<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-will-formally-terminate-nafta-soon-180897">&nbsp;US&nbsp;President Donald Trump </a>said without evidence on Thursday Arizona "is bracing for a massive surge" of<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/major-migration-flows-in-the-last-decade-182125"> immigrants </a>along part of the border that has no protective fence, reiterating his call for Democrats to back funding for his proposed border wall.

"Arizona, together with our Military and Border Patrol, is bracing for a massive surge at a NON-WALLED area. WE WILL NOT LET THEM THROUGH," Trump wrote in a post on Twitter, appearing to maintain pressure on lawmakers seeking to approve legislation to keep the government open through to Sept. 30 next year.

Representatives for the White House, the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon did not respond immediately to requests for comments.

It was unclear if Trump had a specific group of migrants in mind.

On Wednesday, the US&nbsp;Customs and Border Protection said that border agents in Arizona had apprehended two groups of families from Honduras and Guatemala comprising a total of 124 migrants who had crossed into the United States.

The US&nbsp;Congress approved a stopgap two-week spending bill on Thursday but lawmakers still need to agree on a longer-term funding measure to fund government agencies until the end of the fiscal year in September.

Trump, who has made the construction of the wall a foundation of his presidency, has demanded $5 billion this year from Congress for the boundary and has threatened to shut down the government if lawmakers do not accede.

Democrats have argued the wall would be ineffective at ending illegal migration and stemming the flow of illicit drugs across the border.

US President Donald Trump said without evidence on Thursday Arizona "is bracing for a massive surge" of immigrants along part of the border that has no protective fence, reiterating his call for Democrats to back funding for his proposed border wall.

US President Donald Trump said without evidence on Thursday Arizona "is bracing for a massive surge" of immigrants along part of the border that has no protective fence, reiterating his call for Democrats to back funding for his proposed border wall. "Arizona, together with our Military and Border Patrol, is bracing for a massive surge at a NON-WALLED area. WE WILL NOT LET THEM THROUGH," Trump wrote in a post on Twitter, appearing to maintain pressure on lawmakers seeking to approve legislation to keep the government open through to Sept. 30 next year. Representatives for the White House, the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon did not respond immediately to requests for comments. It was unclear if Trump had a specific group of migrants in mind. On Wednesday, the US Customs and Border Protection said that border agents in Arizona had apprehended two groups of families from Honduras and Guatemala comprising a total of 124 migrants who had crossed into the United States. The US Congress approved a stopgap two-week spending bill on Thursday but lawmakers still need to agree on a longer-term funding measure to fund government agencies until the end of the fiscal year in September. Trump, who has made the construction of the wall a foundation of his presidency, has demanded $5 billion this year from Congress for the boundary and has threatened to shut down the government if lawmakers do not accede. Democrats have argued the wall would be ineffective at ending illegal migration and stemming the flow of illicit drugs across the border.

Trump, without evidence, says Arizona 'bracing' for surge of immigrants

US President Donald Trump called Monday for "a long prison term" after his ex-lawyer <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/ex-lawyer-michael-cohen-says-he-told-trump-about-conversation-with-kremlin-court-filing-180788">Michael Cohen</a> admitted lying to Congress about pursuing a real estate deal with Russia on Trump's behalf during the 2016 election campaign.

He also repeated his accusation that <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-sends-written-responses-to-robert-mueller-in-russia-probe-178500">Special Counsel Robert Mueller</a> -- who is investigating possible collusion between Russia and Trump's campaign -- is forcing witnesses to make up lies damaging to the president.

"You mean he can do all of the TERRIBLE, unrelated to Trump, things having to do with fraud, big loans, Taxis, etc., and not serve a long prison term?" the president said on Twitter.

"He lied for this outcome and should, in my opinion, serve a full and complete sentence," Trump added.

Cohen, once one of the president's closest allies and a top executive at The Trump Organization, last week admitted lying in testimony about contacts with powerful Moscow figures over building a Trump Tower in Moscow.

Those contacts, including with a top aide to President Vladimir Putin, continued throughout the first half of 2016 even after Trump secured the Republican nomination for president, Cohen admitted.

Trump and his campaign have repeatedly denied talks on a deal after 2015, but Cohen told a court that Trump and members of his family were informed of the discussions which continued through the middle of 2016, just months before the presidential election.

On Friday Cohen, who had already admitted multiple counts of tax evasion, financial fraud and campaign finance violations, asked the New York federal court for a "time served" sentence.

He hasn't spent any time incarcerated beyond the routine custody before each of his guilty pleas.

Cohen's lawyers said he had fully cooperated with Mueller's investigation and would continue to do so, and deserved to avoid imprisonment.

"Michael's decision to cooperate and take full responsibility for his own conduct well reflects his personal resolve, notwithstanding past errors, to re-point his internal compass true north toward a productive, ethical and thoroughly law-abiding life," the lawyers said in a court filing.

Trump meanwhile lashed out at Mueller, whom he again accused of forcing witnesses to make up lies damaging to him.

"Robert Mueller... and his out of control band of Angry Democrats, don't want the truth, they only want lies. The truth is very bad for their mission!" Trump tweeted.

The president praised former political advisor Roger Stone, who has rejected allegations that he abetted Russian interference to help Trump in the 2016 election through contacts with WikiLeaks, which published stolen emails that embarrassed Trump's Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

Trump cited Stone's pledge to never testify against him.

"Nice to know that some people still have 'guts!'" Trump wrote.

US President Donald Trump called Monday for "a long prison term" after his ex-lawyer Michael Cohen admitted lying to Congress about pursuing a real estate deal with Russia on Trump's behalf during the 2016 election campaign.

US President Donald Trump called Monday for "a long prison term" after his ex-lawyer Michael Cohen admitted lying to Congress about pursuing a real estate deal with Russia on Trump's behalf during the 2016 election campaign. He also repeated his accusation that Special Counsel Robert Mueller -- who is investigating possible collusion between Russia and Trump's campaign -- is forcing witnesses to make up lies damaging to the president. "You mean he can do all of the TERRIBLE, unrelated to Trump, things having to do with fraud, big loans, Taxis, etc., and not serve a long prison term?" the president said on Twitter. "He lied for this outcome and should, in my opinion, serve a full and complete sentence," Trump added. Cohen, once one of the president's closest allies and a top executive at The Trump Organization, last week admitted lying in testimony about contacts with powerful Moscow figures over building a Trump Tower in Moscow. Those contacts, including with a top aide to President Vladimir Putin, continued throughout the first half of 2016 even after Trump secured the Republican nomination for president, Cohen admitted. Trump and his campaign have repeatedly denied talks on a deal after 2015, but Cohen told a court that Trump and members of his family were informed of the discussions which continued through the middle of 2016, just months before the presidential election. On Friday Cohen, who had already admitted multiple counts of tax evasion, financial fraud and campaign finance violations, asked the New York federal court for a "time served" sentence. He hasn't spent any time incarcerated beyond the routine custody before each of his guilty pleas. Cohen's lawyers said he had fully cooperated with Mueller's investigation and would continue to do so, and deserved to avoid imprisonment. "Michael's decision to cooperate and take full responsibility for his own conduct well reflects his personal resolve, notwithstanding past errors, to re-point his internal compass true north toward a productive, ethical and thoroughly law-abiding life," the lawyers said in a court filing. Trump meanwhile lashed out at Mueller, whom he again accused of forcing witnesses to make up lies damaging to him. "Robert Mueller... and his out of control band of Angry Democrats, don't want the truth, they only want lies. The truth is very bad for their mission!" Trump tweeted. The president praised former political advisor Roger Stone, who has rejected allegations that he abetted Russian interference to help Trump in the 2016 election through contacts with WikiLeaks, which published stolen emails that embarrassed Trump's Democratic rival Hillary Clinton. Trump cited Stone's pledge to never testify against him. "Nice to know that some people still have 'guts!'" Trump wrote.

Trump calls for his ex-lawyer Michael Cohen to be jailed

When the US Congress reconvenes on November 13, it will face a deadline less than a month later to fund parts of the federal government and a possible showdown over money for President Donald Trump's proposed US-Mexico border wall.

Taking a confrontational position on the issue, Trump said at a news conference on Wednesday he could not commit to avoiding a partial government shutdown if Congress refuses to provide him all the funding he wants for his wall.

"We need the money to build the wall, the whole wall, not pieces of it," Trump told reporters, days before Congress reconvenes for its mid-November to mid-December "lame duck" session.

Trump has issued ultimatums about wall funding before, with little impact, even with his own Republican Party in majority control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Even though Tuesday's congressional elections gave the Democrats majority control of the House, the Republicans will still control both chambers until January.

That means that they will need Democratic support for any funding bills in the Senate, where Republicans have 51 of 100 seats. They will need 60 votes to advance legislation.

Having won control of the House in the elections, Democrats said they will be even less motivated than before to meet Trump's wall demands.

If the two parties cannot reach a funding deal, there would be a partial government shutdown, with so-called "essential services," including some at the Department of Homeland Security, likely remaining in operation.

"We need to work this out," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said on Wednesday. "Seventy-five per cent of the government was funded before the end of September."

Lawmakers reached a bipartisan agreement in September to fund much of the federal government. The fight over money for the wall was delayed until after the elections by including only temporary funding until December 8 for some government services, including Homeland Security.

"We're going to do the best we can to try to achieve the president's priorities and hopefully we will not be headed down that path," McConnell said of a partial shutdown.

He said Congress would also try to finalize a five-year reauthorization of the farm bill during the "lame duck" session. The legislation expired at the end of September but most of its programs remain in place through the end of the year.

When the US Congress reconvenes on November 13, it will face a deadline less than a month later to fund parts of the federal government and a possible showdown over money for President Donald Trump's proposed US-Mexico border wall.

When the US Congress reconvenes on November 13, it will face a deadline less than a month later to fund parts of the federal government and a possible showdown over money for President Donald Trump's proposed US-Mexico border wall. Taking a confrontational position on the issue, Trump said at a news conference on Wednesday he could not commit to avoiding a partial government shutdown if Congress refuses to provide him all the funding he wants for his wall. "We need the money to build the wall, the whole wall, not pieces of it," Trump told reporters, days before Congress reconvenes for its mid-November to mid-December "lame duck" session. Trump has issued ultimatums about wall funding before, with little impact, even with his own Republican Party in majority control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Even though Tuesday's congressional elections gave the Democrats majority control of the House, the Republicans will still control both chambers until January. That means that they will need Democratic support for any funding bills in the Senate, where Republicans have 51 of 100 seats. They will need 60 votes to advance legislation. Having won control of the House in the elections, Democrats said they will be even less motivated than before to meet Trump's wall demands. If the two parties cannot reach a funding deal, there would be a partial government shutdown, with so-called "essential services," including some at the Department of Homeland Security, likely remaining in operation. "We need to work this out," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said on Wednesday. "Seventy-five per cent of the government was funded before the end of September." Lawmakers reached a bipartisan agreement in September to fund much of the federal government. The fight over money for the wall was delayed until after the elections by including only temporary funding until December 8 for some government services, including Homeland Security. "We're going to do the best we can to try to achieve the president's priorities and hopefully we will not be headed down that path," McConnell said of a partial shutdown. He said Congress would also try to finalize a five-year reauthorization of the farm bill during the "lame duck" session. The legislation expired at the end of September but most of its programs remain in place through the end of the year.

Battle looms in US Congress over money for Trump's border wall

The so-called 'Samosa Caucus' - an informal group of the Indian-Americans in the US Congress - has failed to bolster its strength, though its all four incumbent members got re-elected to the House of Representatives in the crucial midterm elections.

Pramila Jayapal, Ro Khanna and Raja Krishnamoorthi all won in landslides, while Ami Bera, the longtime US representative in California's 7th Congressional District, won in a more closely-contested race.

In the Eighth Congressional District of Illinois, 45-year-old Krishnamoorthi was re-elected for the second term by a comfortable margin of more than 30 percentage points. He defeated his Indian American Republican opponent J D Diganvker.

Three-term lawmaker 53-year-old Bera was re-elected for a record fourth consecutive time from the Seventh Congressional District of California.&nbsp;

Unlike the previous three elections, Bera did not have to wait for weeks for recounting of votes. He defeated Andrew Grant of the Republican party by a small five per cent margin.

"It's been an honour serving the 7th Congressional District as your congressman and I am grateful for the opportunity to serve again," he said in a statement after responding to the news of his victory.

Bera added that the election was about the values held by Americans.

"If we are truly going to heal this country, we must start by rebuilding trust in government, working across party lines, and putting people before politics," he said, adding that "Whether it's protecting health care or improving Social Security and Medicare, the choices we make right now will directly impact future generations raised in Sacramento County.

In the Silicon Valley, Khanna, 42, defeated Ron Cohen of the Republican party with a massive 44 percentage point in the 17th Congressional District of California.&nbsp;

"Tonight was a great night for our campaign and for Democrats across the country. I'm grateful to the voters of #CA17 for giving me the opportunity to continue to represent you in Congress. This has been the honour of my life," Khanna said.

"With Democrats in control of the House, we will push for economic and foreign policy populism," he said.

Congresswoman Jayapal, the only Indian-American woman lawmaker in the House of Representatives, defeated her Republican rival Craig Keller by a massive 66 percentage points.

"The American people voted to put the Democrats back in control of the US House of Representatives. Now, we are primed to restore the balance of power between the branches of government and push back even more strongly against the Trump administration's deeply destructive policies," Jayapal, 53, said in her victory speech in Seattle.

None of the more than half a dozen new Indian-Americans candidates, many of whom caught national attention by giving a tough fight to their opponents and outraising them in the fundraisers, could make it to the House of Representatives, which is equivalent to Lok Sabha in the Indian parliament.

However, Indian-Americans picked up more seats in the State Assemblies. The community sent its member Ram Villivalam for the first time to the Illinois Senate and also elected a Muslim Indian-American Mujtaba Mohammed to the North Carolina State Senate.

For the first time, more than 100 Indian-Americans had entered the race in this mid-term elections, of which over 50 were on the ballot on Tuesday.

Among them, 12, including four incumbents, were running for the House and one for the Senate - a record in itself.

Indian-American of Tibetan descent Aftab Pureval, 35, lost to Republican incumbent Steve Chabot.

Former state department diplomat Sri Preston Kulkarni lost to his Republican incumbent Pete Olson from the 22nd Congressional District of Texas.

A five-time incumbent, Olson defeated his Indian-American Democratic challenger in the most heated 22nd Congressional District that the opposition had hoped to flip due to a large Asian-American population.

In the first Congressional District of Arkansas, Democratic Chintan Desai lost to Republican incumbent Rick Crawford, while Republican Harry Arora lost to incumbent Jim Himes in the Fourth Congressional District of Connecticut.

Successful entrepreneur Shiva Ayyadurai, who fought the Massachusetts Senate race as an independent, came a distant third. Democratic leader Elizabeth Warren registered a comprehensive win over her Republican rival Geoff Diehl to re-enter the US Senate.

Democratic Nima Kulkarni defeated Joshua Neubert from the GOP to make her maiden entry into the Kentucky Assembly from State District 40. A practising and recognised lawyer, she owns Indus Law Firm specialising in immigration, employment and business law.

Mujtaba Mohammed entered the North Carolina State Senate from the Senate District 38. A former staff attorney at the Council for Children's Rights and assistant public defender, Mohammed defeated Richard Rivette.

Republican Niraj Atani, 27, registered his third consecutive electoral victory from Ohio House 42nd District. He is the youngest Indian-American elected official in the US.&nbsp;

He is also the second Indian-American state elected official in Ohio history and the first Indian-American Republican.

Nationwide, the Democratic Party won more than the necessary 218 seats to reclaim control of the House, while the US Senate remains in Republican control.&nbsp;

The so-called 'Samosa Caucus' - an informal group of the Indian-Americans in the US Congress - has failed to bolster its strength, though its all four incumbent members got re-elected to the House of Representatives in the crucial midterm elections.

The so-called 'Samosa Caucus' - an informal group of the Indian-Americans in the US Congress - has failed to bolster its strength, though its all four incumbent members got re-elected to the House of Representatives in the crucial midterm elections. Pramila Jayapal, Ro Khanna and Raja Krishnamoorthi all won in landslides, while Ami Bera, the longtime US representative in California's 7th Congressional District, won in a more closely-contested race. In the Eighth Congressional District of Illinois, 45-year-old Krishnamoorthi was re-elected for the second term by a comfortable margin of more than 30 percentage points. He defeated his Indian American Republican opponent J D Diganvker. Three-term lawmaker 53-year-old Bera was re-elected for a record fourth consecutive time from the Seventh Congressional District of California. Unlike the previous three elections, Bera did not have to wait for weeks for recounting of votes. He defeated Andrew Grant of the Republican party by a small five per cent margin. "It's been an honour serving the 7th Congressional District as your congressman and I am grateful for the opportunity to serve again," he said in a statement after responding to the news of his victory. Bera added that the election was about the values held by Americans. "If we are truly going to heal this country, we must start by rebuilding trust in government, working across party lines, and putting people before politics," he said, adding that "Whether it's protecting health care or improving Social Security and Medicare, the choices we make right now will directly impact future generations raised in Sacramento County. In the Silicon Valley, Khanna, 42, defeated Ron Cohen of the Republican party with a massive 44 percentage point in the 17th Congressional District of California. "Tonight was a great night for our campaign and for Democrats across the country. I'm grateful to the voters of #CA17 for giving me the opportunity to continue to represent you in Congress. This has been the honour of my life," Khanna said. "With Democrats in control of the House, we will push for economic and foreign policy populism," he said. Congresswoman Jayapal, the only Indian-American woman lawmaker in the House of Representatives, defeated her Republican rival Craig Keller by a massive 66 percentage points. "The American people voted to put the Democrats back in control of the US House of Representatives. Now, we are primed to restore the balance of power between the branches of government and push back even more strongly against the Trump administration's deeply destructive policies," Jayapal, 53, said in her victory speech in Seattle. None of the more than half a dozen new Indian-Americans candidates, many of whom caught national attention by giving a tough fight to their opponents and outraising them in the fundraisers, could make it to the House of Representatives, which is equivalent to Lok Sabha in the Indian parliament. However, Indian-Americans picked up more seats in the State Assemblies. The community sent its member Ram Villivalam for the first time to the Illinois Senate and also elected a Muslim Indian-American Mujtaba Mohammed to the North Carolina State Senate. For the first time, more than 100 Indian-Americans had entered the race in this mid-term elections, of which over 50 were on the ballot on Tuesday. Among them, 12, including four incumbents, were running for the House and one for the Senate - a record in itself. Indian-American of Tibetan descent Aftab Pureval, 35, lost to Republican incumbent Steve Chabot. Former state department diplomat Sri Preston Kulkarni lost to his Republican incumbent Pete Olson from the 22nd Congressional District of Texas. A five-time incumbent, Olson defeated his Indian-American Democratic challenger in the most heated 22nd Congressional District that the opposition had hoped to flip due to a large Asian-American population. In the first Congressional District of Arkansas, Democratic Chintan Desai lost to Republican incumbent Rick Crawford, while Republican Harry Arora lost to incumbent Jim Himes in the Fourth Congressional District of Connecticut. Successful entrepreneur Shiva Ayyadurai, who fought the Massachusetts Senate race as an independent, came a distant third. Democratic leader Elizabeth Warren registered a comprehensive win over her Republican rival Geoff Diehl to re-enter the US Senate. Democratic Nima Kulkarni defeated Joshua Neubert from the GOP to make her maiden entry into the Kentucky Assembly from State District 40. A practising and recognised lawyer, she owns Indus Law Firm specialising in immigration, employment and business law. Mujtaba Mohammed entered the North Carolina State Senate from the Senate District 38. A former staff attorney at the Council for Children's Rights and assistant public defender, Mohammed defeated Richard Rivette. Republican Niraj Atani, 27, registered his third consecutive electoral victory from Ohio House 42nd District. He is the youngest Indian-American elected official in the US. He is also the second Indian-American state elected official in Ohio history and the first Indian-American Republican. Nationwide, the Democratic Party won more than the necessary 218 seats to reclaim control of the House, while the US Senate remains in Republican control.

Samosa Caucus, informal group of Indian-Americans fails to increase its strength in US Congress in midterm polls 

Democrats began to scent a big night in the US <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/big-turnout-as-america-votes-in-test-of-trump-presidency-175921">midterm elections</a> Tuesday with early results pointing to them seizing the House of Representatives from the Republicans in what would be a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/democrats-snatch-first-congress-seats-from-republicans-in-us-midterms-175929">dramatic rebuke</a> to President Donald Trump.

With polls yet to close in swaths of the country, it was still far too early to know who will control the House and Senate, which for the first two years of Trump's presidency have been held by his Republican allies.

However, initial results -- like the flipping by Jennifer Wexton of a previously solidly Republican Virginia seat in the House -- signalled that pre-election predictions of Democrats taking over the lower chamber may be confirmed.

Democrats were also heartened by heavy turnout after a bitter campaign which at Trump's own insistence was widely seen as an unofficial referendum on his polarizing presidency. From New York to California and from Missouri to Georgia there were long lines from early morning at polling stations.

Although Republicans remained forecast to keep control of the Senate, a Democratic House would upend the current Washington power balance.

Trump has spent months ahead of the midterms deriding the Democrats as bent on destroying the US economy and allowing criminals to run riot.

But with the party leading the House, Trump would be forced to compromise more -- or risk presiding over an ever more divided country. Democrats, still smarting from Trump's extraordinary upset win against Hillary Clinton in 2016, would likely use their ascendancy to exact payback.

Democratic leadership of the House's powerful investigative committees would breathe new wind into probes of Trump's opaque personal finances, Russian interference in the 2016 election, and even calls for his impeachment.

Confident Democratic leaders 
All 435 seats in the House of Representatives, 35 seats in the 100-member Senate and 36 governorships were up for grabs.

Polls indicated that Democrats have a good chance of winning the 23 seats they need to seize the House, while Republicans could slightly increase their razor-thin Senate majority of 51-49.

Pollsters, gun shy after getting their 2016 predictions wrong, urged caution. Several dozen midterm races where candidates from the two sides were barely separated will decide the day.

Even so, Democrats were confident, with Nancy Pelosi, the party's top leader in the House, saying "it's just a question of the size of the victory."

Former vice president Joe Biden, often touted as a possible Democratic candidate to take on Trump in 2020, said he'd be "dumbfounded" not to win the House.

The first polling stations closed at 6:00 pm Eastern time (2300 GMT) in parts of Kentucky and Indiana, with the last to close seven hours later in Alaska, and results trickling in through the evening.

Big turnout 
Voters often sit out the midterms. This time, they're sitting up.

According to Michael McDonald of the US Elections Project, 38.4 million Americans cast their ballots early ahead of this election, compared with 27.4 million in the 2014 midterm.

And on the streets there was a palpable buzz.

"We have already seen huge turnout, people out and about knocking on doors, making sure everybody gets out there, but I think turnout will be very, very high," Democratic candidate Katie Porter, who is running in Irvine, California, against two-term Republican incumbent Mimi Walters, told AFP.

On the other side of the country, in Atlanta, Georgia, voters waited in line for nearly two hours to cast ballots, according to local media reports.

At a polling station in Arlington, Virginia, head election officer William Harkins said "it's a very good turnout."

Trump himself noted the energy as he wrapped up a punishing schedule of rallies around the country that were intended to boost Republican candidates -- and his own brand heading towards reelection in 2020.

"The midterm elections used to be, like, boring," Trump told a crowd in Cleveland, Ohio, on Monday. "Now it's like the hottest thing."

Immigration fears 
Trump was watching the results alongside friends and family at the White House, his spokeswoman said.

The president so dominates politics across the country that despite not being on any ballot he has made the election largely about him.

Voting in Chicago, James Gerlock, 27, a Republican, said he wanted to see more of the soaring economic growth that Trump says is the fruit of his business-friendly policies.

"I am extremely happy with the economy," Gerlock said. "I just want to keep everything moving, because I'm loving it."

But Democrats have been fired up by anger at Trump's extraordinary attacks over the last few weeks against immigrants, claiming that his opponents seek to throw open the borders to "drug dealers, predators and bloodthirsty MS-13 killers."

Trump has sent soldiers to the Mexican border, threatened to have illegal immigrants shot if they throw stones at the border, and vowed to restrict citizenship rights.

Beto O'Rourke, a charismatic Democrat in a closely watched bid to dethrone Republican Senator Ted Cruz in Texas, told voters that Trump was wrong, describing his state as built from "immigrants, asylum seekers and refugees."

The result in Texas will say much about which way argument has worked best in these polarized times. Other tight Senate races are in Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, Nevada, North Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia.

Democrats began to scent a big night in the US midterm elections Tuesday with early results pointing to them seizing the House of Representatives from the Republicans in what would be a dramatic rebuke to President Donald Trump.

Democrats began to scent a big night in the US midterm elections Tuesday with early results pointing to them seizing the House of Representatives from the Republicans in what would be a dramatic rebuke to President Donald Trump. With polls yet to close in swaths of the country, it was still far too early to know who will control the House and Senate, which for the first two years of Trump's presidency have been held by his Republican allies. However, initial results -- like the flipping by Jennifer Wexton of a previously solidly Republican Virginia seat in the House -- signalled that pre-election predictions of Democrats taking over the lower chamber may be confirmed. Democrats were also heartened by heavy turnout after a bitter campaign which at Trump's own insistence was widely seen as an unofficial referendum on his polarizing presidency. From New York to California and from Missouri to Georgia there were long lines from early morning at polling stations. Although Republicans remained forecast to keep control of the Senate, a Democratic House would upend the current Washington power balance. Trump has spent months ahead of the midterms deriding the Democrats as bent on destroying the US economy and allowing criminals to run riot. But with the party leading the House, Trump would be forced to compromise more -- or risk presiding over an ever more divided country. Democrats, still smarting from Trump's extraordinary upset win against Hillary Clinton in 2016, would likely use their ascendancy to exact payback. Democratic leadership of the House's powerful investigative committees would breathe new wind into probes of Trump's opaque personal finances, Russian interference in the 2016 election, and even calls for his impeachment. Confident Democratic leaders All 435 seats in the House of Representatives, 35 seats in the 100-member Senate and 36 governorships were up for grabs. Polls indicated that Democrats have a good chance of winning the 23 seats they need to seize the House, while Republicans could slightly increase their razor-thin Senate majority of 51-49. Pollsters, gun shy after getting their 2016 predictions wrong, urged caution. Several dozen midterm races where candidates from the two sides were barely separated will decide the day. Even so, Democrats were confident, with Nancy Pelosi, the party's top leader in the House, saying "it's just a question of the size of the victory." Former vice president Joe Biden, often touted as a possible Democratic candidate to take on Trump in 2020, said he'd be "dumbfounded" not to win the House. The first polling stations closed at 6:00 pm Eastern time (2300 GMT) in parts of Kentucky and Indiana, with the last to close seven hours later in Alaska, and results trickling in through the evening. Big turnout Voters often sit out the midterms. This time, they're sitting up. According to Michael McDonald of the US Elections Project, 38.4 million Americans cast their ballots early ahead of this election, compared with 27.4 million in the 2014 midterm. And on the streets there was a palpable buzz. "We have already seen huge turnout, people out and about knocking on doors, making sure everybody gets out there, but I think turnout will be very, very high," Democratic candidate Katie Porter, who is running in Irvine, California, against two-term Republican incumbent Mimi Walters, told AFP. On the other side of the country, in Atlanta, Georgia, voters waited in line for nearly two hours to cast ballots, according to local media reports. At a polling station in Arlington, Virginia, head election officer William Harkins said "it's a very good turnout." Trump himself noted the energy as he wrapped up a punishing schedule of rallies around the country that were intended to boost Republican candidates -- and his own brand heading towards reelection in 2020. "The midterm elections used to be, like, boring," Trump told a crowd in Cleveland, Ohio, on Monday. "Now it's like the hottest thing." Immigration fears Trump was watching the results alongside friends and family at the White House, his spokeswoman said. The president so dominates politics across the country that despite not being on any ballot he has made the election largely about him. Voting in Chicago, James Gerlock, 27, a Republican, said he wanted to see more of the soaring economic growth that Trump says is the fruit of his business-friendly policies. "I am extremely happy with the economy," Gerlock said. "I just want to keep everything moving, because I'm loving it." But Democrats have been fired up by anger at Trump's extraordinary attacks over the last few weeks against immigrants, claiming that his opponents seek to throw open the borders to "drug dealers, predators and bloodthirsty MS-13 killers." Trump has sent soldiers to the Mexican border, threatened to have illegal immigrants shot if they throw stones at the border, and vowed to restrict citizenship rights. Beto O'Rourke, a charismatic Democrat in a closely watched bid to dethrone Republican Senator Ted Cruz in Texas, told voters that Trump was wrong, describing his state as built from "immigrants, asylum seekers and refugees." The result in Texas will say much about which way argument has worked best in these polarized times. Other tight Senate races are in Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, Nevada, North Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia.

US midterms: Democrats scent victory over Trump's Republicans in Congress

All you need to know about US midterm polls

US midterm polls 2018: Candidates campaign full-throttle before election day

US voters are poised to elect two Muslim women to Congress in the midterm election next week, marking a historic first even as anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant rhetoric has been on the rise.

Ilhan Omar, a Somali refugee, is all but certain to be elected to the US House of Representatives in a heavily-Democratic district in the Midwestern state of Minnesota, where she is the party's nominee.

Rashida Tlaib, a social worker born in Detroit to Palestinian immigrant parents, will win a House seat in a district where she is running unopposed.

The two will be the first Muslim women to serve in the US Congress. They will increase the total number of Muslims in Congress to three.

Congressman Andre Carson, who is Muslim and African American, is likely to win reelection in his safely-Democratic district in the state of Indiana.

The expected electoral milestone is in stark contrast to the rise in anti-Muslim sentiment around the country. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) reported a 21 percent increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes in the first six months of 2018.

Trump 'a wake-up call'

Both Tlaib and Omar have positioned themselves as polar opposites of President Donald Trump and his Republican Party.

They oppose Trump's restrictive immigration policies, support a universal health care system which Republicans oppose, and want to abolish US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

ICE has conducted raids throughout the country, leaving immigrant communities terrified of deportations -- including longtime Iraqi refugees in Michigan.

"The election of Donald Trump was a wake-up call," Colin Christopher of the Islamic Society of North America told AFP.

"Now we're seeing communities that were once absent from public conversations... all of a sudden are really engaged."

The two women are part of a historically diverse crop of candidates -- by race, gender, and sexuality -- challenging Republican incumbents.

They reflect a Trump era in which race and women's rights and empowerment have emerged as flashpoint issues for Democrats, and identity politics are increasingly important.

Polls indicate next week's election will likely hand Democrats control of the lower house of Congress in a rebuke of Trump's administration. The Senate is seen as more likely to stay in Republican majority control.

Anti-Trump message

Tlaib was born and raised in Detroit -- the eldest of 14 children. In 2008, she became the first Muslim woman to serve in the Michigan state legislature.

The 42-year-old has positioned herself as a champion of the working class and strongly anti-Trump. During the 2016 presidential campaign, she heckled then-candidate Trump during a speech in Detroit. &nbsp;

Tlaib won the Democratic party's primary election in August in a predominantly African American district.

"Her district does not have many Muslims in it," said Dawud Walid, executive director of CAIR's Michigan chapter.

"I don't believe that her ethnic or religious identity has had much of a part to play in her victory nor any opposition against her."

Tlaib has been mindful of the historic nature of her candidacy. During her tearful primary election victory speech in August, with her mother by her side, she said relatives in the West Bank were watching her success.

"It just shows how incredibly wonderful our country can be," she said. "All the ugliness and the hatred that you hear out there, it's not who we are."

With no Republican opposing Tlaib, she will be elected next week to a two-year term to replace longtime Congressman John Conyers who stepped down in December amid sexual harassment allegations and failing health.

First Somali-American lawmaker

Ilhan Omar also has forged a progressive political identity. She supports free college education, housing for all, and criminal justice reform.

The hijab-wearing Minnesota state lawmaker's personal identity has played a big role in her campaign. She is the first Somali-American legislator in the US.

Omar fled her native country's civil war at the age of eight, and later immigrated with her family to the US. &nbsp;

She was inspired by politics early on, when accompanying her grandfather to his first election vote.

"I just fell in love with politics and with what it could do," she told Elle magazine in September.

"I decided to run because I was one of many people I knew who really wanted to demonstrate what representative democracies are supposed to be."

In 2016, the 36-year-old won an uncontested seat in the legislature of her Midwestern home state, where there is a sizable Somali population.

Running for a congressional seat in a heavily-Democratic district that includes the city of Minneapolis, she is expected to easily defeat her Republican challenger.

She would replace Keith Ellison, who was the first Muslim elected to Congress in 2006. He gave up his seat to run for the state's attorney general's office.

US voters are poised to elect two Muslim women to Congress in the midterm election next week, marking a historic first even as anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant rhetoric has been on the rise.

US voters are poised to elect two Muslim women to Congress in the midterm election next week, marking a historic first even as anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant rhetoric has been on the rise. Ilhan Omar, a Somali refugee, is all but certain to be elected to the US House of Representatives in a heavily-Democratic district in the Midwestern state of Minnesota, where she is the party's nominee. Rashida Tlaib, a social worker born in Detroit to Palestinian immigrant parents, will win a House seat in a district where she is running unopposed. The two will be the first Muslim women to serve in the US Congress. They will increase the total number of Muslims in Congress to three. Congressman Andre Carson, who is Muslim and African American, is likely to win reelection in his safely-Democratic district in the state of Indiana. The expected electoral milestone is in stark contrast to the rise in anti-Muslim sentiment around the country. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) reported a 21 percent increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes in the first six months of 2018. Trump 'a wake-up call' Both Tlaib and Omar have positioned themselves as polar opposites of President Donald Trump and his Republican Party. They oppose Trump's restrictive immigration policies, support a universal health care system which Republicans oppose, and want to abolish US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE has conducted raids throughout the country, leaving immigrant communities terrified of deportations -- including longtime Iraqi refugees in Michigan. "The election of Donald Trump was a wake-up call," Colin Christopher of the Islamic Society of North America told AFP. "Now we're seeing communities that were once absent from public conversations... all of a sudden are really engaged." The two women are part of a historically diverse crop of candidates -- by race, gender, and sexuality -- challenging Republican incumbents. They reflect a Trump era in which race and women's rights and empowerment have emerged as flashpoint issues for Democrats, and identity politics are increasingly important. Polls indicate next week's election will likely hand Democrats control of the lower house of Congress in a rebuke of Trump's administration. The Senate is seen as more likely to stay in Republican majority control. Anti-Trump message Tlaib was born and raised in Detroit -- the eldest of 14 children. In 2008, she became the first Muslim woman to serve in the Michigan state legislature. The 42-year-old has positioned herself as a champion of the working class and strongly anti-Trump. During the 2016 presidential campaign, she heckled then-candidate Trump during a speech in Detroit. Tlaib won the Democratic party's primary election in August in a predominantly African American district. "Her district does not have many Muslims in it," said Dawud Walid, executive director of CAIR's Michigan chapter. "I don't believe that her ethnic or religious identity has had much of a part to play in her victory nor any opposition against her." Tlaib has been mindful of the historic nature of her candidacy. During her tearful primary election victory speech in August, with her mother by her side, she said relatives in the West Bank were watching her success. "It just shows how incredibly wonderful our country can be," she said. "All the ugliness and the hatred that you hear out there, it's not who we are." With no Republican opposing Tlaib, she will be elected next week to a two-year term to replace longtime Congressman John Conyers who stepped down in December amid sexual harassment allegations and failing health. First Somali-American lawmaker Ilhan Omar also has forged a progressive political identity. She supports free college education, housing for all, and criminal justice reform. The hijab-wearing Minnesota state lawmaker's personal identity has played a big role in her campaign. She is the first Somali-American legislator in the US. Omar fled her native country's civil war at the age of eight, and later immigrated with her family to the US. She was inspired by politics early on, when accompanying her grandfather to his first election vote. "I just fell in love with politics and with what it could do," she told Elle magazine in September. "I decided to run because I was one of many people I knew who really wanted to demonstrate what representative democracies are supposed to be." In 2016, the 36-year-old won an uncontested seat in the legislature of her Midwestern home state, where there is a sizable Somali population. Running for a congressional seat in a heavily-Democratic district that includes the city of Minneapolis, she is expected to easily defeat her Republican challenger. She would replace Keith Ellison, who was the first Muslim elected to Congress in 2006. He gave up his seat to run for the state's attorney general's office.

US voters poised to elect 2 Muslim women to Congress in midterm elections

Less than five weeks before elections that will determine control of the US Congress for the next two years, about a third of registered voters do not know the name of their party's candidate for office, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll found.

Name recognition is critical in motivating voters, is the reason candidates spend millions of dollars on TV ads and is a major factor in incumbents' advantage in fending off challengers.

But it may be slightly less critical on November 6 as many voters may view their choices as referendums on a man whose name will not be on the ballot: Republican President Donald Trump.

"With the current party polarization, voters increasingly vote based on party (read: like or dislike Trump) rather than the local candidates," Robert Erikson, a professor of political science at Columbia University in New York City, wrote in an email.

A Reuter/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday found that 34 per cent of Republican registered voters and 32.5 per cent of Democratic registered voters said they did not know the names of their party's congressional candidates in their districts.

The poll of 2,597 registered voters taken September 24-30 had a credibility interval, a measure of precision, of 3 percentage points.

The level of congressional candidate name recognition is about in line with recent elections, said Marc Hetherington, a professor of political science at the University of North Carolina.

"People aren't voting for their side as much as they are voting against the other side," Hetherington said. "It really doesn't matter what the names are these days."

Generic party interest is not working to Republicans' advantage nationally. Some 54 per cent of US adults told Reuters/Ipsos they disapprove of the way Trump is handling the presidency and Democrats have a 9 percentage point lead in a generic question on which party they expect to vote for in Congress.

Democrats need to pick up 23 seats in the House to win a majority that they could use to more effectively oppose Trump's agenda.&nbsp;

Beyond party and name recognition, gender may play a role in voters' decisions this year, said Michael Cornfield, an associate professor of political management at George Washington University. The #MeToo movement and protests around Trump's Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh have played into that trend.

"In these cases, it's not just the name," Cornfield said in an email. "Gender relations may be the top issue."

Less than five weeks before elections that will determine control of the US Congress for the next two years, about a third of registered voters do not know the name of their party's candidate for office, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll found.

Less than five weeks before elections that will determine control of the US Congress for the next two years, about a third of registered voters do not know the name of their party's candidate for office, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll found. Name recognition is critical in motivating voters, is the reason candidates spend millions of dollars on TV ads and is a major factor in incumbents' advantage in fending off challengers. But it may be slightly less critical on November 6 as many voters may view their choices as referendums on a man whose name will not be on the ballot: Republican President Donald Trump. "With the current party polarization, voters increasingly vote based on party (read: like or dislike Trump) rather than the local candidates," Robert Erikson, a professor of political science at Columbia University in New York City, wrote in an email. A Reuter/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday found that 34 per cent of Republican registered voters and 32.5 per cent of Democratic registered voters said they did not know the names of their party's congressional candidates in their districts. The poll of 2,597 registered voters taken September 24-30 had a credibility interval, a measure of precision, of 3 percentage points. The level of congressional candidate name recognition is about in line with recent elections, said Marc Hetherington, a professor of political science at the University of North Carolina. "People aren't voting for their side as much as they are voting against the other side," Hetherington said. "It really doesn't matter what the names are these days." Generic party interest is not working to Republicans' advantage nationally. Some 54 per cent of US adults told Reuters/Ipsos they disapprove of the way Trump is handling the presidency and Democrats have a 9 percentage point lead in a generic question on which party they expect to vote for in Congress. Democrats need to pick up 23 seats in the House to win a majority that they could use to more effectively oppose Trump's agenda. Beyond party and name recognition, gender may play a role in voters' decisions this year, said Michael Cornfield, an associate professor of political management at George Washington University. The #MeToo movement and protests around Trump's Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh have played into that trend. "In these cases, it's not just the name," Cornfield said in an email. "Gender relations may be the top issue."

What's in a name? One-third of US voters don't know candidates

India needs to be central to what the Trump administration does in South and Central Asia, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the lawmakers on Thursday, asserting that India "ought to be" one of America's closest partners.

"For scores of reasons, India needs to be central to what we do. Specific issues -- South Central Asia issues, Southeast Asia issues. They ought to be one of our closest partners and we ought to do everything we can to make sure that we achieve that," he told the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 
 
Pompeo was responding to questions from Senator Chris Coons from Delaware about how to further strengthen the US-India relationship.

"Mr Secretary, if you would like to say anything about how we can work with this most populous democracy, a potential strategic partner to strengthen that relationship, I'll make that my last question," Coons asked.

He said sustaining a strategic dialogue with India was something that "would enjoy strong support here".

Pompeo responded that, "Defense Secretary (James) Mattis and I will jointly meet with our Indian counterparts in a dialogue that the two countries have had. I don't know that the date's been set but we're looking to do it. I think it's set this summer, very important."

Pompeo and Mattis are expected to host their Indian counterparts -- External affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj and Defense Minister Nirmala Sitharaman -- sometime this summer for the inaugural 2+2 dialogue.

The decision about this was taken when Prime Minister Narendra Modi was hosted by President Donald Trump at the White House on June 26 last year.

The US-India relationship enjoys bipartisan support in the US Congress.

Early this week, a top US State Department official said the Trump administration supports India's emergence as a leading global power and as a key partner in the Indo-Pacific region.

"The US-India partnership is rooted in shared democratic values and a commitment to a rules-based order. We support India's emergence as a leading global power and as a key partner in our efforts to ensure that the Indo-

Pacific is a region of peace, stability and growing prosperity," State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert had said.&nbsp;

Pompeo was responding to questions from Senator Chris Coons from Delaware about how to further strengthen the US-India relationship

India needs to be central to what the Trump administration does in South and Central Asia, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the lawmakers on Thursday, asserting that India "ought to be" one of America's closest partners. "For scores of reasons, India needs to be central to what we do. Specific issues -- South Central Asia issues, Southeast Asia issues. They ought to be one of our closest partners and we ought to do everything we can to make sure that we achieve that," he told the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Pompeo was responding to questions from Senator Chris Coons from Delaware about how to further strengthen the US-India relationship. "Mr Secretary, if you would like to say anything about how we can work with this most populous democracy, a potential strategic partner to strengthen that relationship, I'll make that my last question," Coons asked. He said sustaining a strategic dialogue with India was something that "would enjoy strong support here". Pompeo responded that, "Defense Secretary (James) Mattis and I will jointly meet with our Indian counterparts in a dialogue that the two countries have had. I don't know that the date's been set but we're looking to do it. I think it's set this summer, very important." Pompeo and Mattis are expected to host their Indian counterparts -- External affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj and Defense Minister Nirmala Sitharaman -- sometime this summer for the inaugural 2+2 dialogue. The decision about this was taken when Prime Minister Narendra Modi was hosted by President Donald Trump at the White House on June 26 last year. The US-India relationship enjoys bipartisan support in the US Congress. Early this week, a top US State Department official said the Trump administration supports India's emergence as a leading global power and as a key partner in the Indo-Pacific region. "The US-India partnership is rooted in shared democratic values and a commitment to a rules-based order. We support India's emergence as a leading global power and as a key partner in our efforts to ensure that the Indo- Pacific is a region of peace, stability and growing prosperity," State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert had said.

India ought to be one of America's closest partners, says US Secretary of State

A record number of 20 Indian Americans are running for US Congressional elections this year. Collectively they have raised more than $ 5.5 million, as per latest official figures, with seven of them raising over a million each. 
 
With six months still to go for the November Congressional election, except for Hiral Tipirneni who is running for April 24 special elections in Arizona, the figure of more than USD 15.5 million raised by Indian Americans so far that could be a record in itself for any ethnic community in the US.&nbsp; 
 
Traditionally, a significant amount of money is raised by candidates in the last two quarters. 
 
As per the latest fund-raising figures released by the Federal Election Commission, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi from Illinois has raised maximum over $ 3.5 million. Mr Krishnamoorthi is seeking his re-election from the eighth Congressional district in Illinois. Pitted against him is Indian American Jitender Digankar from the Republican party.&nbsp; 
 
Indian-American scientist and entrepreneur Shiv Ayyadurai, who is running as an independent candidate for the US Senate seat from Massachusetts.&nbsp;

Three other Indian American Congressmen Ro Khanna, Dr Ami Bera and Pramila Jayapal each have raise more than a million each. Krishnamoorthi, Khanna, Bera and Jayapal are the four Indian Americans in the current House of Representative. They are collectively called Samosa Caucus. 
 
According to Federal Election Commission Ro Khanna, seeking re-election from California's 17th Congressional district had raised nearly $2 million ($1.92 million to be precise) till March 31.&nbsp; 
 
He is followed by Dr Ami Bera ($ 1.7 million), who is seeking his fourth consecutive term in the US House of Representative from the seventh Congressional District in California. 
 
Pramila Jayapal, the first ever Indian-American to be elected to the House of Representative has raised $ 1.3 million. She is seeking her re-election from the seventh Congressional District of Washington State.&nbsp; 
 
In addition to Jayapal, four other Indian American women are running for the US House of Representatives Hiral Tipirneni from eights Congressional District of Arizona Aruna Miller from sixth Congressional District of Maryland, Anita Malik from sixth Congressional District of Arizona and Saira Rao from the first Congressional District of Colorado. 
 
All four are from the Democratic party. This week all eyes are on Tipirneni as latest polls suggests that in the April 24 Special election she might create an upset by winning this Republican stronghold. She had raised $ 670,521 till March 31, according to FEC records. 
 
Aruna Miller, who has to win the June 26 primaries to become party's nominee for the November Congressional elections has surprised many by raising more than $ 1 million till the last quarter.&nbsp; 
 
Among other two women candidates, Rao has raised $ 255,000 and Malik has raised $64,000, according to FEC records. 
 
Indian-American Aftab Pureva, who is seeking to enter the House of Representative from First Congressional District of Ohio on a Democratic ticket has raised $ 663,000. Recently the Democratic party identified him as a potential winner. 
 
By raising more than $ 1.1 million for the June 26 primary against incumbent Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, young Suraj Patel has surprised many.&nbsp; 
 
In the 11th Congressional District of New York two Indian Americans Omar Vaid and Mohan Radhakrishnan -- are vying for Democratic primary on June 26.&nbsp; 
 
Two have raised 31,000 and 16,000 respectively. Similarly, in the two Indian Americans Peter Jacob and Goutam U Jois -- are running against each other for the June 5 Democratic primary in the Seventh Congressional District of New Jersey.&nbsp; 
 
Sri Preston Kulkarni is headed for a primary run-off for the 22nd Congressional District of Texas on May 22. He has raised more than $ 178,000, FEC records reveal, Abhijit Das from the third Congressional District of Massachusetts more than $ 220,000 and Chintan Desai from the One Congressional District of Arkansas has raised $ 16,000.&nbsp; 
 
In addition to Digankar, Harry Arora is the only other Republican Indian American in race for the Congress. Running from fourth Congressional District of Connecticut, Arora has raised $ 192,000 so far.&nbsp; 
 
A calculation of FEC figures, as of March 31 indicated, that all the 20 Indian-American candidates in the race for the Congressional elections this year have more than $11 million in all for the rest part of the campaign.&nbsp;

FEC figures also reveal that these candidates have loaned more than $1.1 million to their campaigns. The list is topped by Arora with $ 500,000, followed by Abhijit Das ($ 283,000), Vaid ($ 105,000) Jois ($ 100,000), Tipirneni ($ 70,000), Radhakrishnan ($50,000), Kulkarni ($ 35,000) and Jacob ($ 10,000). 
 
The current Congress has four Indian Americans in the House of Representatives, which is a record in itself.

<ul data-ad-size="[0,370]" data-adheight="360" data-adwidth="640" data-autoplay="false" data-callback="sponsorAdSuccess" data-cb="processCtnAds" data-desc-len="90" data-expansion-size="[0,480]" data-loop="0" data-native-tmpl="ctn_midarticle" data-native-vid-tmpl="ctn_belly_vid" data-position="638677211" data-skew="0" data-slot="129146" id="129146-638677211">
</ul>

<ul data-ad-size="[0,370]" data-adheight="360" data-adwidth="640" data-autoplay="false" data-callback="sponsorAdSuccess" data-cb="processCtnAds" data-desc-len="90" data-expansion-size="[0,480]" data-loop="0" data-native-tmpl="ctn_midarticle" data-native-vid-tmpl="ctn_belly_vid" data-position="638677211" data-skew="0" data-slot="129146" id="129146-638677211">
</ul>

Traditionally, a significant amount of money is raised by candidates in the last two quarters

A record number of 20 Indian Americans are running for US Congressional elections this year. Collectively they have raised more than $ 5.5 million, as per latest official figures, with seven of them raising over a million each. With six months still to go for the November Congressional election, except for Hiral Tipirneni who is running for April 24 special elections in Arizona, the figure of more than USD 15.5 million raised by Indian Americans so far that could be a record in itself for any ethnic community in the US. Traditionally, a significant amount of money is raised by candidates in the last two quarters. As per the latest fund-raising figures released by the Federal Election Commission, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi from Illinois has raised maximum over $ 3.5 million. Mr Krishnamoorthi is seeking his re-election from the eighth Congressional district in Illinois. Pitted against him is Indian American Jitender Digankar from the Republican party. Indian-American scientist and entrepreneur Shiv Ayyadurai, who is running as an independent candidate for the US Senate seat from Massachusetts. Three other Indian American Congressmen Ro Khanna, Dr Ami Bera and Pramila Jayapal each have raise more than a million each. Krishnamoorthi, Khanna, Bera and Jayapal are the four Indian Americans in the current House of Representative. They are collectively called Samosa Caucus. According to Federal Election Commission Ro Khanna, seeking re-election from California's 17th Congressional district had raised nearly $2 million ($1.92 million to be precise) till March 31. He is followed by Dr Ami Bera ($ 1.7 million), who is seeking his fourth consecutive term in the US House of Representative from the seventh Congressional District in California. Pramila Jayapal, the first ever Indian-American to be elected to the House of Representative has raised $ 1.3 million. She is seeking her re-election from the seventh Congressional District of Washington State. In addition to Jayapal, four other Indian American women are running for the US House of Representatives Hiral Tipirneni from eights Congressional District of Arizona Aruna Miller from sixth Congressional District of Maryland, Anita Malik from sixth Congressional District of Arizona and Saira Rao from the first Congressional District of Colorado. All four are from the Democratic party. This week all eyes are on Tipirneni as latest polls suggests that in the April 24 Special election she might create an upset by winning this Republican stronghold. She had raised $ 670,521 till March 31, according to FEC records. Aruna Miller, who has to win the June 26 primaries to become party's nominee for the November Congressional elections has surprised many by raising more than $ 1 million till the last quarter. Among other two women candidates, Rao has raised $ 255,000 and Malik has raised $64,000, according to FEC records. Indian-American Aftab Pureva, who is seeking to enter the House of Representative from First Congressional District of Ohio on a Democratic ticket has raised $ 663,000. Recently the Democratic party identified him as a potential winner. By raising more than $ 1.1 million for the June 26 primary against incumbent Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, young Suraj Patel has surprised many. In the 11th Congressional District of New York two Indian Americans Omar Vaid and Mohan Radhakrishnan -- are vying for Democratic primary on June 26. Two have raised 31,000 and 16,000 respectively. Similarly, in the two Indian Americans Peter Jacob and Goutam U Jois -- are running against each other for the June 5 Democratic primary in the Seventh Congressional District of New Jersey. Sri Preston Kulkarni is headed for a primary run-off for the 22nd Congressional District of Texas on May 22. He has raised more than $ 178,000, FEC records reveal, Abhijit Das from the third Congressional District of Massachusetts more than $ 220,000 and Chintan Desai from the One Congressional District of Arkansas has raised $ 16,000. In addition to Digankar, Harry Arora is the only other Republican Indian American in race for the Congress. Running from fourth Congressional District of Connecticut, Arora has raised $ 192,000 so far. A calculation of FEC figures, as of March 31 indicated, that all the 20 Indian-American candidates in the race for the Congressional elections this year have more than $11 million in all for the rest part of the campaign. FEC figures also reveal that these candidates have loaned more than $1.1 million to their campaigns. The list is topped by Arora with $ 500,000, followed by Abhijit Das ($ 283,000), Vaid ($ 105,000) Jois ($ 100,000), Tipirneni ($ 70,000), Radhakrishnan ($50,000), Kulkarni ($ 35,000) and Jacob ($ 10,000). The current Congress has four Indian Americans in the House of Representatives, which is a record in itself.

20 Indian Americans running for US Congress raise more than $15.5 million

HEARING BEFORE THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

April 11, 2018

Testimony of Mark Zuckerberg

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Facebook

I. INTRODUCTION 
&nbsp

Chairman Walden, Ranking Member Pallone, and Members of the Committee,

We face a number of important issues around privacy, safety, and democracy, and you will rightfully have some hard questions for me to answer. Before I talk about the steps we’re taking to address them, I want to talk about how we got here. Facebook is an idealistic and optimistic company. For most of our existence, we focused on all the good that connecting people can bring. As Facebook has grown, people everywhere have gotten a powerful new tool to stay connected to the people they love, make their voices heard, and build communities and businesses. Just recently, we’ve seen the #metoo movement and the March for Our Lives, organized, at least in part, on Facebook. After Hurricane Harvey, people raised more than $20 million for relief. And more than 70 million small businesses now use Facebook to grow and create jobs. But it’s clear now that we didn’t do enough to prevent these tools from being used for harm as well. That goes for fake news, foreign interference in elections, and hate speech, as well as developers and data privacy. We didn’t take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a big mistake. It was my mistake, and I’m sorry. I started Facebook, I run it, and I’m responsible for what happens here.

So now we have to go through every part of our relationship with people and make sure we’re taking a broad enough view of our responsibility. It’s not enough to just connect people, we have to make sure those connections are positive. It’s not enough to just give people a voice, we have to make sure people aren’t using it to hurt people or spread misinformation. It’s not enough to give people control of their information, we have to make sure developers they’ve given it to are protecting it too. Across the board, we have a responsibility to not just build tools, but to make sure those tools are used for good. It will take some time to work through all of the changes we need to make, but I’m committed to 
getting it right. That includes improving the way we protect people’s information and safeguard elections around the world. Here are a few key things we’re doing:

II. CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA

Over the past few weeks, we’ve been working to understand exactly what happened with Cambridge Analytica and taking steps to make sure this doesn’t happen again. We took important actions to prevent this from happening again today four years ago, but we also made 
mistakes, there’s more to do, and we need to step up and do it.

A. What Happened

In 2007, we launched the Facebook Platform with the vision that more apps should be social. Your calendar should be able to show your friends’ birthdays, your maps should show where your friends live, and your address book should show their pictures. To do this, we enabled 
people to log into apps and share who their friends were and some information about them In 2013, a Cambridge University researcher named Aleksandr Kogan created a personality quiz app. It was installed by around 300,000 people who agreed to share some of their Facebook 
information as well as some information from their friends whose privacy settings allowed it. Given the way our platform worked at the time this meant Kogan was able to access some information about tens of millions of their friends.

In 2014, to prevent abusive apps, we announced that we were changing the entire platform to dramatically limit the Facebook information apps could access. Most importantly, apps like Kogan’s could no longer ask for information about a person’s friends unless their friends had 
also authorized the app. We also required developers to get approval from Facebook before they could request any data beyond a user’s public profile, friend list, and email address. These actions would prevent any app like Kogan’s from being able to access as much Facebook data today.

In 2015, we learned from journalists at The Guardian that Kogan had shared data from his app with Cambridge Analytica. It is against our policies for developers to share data without people’s consent, so we immediately banned Kogan’s app from our platform, and demanded that Kogan and other entities he gave the data to, including Cambridge Analytica, formally certify that they had deleted all improperly acquired data — which they ultimately did. Last month, we learned from The Guardian, The New York Times and Channel 4 that Cambridge Analytica may not have deleted the data as they had certified. We immediately banned them from using any of our services. Cambridge Analytica claims they have already deleted the data and has agreed to a forensic audit by a firm we hired to investigate this. We’re also working with 
the UK&nbspInformation Commissioner’s Office, which has jurisdiction over Cambridge Analytica, as it completes its investigation into what happened.

B. What We Are Doing

We have a responsibility to make sure what happened with Kogan and Cambridge Analytica doesn’t happen again. Here are some of the steps we’re taking:

<ul>
	<li>Safeguarding our platform. We need to make sure that developers like Kogan who got access to a lot of information in the past can’t get access to as much information going forward.We made some big changes to the Facebook platform in 2014 to dramatically restrict the amount of data that developers can access and to proactively review the apps on our platform. This makes it so a developer today can’t do what Kogan did years ago.</li>
	<li>But there’s more we can do here to limit the information developers can access. and put more safeguards in place to prevent abuse.</li>
</ul>

We’re removing developers’ access to your data if you haven’t used their app in three months.

We’re reducing the data you give an app when you approve it to only your name, profile photo, and email address. That’s a lot less than apps can get on any other major app platform.

We’re requiring developers to not only get approval but also to sign a contract that imposes strict requirements in order to ask anyone for access to their posts or other private data.

We’re restricting more APIs like groups and events. You should be able to sign into apps and share your public information easily, but anything that might also share other people’s information — like other posts in groups you’re in or other people going to events you’re going to — will be much more restricted. Two weeks ago, we found out that a feature that lets you look someone up by their phone number and email was abused. This feature is useful in cases where people have the same name, but it was abused to link people’s public Facebook information to a phone number they already had. When we found out about the abuse, we shut this feature down.

<ul>
	<li>Investigating other apps. We’re in the process of investigating every app that had access to a large amount of information before we locked down our platform in 2014. If we detect suspicious activity, we’ll do a full forensic audit. And if we find that someone is improperly using data, we’ll ban them and tell everyone affected.</li>
</ul>

&nbsp

<ul>
	<li>Building better controls. Finally, we’re making it easier to understand which apps you’ve allowed to access your data. This week we started showing everyone a list of the apps you’ve used and an easy way to revoke their permissions to your data. You can already do this in your privacy settings, but we’re going to put it at the top of News Feed to make sure everyone sees it. And we also told everyone whose Facebook information may have been shared with Cambridge Analytica. Beyond the steps we had already taken in 2014, I believe these are the next steps we must take to continue to secure our platform.</li>
</ul>

 
III. RUSSIAN ELECTION INTERFERENCE

Facebook’s mission is about giving people a voice and bringing people closer together. Those are deeply democratic values and we’re proud of them. I don’t want anyone to use our tools to undermine democracy. That’s not what we stand for. We were too slow to spot and respond to Russian interference, and we’re working hard to get better. Our sophistication in handling these threats is growing and improving quickly. We will continue working with the government to understand the full extent of Russian interference, and we will do our part not only to ensure the integrity of free and fair elections around the world, but also to give everyone a voice and to be a force for good in democracy everywhere.

A. What Happened

Elections have always been especially sensitive times for our security team, and the 2016 US&nbsppresidential election was no exception. Our security team has been aware of traditional Russian cyber threats — like hacking and malware — for years. Leading up to Election Day in November 2016, we detected and dealt with several threats with ties to Russia. This included activity by a group called APT28, that the US government has publicly linked to Russian military intelligence services. But while our primary focus was on traditional threats, we also saw some new behavior in the summer of 2016 when APT28-related accounts, under the banner of DC Leaks, created fake personas that were used to seed stolen information to journalists. We shut these accounts down for violating our policies.

After the election, we continued to investigate and learn more about these new threats. What we found was that bad actors had used coordinated networks of fake accounts to interfere in the election: promoting or attacking specific candidates and causes, creating distrust in political institutions, or simply spreading confusion. Some of these bad actors also used our ads tools. We also learned about a disinformation campaign run by the Internet Research Agency (IRA) — a Russian agency that has repeatedly acted deceptively and tried to manipulate people in the US, Europe, and Russia. We found about 470 accounts and pages linked to the IRA, which generated around 80,000 Facebook posts over about a two-year period. Our best estimate is that approximately 126 million people may have been served content from a Facebook Page associated with the IRA at some point during that period. On Instagram, where our data on reach is not as complete, we found about 120,000 pieces of content, and estimate that an additional 20 million people were likely served it. Over the same period, the IRA also spent approximately $100,000 on more than 3,000 ads on&nbspFacebook and Instagram, which were seen by an estimated 11 million people in the United States. We shut down these IRA accounts in August 2017.

B. What We Are Doing 
&nbsp

There’s no question that we should have spotted Russian interference earlier, and we’re working hard to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Our actions include: 
&nbsp

<ul>
	<li>Building new technology to prevent abuse. Since 2016, we have improved our techniques to prevent nation states from interfering in foreign elections, and we’ve built more advanced AI tools to remove fake accounts more generally. There have been a number of important elections since then where these new tools have been successfully deployed.</li>
</ul>

For example:

In France, leading up to the presidential election in 2017, we found and took down 30,000 fake accounts.

In Germany, before the 2017 elections, we worked directly with the election commission to learn from them about the threats they saw and to share information.

In the US&nbspSenate Alabama special election last year, we deployed new AI tools that proactively detected and removed fake accounts from Macedonia trying to spread misinformation.

We have disabled thousands of accounts tied to organized, financially motivated fake news spammers. These investigations have been used to improve our automated systems that find fake accounts.

Last week, we took down more than 270 additional pages and accounts operated by the IRA and used to target people in Russia and Russian speakers in countries like Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Ukraine. Some of the pages we removed belong to Russian news organizations that we determined were controlled by the IRA. 
&nbsp

<ul>
	<li>Significantly increasing our investment in security. We now have about 15,000 people working on security and content review. We’ll have more than 20,000 by the end of this year.</li>
</ul>

I’ve directed our teams to invest so much in security — on top of the other investments we’re making — that it will significantly impact our profitability going forward. But I want to be clear about what our priority is: protecting our community is more important than maximizing our profits.

<ul>
	<li>Strengthening our advertising policies. We know some Members of Congress are exploring ways to increase transparency around political or issue advertising, and we’re happy to keep working with Congress on that. But we aren’t waiting for legislation to act.&nbsp</li>
</ul>

From now on, every advertiser who wants to run political or issue ads will need to be authorized. To get authorized, advertisers will need to confirm their identity and location. Any advertiser who doesn’t pass will be prohibited from running political or issue ads. We will also label them and advertisers will have to show you who paid for them. We’re starting this in the US&nbspand expanding to the rest of the world in the coming months.

For even greater political ads transparency, we have also built a tool that lets anyone see all of the ads a page is running. We’re testing this in Canada now and we’ll launch it globally this summer. We’re also creating a searchable archive of past political ads.

We will also require people who manage large pages to be verified as well. This will make it much harder for people to run pages using fake accounts, or to grow virally and spread misinformation or divisive content that way.

In order to require verification for all of these pages and advertisers, we will hire thousands of more people. We’re committed to getting this done in time for the critical months before the 2018 elections in the US&nbspas well as elections in Mexico, Brazil, India, Pakistan and elsewhere in the next year.

These steps by themselves won’t stop all people trying to game the system. But they will make it a lot harder for anyone to do what the Russians did during the 2016 election and use fake accounts and pages to run ads. Election interference is a problem that’s bigger than any one platform, and that’s why we support the

Honest Ads Act. This will help raise the bar for all political advertising online.

<ul>
	<li>Sharing information. We’ve been working with other technology companies to share information about threats, and we’re also cooperating with the US&nbspand foreign governments on election integrity. At the same time, it’s also important not to lose sight of the more straightforward and larger ways Facebook plays a role in elections. In 2016, people had billions of interactions and open discussions on Facebook that may never have happened offline. Candidates had direct channels to communicate with tens of millions of citizens. Campaigns spent tens of millions of dollars organizing and advertising online to get their messages out further. And we organized “get out the vote” efforts that helped more than 2 million people register to vote who might not have voted otherwise. Security — including around elections — isn’t a problem you ever fully solve. Organizations like the IRA are sophisticated adversaries who are constantly evolving, but we’ll keep improving our techniques to stay ahead. And we’ll also keep building tools to help more people make their voices heard in the democratic process.</li>
</ul>

 
IV. CONCLUSION 
&nbsp

My top priority has always been our social mission of connecting people, building community and bringing the world closer together. Advertisers and developers will never take priority over that as long as I’m running Facebook. I started Facebook when I was in college. We’ve come a long way since then. We now serve more than 2 billion people around the world, and every day, people use our services to stay connected with the people that matter to them most. I believe deeply in what we’re doing. And when we address these challenges, I know we’ll look back and view helping people connect and giving more people a voice as a positive force in the world. I realize the issues we’re talking about today aren’t just issues for Facebook and our community — they’re challenges for all of us as Americans. Thank you for having me here 
today, and I’m ready to take your questions.

A full transcript of Mark Zuckerberg's testimony hearing before the United States of Representatives over Facebook data breach row

HEARING BEFORE THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE April 11, 2018 Testimony of Mark Zuckerberg Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Facebook I. INTRODUCTION Chairman Walden, Ranking Member Pallone, and Members of the Committee, We face a number of important issues around privacy, safety, and democracy, and you will rightfully have some hard questions for me to answer. Before I talk about the steps we’re taking to address them, I want to talk about how we got here. Facebook is an idealistic and optimistic company. For most of our existence, we focused on all the good that connecting people can bring. As Facebook has grown, people everywhere have gotten a powerful new tool to stay connected to the people they love, make their voices heard, and build communities and businesses. Just recently, we’ve seen the #metoo movement and the March for Our Lives, organized, at least in part, on Facebook. After Hurricane Harvey, people raised more than $20 million for relief. And more than 70 million small businesses now use Facebook to grow and create jobs. But it’s clear now that we didn’t do enough to prevent these tools from being used for harm as well. That goes for fake news, foreign interference in elections, and hate speech, as well as developers and data privacy. We didn’t take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a big mistake. It was my mistake, and I’m sorry. I started Facebook, I run it, and I’m responsible for what happens here. So now we have to go through every part of our relationship with people and make sure we’re taking a broad enough view of our responsibility. It’s not enough to just connect people, we have to make sure those connections are positive. It’s not enough to just give people a voice, we have to make sure people aren’t using it to hurt people or spread misinformation. It’s not enough to give people control of their information, we have to make sure developers they’ve given it to are protecting it too. Across the board, we have a responsibility to not just build tools, but to make sure those tools are used for good. It will take some time to work through all of the changes we need to make, but I’m committed to getting it right. That includes improving the way we protect people’s information and safeguard elections around the world. Here are a few key things we’re doing: II. CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA Over the past few weeks, we’ve been working to understand exactly what happened with Cambridge Analytica and taking steps to make sure this doesn’t happen again. We took important actions to prevent this from happening again today four years ago, but we also made mistakes, there’s more to do, and we need to step up and do it. A. What Happened In 2007, we launched the Facebook Platform with the vision that more apps should be social. Your calendar should be able to show your friends’ birthdays, your maps should show where your friends live, and your address book should show their pictures. To do this, we enabled people to log into apps and share who their friends were and some information about them In 2013, a Cambridge University researcher named Aleksandr Kogan created a personality quiz app. It was installed by around 300,000 people who agreed to share some of their Facebook information as well as some information from their friends whose privacy settings allowed it. Given the way our platform worked at the time this meant Kogan was able to access some information about tens of millions of their friends. In 2014, to prevent abusive apps, we announced that we were changing the entire platform to dramatically limit the Facebook information apps could access. Most importantly, apps like Kogan’s could no longer ask for information about a person’s friends unless their friends had also authorized the app. We also required developers to get approval from Facebook before they could request any data beyond a user’s public profile, friend list, and email address. These actions would prevent any app like Kogan’s from being able to access as much Facebook data today. In 2015, we learned from journalists at The Guardian that Kogan had shared data from his app with Cambridge Analytica. It is against our policies for developers to share data without people’s consent, so we immediately banned Kogan’s app from our platform, and demanded that Kogan and other entities he gave the data to, including Cambridge Analytica, formally certify that they had deleted all improperly acquired data — which they ultimately did. Last month, we learned from The Guardian, The New York Times and Channel 4 that Cambridge Analytica may not have deleted the data as they had certified. We immediately banned them from using any of our services. Cambridge Analytica claims they have already deleted the data and has agreed to a forensic audit by a firm we hired to investigate this. We’re also working with the UK&nbspInformation Commissioner’s Office, which has jurisdiction over Cambridge Analytica, as it completes its investigation into what happened. B. What We Are Doing We have a responsibility to make sure what happened with Kogan and Cambridge Analytica doesn’t happen again. Here are some of the steps we’re taking: Safeguarding our platform. We need to make sure that developers like Kogan who got access to a lot of information in the past can’t get access to as much information going forward.We made some big changes to the Facebook platform in 2014 to dramatically restrict the amount of data that developers can access and to proactively review the apps on our platform. This makes it so a developer today can’t do what Kogan did years ago. But there’s more we can do here to limit the information developers can access. and put more safeguards in place to prevent abuse. We’re removing developers’ access to your data if you haven’t used their app in three months. We’re reducing the data you give an app when you approve it to only your name, profile photo, and email address. That’s a lot less than apps can get on any other major app platform. We’re requiring developers to not only get approval but also to sign a contract that imposes strict requirements in order to ask anyone for access to their posts or other private data. We’re restricting more APIs like groups and events. You should be able to sign into apps and share your public information easily, but anything that might also share other people’s information — like other posts in groups you’re in or other people going to events you’re going to — will be much more restricted. Two weeks ago, we found out that a feature that lets you look someone up by their phone number and email was abused. This feature is useful in cases where people have the same name, but it was abused to link people’s public Facebook information to a phone number they already had. When we found out about the abuse, we shut this feature down. Investigating other apps. We’re in the process of investigating every app that had access to a large amount of information before we locked down our platform in 2014. If we detect suspicious activity, we’ll do a full forensic audit. And if we find that someone is improperly using data, we’ll ban them and tell everyone affected. Building better controls. Finally, we’re making it easier to understand which apps you’ve allowed to access your data. This week we started showing everyone a list of the apps you’ve used and an easy way to revoke their permissions to your data. You can already do this in your privacy settings, but we’re going to put it at the top of News Feed to make sure everyone sees it. And we also told everyone whose Facebook information may have been shared with Cambridge Analytica. Beyond the steps we had already taken in 2014, I believe these are the next steps we must take to continue to secure our platform. III. RUSSIAN ELECTION INTERFERENCE Facebook’s mission is about giving people a voice and bringing people closer together. Those are deeply democratic values and we’re proud of them. I don’t want anyone to use our tools to undermine democracy. That’s not what we stand for. We were too slow to spot and respond to Russian interference, and we’re working hard to get better. Our sophistication in handling these threats is growing and improving quickly. We will continue working with the government to understand the full extent of Russian interference, and we will do our part not only to ensure the integrity of free and fair elections around the world, but also to give everyone a voice and to be a force for good in democracy everywhere. A. What Happened Elections have always been especially sensitive times for our security team, and the 2016 US&nbsppresidential election was no exception. Our security team has been aware of traditional Russian cyber threats — like hacking and malware — for years. Leading up to Election Day in November 2016, we detected and dealt with several threats with ties to Russia. This included activity by a group called APT28, that the US government has publicly linked to Russian military intelligence services. But while our primary focus was on traditional threats, we also saw some new behavior in the summer of 2016 when APT28-related accounts, under the banner of DC Leaks, created fake personas that were used to seed stolen information to journalists. We shut these accounts down for violating our policies. After the election, we continued to investigate and learn more about these new threats. What we found was that bad actors had used coordinated networks of fake accounts to interfere in the election: promoting or attacking specific candidates and causes, creating distrust in political institutions, or simply spreading confusion. Some of these bad actors also used our ads tools. We also learned about a disinformation campaign run by the Internet Research Agency (IRA) — a Russian agency that has repeatedly acted deceptively and tried to manipulate people in the US, Europe, and Russia. We found about 470 accounts and pages linked to the IRA, which generated around 80,000 Facebook posts over about a two-year period. Our best estimate is that approximately 126 million people may have been served content from a Facebook Page associated with the IRA at some point during that period. On Instagram, where our data on reach is not as complete, we found about 120,000 pieces of content, and estimate that an additional 20 million people were likely served it. Over the same period, the IRA also spent approximately $100,000 on more than 3,000 ads on&nbspFacebook and Instagram, which were seen by an estimated 11 million people in the United States. We shut down these IRA accounts in August 2017. B. What We Are Doing There’s no question that we should have spotted Russian interference earlier, and we’re working hard to make sure it doesn’t happen again. Our actions include: Building new technology to prevent abuse. Since 2016, we have improved our techniques to prevent nation states from interfering in foreign elections, and we’ve built more advanced AI tools to remove fake accounts more generally. There have been a number of important elections since then where these new tools have been successfully deployed. For example: In France, leading up to the presidential election in 2017, we found and took down 30,000 fake accounts. In Germany, before the 2017 elections, we worked directly with the election commission to learn from them about the threats they saw and to share information. In the US&nbspSenate Alabama special election last year, we deployed new AI tools that proactively detected and removed fake accounts from Macedonia trying to spread misinformation. We have disabled thousands of accounts tied to organized, financially motivated fake news spammers. These investigations have been used to improve our automated systems that find fake accounts. Last week, we took down more than 270 additional pages and accounts operated by the IRA and used to target people in Russia and Russian speakers in countries like Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Ukraine. Some of the pages we removed belong to Russian news organizations that we determined were controlled by the IRA. Significantly increasing our investment in security. We now have about 15,000 people working on security and content review. We’ll have more than 20,000 by the end of this year. I’ve directed our teams to invest so much in security — on top of the other investments we’re making — that it will significantly impact our profitability going forward. But I want to be clear about what our priority is: protecting our community is more important than maximizing our profits. Strengthening our advertising policies. We know some Members of Congress are exploring ways to increase transparency around political or issue advertising, and we’re happy to keep working with Congress on that. But we aren’t waiting for legislation to act. From now on, every advertiser who wants to run political or issue ads will need to be authorized. To get authorized, advertisers will need to confirm their identity and location. Any advertiser who doesn’t pass will be prohibited from running political or issue ads. We will also label them and advertisers will have to show you who paid for them. We’re starting this in the US&nbspand expanding to the rest of the world in the coming months. For even greater political ads transparency, we have also built a tool that lets anyone see all of the ads a page is running. We’re testing this in Canada now and we’ll launch it globally this summer. We’re also creating a searchable archive of past political ads. We will also require people who manage large pages to be verified as well. This will make it much harder for people to run pages using fake accounts, or to grow virally and spread misinformation or divisive content that way. In order to require verification for all of these pages and advertisers, we will hire thousands of more people. We’re committed to getting this done in time for the critical months before the 2018 elections in the US&nbspas well as elections in Mexico, Brazil, India, Pakistan and elsewhere in the next year. These steps by themselves won’t stop all people trying to game the system. But they will make it a lot harder for anyone to do what the Russians did during the 2016 election and use fake accounts and pages to run ads. Election interference is a problem that’s bigger than any one platform, and that’s why we support the Honest Ads Act. This will help raise the bar for all political advertising online. Sharing information. We’ve been working with other technology companies to share information about threats, and we’re also cooperating with the US&nbspand foreign governments on election integrity. At the same time, it’s also important not to lose sight of the more straightforward and larger ways Facebook plays a role in elections. In 2016, people had billions of interactions and open discussions on Facebook that may never have happened offline. Candidates had direct channels to communicate with tens of millions of citizens. Campaigns spent tens of millions of dollars organizing and advertising online to get their messages out further. And we organized “get out the vote” efforts that helped more than 2 million people register to vote who might not have voted otherwise. Security — including around elections — isn’t a problem you ever fully solve. Organizations like the IRA are sophisticated adversaries who are constantly evolving, but we’ll keep improving our techniques to stay ahead. And we’ll also keep building tools to help more people make their voices heard in the democratic process. IV. CONCLUSION My top priority has always been our social mission of connecting people, building community and bringing the world closer together. Advertisers and developers will never take priority over that as long as I’m running Facebook. I started Facebook when I was in college. We’ve come a long way since then. We now serve more than 2 billion people around the world, and every day, people use our services to stay connected with the people that matter to them most. I believe deeply in what we’re doing. And when we address these challenges, I know we’ll look back and view helping people connect and giving more people a voice as a positive force in the world. I realize the issues we’re talking about today aren’t just issues for Facebook and our community — they’re challenges for all of us as Americans. Thank you for having me here today, and I’m ready to take your questions.

Mark Zuckerberg testimony before US Congress: Read full text of day 2

Facebook Inc Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg fielded 10 hours of questions over two days from nearly 100 US lawmakers and emerged largely unscathed and considerably richer.

He parried questions of how much control people have over their data on the world's largest social media network without a major gaffe, while avoiding being cornered into supporting new government regulation.

The hearings that ended on Wednesday revealed no consensus among US lawmakers about what kind of privacy legislation they might want to pursue, if any, and no timeline for action. As he did on Tuesday before a Senate hearing, Zuckerberg refused during a House of Representatives committee hearing to make any promises to support new legislation or change how the social network does business.

"It is inevitable that there will need to be some regulation" of internet firms, Zuckerberg said, but he avoided any specifics.

Although Zuckerberg, 33, had never testified at a Congressional hearing before, he succeeded in deflecting questions like a Washington veteran. Forty times the internet mogul told lawmakers he had no answers at hand and would get back to them later. About one in three lawmakers got that response over the two days.

Democratic Representative Debbie Dingell expressed frustration with Zuckerberg's frequent promises to get back to lawmakers later in writing. "Some things are striking during this conversation," she said. "As CEO, you didn't know some key facts."

On one point, Zuckerberg undercut his consistent message that Facebook users have control of their data. He said he was among the nearly 87 million people whose personal information was improperly shared with political consultancy Cambridge Analytica. He gave no further details.

His admission that even the company's tech-savvy founder was unable to protect his own data underscored the problem Facebook has in persuading sceptical lawmakers that users can easily safeguard their own information and that further legislation governing Facebook is unnecessary.

The Cambridge Analytica issue was the reason Zuckerberg was on Capitol Hill, answering questions about how that company - which has counted U.S. President Donald Trump's election campaign among its clients - got hold of data about Facebook users.

"How can consumers have control over their data when Facebook does not have control over the data?" asked Representative Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, at the beginning of Wednesday's hearing.

Zuckerberg said it would take "many months" to complete an audit of other apps that might also have improperly gathered or shared users' data.

"I do imagine that we will find some apps that were either doing something suspicious or misusing people's data," he said.

INEVITABLE REGULATION?

<img alt="facebook-testimony-reuters_0.jpg" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" height="430" src="http://images.wionews.com/iniline-images/facebook-testimony-reuters_0.jpg" width="770" />

A senator holds up his phone displaying a fake Facebook profile during the Congressional hearing. (Reuters)

Zuckerberg was unable to answer Dingell, the Michigan Congresswoman, when she asked how frequently Facebook used computer code embedded in websites to gather dossiers on virtually everyone online.

In a series of questions on how people can remove data from Facebook, Zuckerberg said the company does "collect data on people who are not signed up for Facebook, for security purposes." He had no response when asked how a non-Facebook member could remove information without signing up for the service.

He also said he was not familiar with what various media reports call "shadow profiles," collections of data assembled on Facebook users that they have no knowledge of or control over.

Wearing a dark suit and tie and politely prefacing almost every remark with "Congressman" or "Congresswoman," Zuckerberg appeared even more controlled than he did on Tuesday when he testified before senators. He refrained from cracking jokes and flashed few smiles.

The performance had favourable results. Facebook shares closed up 0.78 percent on Wednesday after rising 4.5 percent Tuesday. Over the two days, the value of Zuckerberg's stake in the company grew about $3 billion.

Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Greg Walden, told reporters he would talk with committee members about holding similar hearings with other technology chief executives. He did not name specific companies.

"This is a wake-up call to Silicon Valley and the tech community that if you let these things get out of hand, having grown up in a very lightly regulated environment, you could end up with a lot more regulation than you seek," he said after the hearing.

Many Democrats disagreed, saying their Republican colleagues held no genuine interest in having a meaningful debate that could lead to a regulatory overhaul of how technology firms handle data.

What remained as the dust settled on Wednesday was an inability to translate bipartisan concern into regulation due to the complexity of regulating technology issues and the powerful lobbying forces assembled against any effort to do so.

"If you think it is hard to pass a bill that affects a lobbyist's favourite client," said Alvaro Bedoya, a former Congressional aide who worked on privacy issues for former Senator Al Franken, "try passing a bill that affects all of them."

Although Zuckerberg, 33, had never testified at a congressional hearing before, he succeeded in deflecting questions like a Washington veteran.

Facebook Inc Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg fielded 10 hours of questions over two days from nearly 100 US lawmakers and emerged largely unscathed and considerably richer. He parried questions of how much control people have over their data on the world's largest social media network without a major gaffe, while avoiding being cornered into supporting new government regulation. The hearings that ended on Wednesday revealed no consensus among US lawmakers about what kind of privacy legislation they might want to pursue, if any, and no timeline for action. As he did on Tuesday before a Senate hearing, Zuckerberg refused during a House of Representatives committee hearing to make any promises to support new legislation or change how the social network does business. "It is inevitable that there will need to be some regulation" of internet firms, Zuckerberg said, but he avoided any specifics. Although Zuckerberg, 33, had never testified at a Congressional hearing before, he succeeded in deflecting questions like a Washington veteran. Forty times the internet mogul told lawmakers he had no answers at hand and would get back to them later. About one in three lawmakers got that response over the two days. Democratic Representative Debbie Dingell expressed frustration with Zuckerberg's frequent promises to get back to lawmakers later in writing. "Some things are striking during this conversation," she said. "As CEO, you didn't know some key facts." On one point, Zuckerberg undercut his consistent message that Facebook users have control of their data. He said he was among the nearly 87 million people whose personal information was improperly shared with political consultancy Cambridge Analytica. He gave no further details. His admission that even the company's tech-savvy founder was unable to protect his own data underscored the problem Facebook has in persuading sceptical lawmakers that users can easily safeguard their own information and that further legislation governing Facebook is unnecessary. The Cambridge Analytica issue was the reason Zuckerberg was on Capitol Hill, answering questions about how that company - which has counted U.S. President Donald Trump's election campaign among its clients - got hold of data about Facebook users. "How can consumers have control over their data when Facebook does not have control over the data?" asked Representative Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, at the beginning of Wednesday's hearing. Zuckerberg said it would take "many months" to complete an audit of other apps that might also have improperly gathered or shared users' data. "I do imagine that we will find some apps that were either doing something suspicious or misusing people's data," he said. INEVITABLE REGULATION? A senator holds up his phone displaying a fake Facebook profile during the Congressional hearing. (Reuters) Zuckerberg was unable to answer Dingell, the Michigan Congresswoman, when she asked how frequently Facebook used computer code embedded in websites to gather dossiers on virtually everyone online. In a series of questions on how people can remove data from Facebook, Zuckerberg said the company does "collect data on people who are not signed up for Facebook, for security purposes." He had no response when asked how a non-Facebook member could remove information without signing up for the service. He also said he was not familiar with what various media reports call "shadow profiles," collections of data assembled on Facebook users that they have no knowledge of or control over. Wearing a dark suit and tie and politely prefacing almost every remark with "Congressman" or "Congresswoman," Zuckerberg appeared even more controlled than he did on Tuesday when he testified before senators. He refrained from cracking jokes and flashed few smiles. The performance had favourable results. Facebook shares closed up 0.78 percent on Wednesday after rising 4.5 percent Tuesday. Over the two days, the value of Zuckerberg's stake in the company grew about $3 billion. Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Greg Walden, told reporters he would talk with committee members about holding similar hearings with other technology chief executives. He did not name specific companies. "This is a wake-up call to Silicon Valley and the tech community that if you let these things get out of hand, having grown up in a very lightly regulated environment, you could end up with a lot more regulation than you seek," he said after the hearing. Many Democrats disagreed, saying their Republican colleagues held no genuine interest in having a meaningful debate that could lead to a regulatory overhaul of how technology firms handle data. What remained as the dust settled on Wednesday was an inability to translate bipartisan concern into regulation due to the complexity of regulating technology issues and the powerful lobbying forces assembled against any effort to do so. "If you think it is hard to pass a bill that affects a lobbyist's favourite client," said Alvaro Bedoya, a former Congressional aide who worked on privacy issues for former Senator Al Franken, "try passing a bill that affects all of them."

Facebook's Zuckerberg unscathed by Congressional grilling, stock rises

President Donald Trump's approval rating has ticked up, according to two recent polls -- an increase that could be due to rosier US economic data -- but the Republican leader's popularity still remains below that of his predecessors.

Trump's rating moved up from 35 per cent to 42 per cent from February to March, according to CNN's monthly opinion poll and another study jointly conducted by The Associated Press and the NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

The two polls have a margin of error of 3.7-4.2 percentage points.

Management of the world's largest economy remains the strong point for the real estate mogul-turned-president -- more Americans (48 per cent) now approve of how he is handling the economy than disapprove (45 per cent), according to the CNN poll.

The sweeping tax cuts adopted by Congress in December are also a high point for Trump: 46 per cent of Americans polled approve of the president's fiscal policy, the AP-NORC study reveals.

On the negative side, Trump earns lower marks for his trade policy and an attitude towards Russia that is seen as "too easy," the CNN poll says.

The apparent upward trend in Trump's approval ratings does not however appear in Gallup's weekly poll, where he has been stuck since last May under 40 per cent approval.

For comparison, after about 430 days in office, Barack Obama enjoyed a 49 per cent approval rating in March 2010, George W. Bush was at 79 percent (in the post-9/11 period) in March 2002 and Bill Clinton was at 51 percent in March 1994.

President Donald Trump's approval rating has ticked up, according to two recent polls -- an increase that could be due to rosier US economic data -- but the Republican leader's popularity still remains below that of his predecessors

President Donald Trump's approval rating has ticked up, according to two recent polls -- an increase that could be due to rosier US economic data -- but the Republican leader's popularity still remains below that of his predecessors. Trump's rating moved up from 35 per cent to 42 per cent from February to March, according to CNN's monthly opinion poll and another study jointly conducted by The Associated Press and the NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. The two polls have a margin of error of 3.7-4.2 percentage points. Management of the world's largest economy remains the strong point for the real estate mogul-turned-president -- more Americans (48 per cent) now approve of how he is handling the economy than disapprove (45 per cent), according to the CNN poll. The sweeping tax cuts adopted by Congress in December are also a high point for Trump: 46 per cent of Americans polled approve of the president's fiscal policy, the AP-NORC study reveals. On the negative side, Trump earns lower marks for his trade policy and an attitude towards Russia that is seen as "too easy," the CNN poll says. The apparent upward trend in Trump's approval ratings does not however appear in Gallup's weekly poll, where he has been stuck since last May under 40 per cent approval. For comparison, after about 430 days in office, Barack Obama enjoyed a 49 per cent approval rating in March 2010, George W. Bush was at 79 percent (in the post-9/11 period) in March 2002 and Bill Clinton was at 51 percent in March 1994.

Trump approval rating on the rise

US lawmakers advanced a critical $1.3 trillion federal spending bill Thursday, as Congress sprints to avoid a another embarrassing government shutdown ahead of a rapidly approaching funding deadline.&nbsp;

President Donald Trump has given his blessing to the bipartisan deal that negotiators clinched the previous evening, even though the White House acknowledged it did not fulfill all of their wishes.

With a Friday midnight deadline looming, the catchall bill, known as an &quot;omnibus,&quot; comfortably passed the House of Representatives on a 256-167 vote.

&quot;The House just voted to rebuild our military, secure our borders, and give our service members their largest pay raise in eight years,&quot; House Speaker Paul Ryan said after the vote.&nbsp;

The bill now heads to the Senate for debate and final passage. It was introduced late Wednesday after weeks of haggling, leaving lawmakers mere hours to peruse and vote on a 2,232-page bill that will touch every aspect of American life.

&quot;Is the president going to sign the bill? The answer is yes,&quot; Mick Mulvaney, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, told reporters.

&quot;Is it perfect? No. Is it exactly what we asked for? No.&quot;

It sets defense spending levels at $700 billion for the year, an increase of $61 billion over the 2017 cap, while non-defense domestic spending will reach $591 billion, an increase of about 10 percent.

It provides $1.6 billion -- far less than Trump wanted -- for border security and funds to construct or fix nearly 100 miles (160 kilometers) of border fencing and barriers, boosts infrastructure spending, and increases funds for school safety and student grants.

It leaves intact funding for women`s health provider Planned Parenthood, a target of relentless criticsm from pro-life Republicans.But in a major blow to Democrats, it fails to include protections for immigrants who arrived in the country illegally as children, or language that would help prevent the president from firing Robert Mueller, the special counsel heading the investigation of Russia`s meddling in the 2016 elections.

And it leaves out a long-sought provision to stabilize the insurance market by funding subsidies that could lower insurance rates for low-income families by about 40 percent.

That health care negotiation apparently broke down over disputes over abortion-related language in the bill.

&quot;I`m extremely disappointed,&quot; the provision`s co-author, Senate Republican Susan Collins, told reporters.

Among the sensitive issues addressed in the bill is gun safety, which has been the focus of national attention in the aftermath of deadly school shootings.&nbsp;

Lawmakers said it includes a provision to strengthen compliance with background checks for firearm sales, and one that reverses what has essentially served as a ban on federal research on gun violence.

Even while professing his support, Trump lamented having to &quot;waste money&quot; on &quot;Dem giveaways&quot; to secure the military funding.

Timing over the next 36 hours is critical.&nbsp;

The Senate is now set to consider the measure, but any senator can slow down the process if he or she does not want to speed the bill through, dragging debate beyond the Friday deadline.&nbsp;

&quot;Clearly it`s a concern,&quot; Republican Senator Roger Wicker told AFP about the short timing. &quot;And it`s a very poor way to legislate.&quot;

US lawmakers advanced a critical $1.3 trillion federal spending bill Thursday, as Congress sprints to avoid another embarrassing government shutdown ahead of a rapidly approaching funding deadline

US lawmakers advanced a critical $1.3 trillion federal spending bill Thursday, as Congress sprints to avoid a another embarrassing government shutdown ahead of a rapidly approaching funding deadline. President Donald Trump has given his blessing to the bipartisan deal that negotiators clinched the previous evening, even though the White House acknowledged it did not fulfill all of their wishes. With a Friday midnight deadline looming, the catchall bill, known as an "omnibus," comfortably passed the House of Representatives on a 256-167 vote. "The House just voted to rebuild our military, secure our borders, and give our service members their largest pay raise in eight years," House Speaker Paul Ryan said after the vote. The bill now heads to the Senate for debate and final passage. It was introduced late Wednesday after weeks of haggling, leaving lawmakers mere hours to peruse and vote on a 2,232-page bill that will touch every aspect of American life. "Is the president going to sign the bill? The answer is yes," Mick Mulvaney, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, told reporters. "Is it perfect? No. Is it exactly what we asked for? No." It sets defense spending levels at $700 billion for the year, an increase of $61 billion over the 2017 cap, while non-defense domestic spending will reach $591 billion, an increase of about 10 percent. It provides $1.6 billion -- far less than Trump wanted -- for border security and funds to construct or fix nearly 100 miles (160 kilometers) of border fencing and barriers, boosts infrastructure spending, and increases funds for school safety and student grants. It leaves intact funding for women`s health provider Planned Parenthood, a target of relentless criticsm from pro-life Republicans.But in a major blow to Democrats, it fails to include protections for immigrants who arrived in the country illegally as children, or language that would help prevent the president from firing Robert Mueller, the special counsel heading the investigation of Russia`s meddling in the 2016 elections. And it leaves out a long-sought provision to stabilize the insurance market by funding subsidies that could lower insurance rates for low-income families by about 40 percent. That health care negotiation apparently broke down over disputes over abortion-related language in the bill. "I`m extremely disappointed," the provision`s co-author, Senate Republican Susan Collins, told reporters. Among the sensitive issues addressed in the bill is gun safety, which has been the focus of national attention in the aftermath of deadly school shootings. Lawmakers said it includes a provision to strengthen compliance with background checks for firearm sales, and one that reverses what has essentially served as a ban on federal research on gun violence. Even while professing his support, Trump lamented having to "waste money" on "Dem giveaways" to secure the military funding. Timing over the next 36 hours is critical. The Senate is now set to consider the measure, but any senator can slow down the process if he or she does not want to speed the bill through, dragging debate beyond the Friday deadline. "Clearly it`s a concern," Republican Senator Roger Wicker told AFP about the short timing. "And it`s a very poor way to legislate."

US spending bill passes House, heads to Senate as shutdown deadline looms

A new legislation introduced in the US Congress is likely to hit call centre employees in India. Democrat Senator Sherrod Brown from Ohio introduced the proposal that aims at creating a public list of companies that outsource call centre jobs.&nbsp;

The legislation aims at giving preference to American employees in federal contracts to companies that haven&rsquo;t shipped these jobs overseas.&nbsp;

The bill will require call centre employees in countries like India to disclose their location and give customers the right to ask to transfer their call to a service agent in the US.&nbsp;

&ldquo;Jobs at call centres are some of the most vulnerable to offshoring. Too many companies have packed up their call centres in Ohio and across the country, and moved to India or Mexico,&rdquo; Brown noted.

&ldquo;So many companies wouldn&rsquo;t be able to function without their customer service staff. Ohio workers like Renee contribute to their businesses and bring ideas to make it work better. We need to value their contributions &ndash; not end their careers and ship their jobs overseas,&rdquo; Brown added.

(With inputs from PTI)

The bill equips US citizens with the right to ask to transfer their call to a customer service agent located in the United States

A new legislation introduced in the US Congress is likely to hit call centre employees in India. Democrat Senator Sherrod Brown from Ohio introduced the proposal that aims at creating a public list of companies that outsource call centre jobs. The legislation aims at giving preference to American employees in federal contracts to companies that haven’t shipped these jobs overseas. The bill will require call centre employees in countries like India to disclose their location and give customers the right to ask to transfer their call to a service agent in the US. “Jobs at call centres are some of the most vulnerable to offshoring. Too many companies have packed up their call centres in Ohio and across the country, and moved to India or Mexico,” Brown noted. “So many companies wouldn’t be able to function without their customer service staff. Ohio workers like Renee contribute to their businesses and bring ideas to make it work better. We need to value their contributions – not end their careers and ship their jobs overseas,” Brown added. (With inputs from PTI)

New bill introduced in US Congress may hit Indian call centre employees

An Indian-American has announced he will run for the US House of Representatives from Florida district.

Sanjay Patel will challenge incumbent Republican Bill Posey in Florida&rsquo;s District 8.

Patel, a resident of satellite beach, announced his candidacy this week at a meeting in Viera of the Brevard County Democratic executive committee that was attended by about 400 people.

On his campaign website, Patel is described as &ldquo;an activist, change-maker, and organisational transformation consultant&rdquo;.

He says he believes in economic justice for all.

If elected, Patel promises to work to build prosperity for communities on the Space and Treasure coasts by supporting policies that ensure large companies pay employees fairly, and that help small businesses launch, compete fairly and thrive.

&ldquo;I will work to build prosperity for Florida&rsquo;s families; guarantee health care for all Americans; protect our land, air and our water; and reform our immigration policy to reflect America&rsquo;s deepest values,&rdquo; Patel wrote on his campaign website.

&ldquo;I am the American Dream, a first-generation immigrant, the son of parents who have barely a high school education, a graduate of UCLA with a degree in economics who has built a small business and a nonprofit, and led transformative efforts in business, philanthropy, and politics,&rdquo; Patel said.

He said he&rsquo;d take his skills and experiences to &ldquo;transform our collective sadness and outrage into justice for all&rdquo;.

&ldquo;I believe it&rsquo;s time to cultivate a real conversation on the Space and Treasure coasts about economic, social and environmental justice for all people,&rdquo; Patel said.

A graduate of UCLA with a degree in economics, Patel began his career in technology, with strategy and consulting roles at Deloitte, Genentech and the Santa Clara County Social Services Agency.

He then launched a small consulting business in San Francisco; and subsequently co-founded a nonprofit, Epic Change, that used social media to raise funds for change-makers across the globe, according to his campaign site.

Patel was one-year-old when his family arrived in America. His father worked at a 7-11 and his vegetarian mother worked at a McDonald&rsquo;s while raising four children, including Sanjay.

&ldquo;My parents&rsquo; hard work for other companies earned little wealth for our family, and even less for our community,&rdquo; he said on his campaign site.

Patel is half of a Brevard Democratic Party power couple. His wife, Stacey Patel, chairs the Brevard County Democratic executive committee. Both were elected Bernie Sanders delegates to the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Sanjay Patel will challenge incumbent Republican Bill Posey in Florida’s District 8

An Indian-American has announced he will run for the US House of Representatives from Florida district. Sanjay Patel will challenge incumbent Republican Bill Posey in Florida’s District 8. Patel, a resident of satellite beach, announced his candidacy this week at a meeting in Viera of the Brevard County Democratic executive committee that was attended by about 400 people. On his campaign website, Patel is described as “an activist, change-maker, and organisational transformation consultant”. He says he believes in economic justice for all. If elected, Patel promises to work to build prosperity for communities on the Space and Treasure coasts by supporting policies that ensure large companies pay employees fairly, and that help small businesses launch, compete fairly and thrive. “I will work to build prosperity for Florida’s families; guarantee health care for all Americans; protect our land, air and our water; and reform our immigration policy to reflect America’s deepest values,” Patel wrote on his campaign website. “I am the American Dream, a first-generation immigrant, the son of parents who have barely a high school education, a graduate of UCLA with a degree in economics who has built a small business and a nonprofit, and led transformative efforts in business, philanthropy, and politics,” Patel said. He said he’d take his skills and experiences to “transform our collective sadness and outrage into justice for all”. “I believe it’s time to cultivate a real conversation on the Space and Treasure coasts about economic, social and environmental justice for all people,” Patel said. A graduate of UCLA with a degree in economics, Patel began his career in technology, with strategy and consulting roles at Deloitte, Genentech and the Santa Clara County Social Services Agency. He then launched a small consulting business in San Francisco; and subsequently co-founded a nonprofit, Epic Change, that used social media to raise funds for change-makers across the globe, according to his campaign site. Patel was one-year-old when his family arrived in America. His father worked at a 7-11 and his vegetarian mother worked at a McDonald’s while raising four children, including Sanjay. “My parents’ hard work for other companies earned little wealth for our family, and even less for our community,” he said on his campaign site. Patel is half of a Brevard Democratic Party power couple. His wife, Stacey Patel, chairs the Brevard County Democratic executive committee. Both were elected Bernie Sanders delegates to the 2016 Democratic National Convention.

Indian-American from Florida to run for US Congress

Congress voted on Monday to end a three-day US&nbsp;government shutdown, approving another short-term funding bill as Democrats accepted promises from Republicans for a broad debate later on the future of young illegal immigrants.

The fourth temporary funding bill since October easily passed the Senate and the House of Representatives. That sent it to the White House, which said President Donald Trump was expected to sign the bill, a product chiefly of negotiations among Senate leaders.

Enactment by Trump of the bill will allow the government to reopen fully on Tuesday and keep the lights on through February 8, when Congress will have to revisit the budget and immigration policy, two disparate issues that have become closely linked.

The House approved the funding bill by a vote of 266-150 just hours after it passed the Senate by a vote of 81-18.

Trump&#39;s attempts to negotiate an end to the shutdown with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer collapsed on Friday in recriminations and fingerpointing. The Republican president took a new swipe at Democrats as he celebrated the Senate`s pact.

&quot;I am pleased that Democrats in Congress have come to their senses,&quot; Trump said in a statement. &quot;We will make a long-term deal on immigration if and only if it`s good for the country.&quot;

Immigration and the budget are entangled because of Congress&#39;&nbsp;failure last year to approve a budget on time by October 1, just weeks after Trump summarily ordered an end by March to Obama-era legal protections for young immigrants known as &quot;Dreamers.&quot;

The budget failure has necessitated passage by Congress of a series of temporary funding measures, giving Democrats leverage each step of the way since they hold votes needed to overcome a 60-vote threshold in the Senate for most legislation.

With government spending authority about to expire again at midnight on Friday, Democrats withheld support for a fourth stopgap spending bill and demanded action for the Dreamers.

Dreamers

The roughly 700,000 young people were brought to the United States illegally as children, mainly from Mexico and Central America. They mostly grew up in the United States.

Former President Barack Obama&#39;s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or DACA, programme gave the Dreamers legal protections and shielded them from deportation.

Democrats, as a condition of supporting a new spending stopgap, demanded a resolution of the uncertain future Trump created for the Dreamers with his DACA order last year.

But Democratic leaders, worried about being blamed for the disruptive shutdown that resulted, relented in the end and accepted a pledge by Republicans to hold a debate later over the fate of the Dreamers and related immigration issues.

Tens of thousands of federal workers had begun closing down operations for lack of funding on Monday, the first weekday since the shutdown, but essential services such as security and defence operations had continued.&nbsp;

The shutdown undercut Trump`s self-crafted image as a dealmaker who would repair the broken culture in Washington.&nbsp;

It forced Trump to cancel a weekend trip to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and created uncertainty around his scheduled trip this week to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.&nbsp;

The US&nbsp;government cannot fully operate without funding bills that are voted in Congress regularly. Washington has been hampered by frequent threats of a shutdown in recent years as the two parties fight over spending, immigration and other issues. The last US&nbsp;government shutdown was in 2013.&nbsp;

Both sides in Washington had tried to blame each other for the shutdown. The White House on Saturday refused to negotiate on immigration issues until the government reopened.&nbsp;

On Monday, Trump met separately at the White House with Republican senators who have taken a harder line on immigration and with moderate Democratic Senators Joe Manchin and Doug Jones.

Why do we have to wait?

Some liberal groups were infuriated by the decision to reopen the government.

&quot;Today&#39;s cave by Senate Democrats - led by weak-kneed, right-of-centre Democrats - is why people don&rsquo;t believe the Democratic Party stands for anything,&quot; said Stephanie Taylor, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.

Markets have absorbed the shutdown drama over the past week.

US&nbsp;stocks advanced on Monday as each of Wall Street&#39;s main indexes touched a record intraday level after the shutdown deal.&nbsp;

For Jovan Rodriguez of Brooklyn, New York, a Dreamer whose family came from Mexico when he was 3 years old and ultimately settled in Texas, the latest development was more of the same.

&quot;Why do we have to wait - again? It`s like our lives are suspended in limbo,&quot; he said. And they have been for months. I don&#39;t trust the Republicans and I don&#39;t trust (Senate Majority Leader Mitch) McConnell with just a promise. That&#39;s not good enough any more.&quot;

The fourth temporary funding bill since October easily passed the Senate and the House of Representatives

Congress voted on Monday to end a three-day US government shutdown, approving another short-term funding bill as Democrats accepted promises from Republicans for a broad debate later on the future of young illegal immigrants. The fourth temporary funding bill since October easily passed the Senate and the House of Representatives. That sent it to the White House, which said President Donald Trump was expected to sign the bill, a product chiefly of negotiations among Senate leaders. Enactment by Trump of the bill will allow the government to reopen fully on Tuesday and keep the lights on through February 8, when Congress will have to revisit the budget and immigration policy, two disparate issues that have become closely linked. The House approved the funding bill by a vote of 266-150 just hours after it passed the Senate by a vote of 81-18. Trump's attempts to negotiate an end to the shutdown with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer collapsed on Friday in recriminations and fingerpointing. The Republican president took a new swipe at Democrats as he celebrated the Senate`s pact. "I am pleased that Democrats in Congress have come to their senses," Trump said in a statement. "We will make a long-term deal on immigration if and only if it`s good for the country." Immigration and the budget are entangled because of Congress' failure last year to approve a budget on time by October 1, just weeks after Trump summarily ordered an end by March to Obama-era legal protections for young immigrants known as "Dreamers." The budget failure has necessitated passage by Congress of a series of temporary funding measures, giving Democrats leverage each step of the way since they hold votes needed to overcome a 60-vote threshold in the Senate for most legislation. With government spending authority about to expire again at midnight on Friday, Democrats withheld support for a fourth stopgap spending bill and demanded action for the Dreamers. Dreamers The roughly 700,000 young people were brought to the United States illegally as children, mainly from Mexico and Central America. They mostly grew up in the United States. Former President Barack Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or DACA, programme gave the Dreamers legal protections and shielded them from deportation. Democrats, as a condition of supporting a new spending stopgap, demanded a resolution of the uncertain future Trump created for the Dreamers with his DACA order last year. But Democratic leaders, worried about being blamed for the disruptive shutdown that resulted, relented in the end and accepted a pledge by Republicans to hold a debate later over the fate of the Dreamers and related immigration issues. Tens of thousands of federal workers had begun closing down operations for lack of funding on Monday, the first weekday since the shutdown, but essential services such as security and defence operations had continued. The shutdown undercut Trump`s self-crafted image as a dealmaker who would repair the broken culture in Washington. It forced Trump to cancel a weekend trip to his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and created uncertainty around his scheduled trip this week to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. The US government cannot fully operate without funding bills that are voted in Congress regularly. Washington has been hampered by frequent threats of a shutdown in recent years as the two parties fight over spending, immigration and other issues. The last US government shutdown was in 2013. Both sides in Washington had tried to blame each other for the shutdown. The White House on Saturday refused to negotiate on immigration issues until the government reopened. On Monday, Trump met separately at the White House with Republican senators who have taken a harder line on immigration and with moderate Democratic Senators Joe Manchin and Doug Jones. Why do we have to wait? Some liberal groups were infuriated by the decision to reopen the government. "Today's cave by Senate Democrats - led by weak-kneed, right-of-centre Democrats - is why people don’t believe the Democratic Party stands for anything," said Stephanie Taylor, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. Markets have absorbed the shutdown drama over the past week. US stocks advanced on Monday as each of Wall Street's main indexes touched a record intraday level after the shutdown deal. For Jovan Rodriguez of Brooklyn, New York, a Dreamer whose family came from Mexico when he was 3 years old and ultimately settled in Texas, the latest development was more of the same. "Why do we have to wait - again? It`s like our lives are suspended in limbo," he said. And they have been for months. I don't trust the Republicans and I don't trust (Senate Majority Leader Mitch) McConnell with just a promise. That's not good enough any more."

Government shutdown fizzles on spending, immigration deal in US Congress

The world&#39;s most powerful government shut down on Saturday after President Donald Trump and the US Congress failed to reach a deal on funding for federal agencies, highlighting America&#39;s deep political divisions.

For the first time since October 2013 - when a similar standoff that lasted 16 days kept only essential agency operations running - federal workers were being told to stay at home or in some cases to work without pay until new funding is approved.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-government-in-shutdown-as-midnight-deadline-passes-30128" target="_blank">US government in shutdown as midnight deadline passes</a>

Republican and Democratic leaders were expected to renew negotiations on Saturday in the hope of restoring government financing before Monday.

The shutdown began a year to the day after Trump was sworn in as president.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/what-happens-in-a-us-government-shutdown-30134" target="_blank">What happens in a US government shutdown?</a>

His inability to cut a deal despite having a Republican majority in both houses of Congress marks arguably the most debilitating setback for his administration.

In Twitter posts early on Saturday, Trump blamed Democrat lawmakers.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
This is the One Year Anniversary of my Presidency and the Democrats wanted to give me a nice present. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DemocratShutdown?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DemocratShutdown</a>
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954678287820902401?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&quot;This is the One Year Anniversary of my Presidency and the Democrats wanted to give me a nice present,&quot; he said.

&quot;Democrats are far more concerned with illegal immigrants than they are with our great military or safety at our dangerous southern border,&quot; he said. &quot;They could have easily made a deal but decided to play shutdown politics instead.&quot;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Democrats are far more concerned with Illegal Immigrants than they are with our great Military or Safety at our dangerous Southern Border. They could have easily made a deal but decided to play Shutdown politics instead. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WeNeedMoreRepublicansIn18?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WeNeedMoreRepublicansIn18</a> in order to power through mess!
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/954674157144477696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Trump said the shutdown showed the need to win more Republican seats in 2018 mid-term elections.

&quot;We can then be even tougher on Crime (and Border), and even better to our Military &amp; Veterans!&quot; he said.

There had been modest hope on Friday when Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer went to the White House to talk with Trump. One person familiar with the events said the two men agreed to seek a grand deal in which Democrats would win protections from deportation for some 700,000 young undocumented immigrants known as &quot;Dreamers&quot; and Trump would get more money for a border wall and tighter security to stem illegal immigration from Mexico.

By early evening, however, that plan was dead. The source said Trump had spoken with conservative Republicans and been hit with their objections to the deal with Schumer.

Last week, Trump rejected a bipartisan Senate deal that would have protected the Dreamers as well as hand the White House $2.7 billion in new money for immigration enforcement at America&#39;s borders.

In a statement issued minutes before Friday&#39;s midnight deadline for a funding deal, Trump&#39;s White House said: &quot;We will not negotiate the status of unlawful immigrants while Democrats hold our lawful citizens hostage over their reckless demands.&quot;

The shutdown was cemented when the Senate, meeting late into Friday night, blocked a bill to maintain the federal government&#39;s funding through Feb. 16.

The vote was 50-49, well short of the 60 needed in the 100-member chamber to vault the bill over a procedural hurdle.

Four Republicans joined most Democrats in killing the measure. A fifth Republican, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, voted &quot;no&quot; too, but only as part of a parliamentary maneuver to make it easier to bring another bill to the floor.

The breakdown ended a long day of closed-door meetings in Congress and at the White House.

Even as they promised to work on getting the government back up again as soon as possible, Republicans and Democrats blamed each other for the predicament.

&quot;What we&#39;ve just witnessed on the floor was a cynical decision by Senate Democrats to shove aside millions of Americans for the sake of irresponsible political games,&quot; McConnell said.

Schumer said his party took significant steps to reach a deal, including raising the possibility of funding for Trump&#39;s proposed wall along the US border with Mexico, which they have ardently opposed.

&quot;It&#39;s almost as if you were rooting for a shutdown,&quot; Schumer said in comments aimed directly at Trump.

The immediate impact of the government shutdown was eased somewhat by its timing, starting on a weekend when most government employees normally do not work anyway.

The Defense Department said its combat operations in Afghanistan and other military activities would continue, while federal law enforcement officers also would remain on duty.

Trump&#39;s administration also said it planned to keep national parks open with rangers and security guards on duty. The parks were closed during the last shutdown in 2013, which upset many tourists and resulted in the loss of $500 million in visitor spending in areas around the parks and at the Smithsonian museums.

But without a quick deal, most day-to-day operations in the federal government will be disrupted. Hundreds of thousands of government employees will be put on temporary unpaid leave, including many of the White House&#39;s 1,700 workers.

On Monday, government employees ranging from financial regulators and tax collectors to scientists and civilian staff at the Pentagon will have to stay away from work.

Early on Saturday, McConnell offered up a new plan. Instead of the Feb. 16 end date for the temporary spending bill, he proposed Feb. 8.

Senate Democrats had argued this week for an extension of just four or five days to force both sides into serious negotiations on the immigration issue.

Open-air parks and monuments remained open in the US capital and on the National Mall preparations were under way for a second multi-city women&#39;s rights march. Some tourists appeared unaware of the shutdown while others expressed frustration at lawmakers&#39; failure to reach a deal.

&quot;It&#39;s ironic that they get paid - meaning Congress - and the rest of the government doesn&#39;t,&quot; said Dawn Gaither, 57, a Washington teacher. &quot;That&#39;s what we need to do, kick these guys in the tail and get them to work.&quot;

Elke Schmacker, 65, a retired government worker, said she was worried her pension payments and health insurance would be cut off.

&quot;I don&#39;t know what&#39;s going to happen if I have to pay out of pocket,&quot; she said, adding that she had continued to work during the last shutdown under the Obama administration.

The shutdown began a year to the day after Trump was sworn in as president

The world's most powerful government shut down on Saturday after President Donald Trump and the US Congress failed to reach a deal on funding for federal agencies, highlighting America's deep political divisions. For the first time since October 2013 - when a similar standoff that lasted 16 days kept only essential agency operations running - federal workers were being told to stay at home or in some cases to work without pay until new funding is approved. Also read: US government in shutdown as midnight deadline passes Republican and Democratic leaders were expected to renew negotiations on Saturday in the hope of restoring government financing before Monday. The shutdown began a year to the day after Trump was sworn in as president. Also read: What happens in a US government shutdown? His inability to cut a deal despite having a Republican majority in both houses of Congress marks arguably the most debilitating setback for his administration. In Twitter posts early on Saturday, Trump blamed Democrat lawmakers. This is the One Year Anniversary of my Presidency and the Democrats wanted to give me a nice present. #DemocratShutdown — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 20, 2018 × "This is the One Year Anniversary of my Presidency and the Democrats wanted to give me a nice present," he said. "Democrats are far more concerned with illegal immigrants than they are with our great military or safety at our dangerous southern border," he said. "They could have easily made a deal but decided to play shutdown politics instead." Democrats are far more concerned with Illegal Immigrants than they are with our great Military or Safety at our dangerous Southern Border. They could have easily made a deal but decided to play Shutdown politics instead. #WeNeedMoreRepublicansIn18 in order to power through mess! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 20, 2018 × Trump said the shutdown showed the need to win more Republican seats in 2018 mid-term elections. "We can then be even tougher on Crime (and Border), and even better to our Military & Veterans!" he said. There had been modest hope on Friday when Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer went to the White House to talk with Trump. One person familiar with the events said the two men agreed to seek a grand deal in which Democrats would win protections from deportation for some 700,000 young undocumented immigrants known as "Dreamers" and Trump would get more money for a border wall and tighter security to stem illegal immigration from Mexico. By early evening, however, that plan was dead. The source said Trump had spoken with conservative Republicans and been hit with their objections to the deal with Schumer. Last week, Trump rejected a bipartisan Senate deal that would have protected the Dreamers as well as hand the White House $2.7 billion in new money for immigration enforcement at America's borders. In a statement issued minutes before Friday's midnight deadline for a funding deal, Trump's White House said: "We will not negotiate the status of unlawful immigrants while Democrats hold our lawful citizens hostage over their reckless demands." The shutdown was cemented when the Senate, meeting late into Friday night, blocked a bill to maintain the federal government's funding through Feb. 16. The vote was 50-49, well short of the 60 needed in the 100-member chamber to vault the bill over a procedural hurdle. Four Republicans joined most Democrats in killing the measure. A fifth Republican, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, voted "no" too, but only as part of a parliamentary maneuver to make it easier to bring another bill to the floor. The breakdown ended a long day of closed-door meetings in Congress and at the White House. Even as they promised to work on getting the government back up again as soon as possible, Republicans and Democrats blamed each other for the predicament. "What we've just witnessed on the floor was a cynical decision by Senate Democrats to shove aside millions of Americans for the sake of irresponsible political games," McConnell said. Schumer said his party took significant steps to reach a deal, including raising the possibility of funding for Trump's proposed wall along the US border with Mexico, which they have ardently opposed. "It's almost as if you were rooting for a shutdown," Schumer said in comments aimed directly at Trump. The immediate impact of the government shutdown was eased somewhat by its timing, starting on a weekend when most government employees normally do not work anyway. The Defense Department said its combat operations in Afghanistan and other military activities would continue, while federal law enforcement officers also would remain on duty. Trump's administration also said it planned to keep national parks open with rangers and security guards on duty. The parks were closed during the last shutdown in 2013, which upset many tourists and resulted in the loss of $500 million in visitor spending in areas around the parks and at the Smithsonian museums. But without a quick deal, most day-to-day operations in the federal government will be disrupted. Hundreds of thousands of government employees will be put on temporary unpaid leave, including many of the White House's 1,700 workers. On Monday, government employees ranging from financial regulators and tax collectors to scientists and civilian staff at the Pentagon will have to stay away from work. Early on Saturday, McConnell offered up a new plan. Instead of the Feb. 16 end date for the temporary spending bill, he proposed Feb. 8. Senate Democrats had argued this week for an extension of just four or five days to force both sides into serious negotiations on the immigration issue. Open-air parks and monuments remained open in the US capital and on the National Mall preparations were under way for a second multi-city women's rights march. Some tourists appeared unaware of the shutdown while others expressed frustration at lawmakers' failure to reach a deal. "It's ironic that they get paid - meaning Congress - and the rest of the government doesn't," said Dawn Gaither, 57, a Washington teacher. "That's what we need to do, kick these guys in the tail and get them to work." Elke Schmacker, 65, a retired government worker, said she was worried her pension payments and health insurance would be cut off. "I don't know what's going to happen if I have to pay out of pocket," she said, adding that she had continued to work during the last shutdown under the Obama administration.

US government shuts down as Donald Trump feuds with Democrats

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/pm-modi-hosts-ceo-roundtable-meeting-at-davos-says-india-means-business-30413">PM Modi hosts CEO roundtable meet at Davos, says &#39;India means business&#39;</a>

Prime Minister Narendra Modi today told top CEOs here that India means business and presents exciting opportunity for the global businesses.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/congress-votes-to-end-us-shutdown-trump-claims-victory-30415" target="_blank">Congress votes to end US shutdown, Trump claims victory</a>

Congress put the US government back in business Monday by voting to end a three-day shutdown, as President Donald Trump claimed victory in his standoff with Democrats in Washington.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/shah-rukh-khan-at-davos-receives-an-award-spoke-against-sexism-30406">We the powerful need to get out of the way to pick barriers apart: Shah Rukh Khan at Davos</a>

Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan attended a celebrity event before the official start of the World Economic Forum&#39;s annual event at Davos on Tuesday.&nbsp;

The 52-year-old actor spoke against discrimination against women and sexism.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/entertainment-metoo-us-supreme-court-justice-says-she-was-sexually-harassed-30414">#MeToo: US Supreme Court Justice says she was sexually harassed</a>

The US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shocked the world by sharing her own sexual harassment story at the Sundance Film Festival this weekend.&nbsp;

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/social-media-is-threat-to-democracy-facebook-30427">Social media a threat to democracy: Facebook</a>

Facebook&#39;s civic engagement chief Samidh Chakrabarti recently identified social media as a &#39;potential threat&#39;. In a blog post, Chakrabarti noted that he was &quot;not blind to the damage that the internet can do to even a well-functioning democracy.&quot;

PM Modi hosts CEO roundtable meet at Davos, says 'India means business' Prime Minister Narendra Modi today told top CEOs here that India means business and presents exciting opportunity for the global businesses. Congress votes to end US shutdown, Trump claims victory Congress put the US government back in business Monday by voting to end a three-day shutdown, as President Donald Trump claimed victory in his standoff with Democrats in Washington. We the powerful need to get out of the way to pick barriers apart: Shah Rukh Khan at Davos Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan attended a celebrity event before the official start of the World Economic Forum's annual event at Davos on Tuesday. The 52-year-old actor spoke against discrimination against women and sexism. #MeToo: US Supreme Court Justice says she was sexually harassed The US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shocked the world by sharing her own sexual harassment story at the Sundance Film Festival this weekend. Social media a threat to democracy: Facebook Facebook's civic engagement chief Samidh Chakrabarti recently identified social media as a 'potential threat'. In a blog post, Chakrabarti noted that he was "not blind to the damage that the internet can do to even a well-functioning democracy."

WION Morning News Brief, January 23, 2018

The federal government shut down this weekend, as Congress failed to pass a stopgap spending measure. Many may wonder what this means for the nation&rsquo;s public health battles against threats like the flu and the opioid crisis.

In a shutdown, contingency plans allow the federal government to meet most short-term health care needs. Most American hospitals are privately run. Public hospitals are, with very few exceptions, run by state and local governments, which aren&rsquo;t directly affected. No one will be turned away at the emergency room because of the shutdown.

There are, however, plenty of federally funded programs and a few medical facilities that are immediately affected. The federal government will also likely take longer to respond to emerging health crises, as nonessential personnel are sent home.

Patient care

Most federal funding for direct patient care is appropriated separately from the budget negotiations causing the shutdown. So Medicare and Medicaid will be largely unaffected, for example.

There&rsquo;s also a separate appropriation to sustain medical care for veterans. This has been in place since the 2013 shutdown, which caused Congress to change the way it funds veteran care.

The shutdown does affect the Department of Health and Human Services, where 50 percent of all public employees will be sent home on furlough, or without pay. The remaining workers are considered essential to protect life and property.

HHS provides direct patient care only in a few cases, but Indian Health Services &ndash; the agency charged with providing clinical care for 2.2 million American Indians and Alaskan Natives &ndash; is under its purview. Thankfully, there will be no disruptions in those services, because nearly every IHS employee is considered essential.

The National Health Institute Clinical Center provides medical services, primarily for patients participating in medical studies funded by the federal government. Patients already admitted will continue to receive care, but there will be no new clinical study admissions during the shutdown.

This is one of the few places where the shutdown could result in fatalities. Many patients only participate in medical studies when conventional medicine has failed. It&rsquo;s possible that some would-be patients, who would have received potentially lifesaving medical care, will die without these lifesaving treatments. That probability increases with the duration of the shutdown.

Public health

Much of the federal funding for public health helps local and state authorities preempt and mitigate threats.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention supports local and state authorities in disease outbreaks and coordinates national level efforts to counter them. The urgent response to disease outbreaks, like the this year&rsquo;s record-breaking flu, will continue without disruption.

However, federal investigations of new disease outbreaks &ndash; which are crucial to countering diseases before they become widespread in multiple states &ndash; will be substantially slower during the shutdown. It will also take longer for the CDC to disseminate crucial national public health information to hospitals and doctors, who often depend on this data to administer appropriate care at local levels.

The federal government also ensures the safety and well-being of Americans through food inspections, which keep contaminated meats, eggs, grains and other foodstuffs from making it to the consumer. Many of these inspections will continue without disruption.

Brain drain

While the law mandates that the essential personnel who protect life and property must remain at work, these government workers will not receive pay during the shutdown.

By law, essential personnel have to be reimbursed for their lost earnings once the government resumes full operations. But, in the short run, it changes how government workers can spend money and take care of their families. The government workers who were furloughed are not guaranteed any pay for the period they were locked out.

The public health sector, more so than many other aspects of the federal government, depends on highly educated and skilled employees with advanced degrees, such as medical doctors and researchers. Although government workers often make higher wages than they could in the private sector, that isn&rsquo;t true for those who are most skilled. Many public servants in public health take pay cuts to work for the federal government.

Friday&rsquo;s government shutdown is the second in just five years. With the disruption to the livelihoods of more than a million federal employees, it&rsquo;s understandable that some employees may seek employment in the private sector instead, leaving the federal government less capable in the future.

&nbsp;

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-government-shutdown-means-for-the-health-of-americans-90430" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;

With the disruption to the livelihoods of more than a million federal employees, it’s understandable that some employees may seek employment in the private sector instead, leaving the federal government less capable in the future.

The federal government shut down this weekend, as Congress failed to pass a stopgap spending measure. Many may wonder what this means for the nation’s public health battles against threats like the flu and the opioid crisis. In a shutdown, contingency plans allow the federal government to meet most short-term health care needs. Most American hospitals are privately run. Public hospitals are, with very few exceptions, run by state and local governments, which aren’t directly affected. No one will be turned away at the emergency room because of the shutdown. There are, however, plenty of federally funded programs and a few medical facilities that are immediately affected. The federal government will also likely take longer to respond to emerging health crises, as nonessential personnel are sent home. Patient care Most federal funding for direct patient care is appropriated separately from the budget negotiations causing the shutdown. So Medicare and Medicaid will be largely unaffected, for example. There’s also a separate appropriation to sustain medical care for veterans. This has been in place since the 2013 shutdown, which caused Congress to change the way it funds veteran care. The shutdown does affect the Department of Health and Human Services, where 50 percent of all public employees will be sent home on furlough, or without pay. The remaining workers are considered essential to protect life and property. HHS provides direct patient care only in a few cases, but Indian Health Services – the agency charged with providing clinical care for 2.2 million American Indians and Alaskan Natives – is under its purview. Thankfully, there will be no disruptions in those services, because nearly every IHS employee is considered essential. The National Health Institute Clinical Center provides medical services, primarily for patients participating in medical studies funded by the federal government. Patients already admitted will continue to receive care, but there will be no new clinical study admissions during the shutdown. This is one of the few places where the shutdown could result in fatalities. Many patients only participate in medical studies when conventional medicine has failed. It’s possible that some would-be patients, who would have received potentially lifesaving medical care, will die without these lifesaving treatments. That probability increases with the duration of the shutdown. Public health Much of the federal funding for public health helps local and state authorities preempt and mitigate threats. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention supports local and state authorities in disease outbreaks and coordinates national level efforts to counter them. The urgent response to disease outbreaks, like the this year’s record-breaking flu, will continue without disruption. However, federal investigations of new disease outbreaks – which are crucial to countering diseases before they become widespread in multiple states – will be substantially slower during the shutdown. It will also take longer for the CDC to disseminate crucial national public health information to hospitals and doctors, who often depend on this data to administer appropriate care at local levels. The federal government also ensures the safety and well-being of Americans through food inspections, which keep contaminated meats, eggs, grains and other foodstuffs from making it to the consumer. Many of these inspections will continue without disruption. Brain drain While the law mandates that the essential personnel who protect life and property must remain at work, these government workers will not receive pay during the shutdown. By law, essential personnel have to be reimbursed for their lost earnings once the government resumes full operations. But, in the short run, it changes how government workers can spend money and take care of their families. The government workers who were furloughed are not guaranteed any pay for the period they were locked out. The public health sector, more so than many other aspects of the federal government, depends on highly educated and skilled employees with advanced degrees, such as medical doctors and researchers. Although government workers often make higher wages than they could in the private sector, that isn’t true for those who are most skilled. Many public servants in public health take pay cuts to work for the federal government. Friday’s government shutdown is the second in just five years. With the disruption to the livelihoods of more than a million federal employees, it’s understandable that some employees may seek employment in the private sector instead, leaving the federal government less capable in the future. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: What the US government shutdown means for Americans

The US Congress made no notable progress this week toward a deal on the status of 700,000 &quot;Dreamer&quot; immigrants, with President Donald Trump saying on Friday that one &quot;could very well not happen&quot; by a deadline next month.

Whether the lack of progress signalled the possibility of another federal government shutdown next week was unclear, but it worried the Dreamers, young people who were brought illegally into the United States as children.

Trump said last year that he would end by March 5 a program that was set up by former President Barack Obama to protect the Dreamers from deportation, and he urged Congress to act before that date. No action has resulted.

&quot;We want to make a deal,&quot; Trump said at an event in Virginia with US Customs and Border Protection officials. And he blamed Democratic lawmakers for the impasse.

&quot;I think they want to use it for political purposes for elections. I really am not happy with the way it&#39;s going from the standpoint of the Democrats,&quot; he said.

Democrats have said repeatedly that they want protections written into law for the Dreamers, who were given temporary legal status by Obama&#39;s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which lets them study and work in the United States without fear of deportation.

Republicans, who control Congress, are undecided on what to do about DACA and the Dreamers. They ended a three-day retreat at a mountain resort in West Virginia on Friday not much nearer to consensus than they were a week ago.

The partisan standoff caused a partial shutdown of the federal government for three days last month after Congress failed to pass a stopgap spending measure needed to keep the lights on at federal facilities across the country.

The House of Representatives plans to vote on Tuesday on legislation to keep federal agencies operating beyond Feb. 8, when existing funds expire, a senior House Republican aide said.

The aide did not provide details, however, on the duration of this latest-in-a-series of temporary funding measures.

Democrats have leverage on the immigration issue because their votes are needed to pass spending measures in the Senate.

The next spending deadline looms on Thursday, with Democrats defiant in their demands and Republicans remaining divided.

Four-Part Offer&nbsp;

Trump has offered the Dreamers a path to citizenship, but only on the condition he also gets funding for a wall along the US-Mexico border, as well as other immigration-related measures that Democrats oppose.

Last month, he proposed letting 1.8 million Dreamers stay in the country and become citizens in exchange for $25 billion for the wall, curbs on family-sponsored immigration, and an end to a visa lottery program.

Some lawmakers want Trump&#39;s four-part immigration framework pared back, while others want it approved or made even more strict on future immigration.

&quot;If we can solve DACA and border security that may be the best I can hope for,&quot; Senator John Thune, a member of the Republican leadership, told reporters at the retreat.

Senator James Lankford was among Republicans who said this week that Trump could give Congress more time to reach a deal by extending the Dreamers&#39; deadline beyond March 5.

Trump reiterated on Thursday at the retreat that all four components of his framework must be included in a deal, a stance viewed as unworkable by many lawmakers in both parties.

Some Republicans say the March 5 deadline lost its power last month when a federal court blocked the rescinding of DACA. That meant the law would remain in effect until the Supreme Court resolves the case, which is unlikely by March 5.

In a research note, financial firm Height Analytics set the odds of another shutdown next week at 65 per cent.

Republicans are trying to call Democrats&#39; bluff on DACA, but the Democrats look even more willing to allow a shutdown than they were last month, the analysts said. &quot;What this has become is a very absurd game of chicken,&quot; they said in the note.

The US Congress made no notable progress this week toward a deal on the status of 700,000 'Dreamer' immigrants, with President Donald Trump saying on Friday that one 'could very well not happen' by a deadline next month

The US Congress made no notable progress this week toward a deal on the status of 700,000 "Dreamer" immigrants, with President Donald Trump saying on Friday that one "could very well not happen" by a deadline next month. Whether the lack of progress signalled the possibility of another federal government shutdown next week was unclear, but it worried the Dreamers, young people who were brought illegally into the United States as children. Trump said last year that he would end by March 5 a program that was set up by former President Barack Obama to protect the Dreamers from deportation, and he urged Congress to act before that date. No action has resulted. "We want to make a deal," Trump said at an event in Virginia with US Customs and Border Protection officials. And he blamed Democratic lawmakers for the impasse. "I think they want to use it for political purposes for elections. I really am not happy with the way it's going from the standpoint of the Democrats," he said. Democrats have said repeatedly that they want protections written into law for the Dreamers, who were given temporary legal status by Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which lets them study and work in the United States without fear of deportation. Republicans, who control Congress, are undecided on what to do about DACA and the Dreamers. They ended a three-day retreat at a mountain resort in West Virginia on Friday not much nearer to consensus than they were a week ago. The partisan standoff caused a partial shutdown of the federal government for three days last month after Congress failed to pass a stopgap spending measure needed to keep the lights on at federal facilities across the country. The House of Representatives plans to vote on Tuesday on legislation to keep federal agencies operating beyond Feb. 8, when existing funds expire, a senior House Republican aide said. The aide did not provide details, however, on the duration of this latest-in-a-series of temporary funding measures. Democrats have leverage on the immigration issue because their votes are needed to pass spending measures in the Senate. The next spending deadline looms on Thursday, with Democrats defiant in their demands and Republicans remaining divided. Four-Part Offer Trump has offered the Dreamers a path to citizenship, but only on the condition he also gets funding for a wall along the US-Mexico border, as well as other immigration-related measures that Democrats oppose. Last month, he proposed letting 1.8 million Dreamers stay in the country and become citizens in exchange for $25 billion for the wall, curbs on family-sponsored immigration, and an end to a visa lottery program. Some lawmakers want Trump's four-part immigration framework pared back, while others want it approved or made even more strict on future immigration. "If we can solve DACA and border security that may be the best I can hope for," Senator John Thune, a member of the Republican leadership, told reporters at the retreat. Senator James Lankford was among Republicans who said this week that Trump could give Congress more time to reach a deal by extending the Dreamers' deadline beyond March 5. Trump reiterated on Thursday at the retreat that all four components of his framework must be included in a deal, a stance viewed as unworkable by many lawmakers in both parties. Some Republicans say the March 5 deadline lost its power last month when a federal court blocked the rescinding of DACA. That meant the law would remain in effect until the Supreme Court resolves the case, which is unlikely by March 5. In a research note, financial firm Height Analytics set the odds of another shutdown next week at 65 per cent. Republicans are trying to call Democrats' bluff on DACA, but the Democrats look even more willing to allow a shutdown than they were last month, the analysts said. "What this has become is a very absurd game of chicken," they said in the note.

No progress on 'Dreamers' as another US shutdown looms

The Republican-controlled US Congress on Thursday passed a short-term funding bill to keep the federal government running for four more weeks, averting a looming shutdown.

Members of the House of voted 231-188 for the bill and the Senate followed with a 66 to 32 vote.

The temporary funding extension,&nbsp;which lasts until January 19, gives more time to lawmakers from both parties to reach an agreement on funding for the remainder of the 2018 fiscal year, which ends September 30.&nbsp;

Opposition Democrats had the numbers to block the Republican bill in the Senate, giving them the ability leverage concessions from the majority party on policy priorities.

Some Democratic senators opposed the measure because it did not address the fate of hundreds of thousands of young immigrants who came to the United States as children, whose status has been thrown into doubt by President Donald Trump.

In the House, some Republicans had threatened to vote &quot;no&quot; on the temporary funding bill because it does not fund the Department of Defense for the entire year.&nbsp;

Earlier in the day, Trump accused Democrats of trying to block the bill in order to close down the federal government -- something that did not in the end occur.

&quot;House Democrats want a SHUTDOWN for the holidays in order to distract from the very popular, just passed, Tax Cuts. House Republicans, don&#39;t let this happen,&quot; he tweeted. &quot;Pass the (bill) TODAY and keep our Government OPEN!&quot;&nbsp;

The House also approved $81 billion in funding on Thursday for states and territories devastated by hurricanes and wildfires this summer and fall.

Members of the House of voted 231-188 for the bill and the Senate followed with a 66 to 32 vote

The Republican-controlled US Congress on Thursday passed a short-term funding bill to keep the federal government running for four more weeks, averting a looming shutdown. Members of the House of voted 231-188 for the bill and the Senate followed with a 66 to 32 vote. The temporary funding extension, which lasts until January 19, gives more time to lawmakers from both parties to reach an agreement on funding for the remainder of the 2018 fiscal year, which ends September 30. Opposition Democrats had the numbers to block the Republican bill in the Senate, giving them the ability leverage concessions from the majority party on policy priorities. Some Democratic senators opposed the measure because it did not address the fate of hundreds of thousands of young immigrants who came to the United States as children, whose status has been thrown into doubt by President Donald Trump. In the House, some Republicans had threatened to vote "no" on the temporary funding bill because it does not fund the Department of Defense for the entire year. Earlier in the day, Trump accused Democrats of trying to block the bill in order to close down the federal government -- something that did not in the end occur. "House Democrats want a SHUTDOWN for the holidays in order to distract from the very popular, just passed, Tax Cuts. House Republicans, don't let this happen," he tweeted. "Pass the (bill) TODAY and keep our Government OPEN!" The House also approved $81 billion in funding on Thursday for states and territories devastated by hurricanes and wildfires this summer and fall.

US Congress approves short-term budget to avoid shutdown

Congressional Republicans on Friday unveiled the final version of their dramatic US&nbsp;tax overhaul - debt-financed cuts for businesses, the wealthy and some middle-class Americans - and picked up crucial support from two wavering senators ahead of planned votes by lawmakers early next week.

Passage of the biggest US&nbsp;tax rewrite since 1986 would provide Republican lawmakers and President Donald Trump their first major legislative victory since he took office in January. Prospects for approval soared after Republican senators Marco Rubio and Bob Corker pledged support.

Three Republican senators, enough to defeat the measure in a Senate that Trump&#39;s party controls with a slim 52-48 majority, remained uncommitted: Susan Collins, Jeff Flake and Mike Lee.

The final version hammered out between Senate and House of Representatives Republicans after each chamber previously passed competing versions contained no surprises.

It would cut the corporate income tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, according to a summary distributed to reporters by congressional tax writers. Corporate tax lobbyists have been seeking a tax cut of this magnitude for many years.

The bill, the summary showed, would create a 20-percent business income tax deduction for owners of &quot;pass-through&quot; businesses, such as partnerships and sole proprietorships; allow for immediate write-off by corporations of new equipment costs, and eliminate the corporate alternative minimum tax.

Under a new territorial system, the bill would exempt US&nbsp;corporations from taxes on most of their future foreign profits. It also sets a one-time tax for companies to repatriate more than $2.6 trillion now held overseas, at rates of 15.5 percent for cash and cash-equivalents and 8 percent for illiquid assets.

If passed by Congress, the changes would be in effect for 2018 taxes, with tax returns for 2017 unaffected.

Democrats have been unified against the measure, calling it a giveaway to corporations and the rich that would drive up the federal deficit.

Bernie Sanders, a leading liberal voice in the Senate who unsuccessfully sought the Democratic presidential nomination last year, called the bill &quot;a moral and economic obscenity.&quot;

&quot;It is a gift to wealthy Republican campaign contributors and an insult to the working families of our country,&quot; Sanders said.

Republicans have said the tax cuts are needed because the economy is not expanding quickly enough. &quot;Now the American people are closer to a plan that will deliver higher wages, lower taxes, a simpler system, and a stronger American economy,&quot; House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said.

The House was expected to vote on the bill on Tuesday. Republicans have a large majority there, and passage was expected despite Democratic opposition. The bill would then go to the Senate. Republicans can afford to lose only two votes from within their own ranks and still win Senate passage.

The tax bill was expected to add at least $1 trillion to the 20 trillion US&nbsp;national debt over 10 years, making it an unusual example of deficit spending on stimulative tax cuts at a time when the economy is already expanding.

For months, Trump has touted the bill as a middle-class tax cut. Studies from independent analysts and non-partisan congressional researchers have projected that corporations and the rich would benefit disproportionately.

Top rate cut 

The Republican bill would maintain the existing seven individual and family income tax brackets with rates of 10, 12, 22, 24, 32, 35 and 37 percent. That top rate, for the highest-earning Americans, would be cut from today&#39;s 39.6 percent.

Republicans abandoned their quest to eliminate the estate tax on inherited assets, a move that would have benefited the richest Americans. But they did propose increasing the exemption for the tax to $10 million from $5 million person.

The bill does not eliminate Wall Street&#39;s so-called carried interest loophole that allows fund managers to claim a lower capital gains tax rate on profits from investments held more than a year. Getting rid of the loophole was a Trump campaign pledge. Instead, the legislation makes it harder for some fund managers to take advantage of the loopholes by requiring them to hold investments for more than three years before claiming it.

Trump, who last year promised voters major tax cuts, wants a bill on his desk before the Dec. 25 Christmas holiday so he can sign it into law and finish 2017 with at least one big win in Congress before the 2018 mid-term election campaigns when Republicans will defend their Senate and House of Representatives majorities.

Since sweeping to power in Washington in January, Trump and his fellow Republicans have failed to pass major legislation including a promised healthcare overhaul, while Trump`s public approval ratings have remained low. Since last month, Republicans have lost hard-fought elections in Alabama and Virginia.

Stock markets have been rallying for months in anticipation of sharply lower tax rates for corporations, wealthy financiers and business owners, all of which the bill would deliver.

Wall Street&#39;s three major stock indexes closed at record highs on Friday, driven by corporate tax rates that looked likely to pass.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 0.58 percent to 24,651.74, the S&amp;P 500 gained 0.90 percent to 2,675.81 and the Nasdaq Composite rose 1.17 percent, to 6,936.58.

Late Changes&nbsp;

As the tax package evolved, it tilted increasingly toward benefiting businesses and the wealthy. Provisions for offsetting the revenue costs of last-minute changes were troublesome for some lawmakers.

Rubio said he would support the bill after its approach to the child tax credit was changed. The bill doubles the credit, meant to help reduce the costs of raising kids, to $2,000 per dependent child under the age of 17, with a refundable portion of $1,400. That refundable portion was raised from $1,100 at the last minute to win Rubio`s backing.

Lee called the change to the child credit &quot;a big win&quot; but stopped short of endorsing the bill until he saw the details.

Corker, a fiscal hawk who opposed an earlier bill that passed the Senate because of its deficit impact, said the final measure was &quot;far from perfect&quot; but he would support it, calling it a &quot;once-in-a-generation opportunity&quot; to help US&nbsp;businesses.

Collins has remained non-committal, in part out of concern about a provision that would repeal the fine imposed under the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, on Americans who do not obtain health insurance.

Flake has said he needs to see all the details before supporting the measure.

The Senate vote outlook has been complicated by Republican Senator John McCain&#39;s hospitalization for treatment for side effects of cancer therapy. His office said he &quot;looks forward to returning to work as soon as possible.&quot;

Under the legislation, the federal corporate tax would fall from 35 percent to 21 percent

Congressional Republicans on Friday unveiled the final version of their dramatic US tax overhaul - debt-financed cuts for businesses, the wealthy and some middle-class Americans - and picked up crucial support from two wavering senators ahead of planned votes by lawmakers early next week. Passage of the biggest US tax rewrite since 1986 would provide Republican lawmakers and President Donald Trump their first major legislative victory since he took office in January. Prospects for approval soared after Republican senators Marco Rubio and Bob Corker pledged support. Three Republican senators, enough to defeat the measure in a Senate that Trump's party controls with a slim 52-48 majority, remained uncommitted: Susan Collins, Jeff Flake and Mike Lee. The final version hammered out between Senate and House of Representatives Republicans after each chamber previously passed competing versions contained no surprises. It would cut the corporate income tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, according to a summary distributed to reporters by congressional tax writers. Corporate tax lobbyists have been seeking a tax cut of this magnitude for many years. The bill, the summary showed, would create a 20-percent business income tax deduction for owners of "pass-through" businesses, such as partnerships and sole proprietorships; allow for immediate write-off by corporations of new equipment costs, and eliminate the corporate alternative minimum tax. Under a new territorial system, the bill would exempt US corporations from taxes on most of their future foreign profits. It also sets a one-time tax for companies to repatriate more than $2.6 trillion now held overseas, at rates of 15.5 percent for cash and cash-equivalents and 8 percent for illiquid assets. If passed by Congress, the changes would be in effect for 2018 taxes, with tax returns for 2017 unaffected. Democrats have been unified against the measure, calling it a giveaway to corporations and the rich that would drive up the federal deficit. Bernie Sanders, a leading liberal voice in the Senate who unsuccessfully sought the Democratic presidential nomination last year, called the bill "a moral and economic obscenity." "It is a gift to wealthy Republican campaign contributors and an insult to the working families of our country," Sanders said. Republicans have said the tax cuts are needed because the economy is not expanding quickly enough. "Now the American people are closer to a plan that will deliver higher wages, lower taxes, a simpler system, and a stronger American economy," House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said. The House was expected to vote on the bill on Tuesday. Republicans have a large majority there, and passage was expected despite Democratic opposition. The bill would then go to the Senate. Republicans can afford to lose only two votes from within their own ranks and still win Senate passage. The tax bill was expected to add at least $1 trillion to the 20 trillion US national debt over 10 years, making it an unusual example of deficit spending on stimulative tax cuts at a time when the economy is already expanding. For months, Trump has touted the bill as a middle-class tax cut. Studies from independent analysts and non-partisan congressional researchers have projected that corporations and the rich would benefit disproportionately. Top rate cut The Republican bill would maintain the existing seven individual and family income tax brackets with rates of 10, 12, 22, 24, 32, 35 and 37 percent. That top rate, for the highest-earning Americans, would be cut from today's 39.6 percent. Republicans abandoned their quest to eliminate the estate tax on inherited assets, a move that would have benefited the richest Americans. But they did propose increasing the exemption for the tax to $10 million from $5 million person. The bill does not eliminate Wall Street's so-called carried interest loophole that allows fund managers to claim a lower capital gains tax rate on profits from investments held more than a year. Getting rid of the loophole was a Trump campaign pledge. Instead, the legislation makes it harder for some fund managers to take advantage of the loopholes by requiring them to hold investments for more than three years before claiming it. Trump, who last year promised voters major tax cuts, wants a bill on his desk before the Dec. 25 Christmas holiday so he can sign it into law and finish 2017 with at least one big win in Congress before the 2018 mid-term election campaigns when Republicans will defend their Senate and House of Representatives majorities. Since sweeping to power in Washington in January, Trump and his fellow Republicans have failed to pass major legislation including a promised healthcare overhaul, while Trump`s public approval ratings have remained low. Since last month, Republicans have lost hard-fought elections in Alabama and Virginia. Stock markets have been rallying for months in anticipation of sharply lower tax rates for corporations, wealthy financiers and business owners, all of which the bill would deliver. Wall Street's three major stock indexes closed at record highs on Friday, driven by corporate tax rates that looked likely to pass. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 0.58 percent to 24,651.74, the S&P 500 gained 0.90 percent to 2,675.81 and the Nasdaq Composite rose 1.17 percent, to 6,936.58. Late Changes As the tax package evolved, it tilted increasingly toward benefiting businesses and the wealthy. Provisions for offsetting the revenue costs of last-minute changes were troublesome for some lawmakers. Rubio said he would support the bill after its approach to the child tax credit was changed. The bill doubles the credit, meant to help reduce the costs of raising kids, to $2,000 per dependent child under the age of 17, with a refundable portion of $1,400. That refundable portion was raised from $1,100 at the last minute to win Rubio`s backing. Lee called the change to the child credit "a big win" but stopped short of endorsing the bill until he saw the details. Corker, a fiscal hawk who opposed an earlier bill that passed the Senate because of its deficit impact, said the final measure was "far from perfect" but he would support it, calling it a "once-in-a-generation opportunity" to help US businesses. Collins has remained non-committal, in part out of concern about a provision that would repeal the fine imposed under the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, on Americans who do not obtain health insurance. Flake has said he needs to see all the details before supporting the measure. The Senate vote outlook has been complicated by Republican Senator John McCain's hospitalization for treatment for side effects of cancer therapy. His office said he "looks forward to returning to work as soon as possible."

Trump's much-touted tax cut on track for passage in US Congress, voting next week

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/science-tech/facebook-changes-algorithm-to-curb-tiny-group-of-spammers-17547" target="_blank">Facebook</a> said it plans on Monday to turn over to the US Congress copies of some 3,000 ads that the social network says were bought on Facebook likely by people in Russia in the months before and after the 2016 US election.

Last month, in response to calls from US lawmakers, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-ceo-zuckerberg-wife-vow-3-billion-to-end-all-diseases-6641" target="_blank">Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg</a> pledged to hand over the ads to congressional investigators who are looking into alleged Russian involvement in the US presidential election, but he had left the timing unclear.

The materials would be delivered on Monday, Facebook said on Sunday.

Facebook, the world&#39;s largest social network, has become a primary platform for internet political ads because it has a wide reach and gives advertisers powerful targeting capabilities. For that reason, it may possess valuable clues for US investigators.

Facebook has already provided information about Russia-linked ads to US special counsel Robert Mueller, who is also investigating alleged election meddling, a source said last month.

Moscow has denied any meddling in last year&#39;s US election, in which Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Facebook said on Sunday it would provide to Congress copies of the ads it has found, as well as related data such as whom the ads were targeted at and how much each ad cost.

The materials would be turned over to the intelligence committees of the Senate and House of Representatives, and to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Facebook said.

The $100,000 in ads linked to Russia focused on amplifying divisive US social and political messages, Facebook said last month. Some ads mentioned Muslim support for Clinton, promoted in-person events and weighed in on the Black Lives Matter protests against police shootings, according to media reports.

The emergence of Facebook as a battleground for government-sponsored propaganda has become a major challenge for the social network&#39;s corporate image.

Zuckerberg, in Facebook posts last month, disclosed a series of steps he said the company would take to prevent governments from manipulating it and said he had earlier been wrong to dismiss the possibility of Facebook being used in such a way.

US Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat, has likened digital political advertising to the &quot;Wild, Wild West,&quot; and he and others have called for legislation to impose disclosure requirements similar to what is required in the United States for political ads on television.

Facebook said on Sunday it would provide to Congress copies of the ads it has found

Facebook said it plans on Monday to turn over to the US Congress copies of some 3,000 ads that the social network says were bought on Facebook likely by people in Russia in the months before and after the 2016 US election. Last month, in response to calls from US lawmakers, Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg pledged to hand over the ads to congressional investigators who are looking into alleged Russian involvement in the US presidential election, but he had left the timing unclear. The materials would be delivered on Monday, Facebook said on Sunday. Facebook, the world's largest social network, has become a primary platform for internet political ads because it has a wide reach and gives advertisers powerful targeting capabilities. For that reason, it may possess valuable clues for US investigators. Facebook has already provided information about Russia-linked ads to US special counsel Robert Mueller, who is also investigating alleged election meddling, a source said last month. Moscow has denied any meddling in last year's US election, in which Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton. Facebook said on Sunday it would provide to Congress copies of the ads it has found, as well as related data such as whom the ads were targeted at and how much each ad cost. The materials would be turned over to the intelligence committees of the Senate and House of Representatives, and to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Facebook said. The $100,000 in ads linked to Russia focused on amplifying divisive US social and political messages, Facebook said last month. Some ads mentioned Muslim support for Clinton, promoted in-person events and weighed in on the Black Lives Matter protests against police shootings, according to media reports. The emergence of Facebook as a battleground for government-sponsored propaganda has become a major challenge for the social network's corporate image. Zuckerberg, in Facebook posts last month, disclosed a series of steps he said the company would take to prevent governments from manipulating it and said he had earlier been wrong to dismiss the possibility of Facebook being used in such a way. US Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat, has likened digital political advertising to the "Wild, Wild West," and he and others have called for legislation to impose disclosure requirements similar to what is required in the United States for political ads on television.

Facebook to give Russia-linked ads to US Congress on Monday

United States President Donald Trump signed a Congressional resolution condemning white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, and other similar hate groups.

In a statement, Trump said he was &quot;pleased to sign&quot;&nbsp;the resolution.

&quot;As Americans, we condemn the recent violence in Charlottesville and oppose hatred, bigotry, and racism in all forms,&quot; said Trump.

The US Congress unanimously passed a resolution &quot;rejecting white nationalists, white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and other hate groups&quot; earlier this week.

Trump had to face heavy criticism after his equivocal stand on the August violence that erupted in Charlottesville after a white supremacist plowed his vehicle into a crowd of&nbsp;counter-protesters killing one during a rally by&nbsp;far-right extremists.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The US Congress unanimously passed a resolution 'rejecting white nationalists, white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and other hate groups' earlier this week

United States President Donald Trump signed a Congressional resolution condemning white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, and other similar hate groups. In a statement, Trump said he was "pleased to sign" the resolution. "As Americans, we condemn the recent violence in Charlottesville and oppose hatred, bigotry, and racism in all forms," said Trump. The US Congress unanimously passed a resolution "rejecting white nationalists, white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, and other hate groups" earlier this week. Trump had to face heavy criticism after his equivocal stand on the August violence that erupted in Charlottesville after a white supremacist plowed his vehicle into a crowd of counter-protesters killing one during a rally by far-right extremists.

Trump signs resolution condemning white supremacists, other hate groups

The US Congress is poised to approve tough new sanctions on Russia, Iran and North Korea this week after reaching a compromise deal, which the White House indicated Sunday it could support.

In mid-June, the Senate overwhelmingly passed tough sanctions on Moscow and Tehran, but the text stalled in the House of Representatives, until agreement was reached on Saturday.

The House is now set to vote Tuesday on a bill that targets Russia -- for its alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election and its annexation of Crimea -- as well as Iran and North Korea, for its recent ballistic missile tests.

Initially, Trump resisted the legislation, which would prevent him from unilaterally easing penalties against Moscow in the future -- effectively placing him under Congress&#39;s watch.

But faced with near-total consensus among Republican and Democratic lawmakers, the White House blinked.

&quot;We support where the legislation is now, and will continue to work with the House and Senate to put those tough sanctions in place on Russia until the situation in Ukraine is fully resolved,&quot; new White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told ABC&#39;s &quot;This Week&quot; news program.

&quot;The original piece of legislation was poorly written,&quot; she added.

Her boss, communications director Anthony Scaramucci, said it was still up to Trump whether or not to sign the measure into law.

&quot;My guess is that he&#39;s going to make that decision shortly,&quot; Scaramucci told CNN, introducing a bit more doubt as to Trump&#39;s intentions.

Even if Trump were to oppose the measure, Congress could overturn it with a two-thirds majority of both houses.

&quot;If he vetoes the bill, we will override his veto,&quot; Democratic Senator Ben Cardin told Fox News Sunday.

Once the House approves the compromise bill, the Senate will vote again, likely before the summer recess begins in August.

In Europe, the unilateral move by the US Congress does not sit well.

A spokeswoman for the European Commission said the draft legislation appeared to be &quot;driven primarily by domestic considerations.&quot;

&quot;Sanctions are at their most effective when they are coordinated. Currently our sanctions regimes are coordinated,&quot; she added, expressing concern that any new US measures could have &quot;unintended consequences.&quot;

House Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy alluded to those concerns, saying the text, which has not yet been made public, would &quot;help bolster the energy security of our European allies by maintaining their access to key energy resources outside of Russia.&quot;

The US Congress is poised to approve tough new sanctions on Russia, Iran and North Korea this week

The US Congress is poised to approve tough new sanctions on Russia, Iran and North Korea this week after reaching a compromise deal, which the White House indicated Sunday it could support. In mid-June, the Senate overwhelmingly passed tough sanctions on Moscow and Tehran, but the text stalled in the House of Representatives, until agreement was reached on Saturday. The House is now set to vote Tuesday on a bill that targets Russia -- for its alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election and its annexation of Crimea -- as well as Iran and North Korea, for its recent ballistic missile tests. Initially, Trump resisted the legislation, which would prevent him from unilaterally easing penalties against Moscow in the future -- effectively placing him under Congress's watch. But faced with near-total consensus among Republican and Democratic lawmakers, the White House blinked. "We support where the legislation is now, and will continue to work with the House and Senate to put those tough sanctions in place on Russia until the situation in Ukraine is fully resolved," new White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told ABC's "This Week" news program. "The original piece of legislation was poorly written," she added. Her boss, communications director Anthony Scaramucci, said it was still up to Trump whether or not to sign the measure into law. "My guess is that he's going to make that decision shortly," Scaramucci told CNN, introducing a bit more doubt as to Trump's intentions. Even if Trump were to oppose the measure, Congress could overturn it with a two-thirds majority of both houses. "If he vetoes the bill, we will override his veto," Democratic Senator Ben Cardin told Fox News Sunday. Once the House approves the compromise bill, the Senate will vote again, likely before the summer recess begins in August. In Europe, the unilateral move by the US Congress does not sit well. A spokeswoman for the European Commission said the draft legislation appeared to be "driven primarily by domestic considerations." "Sanctions are at their most effective when they are coordinated. Currently our sanctions regimes are coordinated," she added, expressing concern that any new US measures could have "unintended consequences." House Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy alluded to those concerns, saying the text, which has not yet been made public, would "help bolster the energy security of our European allies by maintaining their access to key energy resources outside of Russia."

US Congress to vote on Russia sanctions, tying Trump's hands

President Donald Trump&#39;s eldest son and his former campaign chairman have been given approval by a US special counsel to testify publicly to Congress as part of investigations into Russian meddling in the 2016 election,&nbsp;the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said on Tuesday.

US Senator Dianne Feinstein told Reuters the special counsel, former FBI director Robert Mueller, said that Donald Trump Jr and Paul Manafort, campaign manager from March to August, were free to speak to the committee.

Mueller is investigating allegations by US intelligence agencies that Russia interfered to help Trump win the presidency and possible collusion between Moscow and the Republican&#39;s campaign. Russia denies meddling in the campaign, and Trump says there was no collusion.

If Trump Jr were to appear before the judiciary committee, he would be the highest member of the president&#39;s inner circle of relatives and White House aides to testify in Congress about the Russia allegations. Several congressional panels have investigations open.

The allegations have dominated Trump`s first six months in office. Trump Jr, who runs the Trump Organization family business, released emails last week in which he eagerly agreed in June 2016 to meet a woman he was told was a Russian government lawyer who might have damaging information about Democratic election rival Hillary Clinton as part of Moscow&#39;s official support for his father&#39;s campaign.

The meeting in Trump Tower in New York appears to be the most tangible evidence of a connection between Trump`s campaign and Russia, investigators in congress have said.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley has said he would coordinate with Mueller to ensure that any witnesses the panel brings would not conflict with Mueller&#39;s criminal investigation.

Feinstein, asked whether Mueller had given the go ahead for Trump Jr and Manafort to testify publicly, said, &quot;yes.&quot;

Feinstein said the committee planned for the testimony to be part of a broader hearing scheduled for Wednesday but has now been postponed. She could not confirm whether the hearing would take place next week.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Eighth person in Trump Tower meeting identified

A man who works for a Moscow-based developer with ties to Trump was identified on Tuesday as the eighth person to attend the Trump Tower meeting.

Lawyer Scott Balber confirmed Ike Kaveladze&#39;s name to Reuters after CNN reported that his client had been identified by special counsel Mueller&#39;s&nbsp;prosecutors and was cooperating in their investigation.

Balber represented Trump himself in the New York businessman&#39;s 2013 lawsuit against comedian television host Bill Maher, demanding the $5 million Maher offered to give to charity if Trump could prove his father is not an orangutan.

Kaveladze&#39;s LinkedIn profile identifies him as vice president of Crocus Group, a company run by Moscow-based developers Aras Agalarov and his son, Emin, an Azerbaijani-Russian pop star. The two have ties to the Trump family and helped set up last year&#39;s meeting between Trump Jr and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Ike Kaveladze, the eighth man at the Trump Jr meeting, was implicated in a Russian money-laundering scheme in 2000 <a href="https://t.co/PscHNg6Ubz">https://t.co/PscHNg6Ubz</a> <a href="https://t.co/i3OQ05ryni">pic.twitter.com/i3OQ05ryni</a>
&mdash; Sarah Kendzior (@sarahkendzior) <a href="https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/status/887345849176662016">July 18, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Kaveladze was asked to go to the meeting with the understanding that he would be a translator for Veselnitskaya, only to find she had brought her own translator with her, Balber told CNN.

Balber said he also represents the Agalarovs. Balber said Mueller&#39;s investigators have not interviewed his client or made contact about the Agalarovs.

In addition to Trump Jr, lawyer Veselnitskaya, her translator, and Kaveladze, the meeting was attended by Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, Manafort, publicist Rob Goldstone and Russian-American lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin.

Anatoli Samochornov was identified as Veselnitskaya&#39;s translator in multiple media reports.

In Moscow, Russia said it reserved the right to retaliate against the United States after a meeting in Washington ended without an agreement to return Russian diplomatic property the US had seized.

Trump&#39;s predecessor President Barack Obama ordered the seizure of two Russian diplomatic compounds in New York and Maryland and the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats in December over what he said was their involvement in hacking the US election campaign.

President Donald Trump's eldest son and his former campaign chairman have been given approval by a US special counsel to testify publicly to Congress as part of investigations into Russian meddling

President Donald Trump's eldest son and his former campaign chairman have been given approval by a US special counsel to testify publicly to Congress as part of investigations into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said on Tuesday. US Senator Dianne Feinstein told Reuters the special counsel, former FBI director Robert Mueller, said that Donald Trump Jr and Paul Manafort, campaign manager from March to August, were free to speak to the committee. Mueller is investigating allegations by US intelligence agencies that Russia interfered to help Trump win the presidency and possible collusion between Moscow and the Republican's campaign. Russia denies meddling in the campaign, and Trump says there was no collusion. If Trump Jr were to appear before the judiciary committee, he would be the highest member of the president's inner circle of relatives and White House aides to testify in Congress about the Russia allegations. Several congressional panels have investigations open. The allegations have dominated Trump`s first six months in office. Trump Jr, who runs the Trump Organization family business, released emails last week in which he eagerly agreed in June 2016 to meet a woman he was told was a Russian government lawyer who might have damaging information about Democratic election rival Hillary Clinton as part of Moscow's official support for his father's campaign. The meeting in Trump Tower in New York appears to be the most tangible evidence of a connection between Trump`s campaign and Russia, investigators in congress have said. Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley has said he would coordinate with Mueller to ensure that any witnesses the panel brings would not conflict with Mueller's criminal investigation. Feinstein, asked whether Mueller had given the go ahead for Trump Jr and Manafort to testify publicly, said, "yes." Feinstein said the committee planned for the testimony to be part of a broader hearing scheduled for Wednesday but has now been postponed. She could not confirm whether the hearing would take place next week. Eighth person in Trump Tower meeting identified A man who works for a Moscow-based developer with ties to Trump was identified on Tuesday as the eighth person to attend the Trump Tower meeting. Lawyer Scott Balber confirmed Ike Kaveladze's name to Reuters after CNN reported that his client had been identified by special counsel Mueller's prosecutors and was cooperating in their investigation. Balber represented Trump himself in the New York businessman's 2013 lawsuit against comedian television host Bill Maher, demanding the $5 million Maher offered to give to charity if Trump could prove his father is not an orangutan. Kaveladze's LinkedIn profile identifies him as vice president of Crocus Group, a company run by Moscow-based developers Aras Agalarov and his son, Emin, an Azerbaijani-Russian pop star. The two have ties to the Trump family and helped set up last year's meeting between Trump Jr and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. Ike Kaveladze, the eighth man at the Trump Jr meeting, was implicated in a Russian money-laundering scheme in 2000 https://t.co/PscHNg6Ubz pic.twitter.com/i3OQ05ryni — Sarah Kendzior (@sarahkendzior) July 18, 2017 × Kaveladze was asked to go to the meeting with the understanding that he would be a translator for Veselnitskaya, only to find she had brought her own translator with her, Balber told CNN. Balber said he also represents the Agalarovs. Balber said Mueller's investigators have not interviewed his client or made contact about the Agalarovs. In addition to Trump Jr, lawyer Veselnitskaya, her translator, and Kaveladze, the meeting was attended by Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, Manafort, publicist Rob Goldstone and Russian-American lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin. Anatoli Samochornov was identified as Veselnitskaya's translator in multiple media reports. In Moscow, Russia said it reserved the right to retaliate against the United States after a meeting in Washington ended without an agreement to return Russian diplomatic property the US had seized. Trump's predecessor President Barack Obama ordered the seizure of two Russian diplomatic compounds in New York and Maryland and the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats in December over what he said was their involvement in hacking the US election campaign.

Trump Jr given approval to testify in Congress: Senator

The US Congress easily passed a one-week stopgap spending bill Friday, assuring there is no embarrassing government shutdown on the 100th day of Donald Trump&#39;s presidency.

After weeks of tense negotiations over federal spending, the measure sailed through the House and Senate just hours before a midnight deadline.

It now heads to Trump&#39;s desk, and the president is expected to sign it later Friday.

The bill extends current funding levels until May 5, giving lawmakers in the Republican-controlled Congress one week of breathing room to hash out a measure that funds government operations through September, when the fiscal year ends.

With lawmakers mindful of the midnight deadline, the measure cleared the House of Representatives 382 to 30, with broad bipartisan support.

Minutes later, the Senate approved it by a simple voice vote.

Congressional leaders have said the two sides have made important progress on the broader spending bill and that an agreement was within reach.

&quot;But we shouldn&#39;t be in this situation,&quot; Senate Democrat Patrick Leahy said.

&quot;We shouldn&#39;t have allowed partisan politics once again to turn a looming deadline into a political standoff.&quot;

The temporary bill sets aside several contentious elements which have been the focus of bitter rhetorical feuding in recent days.

It leaves out funding for the wall that Trump has pledged to build on the southern US border with Mexico. Democrats have warned they will not support a funding measure that includes appropriations for the wall, but they are open to funding for broader border security elements.

The spending bill is also expected to continue to fund subsidies for low-income Americans purchasing health insurance as part of Obamacare.

Top House Democrat Nancy Pelosi said the White House signaled &quot;they would be going forward with the cost-sharing funding,&quot; but the length of that funding remained unclear.&nbsp;

&quot;Not all the poison pill riders have been eliminated, some have. A good number have,&quot; Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, referring to controversial provisions that could sink the legislation.

&quot;We&#39;re willing to extend things for a little bit more time in hopes that the same kind of progress can continue to be made, but we still have a little bit of a ways to go.&quot;

Trump had been seeking a major legislative victory to cap his first 100 days in office, but it has proved elusive.

His White House had been pushing hard for Congress to ram through a bill that repeals much of the Affordable Care Act, the landmark health care reforms of Trump&#39;s predecessor.

Republicans this week resurrected their health bill after initial efforts collapsed last month, when party moderates and conservatives failed to unite on how to repeal Obamacare. They want to replace it with a measure that lowers premiums and other costs and does not leave millions uninsured.

After flirting with a vote on the new measure this week -- a move that angered Democrats -- Republicans backed away, acknowledging they were shy of the votes needed to get them across the finish line.

(AFP)

After weeks of tense negotiations over federal spending, the measure sailed through the House and Senate just hours before a midnight deadline

The US Congress easily passed a one-week stopgap spending bill Friday, assuring there is no embarrassing government shutdown on the 100th day of Donald Trump's presidency. After weeks of tense negotiations over federal spending, the measure sailed through the House and Senate just hours before a midnight deadline. It now heads to Trump's desk, and the president is expected to sign it later Friday. The bill extends current funding levels until May 5, giving lawmakers in the Republican-controlled Congress one week of breathing room to hash out a measure that funds government operations through September, when the fiscal year ends. With lawmakers mindful of the midnight deadline, the measure cleared the House of Representatives 382 to 30, with broad bipartisan support. Minutes later, the Senate approved it by a simple voice vote. Congressional leaders have said the two sides have made important progress on the broader spending bill and that an agreement was within reach. "But we shouldn't be in this situation," Senate Democrat Patrick Leahy said. "We shouldn't have allowed partisan politics once again to turn a looming deadline into a political standoff." The temporary bill sets aside several contentious elements which have been the focus of bitter rhetorical feuding in recent days. It leaves out funding for the wall that Trump has pledged to build on the southern US border with Mexico. Democrats have warned they will not support a funding measure that includes appropriations for the wall, but they are open to funding for broader border security elements. The spending bill is also expected to continue to fund subsidies for low-income Americans purchasing health insurance as part of Obamacare. Top House Democrat Nancy Pelosi said the White House signaled "they would be going forward with the cost-sharing funding," but the length of that funding remained unclear. "Not all the poison pill riders have been eliminated, some have. A good number have," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, referring to controversial provisions that could sink the legislation. "We're willing to extend things for a little bit more time in hopes that the same kind of progress can continue to be made, but we still have a little bit of a ways to go." Trump had been seeking a major legislative victory to cap his first 100 days in office, but it has proved elusive. His White House had been pushing hard for Congress to ram through a bill that repeals much of the Affordable Care Act, the landmark health care reforms of Trump's predecessor. Republicans this week resurrected their health bill after initial efforts collapsed last month, when party moderates and conservatives failed to unite on how to repeal Obamacare. They want to replace it with a measure that lowers premiums and other costs and does not leave millions uninsured. After flirting with a vote on the new measure this week -- a move that angered Democrats -- Republicans backed away, acknowledging they were shy of the votes needed to get them across the finish line. (AFP)

US Congress averts shutdown, passing stopgap spending bill

The US&nbsp;House voted on Tuesday 215-205 to repeal regulations requiring internet service providers to do more to protect customers&#39; privacy than websites like Alphabet Inc&#39;s Googleor &nbsp;Facebook Inc.

The White House said earlier Tuesday that President Donald Trump strongly supports the repeal of the rules approved by the Federal Communications Commission in October under then-President Barack Obama.

Under the rules, internet providers would need to obtain consumer consent before using precise geo-location, financial information, health information, children&#39;s information and web browsing history for advertising and marketing.

Last week, the Senate voted 50-48 to reverse the rules in a win for AT&amp;T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc.

The White House in its statement said internet providers would need to obtain affirmative &quot;opt-in&quot; consent from consumers to use and share certain information, but noted that websites are not required to get the same consent. &quot;This results in rules that apply very different regulatory regimes based on the identity of the online actor,&quot; the White House said.

Websites are governed by a less restrictive set of privacy rules overseen by the Federal Trade Commission.

FCC chairman Ajit Pai in a statement praised the decision of Congress to overturn &quot;privacy regulations designed to benefit one group of favoured companies over another group of disfavoured companies.&quot; Last week, Pai said consumers would have privacy protections even without the Obama internet provider rules, but critics say they will weaken.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which opposes the measure, said companies &quot;should not be able to use and sell the sensitive data they collect from you without your permission&quot;.

An Internet &amp; Television Association statement called the repeal &quot;an important step toward restoring consumer privacy protections that apply consistently&quot;.

One critic of the repeal, Craig Aaron, president of Free Press advocacy group, said major Silicon Valley companies shied away from the fight over the rules because they profit from consumer data.

&quot;There are a lot of companies that are very concerned about drawing attention to themselves and being regulated on privacy issues, and are sitting this out in a way that they haven&rsquo;t sat out previous privacy issues,&quot; Aaron said.

Representative Michael Capuano, a Massachusetts Democrat, said Tuesday that Comcast could know his personal information because he looked up his mother&#39;s medical condition and his purchase history. &quot;Just last week I bought underwear on the internet. Why should you know what size I take? Or the colour?&quot; Capuano asked. &quot;They are going to sell it to the underwear companies.&quot;

Comcast declined to comment.

Representative Michael Burgess, a Texas Republican, said the rules &quot;unfairly skews the market in favour&quot; of websites that are free to collect data without consent.

Republican commissioners, including Pai, said in October that the rules would unfairly give websites like Facebook, Twitter Inc&nbsp;or Google the ability to harvest more data than internet service providers and thus further dominate digital advertising. The FCC earlier this month delayed the data rules from taking effect.

(Reuters)

Under the rules, internet providers would need to obtain consumer consent before using precise geo-location, financial and other information

The US House voted on Tuesday 215-205 to repeal regulations requiring internet service providers to do more to protect customers' privacy than websites like Alphabet Inc's Googleor Facebook Inc. The White House said earlier Tuesday that President Donald Trump strongly supports the repeal of the rules approved by the Federal Communications Commission in October under then-President Barack Obama. Under the rules, internet providers would need to obtain consumer consent before using precise geo-location, financial information, health information, children's information and web browsing history for advertising and marketing. Last week, the Senate voted 50-48 to reverse the rules in a win for AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc. The White House in its statement said internet providers would need to obtain affirmative "opt-in" consent from consumers to use and share certain information, but noted that websites are not required to get the same consent. "This results in rules that apply very different regulatory regimes based on the identity of the online actor," the White House said. Websites are governed by a less restrictive set of privacy rules overseen by the Federal Trade Commission. FCC chairman Ajit Pai in a statement praised the decision of Congress to overturn "privacy regulations designed to benefit one group of favoured companies over another group of disfavoured companies." Last week, Pai said consumers would have privacy protections even without the Obama internet provider rules, but critics say they will weaken. The American Civil Liberties Union, which opposes the measure, said companies "should not be able to use and sell the sensitive data they collect from you without your permission". An Internet & Television Association statement called the repeal "an important step toward restoring consumer privacy protections that apply consistently". One critic of the repeal, Craig Aaron, president of Free Press advocacy group, said major Silicon Valley companies shied away from the fight over the rules because they profit from consumer data. "There are a lot of companies that are very concerned about drawing attention to themselves and being regulated on privacy issues, and are sitting this out in a way that they haven’t sat out previous privacy issues," Aaron said. Representative Michael Capuano, a Massachusetts Democrat, said Tuesday that Comcast could know his personal information because he looked up his mother's medical condition and his purchase history. "Just last week I bought underwear on the internet. Why should you know what size I take? Or the colour?" Capuano asked. "They are going to sell it to the underwear companies." Comcast declined to comment. Representative Michael Burgess, a Texas Republican, said the rules "unfairly skews the market in favour" of websites that are free to collect data without consent. Republican commissioners, including Pai, said in October that the rules would unfairly give websites like Facebook, Twitter Inc or Google the ability to harvest more data than internet service providers and thus further dominate digital advertising. The FCC earlier this month delayed the data rules from taking effect. (Reuters)

US Congress votes to repeal Obama's internet privacy regulations

President Donald Trump will ask the US&nbsp;Congress for dramatic cuts to many federal programs as he seeks to bulk up defence spending, start building a wall on the border with Mexico and spend more money deporting illegal immigrants.

In a federal budget proposal with many losers, the Environmental Protection Agency and State Department stand out as targets for the biggest spending reductions. Funding would disappear altogether for 19 independent bodies that count on federal money for public broadcasting, the arts and regional issues from Alaska to Appalachia.

Trump&#39;s budget outline is a bare-bones plan covering just &quot;discretionary&quot; spending for the 2018 fiscal year starting on October 1. It is the first volley in what is expected to be an intense battle over spending in coming months in Congress, which holds the federal purse strings and seldom approves presidents&#39; budget plans.

Congress, controlled by Trump&#39;s fellow Republicans, may reject some or many of his proposed cuts. Some of the proposed changes, which Democrats will broadly oppose, have been targeted for decades by conservative Republicans.

Moderate Republicans have already expressed unease with potential cuts to popular domestic programs such as home-heating subsidies, clean-water projects and job training.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The defence increases are matched by cuts to other programs so as to not increase the $488 billion federal deficit</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The defence increases are matched by cuts to other programs so as to not increase the $488 billion federal deficit" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Trump is willing to discuss priorities, said White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, a former South Carolina congressman who made a name for himself as a spending hawk before Trump plucked him for his Cabinet.

&quot;The president wants to spend more money on defence, more money securing the border, more money enforcing the laws, and more money on school choice, without adding to the deficit,&quot; Mulvaney told a small group of reporters during a preview on Wednesday.

&quot;If they have a different way to accomplish that, we are more than interested in talking to them,&quot; Mulvaney said.

Trump wants to spend $54 billion more on defence, put a down payment on his border wall, and breathe life into a few other campaign promises. His initial budget outline does not incorporate his promise to pour $1 trillion into roads, bridges, airports and other infrastructure projects. The White House has said the infrastructure plan is still to come.

The defence increases are matched by cuts to other programs so as to not increase the $488 billion federal deficit. Mulvaney acknowledged the proposal would likely result in significant cuts to the federal workforce.

&quot;You can&rsquo;t drain the swamp and leave all the people in it,&quot; Mulvaney said.

&#39;America first&#39;

White House officials looked at Trump&#39;s campaign speeches and &quot;America First&quot; pledges as they crunched the numbers, Mulvaney said.

&quot;We turned those policies into numbers,&quot; he said, explaining how the document mirrored pledges to spend more on the US&nbsp;nuclear weapons arsenal, veterans&#39; health care, the FBI, and Justice Department efforts to fight drug dealers and violent crime.

The Department of Homeland Security would get a 6.8 per cent increase, with more money for extra staff needed to catch, detain and deport illegal immigrants.

Trump wants Congress to shell out $1.5 billion for the border wall with Mexico in the current fiscal year -- enough for pilot projects to determine the best way to build it -- and a further $2.6 billion in fiscal 2018, Mulvaney said.

The estimate of the full cost of the wall will be included in the full budget, expected in mid-May, which will project spending and revenues over 10 years.

Trump has vowed Mexico will pay for the border wall, which the Mexican government has flatly said it will not do. The White House has said recently that funding would be kick-started in the United States.

The voluminous budget document will include economic forecasts and Trump&#39;s views on &quot;mandatory entitlements&quot; -- big-ticket programs like Social Security and Medicare, which Trump vowed to protect on the campaign trail.

Biggest losers

Trump asked Congress to slash the EPA by $2.6 billion or more than 31 per cent, and the State Department by more than 28 per cent or $10.9 billion.

Mulvaney said the &quot;core functions&quot; of those agencies would be preserved. Hit hard would be foreign aid, grants to multilateral development agencies like the World Bank and climate change programs at the United Nations.

Trump wants to get rid of more than 50 EPA programs, end funding for former Democratic President Barack Obama&#39;s signature Clean Power Plan aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions, and cut renewable energy research programs at the Energy Department.

Regional programs to clean up the Great Lakes and the Chesapeake Bay would be sent to the chopping block.

Community development grants at the Housing Department - around since 1974 - were cut in Trump&#39;s budget, along with more than 20 Education Department programs, including some funding program for before- and after- school programs.

Anti-poverty grants and a program that helps poor people pay their energy bills would be slashed, as well as a Labor Department program that helps low-income seniors find work.

Trump&#39;s rural base did not escape cuts. The White House proposed a 21 per cent reduction to the Agriculture Department, cutting loans and grants for wastewater, reducing staff in county offices and ending a popular program that helps US&nbsp;farmers donate crops for overseas food aid.

(Reuters)

Trump wants to slash the EPA's budget by 31%, the State Department's by more than 28%

President Donald Trump will ask the US Congress for dramatic cuts to many federal programs as he seeks to bulk up defence spending, start building a wall on the border with Mexico and spend more money deporting illegal immigrants. In a federal budget proposal with many losers, the Environmental Protection Agency and State Department stand out as targets for the biggest spending reductions. Funding would disappear altogether for 19 independent bodies that count on federal money for public broadcasting, the arts and regional issues from Alaska to Appalachia. Trump's budget outline is a bare-bones plan covering just "discretionary" spending for the 2018 fiscal year starting on October 1. It is the first volley in what is expected to be an intense battle over spending in coming months in Congress, which holds the federal purse strings and seldom approves presidents' budget plans. Congress, controlled by Trump's fellow Republicans, may reject some or many of his proposed cuts. Some of the proposed changes, which Democrats will broadly oppose, have been targeted for decades by conservative Republicans. Moderate Republicans have already expressed unease with potential cuts to popular domestic programs such as home-heating subsidies, clean-water projects and job training. The defence increases are matched by cuts to other programs so as to not increase the $488 billion federal deficit × Trump is willing to discuss priorities, said White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, a former South Carolina congressman who made a name for himself as a spending hawk before Trump plucked him for his Cabinet. "The president wants to spend more money on defence, more money securing the border, more money enforcing the laws, and more money on school choice, without adding to the deficit," Mulvaney told a small group of reporters during a preview on Wednesday. "If they have a different way to accomplish that, we are more than interested in talking to them," Mulvaney said. Trump wants to spend $54 billion more on defence, put a down payment on his border wall, and breathe life into a few other campaign promises. His initial budget outline does not incorporate his promise to pour $1 trillion into roads, bridges, airports and other infrastructure projects. The White House has said the infrastructure plan is still to come. The defence increases are matched by cuts to other programs so as to not increase the $488 billion federal deficit. Mulvaney acknowledged the proposal would likely result in significant cuts to the federal workforce. "You can’t drain the swamp and leave all the people in it," Mulvaney said. 'America first' White House officials looked at Trump's campaign speeches and "America First" pledges as they crunched the numbers, Mulvaney said. "We turned those policies into numbers," he said, explaining how the document mirrored pledges to spend more on the US nuclear weapons arsenal, veterans' health care, the FBI, and Justice Department efforts to fight drug dealers and violent crime. The Department of Homeland Security would get a 6.8 per cent increase, with more money for extra staff needed to catch, detain and deport illegal immigrants. Trump wants Congress to shell out $1.5 billion for the border wall with Mexico in the current fiscal year -- enough for pilot projects to determine the best way to build it -- and a further $2.6 billion in fiscal 2018, Mulvaney said. The estimate of the full cost of the wall will be included in the full budget, expected in mid-May, which will project spending and revenues over 10 years. Trump has vowed Mexico will pay for the border wall, which the Mexican government has flatly said it will not do. The White House has said recently that funding would be kick-started in the United States. The voluminous budget document will include economic forecasts and Trump's views on "mandatory entitlements" -- big-ticket programs like Social Security and Medicare, which Trump vowed to protect on the campaign trail. Biggest losers Trump asked Congress to slash the EPA by $2.6 billion or more than 31 per cent, and the State Department by more than 28 per cent or $10.9 billion. Mulvaney said the "core functions" of those agencies would be preserved. Hit hard would be foreign aid, grants to multilateral development agencies like the World Bank and climate change programs at the United Nations. Trump wants to get rid of more than 50 EPA programs, end funding for former Democratic President Barack Obama's signature Clean Power Plan aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions, and cut renewable energy research programs at the Energy Department. Regional programs to clean up the Great Lakes and the Chesapeake Bay would be sent to the chopping block. Community development grants at the Housing Department - around since 1974 - were cut in Trump's budget, along with more than 20 Education Department programs, including some funding program for before- and after- school programs. Anti-poverty grants and a program that helps poor people pay their energy bills would be slashed, as well as a Labor Department program that helps low-income seniors find work. Trump's rural base did not escape cuts. The White House proposed a 21 per cent reduction to the Agriculture Department, cutting loans and grants for wastewater, reducing staff in county offices and ending a popular program that helps US farmers donate crops for overseas food aid. (Reuters)

In Trump's first budget proposal, military wins, environment & aid lose big

us-congress

Us Congress, News on Us Congress, stories on Us Congress, articles on Us Congress, Us Congress stories at Wion, Us Congress news, Us Congress latest news

us congress