usatoday--2020-10-13--Election week? Maybe not: Arizona, Florida and others could give early indication of who is winning

WASHINGTON – Many election experts have warned it might take days or even weeks after Election Day for a final outcome in the presidential race because of the unprecedented deluge of mail ballots amid the coronavirus pandemic .
But the country could get major clues on election night even as counting continues in some key states .
Several battleground states – some accustomed to high-volume mail-voting and others that start processing absentee ballots weeks before Nov. 3 – are expected to have substantial shares of their votes counted and reported on election night and into the next morning .
Recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ built a double-digit lead nationally since the first presidential debate and has widened his leads in most swing states .
Election night numbers in some states could indicate whether the former vice president is on track for a decisive win over President Donald Trump – and surpassing the needed 270 electoral votes – or whether the outcome remains in doubt .
More : The week in polls : Biden hits double-digit lead in national average , surges in Florida , Michigan Those states include Florida , which begins processing mail ballots 22 days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ starts that process two weeks before the election ; North Carolina , which started processing ballots on Sept. 29 ; and Texas .
Although Texas is not among states that expanded mail-voting to all voters during the pandemic , its largest counties can begin processing absentee ballots 12 days before the election .
Georgia , which did make mail-voting available to all voters , allows the processing of ballots to begin two weeks in advance .
Ohio started processing mail ballots last week .
In Iowa , counties can start opening the outer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Election Day .
Each is in contrast to three critical Rust Belt states – Pennsylvania , Wisconsin and Michigan – where election officials must wait until Election Day , or in Michigan 's case , 10 hours before the election , before they can open mail ballots and begin counting .
These three states are expected to be counting millions of absentee ballots days after polls close .
`` I think the conventional wisdom of this thing taking weeks or many , many days is probably wrong , '' said Thomas Volgy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Arizona .
More : 'Running out of time ' : Efforts to speed up counting mail ballots stall in battleground states Processing absentee ballots involves opening the envelopes containing the ballots , matching signatures to registration rolls and verifying barcodes on the envelopes .
Each is a necessary step before ballots are counted .
Even before the coronavirus pandemic , 4 out of 5 Arizonans voted by mail .
The state wo n't have results instantly , according to Volgy , a former Democratic mayor of Tucson , but the winner of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ morning .
Recent polls in Arizona , which has n't voted Democrat in a presidential election since 1996 , have Biden ahead 2 to 8 percentage points .
`` We 'll have clues very , very clearly , '' Volgy said .
`` If a state like Arizona reports out with Biden having won , as the polls look like right now , or Florida , it 's going to give a really large signal about what 's happening with the rest of the ballots in the Midwestern states as well that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers ' : Early voting is breaking records in 2020 , fueled by a big mail-ballot lead for Democrats Several of the early-indicator states are in the Sun Belt , lean conservative historically and went for Trump in 2016 .
But Biden is either ahead or competitive in each , according to recent polls , as the president 's support among seniors , college-educated suburban voters and women erodes .
Some of the states that begin processing early also feature competitive U.S. Senate races – Sen. Martha McSally versus Democrat Mark Kelly in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cal Cunningham in North Carolina , for example – that could decide whether Democrats take control of the Senate .
None of these states will have complete results on election night , but they could have enough counted and publicized to show whether Biden or Trump is likely to prevail or if the race is going to remain tight as outstanding absentee ballots are counted .
`` We 're going to know about Florida and Arizona by the very latest probably the next morning , '' Volgy said .
`` There is no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if he loses both Florida and Arizona . ''
Conversely , Biden would still have life if Trump were to carry Florida and Arizona .
The former vice president would need to carry every state that Hillary Clinton won in 2016 and flip Michigan , Wisconsin and Pennsylvania , each won by Trump four years ago .
That 's why a Trump victory in Florida and Arizona would not necessarily mean a reelection victory but rather shift the focus on the counting efforts in the Midwest states .
Even if Biden and Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election night , that could mean Biden is in good shape in Wisconsin , Michigan and Pennsylvania – states where Biden has polled better and consistently led throughout the race .
Close contests in Georgia or North Carolina could also spell trouble for Trump nationally .
Patrick Gannon , a spokesman for the North Carolina State Board of Elections , said the Tar Heel State expects `` 98 % to 99 % '' of ballots to be reported in the hours after polls close .
Recent polls in North Carolina range from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percentage points .
`` We should be able to see what 's going to happen , '' said Michael McDonald , associate professor of political science at the University of Florida , looking ahead to election night .
More : Biden is getting trounced with Cuban American voters in Florida , a trend that could tip the state to Trump In Florida , absentee ballots must be in election offices on Election Day .
The first results posted in Florida will include early in-person and mail ballots .
Historically , 30 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This year , already 1.7 million people have voted early by mail in Florida , with Democrats holding a big advantage – 850,000 Democrats have returned mail ballots , compared with 480,000 Republicans .
Polling suggests Biden voters are twice as likely to vote by mail than Trump supporters amid the president 's monthslong assault on mail-voting , which he has argued without evidence is rife with fraud .
Most recent polls in Florida show Biden ahead .
If Biden is ahead on election night in Florida , even by just 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left to count will be military , overseas and provisional ballots likely to benefit Biden , McDonald said .
`` The most likely scenario is that we know who wins Florida , '' he said , adding that if Biden wins , it `` greatly restricts Trump 's pathway to an Electoral College victory .
If Biden wins North Carolina and Texas on top of that , or Arizona , these pathways become virtually nonexistent for Trump .
So there 's a good chance on election night we will know who the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short order which world we live in' Election night numbers in Pennsylvania , Michigan and Wisconsin are likely to favor Trump because of his anticipated advantage with in-person voting on Election Day .
Democrats have raised the alarm about a `` red mirage '' on election night showing Trump ahead in these states , only to replaced by a `` blue shift '' as mail ballots , which could skew 2 to 1 for Biden , are counted .
More : Some Democrats warn Trump may use 'red mirage ' to prematurely declare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the opposite could be true in Florida , a state that has voted for the presidential winner in every election since 1996 .
`` If anything , we 're going to see the 'red shift ' in Florida , '' McDonald said , alluding to the mail-in ballot tallies likely to be posted first .
`` Biden should probably jump out to a huge lead in Florida , and then as the Election Day results come in from the precincts , that 's where we 're going to see Trump make up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a law professor at Stanford University and a co-director of the Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Projects , said it 's true a winner might not `` definitively ' be known on election night .
But he said it 's more likely that election night will produce enough results from fully counted states and fully counted counties to `` make inferences '' on the likely winner .
He said that even though Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin might not be finished counting all absentee ballots , some fast-counting counties in those states should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ observers should be able to compare Trump 's tallies in those counties to his performances in 2016 to know where things stand .
`` Since 2016 was such a narrow victory , if he 's doing worse than in 2016 , then that gives you a sense of whether he 's going to be able to win this year , '' Persily said .
More : Not old enough to vote , but old enough to help : How teens are helping to avert an election crisis Trump has not committed to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refrain from prematurely declaring victory .
He has also hinted at post-election litigation , even up the Supreme Court , leading many to predict the election will be decided in court .
`` It make sense to preach caution but not to predict chaos , '' Persily said .
`` We need to prepare the American people for a different kind of election night because it 's possible if we have a repeat of 2016 , or let alone 2000 , we may be in for the long haul . ''
But he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short order which world we live in – one where there is a clear winner or one where we will be fighting over absentee ballots for many days . ''
More : Experts held 'war games ' on the Trump vs. Biden election .
Their finding ?
Brace for a mess In recent weeks , the Trump campaign – facing a fundraising disadvantage against Biden – pulled TV ads slated to run in Michigan and Wisconsin and boosted their ad spending in Florida , Arizona , Georgia and Nevada , a swing state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to BuzzFeed News .
In a sign of a close race in Georgia , which polls show in a virtual tie , the president has scheduled a rally in the state later this week , days after his daughter Ivanka Trump will campaign in the state .
Texas , second to only California in electoral college votes with 38 , remains perhaps the toughest of the Sun Belt states for Biden to win .
But it 's a state that , thanks to changing demographics and several tight congressional races , Democrats think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since the 1976 presidential election .
More : Go big or play it safe ?
Electoral map widens for Joe Biden and Democrats , but with risk In a push to put both Georgia and Texas in play , Biden 's wife , Jill Biden , campaigned in Georgia on Monday and plans to travels to El Paso , Dallas , and Houston on Tuesday .
The Biden campaign has spent nearly $ 4 million on TV ads in Georgia and $ 6 million in Texas , according to Advertising Analytics , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Texas `` is something that 's possible but not probable , '' said James Henson , director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas-Austin .
Texas ' biggest cities , such as Houston , have a history of long lines lasting late into the night of Election Day and even early morning .
But Texas , which begins in-person early voting Tuesday , should n't have the massive amount of outstanding absentee ballots like other states because its leaders opted not to expand mail-voting amid the pandemic .
`` I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indication of what 's going on , but there 's a lot of big ifs there , '' Henson said .
Trump won Texas by 9 percentage points in 2016 , but polling shows him maintaining a slimmer lead of 2 to 7 percentage points this year .
If Texas is close on election night , it could be a sign of a Biden landslide .
`` If Wednesday morning rolls around and Texas looks too close to call , I think you have to assume that there has been a pretty successful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
`` And so at that point , who knows ?
It may not matter . ''

Election week? Maybe not: Arizona, Florida and others could give early indication of who is winning
Show Caption Hide Caption Voter registration day: Here's why your vote matters more than ever Thinking of sitting out the election? Here's why your vote counts. Register, verify your status or request an absentee ballot at vote.usatoday.com. USA TODAY
WASHINGTON – Many election experts have warned it might take days or even weeks after Election Day for a final outcome in the presidential race because of the unprecedented deluge of mail ballots amid the coronavirus pandemic.
But the country could get major clues on election night even as counting continues in some key states.
Several battleground states – some accustomed to high-volume mail-voting and others that start processing absentee ballots weeks before Nov. 3 – are expected to have substantial shares of their votes counted and reported on election night and into the next morning.
Recent polling shows Democratic nominee Joe Biden has built a double-digit lead nationally since the first presidential debate and has widened his leads in most swing states. Election night numbers in some states could indicate whether the former vice president is on track for a decisive win over President Donald Trump – and surpassing the needed 270 electoral votes – or whether the outcome remains in doubt.
More: The week in polls: Biden hits double-digit lead in national average, surges in Florida, Michigan
Elections 2020: Mail-in voting could decide next president Many states are planning on drastically different elections this year and mail-in ballots could be a big game changer. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
Those states include Florida, which begins processing mail ballots 22 days before the election; Arizona, which starts that process two weeks before the election; North Carolina, which started processing ballots on Sept. 29; and Texas.
Although Texas is not among states that expanded mail-voting to all voters during the pandemic, its largest counties can begin processing absentee ballots 12 days before the election. Georgia, which did make mail-voting available to all voters, allows the processing of ballots to begin two weeks in advance. Ohio started processing mail ballots last week. In Iowa, counties can start opening the outer envelopes on absentee ballots the Saturday before Election Day.
Each is in contrast to three critical Rust Belt states – Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan – where election officials must wait until Election Day, or in Michigan's case, 10 hours before the election, before they can open mail ballots and begin counting. These three states are expected to be counting millions of absentee ballots days after polls close.
"I think the conventional wisdom of this thing taking weeks or many, many days is probably wrong," said Thomas Volgy, a political science professor at the University of Arizona.
More: 'Running out of time': Efforts to speed up counting mail ballots stall in battleground states
A 'large signal' on election night?
Processing absentee ballots involves opening the envelopes containing the ballots, matching signatures to registration rolls and verifying barcodes on the envelopes. Each is a necessary step before ballots are counted.
Even before the coronavirus pandemic, 4 out of 5 Arizonans voted by mail. The state won't have results instantly, according to Volgy, a former Democratic mayor of Tucson, but the winner of Arizona could be known by the next morning. Recent polls in Arizona, which hasn't voted Democrat in a presidential election since 1996, have Biden ahead 2 to 8 percentage points.
"We'll have clues very, very clearly," Volgy said. "If a state like Arizona reports out with Biden having won, as the polls look like right now, or Florida, it's going to give a really large signal about what's happening with the rest of the ballots in the Midwestern states as well that are counting late."
More: 'Staggering numbers': Early voting is breaking records in 2020, fueled by a big mail-ballot lead for Democrats
Several of the early-indicator states are in the Sun Belt, lean conservative historically and went for Trump in 2016. But Biden is either ahead or competitive in each, according to recent polls, as the president's support among seniors, college-educated suburban voters and women erodes.
Some of the states that begin processing early also feature competitive U.S. Senate races – Sen. Martha McSally versus Democrat Mark Kelly in Arizona and Sen. Thom Tillis against Democrat Cal Cunningham in North Carolina, for example – that could decide whether Democrats take control of the Senate.
None of these states will have complete results on election night, but they could have enough counted and publicized to show whether Biden or Trump is likely to prevail or if the race is going to remain tight as outstanding absentee ballots are counted.
"We're going to know about Florida and Arizona by the very latest probably the next morning," Volgy said. "There is no path to victory for the Trump campaign if he loses both Florida and Arizona."
Conversely, Biden would still have life if Trump were to carry Florida and Arizona. The former vice president would need to carry every state that Hillary Clinton won in 2016 and flip Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, each won by Trump four years ago. That's why a Trump victory in Florida and Arizona would not necessarily mean a reelection victory but rather shift the focus on the counting efforts in the Midwest states.
Florida, Florida, Florida
Even if Biden and Trump are neck-and-neck in Florida or Arizona on election night, that could mean Biden is in good shape in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania – states where Biden has polled better and consistently led throughout the race.
Close contests in Georgia or North Carolina could also spell trouble for Trump nationally. Patrick Gannon, a spokesman for the North Carolina State Board of Elections, said the Tar Heel State expects "98% to 99%" of ballots to be reported in the hours after polls close. Recent polls in North Carolina range from a tied race to Biden ahead by 4 percentage points.
"We should be able to see what's going to happen," said Michael McDonald, associate professor of political science at the University of Florida, looking ahead to election night.
More: Biden is getting trounced with Cuban American voters in Florida, a trend that could tip the state to Trump
In Florida, absentee ballots must be in election offices on Election Day. The first results posted in Florida will include early in-person and mail ballots. Historically, 30% of Floridians voted by mail before the pandemic. This year, already 1.7 million people have voted early by mail in Florida, with Democrats holding a big advantage – 850,000 Democrats have returned mail ballots, compared with 480,000 Republicans.
Polling suggests Biden voters are twice as likely to vote by mail than Trump supporters amid the president's monthslong assault on mail-voting, which he has argued without evidence is rife with fraud. Most recent polls in Florida show Biden ahead.
If Biden is ahead on election night in Florida, even by just 1 percentage point, then the only ballots left to count will be military, overseas and provisional ballots likely to benefit Biden, McDonald said.
"The most likely scenario is that we know who wins Florida," he said, adding that if Biden wins, it "greatly restricts Trump's pathway to an Electoral College victory. If Biden wins North Carolina and Texas on top of that, or Arizona, these pathways become virtually nonexistent for Trump. So there's a good chance on election night we will know who the president is."
Biden, Harris to AZ: Vote like life depends on it Democrats Joe Biden and Kamala Harris urged voters in the battleground state of Arizona Thursday to vote "like your life depends on it." It's their first campaign trip together since the Democratic National Convention in August. (Oct. 8) AP
'We will know in short order which world we live in'
Election night numbers in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin are likely to favor Trump because of his anticipated advantage with in-person voting on Election Day. Democrats have raised the alarm about a "red mirage" on election night showing Trump ahead in these states, only to replaced by a "blue shift" as mail ballots, which could skew 2 to 1 for Biden, are counted.
More: Some Democrats warn Trump may use 'red mirage' to prematurely declare victory while absentee ballots are being counted
But the opposite could be true in Florida, a state that has voted for the presidential winner in every election since 1996.
"If anything, we're going to see the 'red shift' in Florida," McDonald said, alluding to the mail-in ballot tallies likely to be posted first. "Biden should probably jump out to a huge lead in Florida, and then as the Election Day results come in from the precincts, that's where we're going to see Trump make up ground on Biden."
Nathaniel Persily, a law professor at Stanford University and a co-director of the Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Projects, said it's true a winner might not "definitively' be known on election night. But he said it's more likely that election night will produce enough results from fully counted states and fully counted counties to "make inferences" on the likely winner.
He said that even though Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin might not be finished counting all absentee ballots, some fast-counting counties in those states should be finished shortly after the election. Election observers should be able to compare Trump's tallies in those counties to his performances in 2016 to know where things stand.
"Since 2016 was such a narrow victory, if he's doing worse than in 2016, then that gives you a sense of whether he's going to be able to win this year," Persily said.
More: Not old enough to vote, but old enough to help: How teens are helping to avert an election crisis
Trump has not committed to a peaceful transfer of power or agreed to refrain from prematurely declaring victory. He has also hinted at post-election litigation, even up the Supreme Court, leading many to predict the election will be decided in court.
How the US votes and why advocates say it needs to change US elections are mainly conducted by 'First Past the Post' voting. Here's why some say this system needs an overhaul. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
"It make sense to preach caution but not to predict chaos," Persily said. "We need to prepare the American people for a different kind of election night because it's possible if we have a repeat of 2016, or let alone 2000, we may be in for the long haul."
But he added: "We will know in short order which world we live in – one where there is a clear winner or one where we will be fighting over absentee ballots for many days."
More: Experts held 'war games' on the Trump vs. Biden election. Their finding? Brace for a mess
Campaigns targeting Georgia, Texas
In recent weeks, the Trump campaign – facing a fundraising disadvantage against Biden – pulled TV ads slated to run in Michigan and Wisconsin and boosted their ad spending in Florida, Arizona, Georgia and Nevada, a swing state that Clinton won in 2016, according to BuzzFeed News.
In a sign of a close race in Georgia, which polls show in a virtual tie, the president has scheduled a rally in the state later this week, days after his daughter Ivanka Trump will campaign in the state.
Texas, second to only California in electoral college votes with 38, remains perhaps the toughest of the Sun Belt states for Biden to win. But it's a state that, thanks to changing demographics and several tight congressional races, Democrats think they can win for the first time since the 1976 presidential election.
More: Go big or play it safe? Electoral map widens for Joe Biden and Democrats, but with risk
In a push to put both Georgia and Texas in play, Biden's wife, Jill Biden, campaigned in Georgia on Monday and plans to travels to El Paso, Dallas, and Houston on Tuesday. The Biden campaign has spent nearly $4 million on TV ads in Georgia and $6 million in Texas, according to Advertising Analytics, a political advertising tracking firm.
Biden carrying Texas "is something that's possible but not probable," said James Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas-Austin.
Texas' biggest cities, such as Houston, have a history of long lines lasting late into the night of Election Day and even early morning. But Texas, which begins in-person early voting Tuesday, shouldn't have the massive amount of outstanding absentee ballots like other states because its leaders opted not to expand mail-voting amid the pandemic.
"I think we'll have a pretty good indication of what's going on, but there's a lot of big ifs there," Henson said.
Trump won Texas by 9 percentage points in 2016, but polling shows him maintaining a slimmer lead of 2 to 7 percentage points this year. If Texas is close on election night, it could be a sign of a Biden landslide.
"If Wednesday morning rolls around and Texas looks too close to call, I think you have to assume that there has been a pretty successful wave for Biden nationwide," Henson said. "And so at that point, who knows? It may not matter."
Reach Joey Garrison on Twitter @joeygarrison.


usatoday--2020-10-14--Sen. Harris tells Judge Barrett reducing ACA protections could have a 'devastating impact'

Sen. Kamala Harris urged Judge Amy Coney Barrett to consider the benefit of the Affordable Care Act on the second @ @ @ @ @ .

Amy Coney Barrett hearing: Sen. Harris on 'devastating impact' to ACA
Sen. Kamala Harris urged Judge Amy Coney Barrett to consider the benefit of the Affordable Care Act on the second day of her confirmation hearings.
USA TODAY, Associated Press


usatoday--2020-10-13--Amy Coney Barrett is asked about recusal if election outcome becomes Supreme Court case

Amy Coney Barrett is asked about recusal if election outcome becomes Supreme Court case Amy Coney Barrett is asked by @ @ @ @ @ Del . )
about recusal if 2020 election outcome is contested and does becomes a @ @ @ @

Judge Barrett on recusal if 2020 election outcome hits Supreme Court
Amy Coney Barrett is asked by Sen. Chris Coons (D- Del.) about recusal if 2020 election outcome is contested and does becomes a Supreme Court case.
USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-10-13--Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse outlines dark money schemes, hidden powers behind SCOTUS nominee

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse ( D-R.I. ) outlines the flow of dark money around Supreme Court nominees , coordinated amicus briefs @ @ @ @ @

Senator Whitehouse outlines dark money schemes behind SCOTUS nominee
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) outlines the flow of dark money around Supreme Court nominees, coordinated amicus briefs, and elevating cases.
USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-10-13--McConnell says Senate will vote on a $500 billion stimulus plan before Election Day as Trump tells G

McConnell says Senate will vote on a $500 billion stimulus plan before Election Day as Trump tells GOP to 'go big or go home'

WASHINGTON – Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced Tuesday the Senate would vote on a roughly $ 500 billion COVID-19 stimulus plan next week , only two weeks before the election , as President Donald Trump urged Republicans to `` go big or go home '' on stimulus .
McConnell said in a statement the Republican-led Senate 's `` first order of business '' once they return Monday would be to vote on a `` targeted '' relief plan , including new funding for the Paycheck Protection Program ( PPP ) , a loan forgiveness program for small businesses .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers , we will have time to pass it before we proceed as planned to the pending Supreme Court nomination as soon as it is reported by the Judiciary Committee , '' he said , referring to the ongoing confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett .
Both parties head into the election without a stimulus deal in hand and as many of the programs passed in March have lapsed .
The PPP loans expired , a federal boost to unemployment benefits ran out , and airlines warned of mass layoffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the beginning of the month .
Democrats blocked a $ 300 billion plan supported by Republicans last month as both sides deadlocked over stimulus negotiations .
House Democrats passed their own $ 2.2 trillion plan earlier this month , but Senate Republicans are unlikely to act on the bill .
Trump briefly pulled out of negotiations last week , telling Senate Republicans he wanted them to focus on Barrett 's nomination instead .
Since then , the president reversed course , first calling for stand-alone bills on airline relief and $ 1,200 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 1.8 trillion proposal that Democrats rejected as inadequate .
More : Barrett says 'rule of law ' would drive her judgment , says she has 'absolutely not ' made promises on future rulings - hearing live updates More : Social Security cost-of-living increase to nudge up benefits 1.3 % in 2021 Asked about the White House 's proposal , Sen. Marsha Blackburn , R-Tenn. , told reporters Monday `` I like the package we had on the floor , '' referring to Senate Republicans ' previous $ 300 billion package .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday morning , Pelosi reiterated her opposition to the White House proposal , saying in some respects , the White House proposal `` makes matters worse . ''
`` A fly on the wall or wherever else it might land in the Oval Office tells me that the President only wants his name on a check to go out before Election Day and for the market to go up , '' Pelosi said .
The two sides remain at an impasse over the total amount to spend , the level of funding for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national COVID-19 testing plan , and election assistance funding , among other provisions .
More : White House sends mixed signals on stimulus as Pelosi announces opposition to latest White House proposal More : 'An unbelievable chain of oppression ' : America 's history of racism was a preexisting condition for COVID-19 Pelosi seemed unfazed by McConnell 's announcement on a conference call with House Democrats , telling them she was `` confident ' in their position , according to a source on the call who was granted anonymity to reveal the contents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t think our leverage has ever been greater than it is now , '' she said .
`` Even the President is saying , ‘ Go big or go home , ' '' she said in response to concerns some Democrats raised about taking the White House offer and using it as a starting point should former Vice President Joe Biden win the presidency in November .

McConnell says Senate will vote on a $500 billion stimulus plan before Election Day as Trump tells GOP to ‘go big or go home’
Show Caption Hide Caption How systemic racism led to COVID-19's rapid spread among people of color Racist policies have led to COVID-19 being more dangerous and deadly for Black, Latino, Asian and Indigenous Americans than for white Americans. Patrick Shannahan, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON – Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced Tuesday the Senate would vote on a roughly $500 billion COVID-19 stimulus plan next week, only two weeks before the election, as President Donald Trump urged Republicans to "go big or go home" on stimulus.
McConnell said in a statement the Republican-led Senate's "first order of business" once they return Monday would be to vote on a "targeted" relief plan, including new funding for the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a loan forgiveness program for small businesses.
"Unless Democrats block this aid for workers, we will have time to pass it before we proceed as planned to the pending Supreme Court nomination as soon as it is reported by the Judiciary Committee," he said, referring to the ongoing confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett.
Both parties head into the election without a stimulus deal in hand and as many of the programs passed in March have lapsed. The PPP loans expired, a federal boost to unemployment benefits ran out, and airlines warned of mass layoffs and furloughs after their federal assistance lapsed at the beginning of the month.
Democrats blocked a $300 billion plan supported by Republicans last month as both sides deadlocked over stimulus negotiations. House Democrats passed their own $2.2 trillion plan earlier this month, but Senate Republicans are unlikely to act on the bill.
Trump briefly pulled out of negotiations last week, telling Senate Republicans he wanted them to focus on Barrett's nomination instead. Since then, the president reversed course, first calling for stand-alone bills on airline relief and $1,200 stimulus checks, and then offering a $1.8 trillion proposal that Democrats rejected as inadequate.
More: Barrett says 'rule of law' would drive her judgment, says she has 'absolutely not' made promises on future rulings - hearing live updates
More: Social Security cost-of-living increase to nudge up benefits 1.3% in 2021
Asked about the White House's proposal, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., told reporters Monday "I like the package we had on the floor," referring to Senate Republicans' previous $300 billion package.
In a letter sent to House Democrats on Tuesday morning, Pelosi reiterated her opposition to the White House proposal, saying in some respects, the White House proposal "makes matters worse."
"A fly on the wall or wherever else it might land in the Oval Office tells me that the President only wants his name on a check to go out before Election Day and for the market to go up," Pelosi said.
The two sides remain at an impasse over the total amount to spend, the level of funding for state and local government assistance, a national COVID-19 testing plan, and election assistance funding, among other provisions.
More: White House sends mixed signals on stimulus as Pelosi announces opposition to latest White House proposal
More: 'An unbelievable chain of oppression': America's history of racism was a preexisting condition for COVID-19
Pelosi seemed unfazed by McConnell's announcement on a conference call with House Democrats, telling them she was "confident' in their position, according to a source on the call who was granted anonymity to reveal the contents of a private conversation.
"I don’t think our leverage has ever been greater than it is now," she said.
"Even the President is saying, ‘Go big or go home,'" she said in response to concerns some Democrats raised about taking the White House offer and using it as a starting point should former Vice President Joe Biden win the presidency in November.
People in need can’t wait until February. 1.8 trillion is significant & more than twice Obama stimulus. It will allow Biden to start with infrastructure. Obama won in 08 by doing the right thing on TARP instead of what was expedient. Make a deal & put the ball in McConnell court. https://t.co/qAEtd049sW — Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) October 11, 2020
Contributing: Christal Hayes
More: Mitt Romney reprimands Trump, Democrats for 'vile' and 'hate-filled' politics


usatoday--2020-10-13--John Cornyn singled out as a Republican attempting to end the Affordable Care Act

John Cornyn singled out as a Republican attempting to end the Affordable Care Act Sheldon Whitehouse , D-R.I. , singles @ @ @ @ @ to the Affordable Care Act during hearing on Judge Amy Coney Barrett ’ s nomination @

John Cornyn singled out as attempting to end the Affordable Care Act
Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., singles out John Cornyn's opposition to the Affordable Care Act during hearing on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination.
USA TODAY


usatoday--2020-10-13--Martha McSally's attack puts spotlight on Gabrielle Giffords shooting, Mark Kelly's gun-safety advoc

Martha McSally's attack puts spotlight on Gabrielle Giffords shooting, Mark Kelly's gun-safety advocacy

PHOENIX – A show-stopping moment during last week ’ s Senate debate between Republican Sen. Martha McSally and her Democratic opponent Mark Kelly came when the senator accused Kelly of having a part in a `` radical political organization '' tied to the `` extreme left '' fringe of the Democratic Party .
Without explaining the nature of the group or naming it , McSally charged that Kelly , a retired NASA astronaut who is running as a moderate Democrat , had been “ a political operative for a decade … Some of the most extreme , left-wing candidates in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them , endorsing them.
” Pressed to explain her attack , McSally punted to her rival .
“ I think he knows , ” she said , adding the group “ has raised $ 57 million.
” Kelly responded that McSally was talking about Giffords , the national organization that is named after his wife , former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords , and was formed to end gun violence .
`` Gabby was injured , shot in the head , in 2011 , '' Kelly said .
`` The issue of gun violence is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I 'll never forget what she went through for that year and a half .
In the hospital for six months , a year of significant rehab … So we formed an organization to try to make communities , and help communities become safer from gun violence . ''
Kelly , a gun owner , noted his support of the Second Amendment , saying “ Our rights and traditions are so important ...
But we can never let a bunch of kids in the classroom get killed and think there is nothing we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s wife has played a crucial role in Kelly ’ s front-running Senate campaign , making public appearances to testify about his character while rallying volunteers to get-out-the-vote .
Giffords is featured in Kelly ’ s new one-minute TV ad released Tuesday that centers on his commitment to her and their marriage .
The ad was written a few weeks before it was recorded and Giffords practiced the script with Kelly and her speech therapist , according to the campaign .
Giffords ’ public comments largely center on Kelly ’ s message of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thereby maintaining insurance coverage for those with pre-existing conditions .
McSally ’ s attack at the debate thrust back into the national spotlight the story of Kelly ’ s wife , and the couple ’ s gun-control activism that followed the mass shooting by a mentally-ill man near Tucson that killed six and wounded 13 .
The shot to Giffords ’ head will result in lifelong medical issues for her .
After the massacre of 26 people , including 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012 , the couple emerged as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prominent voices for stricter gun controls .
It was McSally ’ s most direct attack on the couples ’ work and was watched by tens of thousands of Americans , many of whom agree with their calls for universal background checks on gun sales .
McSally sought to avoid invoking Kelly ’ s wife directly , instead tying the organization the couple created , known today as “ Giffords ” to be what she deemed a fringe element of the corners of the Democratic Party .
`` This is about who Mark Kelly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sending to Washington : the most liberal Democrats who have been champions for infringing on our Constitutional rights , open borders , socialized medicine , defunding the police and the many other radical ideas that are now mainstream in the Democrat Party , '' said Caroline Anderegg , McSally 's campaign spokesperson .
`` Mark has been on an unabashed crusade to open the door for these ideas and roll back our Second Amendment rights , and that he tries to claim otherwise further proves he 'll say anything to get elected .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ founded Americans for Responsible Solutions , a non-profit organization and super PAC that supports gun control measures and like-minded candidates .
The group , renamed `` Giffords '' in 2017 , works through three entities to end gun violence in the U.S. : through policy and research and through the legal and political fronts , including a political action committee .
`` Giffords works across the country to educate Americans about the need for gun safety and to enact solutions to keep Americans safer , '' Peter Ambler , the organization ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement .
“ We work on research and policy , organizing and advocacy , and voting and elections .
Our goal is to bring people together from all walks — Democrats and Republicans , gun owners and non-gun owners , veterans , law enforcement , medical professionals and more — to pass commonsense reforms like universal background checks , '' his statement continued .
`` Giffords is driven by Gabby 's goals , leadership , and values , and we 're taking on special interests with Gabby 's trademark grit and determination.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and donated tens of millions of dollars since its creation , according to the website Open Secrets , which tracks campaign financing .
Since 2014 , the group has made nearly $ 60 million in contributions to both Democratic and Republican candidates , although the group favors Democrats .
Its beneficiaries in 2018 included dozens of contributions to federal candidates , such as $ 1,000 contributions to Rep. Rashida Tlaib , D-Mich. , the year she won her congressional race to the U.S. House of Representatives .
That year , the organization endorsed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but did not give her money .
That cycle , the committee also gave money to help the campaigns of Democratic Reps. Ruben Gallego and Tom O ’ Halleran of Arizona and to House Republicans Rep. Pete King of New York and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania .
That same year , the committee also gave tens of thousands of dollars combined to groups that include the Arizona Democratic Party ; the House Majority PAC , a super PAC linked to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ; and America Votes Action Fund , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a nonprofit group that encourages progressives to vote .
Last cycle , the group spent an estimated $ 5.6 million to help defeat gun-friendly Republicans across the nation , including Rep. Mike Coffman of Colorado and Rep. Jason Lewis of Minnesota .
Kelly stopped his unpaid work with the group shortly before announcing his run for the Senate in February 2019 , his campaign spokesperson Jacob Peters said .
Giffords continues her unpaid work with the organization , which is not participating in Arizona 's U.S. Senate special election this cycle but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation .
This year through the organization , Giffords is lending her voice to help elect Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden and various House and Senate candidates as well as to help with the organization ’ s virtual tour advocating for universal background checks .
This election cycle , the group has raised nearly $ 8.9 million , according to Open Secrets .
It has spent $ 8.5 million , making contributions exclusively to Democratic candidates , as well as to state and local parties .
The group has spent about $ 1.7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cory Gardner of Colorado and Thom Tillis of North Carolina .
In the race for Arizona ’ s Senate seat , McSally was slower than some anticipated to make an issue of the couples ’ gun-safety advocacy .
McSally repeated a variation of her debate attack over the weekend at a campaign stop in Yuma , where she spoke from the bed of a pick-up truck to supporters in comments that were streamed online .
`` Mark is a combat veteran and gun owner who along with the majority of Arizonans supports common @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun sales , '' Peters said .
`` This is just another one of the misleading attacks Arizonans have come to expect from Senator McSally . ''
Kelly 's campaign would not comment on whether Kelly ’ s campaign was using Giffords ’ fundraising list .
Both Kelly and McSally are military veterans and describe themselves as pro-Second Amendment , meaning they support the constitutional right for law-abiding people to own guns .
McSally ’ s previous campaigns for public office have been financially helped by the National Rifle Association , the nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hamper significant gun-control measures .
Last year , after mass shootings in El Paso , Texas , and Dayton , Ohio , McSally said she was open to considering new legislation to prevent gun violence .
At the time , McSally said more needed to be done at the federal , state and local levels to act on warnings of violent tendencies or activities by those who may have access to guns .
Her comments came after President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , indicated they , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so-called “ red-flag ” laws , viewed as a way to tighten gun laws .
“ We ’ ll be looking at some federal legislation potentially to incentivize that type of activity , ” McSally told The Arizona Republic in August 2019 .
McSally tried to distance herself during the debate from that position , one that was criticized by many in the conservative wing of the party and her primary GOP opponent .
Kelly ’ s wife has been a near-constant presence in his campaign — even if she ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in the weeks leading up to the debate , Kelly prepared for the debate with his wife at their home .
She often reminded him to slow down , according to his campaign .
When speaking about the centerpiece issue of his campaign — health care and coverage of pre-existing conditions — Kelly ’ s telling of how he and his family navigating the health care system and making medical decisions after the shooting , is a message that draws in viewers and potential supporters .
Giffords is a familiar face in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which she represented at the state Capitol and later in Congress .
Nearly everyone is familiar with the couples ’ marriage , the 2011 shooting and her recovery .
But to voters , Kelly ties the tragedy to the family decisions he had to make during a traumatic time against the backdrop of a complex health care system , soaring medical bills , and pricey medications and procedures .
“ Nothing can prepare you for a health care crisis , ” Kelly said in a TV ad earlier this cycle , offering an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his wife .
At a campaign event over the weekend , Kelly was joined by his wife , who greeted supporters and passed out campaign yard signs .
The appearance marked a physical return to the campaign trail for Kelly , who largely has campaigned virtually throughout the COVID-19 pandemic .
Before the COVID-19 crisis , Giffords attended backyard fundraisers at the homes of supporters .
She has joined her husband writing fundraising letters to potential donors .
And Giffords makes frequent appearances on virtual phone-banking calls for “ Mission for Arizona , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to elect Kelly , Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris of California the presidential ticket , and other Democrats on the ballot .
“ This election is so important , ” Giffords told volunteers during an Aug. 22 virtual event .
“ Lowering drug prices , raising middle class wages , protecting Medicare and Social Security — it ’ s all at stake .
That ’ s why I ’ m here to support my husband Mark Kelly .
“ Mark focuses on facts , not politics .
Mark is loyal and caring .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ so many ways , now we need him in the Senate … This is so important for Arizona , for our country , we can not do it alone .
Thank you , thank you , thank you.
” Have news to share about Arizona 's U.S. senators or national politics ?
Reach the reporter on Twitter and Facebook .
Contact her at yvonne.wingett @ arizonarepublic.com and 602-444-4712 .
Subscribe for free to The Gaggle political podcast on Apple Podcasts , Overcast , or wherever you listen to audio content .

Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, Arizona Republic

Martha McSally’s attack puts spotlight on Gabrielle Giffords shooting, Mark Kelly's gun-safety advocacy
Show Caption Hide Caption Giffords pushes gun reform during virtual DNC Gabby Giffords, the former Arizona congresswoman who was shot and has since become a national advocate for tighter gun control, was among a lengthy list of Democratic speakers Wednesday for the third night of the party’s national convention. (Aug 19). AP
PHOENIX – A show-stopping moment during last week’s Senate debate between Republican Sen. Martha McSally and her Democratic opponent Mark Kelly came when the senator accused Kelly of having a part in a "radical political organization" tied to the "extreme left" fringe of the Democratic Party.
Without explaining the nature of the group or naming it, McSally charged that Kelly, a retired NASA astronaut who is running as a moderate Democrat, had been “a political operative for a decade … Some of the most extreme, left-wing candidates in our country running for office, bankrolling them, endorsing them.”
Pressed to explain her attack, McSally punted to her rival.
“I think he knows,” she said, adding the group “has raised $57 million.”
Kelly responded that McSally was talking about Giffords, the national organization that is named after his wife, former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, and was formed to end gun violence.
"Gabby was injured, shot in the head, in 2011," Kelly said. "The issue of gun violence is personal for Gabby and me, and I'll never forget what she went through for that year and a half. In the hospital for six months, a year of significant rehab … So we formed an organization to try to make communities, and help communities become safer from gun violence."
Kelly, a gun owner, noted his support of the Second Amendment, saying “Our rights and traditions are so important ... But we can never let a bunch of kids in the classroom get killed and think there is nothing we can do about it.”
Kelly’s wife has played a crucial role in Kelly’s front-running Senate campaign, making public appearances to testify about his character while rallying volunteers to get-out-the-vote.
Giffords is featured in Kelly’s new one-minute TV ad released Tuesday that centers on his commitment to her and their marriage. The ad was written a few weeks before it was recorded and Giffords practiced the script with Kelly and her speech therapist, according to the campaign.
Giffords’ public comments largely center on Kelly’s message of keeping the Affordable Care Act, and thereby maintaining insurance coverage for those with pre-existing conditions.
McSally’s attack at the debate thrust back into the national spotlight the story of Kelly’s wife, and the couple’s gun-control activism that followed the mass shooting by a mentally-ill man near Tucson that killed six and wounded 13.
The shot to Giffords’ head will result in lifelong medical issues for her. After the massacre of 26 people, including 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, the couple emerged as two of the nation’s most prominent voices for stricter gun controls.
It was McSally’s most direct attack on the couples’ work and was watched by tens of thousands of Americans, many of whom agree with their calls for universal background checks on gun sales.
McSally sought to avoid invoking Kelly’s wife directly, instead tying the organization the couple created, known today as “Giffords” to be what she deemed a fringe element of the corners of the Democratic Party.
"This is about who Mark Kelly has spent the last decade supporting and sending to Washington: the most liberal Democrats who have been champions for infringing on our Constitutional rights, open borders, socialized medicine, defunding the police and the many other radical ideas that are now mainstream in the Democrat Party," said Caroline Anderegg, McSally's campaign spokesperson. "Mark has been on an unabashed crusade to open the door for these ideas and roll back our Second Amendment rights, and that he tries to claim otherwise further proves he'll say anything to get elected."
In 2013, Kelly and Giffords founded Americans for Responsible Solutions, a non-profit organization and super PAC that supports gun control measures and like-minded candidates.
The group, renamed "Giffords" in 2017, works through three entities to end gun violence in the U.S.: through policy and research and through the legal and political fronts, including a political action committee.
"Giffords works across the country to educate Americans about the need for gun safety and to enact solutions to keep Americans safer," Peter Ambler, the organization’s executive director, said in a written statement.
“We work on research and policy, organizing and advocacy, and voting and elections. Our goal is to bring people together from all walks — Democrats and Republicans, gun owners and non-gun owners, veterans, law enforcement, medical professionals and more — to pass commonsense reforms like universal background checks," his statement continued. "Giffords is driven by Gabby's goals, leadership, and values, and we're taking on special interests with Gabby's trademark grit and determination.”
The group’s committee has raised and donated tens of millions of dollars since its creation, according to the website Open Secrets, which tracks campaign financing.
Since 2014, the group has made nearly $60 million in contributions to both Democratic and Republican candidates, although the group favors Democrats.
Mark Kelly and Gabrielle Giffords hand out campaign signs Senatorial candidate Mark Kelly and his wife, former Rep. Gabby Giffords, pass out campaign signs. Patrick Breen, azcentral.com
Its beneficiaries in 2018 included dozens of contributions to federal candidates, such as $1,000 contributions to Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., the year she won her congressional race to the U.S. House of Representatives. That year, the organization endorsed Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, but did not give her money.
That cycle, the committee also gave money to help the campaigns of Democratic Reps. Ruben Gallego and Tom O’Halleran of Arizona and to House Republicans Rep. Pete King of New York and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
That same year, the committee also gave tens of thousands of dollars combined to groups that include the Arizona Democratic Party; the House Majority PAC, a super PAC linked to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; and America Votes Action Fund, an independent expenditure political action committee affiliated with a nonprofit group that encourages progressives to vote.
Last cycle, the group spent an estimated $5.6 million to help defeat gun-friendly Republicans across the nation, including Rep. Mike Coffman of Colorado and Rep. Jason Lewis of Minnesota.
Kelly stopped his unpaid work with the group shortly before announcing his run for the Senate in February 2019, his campaign spokesperson Jacob Peters said. Giffords continues her unpaid work with the organization, which is not participating in Arizona's U.S. Senate special election this cycle but is active in other races across the nation.
This year through the organization, Giffords is lending her voice to help elect Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden and various House and Senate candidates as well as to help with the organization’s virtual tour advocating for universal background checks.
This election cycle, the group has raised nearly $8.9 million, according to Open Secrets.
It has spent $8.5 million, making contributions exclusively to Democratic candidates, as well as to state and local parties. The group has spent about $1.7 million against two vulnerable Republican senators, Cory Gardner of Colorado and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
In the race for Arizona’s Senate seat, McSally was slower than some anticipated to make an issue of the couples’ gun-safety advocacy.
McSally repeated a variation of her debate attack over the weekend at a campaign stop in Yuma, where she spoke from the bed of a pick-up truck to supporters in comments that were streamed online.
"Mark is a combat veteran and gun owner who along with the majority of Arizonans supports common sense measures like background checks on all gun sales," Peters said. "This is just another one of the misleading attacks Arizonans have come to expect from Senator McSally."
Kelly's campaign would not comment on whether Kelly’s campaign was using Giffords’ fundraising list.
Both Kelly and McSally are military veterans and describe themselves as pro-Second Amendment, meaning they support the constitutional right for law-abiding people to own guns.
McSally’s previous campaigns for public office have been financially helped by the National Rifle Association, the nation’s largest gun lobby that works to hamper significant gun-control measures.
Follow Arizona politics? Our reporters stay on top of it all. Subscribe now to azcentral.com.
Last year, after mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, McSally said she was open to considering new legislation to prevent gun violence.
At the time, McSally said more needed to be done at the federal, state and local levels to act on warnings of violent tendencies or activities by those who may have access to guns. Her comments came after President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., indicated they, too, were open to considering the so-called “red-flag” laws, viewed as a way to tighten gun laws.
“We’ll be looking at some federal legislation potentially to incentivize that type of activity,” McSally told The Arizona Republic in August 2019.
McSally tried to distance herself during the debate from that position, one that was criticized by many in the conservative wing of the party and her primary GOP opponent.
Democrats, including Kelly, have called for stricter measures.
Kelly’s wife has been a near-constant presence in his campaign — even if she’s not always physically present.
Behind the scenes, in the weeks leading up to the debate, Kelly prepared for the debate with his wife at their home. She often reminded him to slow down, according to his campaign.
When speaking about the centerpiece issue of his campaign — health care and coverage of pre-existing conditions — Kelly’s telling of how he and his family navigating the health care system and making medical decisions after the shooting, is a message that draws in viewers and potential supporters.
Giffords is a familiar face in Arizona, and especially southern Arizona, which she represented at the state Capitol and later in Congress.
Nearly everyone is familiar with the couples’ marriage, the 2011 shooting and her recovery.
But to voters, Kelly ties the tragedy to the family decisions he had to make during a traumatic time against the backdrop of a complex health care system, soaring medical bills, and pricey medications and procedures.
“Nothing can prepare you for a health care crisis,” Kelly said in a TV ad earlier this cycle, offering an unspoken reference to the attempted assassination of his wife.
At a campaign event over the weekend, Kelly was joined by his wife, who greeted supporters and passed out campaign yard signs. The appearance marked a physical return to the campaign trail for Kelly, who largely has campaigned virtually throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Before the COVID-19 crisis, Giffords attended backyard fundraisers at the homes of supporters. She has joined her husband writing fundraising letters to potential donors.
And Giffords makes frequent appearances on virtual phone-banking calls for “Mission for Arizona,” which is working on the ground to elect Kelly, Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris of California the presidential ticket, and other Democrats on the ballot.
“This election is so important,” Giffords told volunteers during an Aug. 22 virtual event. “Lowering drug prices, raising middle class wages, protecting Medicare and Social Security — it’s all at stake. That’s why I’m here to support my husband Mark Kelly.
“Mark focuses on facts, not politics. Mark is loyal and caring. Mark has always served our country in so many ways, now we need him in the Senate … This is so important for Arizona, for our country, we cannot do it alone. Thank you, thank you, thank you.”
Have news to share about Arizona's U.S. senators or national politics? Reach the reporter on Twitter and Facebook. Contact her at yvonne.wingett@arizonarepublic.com and 602-444-4712.
Support local journalism. Subscribe to azcentral.com today.
Subscribe for free to The Gaggle political podcast on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, or wherever you listen to audio content.


usatoday--2020-10-13--Judge Amy Coney Barrett asked about killing of George Floyd, racism in America

Judge Amy Coney Barrett asked about killing of George Floyd , racism in America Discussing her reaction to the George @ @ @ @ @ Coney Barrett calls it an `` obvious statement ... that racism persists in our country @ @

Amy Coney Barrett says racism persists in America, cites George Floyd
Discussing her reaction to the George Floyd killing, Judge Amy Coney Barrett calls it an "obvious statement... that racism persists in our country."
USA TODAY, Associated Press


usatoday--2020-10-14--Amy Coney Barret hearing live updates: Senators open third day of confirmation hearings

The third day of Amy Coney Barrett 's confirmation hearings has started .
Refresh this page for updates .
Graham praises Barrett as an icon for conservative women at beginning of Day 3 Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , kicked off the second day of questioning in Amy Coney Barrett 's confirmation hearings by pushing back against arguments made by Democrats over the past two days and praising Barrett as an icon for conservative women .
`` The hearing to me is an opportunity to not punch through a glass ceiling , but a reinforced concrete barrier around conservative women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that barrier , ” Graham told Barrett , who he also hailed as the first “ unashamedly pro-life ” woman to be nominated to the Supreme Court .
He used part of his 20 minutes of questioning time to respond to Democrats ’ allegations Barrett had not been fully candid in her answers , telling Barrett , “ I couldn ’ t disagree more , ” and citing previous Supreme Court nominees ’ refusal to fully share their legal philosophy .
He also addressed the 2006 pro-life letter signed by Barrett , saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was turn a pro-life group into a legislative body and tried to get you to rule on their beliefs . ''
Barrett had declined to comment on her beliefs about abortion when pressed by lawmakers about the letter and a 2013 ad , telling lawmakers it would not be “ appropriate ” for her to comment on issues that could come before the court Barrett ’ s family sat in the audience behind her as the hearing went on .
The third day of Amy Coney Barrett 's confirmation hearings started shortly after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beginning the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting .
Barrett , President Donald Trump 's Supreme Court nominee , faced 11 hours of questioning Tuesday .
Senators on the committee get more time to ask questions Wednesday .
Senators to grill Amy Coney Barrett on third day of hearings WASHINGTON – Senators on Wednesday will get to grill Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett again on her career and views that could offer insights on how she would rule on the nation 's highest court .
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee will get another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the law and a number of hot-button issues that could come before the court .
On Tuesday , Barrett fielded questions from senators for more than 11 hours , where she attempted to differentiate her legal views from her personal beliefs and largely escaped any controversial confrontations with Democrats eager to block her nomination .
Barrett repeatedly refrained from offering her stance on key issues and cases , such those that could decide the fate of abortion , healthcare and gun laws .
Throughout the lengthy hearing , the 48-year-old federal appeals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indiana sought to define herself as someone who puts personal views aside and addresses legal issues with an open mind .
`` I 'm committed to the rule of law and the role of the Supreme Court and dispensing equal justice for all , '' she said during Tuesday ' hearing .
Democrats repeatedly highlighted the history of remarks and opinions she 's offered over her career that liberals argue endanger the future of a woman 's right to abortions and the Affordable Care Act , which provides healthcare for millions of Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett strives to show independence from White House , Republicans How it works : How Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett 's confirmation process will unfold “ If I ’ m confirmed , you would not be getting Justice Scalia , you would be getting Justice Barrett , '' she said in reference to her more outspoken mentor , the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia .
She repeatedly stated under oath that she 'd offered `` no commitment to anyone , not in the Senate , not over at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would decide any case . ''
On Wednesday , each senator will be given at least 20 minutes to pepper Barrett with questions .
The following day , on Thursday , is scheduled to mark the end of Barrett 's public vetting , when senators are scheduled to hear from additional witnesses who know Barrett .
Republicans are eager to confirm Barrett to the Court before Election Day and have sped along the confirmation process .
A final vote by the full Senate is expected before the end of the month .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett 's confirmation this week but rather will hold it for one week , a common practice by the panel , before an expected vote around Oct. 22 .
Barrett 's nomination is likely to split along party lines , 12 Republicans and 10 Democrats , before the full Senate takes up her nomination .
She will need at least a majority of the 100-member chamber to be confirmed to the high court , a feat she is expected to cross as Democrats have acknowledged they lack the votes to block her confirmation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Coney Barrett says George Floyd video was personal for family More : Amy Barrett 's law review articles show how Supreme Court rulings like Roe v. Wade could be challenged

Christal Hayes, Nicholas Wu, Richard Wolf and Ledyard King, USA TODAY

Amy Coney Barrett hearing live updates: ‘You will be confirmed, God willing’: Senators end questioning of Barrett
The third day of Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearings has started. Refresh this page for updates.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., praised Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett as having “met every test” as senators finished their last round of questions.
“You will be confirmed, God willing,” he said.
Graham said he would “hope it’s okay you can be pro-life and adhere to your faith and still be considered by your fellow citizens to be worthy of this job.”
“You can have two glasses of wine tonight,” Graham joked to Barrett, referring to her comments about having a glass of wine after the first night of questioning.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., thanked Barrett for appearing before the committee and apologized for “painful moments” about her children.
“They are innocent victims, and they should not have to go through this,” he said.
The committee now goes into a closed session tonight as they review Barrett’s background report. They will reconvene Thursday morning to hear from outside witnesses.
— Nicholas Wu
Does Barrett believe that climate change is a thing?
Later in the hearing, Barrett was again asked about climate change. Sen. Kamala Harris, the California Democrat running for vice president, first posed several other science-based questions to Barrett, including whether she believed smoking causes cancer and whether COVID-19 is contagious. Barrett agreed with both points.
But as Harris uttered her third question, "do you believe that climate change is happening and it's threatening the air we breathe and the water we drink," Barrett refused to weigh in, calling the issue a "very contentious matter of public debate."
"I will not express a view on a matter of public policy, especially one that is politically controversial because that's inconsistent with the judicial role," Barrett said.
— Christal Hayes
Barrett sidesteps question on whether humans cause global warming
Judge Amy Coney Barrett refused to weigh in on climate change her during confirmation hearing Wednesday, explaining to senators her views on the subject aren't relevant to the job she wants serving on the Supreme Court.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., asked bluntly whether Barrett believed "human beings cause global warming" to which Barrett responded: "I don't think I am competent to opine on what causes global warming or not."
She continued: "I don't think that my views on global warming or climate change are relevant to the job I would do as a judge, nor do I feel like I have views that are informed enough, and I haven't studied scientific data. I'm not really in a position to offer any kind of informed opinion."
Barrett has gotten around directly answering many questions on her views about controversial issues, citing a common ethical practice to not answer questions about issues that could come before the court. The practice was made famous by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and dubbed the "Ginsburg rule," something Barrett has cited repeatedly throughout both days of questioning by senators.
Blumenthal voiced his disappointment in Barrett refusing to weigh in on issues that could impact millions of Americans.
"There have been a lot of references to the Ginsburg rule," Blumenthal said. "I think this administration has taken the Ginsburg rule to a new level. I hope it won't be known as the Barrett rule of avoiding responses."
– Christal Hayes
Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., pressed Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on whether she shared the judicial philosophy of one of her mentors, the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. But Barrett insisted she was her own justice.
Asked about Scalia’s view that Griswold v. Connecticut, a landmark 1965 Supreme Court case on contraception, was wrongly decided, Barrett said, “I think that Griswold is very, very, very, very, very, very unlikely to go anywhere."
Coons asked Barrett if she agreed with Scalia that "Griswold was wrongly decided and the state should make it illegal to use contraceptives if they so chose?"
Barrett said she could not express a view "with respect to precedent" but said in order for the decision to be overturned a state legislature would have to pass a state law banning contraceptives – a scenario she said would be "shockingly unlikely."
"I understand that you'll be your own justice and Justice Scalia's philosophy is significant, but I also think you've made it's clear that it's largely your philosophy,“ Coons said. “I'm trying to help viewers understand what it means to replace Justice Ginsburg with someone who may more closely follow Justice Scalia's approach."
Coons argued Barrett’s confirmation “may launch a new chapter of conservative judicial activism” and said he would vote against her confirmation.
Asked by Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., whether she was aware of legislative efforts to overturn Griswold, Barrett said she was not aware of any.
Hawley called it “demeaning and insulting” Democrats would try to link Barrett to the “worst interpretation” of Scalia’s philosophy.
-Nicholas Wu
Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court would mean one-third of the high court helped George W. Bush win the presidency 20 years ago.
That point was driven home Wednesday by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., who noted that Barrett would be the third justice to have worked on the Republican side in the 2000 dispute over ballots in Florida that led to the Bush v. Gore case decided by the high court.
In her Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire, Barrett called it a “significant case on which I provided research and briefing assistance.” She was recruited to work on the case in Florida for a week at the start of the litigation.
That puts her in powerful company, Klobuchar noted. Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh also traveled to Florida to help the GOP cause. Klobuchar asked if that risked the court's legitimacy, but Barrett didn't bite.
“Asking whether something would undermine the legitimacy of the court or not seems to be trying to elicit a question about whether it would be appropriate for justices who participated in that litigation to sit on the case rather than recuse, and I went down that road yesterday," she said.
The topic arose during Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing process in 2018. Noting Kavanaugh also helped independent counsel Ken Starr investigate President Bill Clinton in the late 1990s and went on to serve in Bush's White House, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., called him the “Forrest Gump of Republican politics.” Sen Chuck Schumer, now the Senate Democratic leader, said, “If there was a political fight that needed a political foot soldier … Brett Kavanaugh was probably there.”
– Richard Wolf
Judge Amy Coney Barrett, during her third day of confirmation hearings Wednesday, maintained that if confirmed to the Supreme Court she would not have any preconceived plans on how she would view the Affordable Care Act and rule in a case next month that could decide the future of health care for millions.
Piecing together a timeline, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., noted that for years President Donald Trump has made clear his "obsession to repeal Obamacare" and highlighted the timing of a legal journal article Barrett authored in January 2017 – the month Trump took office. That article criticized Chief Justice John Roberts for pushing "the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute" in a 2012 ruling. Klobuchar asked Barrett whether she was aware at the time of that writing that the president was set on repealing the Affordable Care Act and asked whether the federal appeals judge was aware that the president aimed to nominate judges to the Supreme Court who would overturn the law.
"I think that the Republicans have kind of made that clear. It's just been part of the public discourse," Barrett said. "All these questions, you're suggesting that I have animus or that I cut a deal with the president and I was very clear yesterday that, that isn't what happened."
She continued, explaining that she was "aware that [Trump] has criticized the Affordable Care Act" but her journal article was not a message for the president. "I want to stress, I have no animus to or agenda for the Affordable Care Act so to the extent you're suggesting this was like an open letter to President Trump. It was not."
Klobuchar noted the dozens of times Republicans have attempted to overturn Obamacare and said "I find it very hard to believe that you didn't understand that when you wrote the article."
– Christal Hayes
If Amy Coney Barrett makes the leap from a federal appeals court to the Supreme Court, she will find the ethics and financial reporting rules are easier to abide by.
That’s because the high court isn’t subject to the same requirements that govern all lower federal courts.
“I think it’s anomalous that the highest court should have the lowest standards,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said during Wednesday’s confirmation hearing.
Whitehouse sought out Barrett as an ally in his effort to change that situation. In doing so, he seemed to throw in the towel on blocking Barrett’s ascension.
“Take a look at that when you get up there,” he said.
Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, which advocates that justices have term limits and be bound by a code of ethics, notes that there is no formal code of conduct for the Supreme Court, as there is for other federal courts. The justices voluntarily list gifts received on their annual financial disclosure forms, but in lower courts gift rules are set by statute. Appeals courts like Barrett’s keep lists of privately funded judicial seminars, unlike the Supreme Court. And if a justice breaches ethics guidelines, there is no recourse or reprimand, save for impeachment.
– Richard Wolf
Barrett spars with Durbin over gun rights, voting question
Does Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett put gun rights ahead of voting rights?
Yes, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said during Wednesday’s hearing. No, Barrett insisted.
It’s a line of questioning that stems from Barrett’s dissent on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in which she said a nonviolent felon should not lose his right to own a gun.
She lost that argument in court, but she was determined not to lose the argument with Durbin, the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat.
Why, Durbin asked, did she believe owning a gun was an individual right, but voting is only a civic right based on collective action? Why can a felon have a gun but, as is the case in some states, be denied the right to vote?
Barrett has remained calm during most of this week’s hearing, but she clearly took umbrage at Durbin’s conclusion. “I have never denigrated the right to vote,” she said, accusing Durbin of distorting her record. “I think voting is a fundamental right.”
– Richard Wolf
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett agreed under oath that no one person is above the law, even President Donald Trump.
Under questioning from Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, the federal appeals court judge took a similar stance as other justices on the high court that Trump is not above the law.
"Would you agree, first, that nobody is above the law. Not the president, not you, not me. Is that correct?" Leahy asked virtually over video conference.
"I agree, no one is above the law," Barrett stated unequivocally.
She declined to weigh in when asked by Leahy about whether the president has the "absolute right to pardon himself for a crime."
Barrett explained that the question had never come before her in a court and "it's one that calls for legal analysis of what the scope of the pardon power is" and she would need to go through "the judicial process to decide it."
Leahy, unsatisfied by her explanation, said he found the two back-to-back answers "somewhat incompatible."
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored an opinion earlier this year on his and Neil Gorsuch's behalf in which he made clear that Trump is not immune from the law. The case dealt with the president's tax returns, with the high court ruling that Trump could not block prosecutors from gaining access to his financials.
– Christal Hayes
Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee released the list of witnesses who will testify on the last day of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings on Thursday.
The hearing will feature two panels of witnesses.
The first panel would include two members of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which evaluates the qualifications of every judicial nominee: Randall D. Noel of Butler Snow, LLP and Pamela J. Roberts of Bowman and Brooke LLP.
The second panel will include Democratic and Republican witnesses who will likely speak to Barrett’s character or in opposition to her confirmation:
Dr. Farhan Bhatti, CEO and medical director of Care Free Medical. Bhatti will discuss the Affordable Care Act
Retired Judge Thomas Griffith of th United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, who has praised Barrett.
Kristen Clarke, President and Executive Director, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. Clarke will testify about voting and civil rights.
Professor Saikrishna Prakash of the University of Virginia School of Law, one of Barrett’s professional colleagues
Crystal Good, who fought in court for an abortion at age 16 and who will testify about abortion rights.
Amanda Rauh-Bieri, associate at Miller Canfield, and a former clerk for Barrett.
Stacy Staggs will testify about the consequences of overturning the Affordable Care Act.
Laura Wolk, an attorney and one of Barrett’s former law students.
– Nicholas Wu
Judge Barrett says she was 'deeply honored' by Supreme Court pick Judge Amy Coney Barrett delivered her opening statement in her Supreme Court confirmation hearing. USA TODAY
Republicans sought to assure Americans Wednesday that Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation isn’t likely to eliminate the Affordable Care Act.
Their principal witness: Amy Coney Barrett.
On the second day of questioning, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee elicited responses from Barrett indicating that a Nov. 10 Supreme Court showdown over the law is most likely to erase one provision of the law – not the law itself.
Severing an unconstitutional portion of a law rather than the law itself “serves a valuable function of trying not to undo your work,” Barrett told Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the panel.
While her mentor, the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, said in 2012 that the entire law should be struck down because he thought two provisions were unconstitutional, she said the new challenge over tax policy involves only one provision.
The challenge stems from a $1.5 trillion tax cut passed by the Republican-dominated Congress in 2017, which repealed the health care law's tax on people who refuse to buy insurance. That tax was intended to prod them into the health insurance marketplace rather than let them seek emergency care while uninsured.
In reality, it will be very difficult for Barrett to topple the law because at least five justices on the court are likely to uphold it: the three remaining liberal justices along with Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
– Richard Wolf
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, will invite four witnesses to speak at Thursday’s confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett.
The witnesses come from health care and legal backgrounds and will likely speak to Democrats’ concerns about the possible overturning of the Affordable Care Act and other issues that could come before the court.
The four witnesses are:
Stacy Staggs, a mother of 7-year old twins with pre-existing conditions. Staggs will testify about the consequences of overturning the Affordable Care Act.
Dr. Farhan Bhatti, a family physician and CEO of Care Free Medical, a nonprofit clinic. Bhatti will discuss the Affordable Care Act.
Crystal Good, who fought in court for an abortion at age 16, will testify about abortion rights.
Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, will testify about voting and civil rights.
-Nicholas Wu
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., kicked off the second day of questioning in Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearings by pushing back against arguments made by Democrats over the past two days and praising Barrett as an icon for conservative women.
"The hearing to me is an opportunity to not punch through a glass ceiling, but a reinforced concrete barrier around conservative women. You’re gonna shatter that barrier,” Graham told Barrett, who he also hailed as the first “unashamedly pro-life” woman to be nominated to the Supreme Court.
He used part of his 20 minutes of questioning time to respond to Democrats’ allegations Barrett had not been fully candid in her answers, telling Barrett, “I couldn’t disagree more,” and citing previous Supreme Court nominees’ refusal to fully share their legal philosophy.
He also addressed the 2006 pro-life letter signed by Barrett, saying "what we tried to do yesterday was turn a pro-life group into a legislative body and tried to get you to rule on their beliefs."
Barrett had declined to comment on her beliefs about abortion when pressed by lawmakers about the letter and a 2013 ad, telling lawmakers it would not be “appropriate” for her to comment on issues that could come before the court
Barrett’s family sat in the audience behind her as the hearing went on.
– Nicholas Wu
The third day of Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearings started shortly after 9 a.m. EDT with Sen. Lindsey Graham beginning the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting.
Barrett, President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee, faced 11 hours of questioning Tuesday. Senators on the committee get more time to ask questions Wednesday.
– Sean Rossman
WASHINGTON – Senators on Wednesday will get to grill Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett again on her career and views that could offer insights on how she would rule on the nation's highest court.
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee will get another chance to question Barrett on her views on the law and a number of hot-button issues that could come before the court.
On Tuesday, Barrett fielded questions from senators for more than 11 hours, where she attempted to differentiate her legal views from her personal beliefs and largely escaped any controversial confrontations with Democrats eager to block her nomination.
Barrett repeatedly refrained from offering her stance on key issues and cases, such those that could decide the fate of abortion, healthcare and gun laws.
Throughout the lengthy hearing, the 48-year-old federal appeals court judge and law school professor from Indiana sought to define herself as someone who puts personal views aside and addresses legal issues with an open mind.
"I'm committed to the rule of law and the role of the Supreme Court and dispensing equal justice for all," she said during Tuesday' hearing.
Democrats repeatedly highlighted the history of remarks and opinions she's offered over her career that liberals argue endanger the future of a woman's right to abortions and the Affordable Care Act, which provides healthcare for millions of Americans.
How a Supreme Court justice is nominated, confirmed, and opposed The Supreme Court is a vital component of our democracy. Here's how the process works to nominate, confirm, and oppose a potential justice. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY
A recap of Tuesday: Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett strives to show independence from White House, Republicans
How it works: How Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation process will unfold
“If I’m confirmed, you would not be getting Justice Scalia, you would be getting Justice Barrett," she said in reference to her more outspoken mentor, the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia.
She repeatedly stated under oath that she'd offered "no commitment to anyone, not in the Senate, not over at the White House, about how I would decide any case."
On Wednesday, each senator will be given at least 20 minutes to pepper Barrett with questions. The following day, on Thursday, is scheduled to mark the end of Barrett's public vetting, when senators are scheduled to hear from additional witnesses who know Barrett.
Republicans are eager to confirm Barrett to the Court before Election Day and have sped along the confirmation process. A final vote by the full Senate is expected before the end of the month.
The Senate Judiciary Committee will not vote on Barrett's confirmation this week but rather will hold it for one week, a common practice by the panel, before an expected vote around Oct. 22. Barrett's nomination is likely to split along party lines, 12 Republicans and 10 Democrats, before the full Senate takes up her nomination.
She will need at least a majority of the 100-member chamber to be confirmed to the high court, a feat she is expected to cross as Democrats have acknowledged they lack the votes to block her confirmation.
'We wept together': Amy Coney Barrett says George Floyd video was personal for family
More: Amy Barrett's law review articles show how Supreme Court rulings like Roe v. Wade could be challenged


usatoday--2020-10-14--Kyle Rittenhouse, accused of killing 2 people during Wisconsin protests, won't face charges in Illin

Illinois authorities have determined the AR-15 rifle used to kill two people and injure a third during unrest in Kenosha was purchased , stored and used in Wisconsin , and that Kyle Rittenhouse never possessed it in Illinois .
That bit of information came from the Lake County State 's Attorney 's Office in a news release issued Tuesday .
The release said police in Antioch , Rittenhouse 's hometown — and where he turned himself in — investigated any possible crimes Rittenhouse may have committed in Illinois , but found none .
The statement does not indicate whether someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or where it is now .
It said prosecutors — not Antioch police — would release any additional information `` as to not disrupt any investigation that may be taking place in Wisconsin . ''
'That 's the shooter ' : Witnesses describe the night Kyle Rittenhouse opened fire in Kenosha The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel , part of the USA TODAY Network , has sued to obtain records of Rittenhouse 's arrest in Illinois .
Rittenhouse , 17 , remains in a Lake County juvenile detention center awaiting a ruling on his lawyers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wisconsin .
He is facing six charges , including one count of first-degree intentional homicide , and could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted of the most serious charge .
Rittenhouse was acting as self-appointed security against rioting on the third night of protests after the police shooting of Jacob Blake in August and considered himself a militia member , the Journal Sentinel has reported .

Bruce Vielmetti, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Kyle Rittenhouse, accused of killing 2 people during Wisconsin protests, won't face charges in Illinois, his home state
Show Caption Hide Caption Kenosha protest shooting: What we know about shooter Kyle Rittenhouse 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse is being charged as an adult for shooting three people, two of them fatally, during protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin. USA TODAY, Storyful
Illinois authorities have determined the AR-15 rifle used to kill two people and injure a third during unrest in Kenosha was purchased, stored and used in Wisconsin, and that Kyle Rittenhouse never possessed it in Illinois.
That bit of information came from the Lake County State's Attorney's Office in a news release issued Tuesday. The release said police in Antioch, Rittenhouse's hometown — and where he turned himself in — investigated any possible crimes Rittenhouse may have committed in Illinois, but found none.
The statement does not indicate whether someone else possessed the gun in Illinois, or where it is now. It said prosecutors — not Antioch police — would release any additional information "as to not disrupt any investigation that may be taking place in Wisconsin."
'That's the shooter': Witnesses describe the night Kyle Rittenhouse opened fire in Kenosha
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, part of the USA TODAY Network, has sued to obtain records of Rittenhouse's arrest in Illinois.
Rittenhouse, 17, remains in a Lake County juvenile detention center awaiting a ruling on his lawyers' attempts to block his extradition to Wisconsin. He is facing six charges, including one count of first-degree intentional homicide, and could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted of the most serious charge.
Rittenhouse was acting as self-appointed security against rioting on the third night of protests after the police shooting of Jacob Blake in August and considered himself a militia member, the Journal Sentinel has reported.
Follow Bruce Vielmetti on Twitter: @ProofHearsay.