House GOP votes to oust Democrat Ilhan Omar from major committee
The Republican-led House voted after raucous debate Thursday to oust Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar from the chamber’s Foreign Affairs Committee, citing her anti-Israel comments, in a dramatic response to Democrats last session booting far-right GOP lawmakers over incendiary remarks. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy was able to solidify Republicans to take action against the Somali-born Muslim in the new Congress, although some GOP lawmakers had expressed reservations. Removal of lawmakers from House committees was essentially unprecedented until the Democratic ousters two years ago of hard-right Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Paul Gosar of Arizona. The 218-211 vote, along party lines, came after a heated, voices-raised debate in which Democrats accused the GOP of going after Omar based on her race. Omar, who has apologized for 2019 remarks widely seen as antisemitic, defended herself on the House floor, asking if anyone was surprised she was being targeted. Democratic colleagues hugged her during the vote. “My voice will get louder and stronger, and my leadership will be celebrated around the world, as it has been,” Omar said in a closing speech. House Republicans focused on six statements she has made that “under the totality of the circumstances, disqualify her from serving on the Committee of Foreign Affairs,” said Rep. Michael Guest of Mississippi, the incoming chairman of the House Ethics Committee. “All members, both Republicans and Democrats alike who seek to serve on Foreign Affairs, should be held to the highest standard of conduct due to the international sensitivity and national security concerns under the jurisdiction of this committee,” Guest said. Republicans have clashed with Omar since she arrived in Congress, and former President Donald Trump frequently taunted her at his rallies in ways that appealed to his supporters. The resolution proposed by Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, a former official in the Trump administration, declared, “Omar’s comments have brought dishonor to the House of Representatives.” Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said Omar has at times “made mistakes” and used antisemitic tropes that were condemned by House Democrats four years ago. But that’s not what Thursday’s vote was about, he said. “It’s about political revenge,” Jeffries said. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., went further, referring to the Sept. 11, 2001, attack as she called the GOP’s action part of one of the “disgusting legacies after 9/11, the targeting and racism against Muslim-Americans throughout the United States of America. And this is an extension of that legacy.” She added, “This is about targeting women of color.” McCarthy denied the Republican decision to oust Omar was a tit-for-tat after the Greene and Gosar removals under Democrats, though he had warned in late 2021 that such a response might be expected if Republicans won back the House majority. “This is nothing like the last Congress,” he said Thursday. He noted that Omar can remain on other panels, just not Foreign Affairs, after her anti-Israel comments. Omar is one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress. She is also the first to wear a hijab in the House chamber after floor rules were changed to allow members to wear head coverings for religious reasons. She quickly generated controversy after joining Congress in 2019 with a pair of tweets that suggested lawmakers who supported Israel were motivated by money. In the first, she criticized the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC. “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby,” she wrote, invoking slang about $100 bills. Asked on Twitter who she thought was paying members of Congress to support Israel, Omar responded, “AIPAC!” Omar’s remarks sparked a public rebuke from then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats who made clear that she had overstepped. She soon apologized. “We have to always be willing to step back and think through criticism, just as I expect people to hear me when others attack me about my identity,” Omar tweeted. “This is why I unequivocally apologize.” Also, in a May 2021 tweet, she made reference to Israel as “an apartheid state” over its treatment of Palestinians. Democrats rallied Thursday in a fiery defense of Omar and the experiences she brings to Congress. “This clearly isn’t about what Ilhan Omar said as much as who she is — being a smart, outspoken Black woman of the Muslim faith is apparently the issue,” said Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis. Black, Latino, and progressive lawmakers, in particular, spoke of her unique voice in the House and criticized Republicans for what they called a racist attack. “Racist gaslighting,” said Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo. A “revenge resolution,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington, the chair of the progressive caucus. “It’s so painful to watch,” said Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., who joined Congress with Omar as the first two female Muslims elected to the House. “To Congresswoman Omar, I am so sorry that our country is failing you today through this chamber,” Tlaib said through tears. “You belong on that committee.” In the weeks leading up to the vote, the chairman of the committee, Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, argued for excluding Omar from the panel during a recent closed-door meeting with fellow Republicans. “It’s just that her worldview of Israel is so diametrically opposed to the committee’s,” McCaul told reporters in describing his stance. “I don’t mind having differences of opinion, but this goes beyond that.” At the White House, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said of the ouster, “It’s a political stunt.” McCarthy has already blocked Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, both California Democrats, from rejoining the House Intelligence Committee once the GOP took control of the chamber in January. While appointments to the intelligence panel are the prerogative of the speaker, the action on Omar required a House vote. Several Republicans skeptical of removing Omar wanted “due process” for lawmakers who face removal. McCarthy said he told them he would work with Democrats on creating a due process system, but acknowledged it’s still a work in progress. One Republican, Rep. David Joyce of Ohio, voted present. In the last Congress, several Republicans had joined Democrats in removing Greene and Gosar from
Missouri leads 20 AGs warning Walgreens, CVS about mailing abortion pills
Republican Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey and 19 other attorneys general are warning Walgreens and CVS pharmacies that any plans to mail abortion-inducing pills is illegal and unsafe. “As the principal legal and law enforcement officers of our 20 states, we offer you these thoughts on the current legal landscape,” Bailey wrote. In late January, the Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone to be used in a regimen with misoprostol “to end an intrauterine pregnancy through 10 weeks gestation.” The drugs must be dispensed or under the supervision of a certified prescriber or pharmacy and “may be dispensed in-person or by mail,” according to the FDA website. In late December, the Department of Justice published a 21-page memorandum for the U.S. Postal Service stating “no matter where the drugs are delivered, a variety of uses of mifepristone and misoprostol serve important medical purposes and are lawful under federal and state law.” The document said the USPS couldn’t assume the drugs can’t be mailed because “they are being sent into a jurisdiction that significantly restricts abortion.” CVS and Walgreens recently announced they are seeking certification from the FDA to sell and mail the pills, according to multiple media reports. “As Attorney General, it is my responsibility to enforce the laws as written, and that includes enforcing the very laws that protect Missouri’s women and unborn children,” Bailey said in a statement. “My office is doing everything in its power to inform these companies of the law, with the promise that we will use every tool at our disposal to uphold the law if broken.” Missouri became the first state to end elective abortions when a “trigger law” was executed hours after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last June. In addition to prohibiting doctors from performing abortions unless there is a medical emergency, Missouri law states, “any person who knowingly performs or induces an abortion of an unborn child in violation of this subsection shall be guilty of a class B felony, as well as subject to suspension or revocation of his or her professional license by his or her professional licensing board.” Bailey’s letter to the companies stated Missouri law prohibits “using the mail to send or receive abortion drugs.” Bailey referred to research published by Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSRH) stating medication abortions were 5.96 times as likely to result in a complication as first-trimester aspiration abortions. (When the Supreme Court ruled last June, ANSRH stated the decision contradicted scientific evidence and said it “stands against this decision as one that will have devastating consequences to people’s lives and their families.”) “And finally,” Bailey wrote, “mail-order abortion pills also invite the horror of an increase in coerced abortions. When abortion drugs are mailed or consumed outside a regulated medical facility, the risk of coercion is much higher – indeed, guaranteed – because there is no oversight. Outside the regulated medical context, a person can obtain an abortion pill quite easily and then coerce a woman into taking it.” The attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia signed Bailey’s letter. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Lawmakers raise concerns, delay prison healthcare contract
Members of a legislative oversight committee on Thursday raised concerns about the Alabama prison system’s $1 billion inmate healthcare contract, questioning a state official about the cost, selection process, and lawsuits filed against an earlier version of the company. The Legislative Contract Review Committee put a 45-day hold on the contract between YesCare Corp and the Alabama Department of Corrections. The delay illustrates lawmakers’ discomfort with the contract but has little practical effect since the committee can’t void the agreement. The four 1/2-year contracts is scheduled to take effect on April 1. Democratic Rep. Chris England, a committee member, argued the contract should be canceled, saying he believed there was a “massive cloud” over the selection process. “We’re talking about a billion dollars. We are also talking about the Department of Corrections. Just based on recent activity, most if not all of the things that the Department of Corrections is involved in probably need to be looked at several times,” England said. A private practice attorney, who is defending the Alabama Department of Corrections in an ongoing lawsuit over inmate medical care, had been named to YesCare’s advisory board in June, according to a company statement. Mary-Coleman Roberts, acting general counsel for the Alabama Department of Corrections, defended the selection process. She said the bids had already been redone because of the concerns. The prison system had initially selected YesCare in July, but rescinded that decision. Roberts said there had been an allegation of improper communication with the selection committee, and although it did not involve the healthcare contract, it “looked bad.” She said they also discovered that Bill Lunsford, the attorney representing the prison system in the lawsuit over inmate care, had the offer to join the YesCare board. “We didn’t think he did anything wrong, but it was enough that we didn’t think it was fair,” said Roberts, adding that Lunsford is no longer joining the board. She said they shared information about the healthcare case with other vendors and added contract language to forbid an overlap of contractors and legal counsel. YesCare also won the second selection process. “We believe that YesCare would be a good partner for the state of Alabama,” Roberts said. She said she understood that there will “probably be some sticker shock with this price tag.” YesCare did not submit the lowest cost proposal, but they scored better for staffing and services, she said. The department did not release the scores or bids. The scoring summary for the bids will not become public record until the contract is executed, a spokeswoman for the Alabama Department of Corrections said last month. YesCare was formed out of Corizon, which previously provided healthcare services to the Alabama prison system and was the provider when a class action lawsuit was filed against the state over the quality of healthcare and mental health care. During the oversight committee meeting, Democratic Sen. Billy Beasley asked about litigation filed against YesCare and Corizon in other states. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan sued Corizon over unpaid claims in 2022. “I don’t know that it would be a good idea for the state of Alabama to do business with those charged with litigation,” Beasley said. Republican Sen. Dan Roberts announced at the beginning of the meeting that the contract would be put on hold because of members’ concerns. “We respect the Alabama Legislature’s oversight role in reviewing contracts related to important state services like correctional healthcare,” YesCare CEO Sara Tirschwel said in a statement. “We will continue to work to address any questions on the part of committee members, and we look forward to returning to Alabama on April 1 to serve the people of the state.” The other companies that competed for the contract were Centurion, Vital Core, and Wexford. Wexford is the state’s current provider. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Former corrections officer Stacy George is supportive of expedited release of inmates
On Tuesday, the Alabama Department of Corrections made headlines when it released 90 inmates in a supervised release with ankle monitors. The release has been criticized by some members of law enforcement denounced the move, but former correctional office and gubernatorial candidate Stacy George released a statement in support of the decision. “I fully support Governor [Kay] Ivey, the Alabama State House, the Alabama State Senate in the 2015 legislation and the amended bill in 2021 that is associated with this release,” George said. “As a former 13-and-a-half-year veteran Correctional Officer in the State of Alabama assigned to the largest prison (Limestone Correctional Facility). I have taken inmates to the bus station who have been released under Mandatory Release, Spontaneous Release, and End of Sentence (EOS).”05 George is a former Morgan County Commissioner. He twice ran for the Republican nomination for Governor in 2014 and 2022. George recently left his job as a corrections officer for the Alabama Department of Corrections (ADOC) and has advocated for better treatment for convicts. “As a two-time cans Officer at Limestone prison, I have attended many prison reform meetings as well,” said George. “I remember being in a meeting in Shelby County at the ATF. I remember one statement that was stated pertaining to this very issue. No inmate should ever EOS (End of Sentence) from an Alabama prison. They should be paroled out 3 years before they EOS from prison. This allows the inmate to be monitored with various devices and drug tested to be certain they are ready to re-enter society. If you just simply let them EOS (End of Sentence) you have no way to monitor them.” The state released 80 Alabama prisoners with ankle monitors on Tuesday due to the 2021 justice reform law that orders ADOC to release inmates approaching their end of sentences to spend the final few months on supervised release. An estimated 412 inmates are eligible to be released under the new law. The Alabama Bureau of Pardons and Paroles is tasked with supervising them during their period of supervised release. Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, several district attorneys, and members of law enforcement have expressed their concerns about the plan. “There are many inmates in the Alabama prison system who, if given a chance, could re-enter society and be a model citizen,” George said. “I know this because I have been there in prison with them as an Officer on the ground for over 13 years. There are people who never should get out of prison as well. This is why the Alabama Pardons and Paroles is such an important department in Alabama. Sometimes inmates need some monitoring to stay on the right track in this crazy world we live in. I can give a different perspective on this issue because I have been that guy who dropped off an inmate at the bus station with 10 dollars and a bus ticket to the same place that sentenced them. I do not think people should panic over this issue. It just needs to be explained a little different way.” The remaining prisoners will be released in phases. One hundred thirty-two have been released through Thursday. The Department of Corrections has stated that it will release another 200 prisoners in the coming days. ALDOC is reportedly notifying their victims prior to releasing the prisoners – most of them convicted of violent crimes – including murder. To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
