federal campaign disclosure reports.
