Politics

A king with three teams

Published

3 hours ago

June 14, 2026

The Dutch king, Willem-Alexander, is in luck this World Cup: He has not one, not two, but three countries to root for,.

For the first time, the Dutch are not the only country from what is today the Kingdom of the Netherlands to qualify for football’s biggest tournament. Curaçao’s squad will represent its population of 158,000 in North America, having qualified late last year.

The island, situated just north of Venezuela, is a former Dutch colony and once served as a major trade hub for the Dutch West India Company. In the mid 1800s, it was one of six Caribbean islands placed under joint colonial administration based in the country’s capital Willemstad. In 1954, the Charter for the Kingdom of the Netherlands was signed and the islands formally became known as the “Netherlands Antilles.”

That arrangement was dissolved and by 2010, Curaçao, Aruba and St. Maarten were all autonomous constituent countries within the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Sun-drenched Curaçao wasted little time establishing itself on the international football scene. It appeared on FIFA’s member list in March 2011, inheriting the Netherlands Antilles’ FIFA membership, records and ranking. Curaçao will play its first-ever World Cup match today, against Germany in Houston.

King Willem-Alexander remains Curaçao’s head of state, while the country has its own government and handles most internal affairs itself, including education, health care, and tourism. The Kingdom of the Netherlands retains overarching responsibility for foreign relations and defense.

Now, as if Willem-Alexander didn’t have his hands full enough, he will likely also be, at least ostensibly, showing support for Argentina to keep the peace within the royal household. In 2002, he married Máxima Zorreguieta, who is Argentine by birth, after the pair met in Seville in southern Spain.

With three half-Argentine and bilingual daughters, the royal family have plenty of reasons to keep an eye on La Albiceleste. The Netherlands and Argentina have played some of the most iconic games in World Cup history: a tense 1978 final, won by Argentina, in front of military dictator Jorge Rafael Videla, in Buenos Aires; a sweltering Marseille quarterfinal in 1998; and a very bad-tempered scrap at the same stage at Qatar 2022.

A spokesperson for the Dutch royal family told Blue Light News that, “King Willem-Alexander, Queen Máxima and Princess Ariane will be traveling to Houston and Kansas to cheer on the football teams of the Netherlands and Curaçao when they play against respectively Sweden and Ecuador.”

Time will tell if the Dutch monarch will be raising a glass of Heineken, Curaçao liqueur or Malbec this summer.

Politics

The government officials who can’t wait to clean out stadium toilets

Published

1 hour ago

June 14, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

INGLEWOOD, Calif. — Those in charge of SoFi Stadium have two days to clean out SoFi Stadium between the United States’ thumping of Paraguay on Friday and a face-off on Monday between Iran and New Zealand. They can count on the L.A. County Department of Health to help with the grossest part.

County health officials are already removing wastewater from the stadium before, during and after every match played at SoFi Stadium, to test for the presence of various viruses. The county health department — which is responsible for the well-being of ten million residents — developed its syndromic-surveillance capacity during the Covid pandemic, but is now deploying it for the first time it at a sports facility.

You can read more in a fascinating report from Blue Light News health-care reporters from coast to coast, led by my Sacramento-based colleague Rachel Bluth, about how public-health authorities have prepared for a World Cup unfolding amid an Ebola outbreak, rising measles cases in the United States, and continued fears of hantavirus.

Click here for the whole story.

Politics

Secretive super PAC funding is skyrocketing in primaries

Published

1 hour ago

June 14, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

A record number of groups are exploiting a gap in campaign finance law to flood this year’s primary elections with money — without disclosing their donors until long after the race is over.

More than $48 million has already been spent on House and Senate primaries this year by super PACs that did not have to reveal their donors before elections took place, according to a Blue Light News analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission. That is more than double the total at this time in the 2024 cycle, and 10 times higher than in 2018.

The groups are taking advantage of the campaign finance calendar. A super PAC formed after the last pre-election FEC deadline can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money in the crucial final days of an election without disclosing its donors until afterward. The practice has been used for years, but never to the degree of this year’s midterms.

Roughly 1 in 10 dollars in outside spending that has flowed into primaries so far this year has been through these secretive groups.

In some cases, the pop-up super PAC spending has the characteristics of one political party meddling in another’s primary to help boost a candidate seen as more beatable in November, which is what happened in competitive races in Texas’ 35th District, Maine’s 2nd District and most recently New York’s 17th District. In other cases, groups sought to hide their connection to controversial sources, like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

“It’s certainly a very strategic effort to avoid providing transparency for voters,” said Saurav Ghosh, director of federal campaign finance reform at the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center. “So even if they’re acting within the letter of the law, they are ultimately undermining in spirit. Because disclosure requirements exist so that voters — when they’re deciding who to cast their ballot for — have the information about who has spent money backing these candidates.”

The path for secretive spending on primaries is relatively straightforward. New groups launch after a monthly or quarterly FEC deadline. They spend millions of dollars to support their preferred candidates, bombarding voters in the final days when they are most engaged with an election. And by the time they have to report their money, weeks after the end of the month or quarter, the election they were aiming to influence is already over.

The tactic is more common in primaries than general elections because outside groups have to file pre-general reports in mid-October, leaving only a relatively small window before the November election where they would be able to launch and spend without disclosing financial information.

The efforts to hide sources of funding have happened across the country this cycle and to support and oppose candidates of widely varying ideologies. More money has been spent in Democratic primaries than Republican ones so far.

Since the beginning of May, two super PACs widely suspected of being tied to Republicans — Lead Left and Real Change — have spent $4.3 million across Democratic primaries in five competitive House districts to boost progressive candidates that are seen as weaker in the general election. Neither group will have to reveal their donors until mid-July.

In Kentucky’s 4th District, where GOP Rep. Thomas Massie was seeking reelection after President Donald Trump endorsed his challenger Ed Gallrein, a newly created super PAC spent a whopping $6.7 million to attack Gallrein. The PAC shut itself down shortly after the primary, revealing only then that most of its funds came from a Texas-based firm. (The PAC is now facing an FEC complaint alleging it was a straw donor scheme.)

In Illinois’ March primaries, three newly created groups tied to AIPAC spent $16 million on House races. While news reports linked AIPAC to the groups throughout the primaries, it wasn’t revealed until afterward that United Democracy Project, AIPAC’s main super PAC, was the leading funder. That allowed AIPAC — which has become politically controversial in Democratic primaries — to attempt to influence the elections without officially declaring its involvement as ballots were being cast.

In the special primary election to replace the late Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) last year, a newly launched super PAC called Fight for Virginia’s Future backed Connolly’s former chief of staff, James Walkinshaw. After the election, which Walkinshaw won, it was revealed that the group’s funding was transferred from Connolly’s campaign account.

Not every newly launched super PAC is inherently secretive. In some cases, new groups are clear about their affiliations even if they don’t immediately report their donors to the FEC.

And there are other ways for super PACs to hide their sources of funding beyond taking advantage of the FEC’s timing. Many get transfers from 501(c)(4) nonprofits, which face far fewer disclosure requirements.

As the practice of pop-up super PACs has become more common, it’s also become more sophisticated.

In past cycles, new super PACs that hid their sources of funding were sometimes linked to existing interests through the little information they do have to share when they are formed or spend money: their vendors, address and treasurer name and contact info. But many groups have developed workarounds and now use unknown treasurers or new vendors that also popped up around the same time as the PACs themselves.

In a handful of Democratic primaries in competitive districts this year, pop-up super PACs that have been linked to Republicans through PO boxes and website metadata have run ads that closely mimic the logos and official materials of Democratic campaigns in the race.

In one case last month, the Republican-linked Lead Left PAC spent nearly $1 million backing Democrat Maureen Galindo over Johnny Garcia in Texas’ 35th District. Galindo had been widely condemned by her own party for calls to turn a local ICE detention center into a “prison for American Zionists.”

The spending on her behalf led to the moderate Blue Dog PAC leading a rescue mission for Garcia: It spent more than $1 million to boost the former Bexar County sheriff’s deputy.

Neither Real Change or Lead Left responded to requests for comment sent to the emails listed on FEC filings. Other groups, including Fight for Virginia’s Future, Kentucky 4th PAC and UDP also didn’t respond to requests for comment. Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC tied to House GOP leadership that is widely speculated to be behind some of the pop-up PACs, did not respond to a request for comment.

Phil Gardner, a senior adviser to the Blue Dog PAC, said the Lead Left ads were “literally trying to impersonate other campaigns.”

Garcia — who ultimately won his race by more than 20 points — said in an interview that news reports linking Lead Left to Republicans helped show voters the importance of the race.

“It showed just how scared they were of our campaign, that they were willing to invest in a candidate that was clearly antisemitic that they knew they would defeat very easily in the general election,” Garcia said.

A similar pop-up PAC also spent heavily for progressive Matt Dunlap over state Sen. Joe Baldacci in Maine’s battleground 2nd District, which Trump won in 2024 and is open this cycle because moderate Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) opted not to seek reelection.

Ian Russell, a national Democratic strategist who is working on Baldacci’s race, said the GOP-linked ads could trick voters who don’t realize they aren’t coming from Dunlap’s campaign.

“They’re literally running a positive ad for Matt Dunlap,” Russell said. “They’re using his campaign logo. They’re using B-roll off of his YouTube page.”

That race is still uncalled as it goes to a ranked-choice count this week.

In recent years, some Democratic and Republican lawmakers have pushed for tightening campaign finance law, saying sources of funding should be more readily disclosed. But there have not been meaningful advances in campaign finance legislation.

Just last week, Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) introduced a bill that would require super PACs to disclose every large donation they receive in the final 20 days of an election — which would make it harder for pop-up PACs to hide their sources of funding.

“All this dark spending money is just skyrocketing,” Crow said in an interview. “Super PACs, corporate donations, pop-up PACs. It’s out of control and it’s getting worse every cycle.”

Politics

The man who runs the town between the stadiums

Published

2 hours ago

June 14, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

ARLINGTON, Texas – In the run-up to the 2026 World Cup, politicians around the country have complained they’re being asked to foot the bill for transportation and security, while sky-high ticket prices make it impossible for locals to attend the matches.

You won’t hear that argument from Jim Ross, the mayor of Arlington, Texas. His city has spent hundreds of millions on professional sports stadiums over the last three decades — including the NFL venue that’s been renamed Dallas Stadium as it prepares for the World Cup’s busiest schedule.

Voters have approved the spending three times, twice for baseball stadiums and once for the football stadium.

The community of 400,000 has hosted a World Series, a Super Bowl, the final four of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament and a Taylor Swift concert. If that’s not enough, there’s a Six Flags theme park and a water park near the stadiums.

Ross, a former Arlington police officer, spent part of his career providing security at baseball games. He later went to law school and was elected mayor in 2021 and 2026 as an independent (municipal elections in most of Texas are technically non-partisan). Ross said he became a soccer fan when his youngest daughter played the sport, watching FC Dallas in Major League Soccer.

He comes down squarely in favor of professional sports — and the hundreds of millions that the city has spent to subsidize them — arguing that AT&T Stadium alone provides $324 million in annual economic benefits to local businesses. And he’s not worried about the $8.5 million in World Cup-related expenses Arlington has racked up – he expects the state and federal governments will reimburse the city.

There are still critics. Game-day traffic around the stadiums can be a nightmare, and some residents question whether the city really really benefits from the public spending on sports venues.

And for fans, getting to the stadium can be a challenge. And Arlington is the largest city in the U.S. without a mass transit system, although the city sponsors a ride-share system.

The transportation agencies that serve Dallas and Fort Worth don’t extend into Arlington, but local officials cobbled together a system that will ferry fans to the stadium using a combination of a regional commuter rail and buses.

Driving to the games? Expect to pay hundreds of dollars for parking.

The first of six group-stage matches kicks off Sunday, with the Netherlands taking on Japan. Argentina, the defending World Cup champions, will play Austria on June 22 and Jordan on June 27.

Ross talked with Blue Light News about pros and cons of hosting professional sports, high ticket prices, transportation and other issues, along with his plans for the cup.

Does it irk you at all to have the stadium renamed for Dallas?

A: Listen, I love Dallas, they are great neighbors, but Arlington is my city, and we’re very proud of what we’ve done here in Arlington. Did I have a number of communications with FIFA about the naming of the stadium, and, and what it should be called, and shouldn’t be called – yeah.

The President of Mexico famously gave away her free ticket as a protest, the mayor of New York whooped and hollered about ticket prices, until FIFA put some relatively cheap tickets up for sale. Is that a concern for you, that regular folks are being priced out of the games?

It’s a concern for me that regular people are being priced out of games on all fronts. I mean, I’ll be candid, you, whether you go to a UFC fight, whether you go to a football game, baseball games, and all that stuff, it’s difficult.

I don’t set ticket prices for anything, anywhere. I certainly want everybody to have an opportunity to enjoy the games and to be a part of it, and I think there’s a number of avenues by which they can do that. (FIFA is giving away free tickets to veterans and first responders, and local charities have access to some tickets.)

Would you take the kind of risk that Mayor Monda Mamdani did — you know, jawboning and seeing if you could get lower price tickets for the fans here?

We’ve had discussions like that, with FIFA, not just ticket pricing.

If I had a city the size of New York, maybe we can get more people to listen to us on things. But we don’t, you know … we’re a smaller big city.

One of the other complaints that’s popped up around the country is, FIFA didn’t do cost sharing for security and other expenses this year. Has that been a problem for you?

We expect significant reimbursement from our federal and state partners on this, and there’s been money set aside to do just that. In fact, I was at the governor’s mansion last Monday with the mayor of Dallas, and when I was leaving there, Governor Abbott reassured me again. He was like, “Mayor, you call me if you need anything else from a public safety perspective, during the games.”

The other thing that’s popped up, you know, whether it’s the Olympics or the World Cup, and so forth, is whether big sporting events are a benefit for the host cities. Is it worth the city’s expense to have these stadiums out here and do these big events?

I’ll give you an example of just having AT&T (AT&T Stadium, the NFL venue where the Cup games will be held). AT&T gives an economic benefit to the city of Arlington of $324 million a year. That’s not the city of Arlington’s cash register ringing, that’s every small business around, their cash register ringing.

Another thing that’s been a problem around the country is transportation to the stadiums. Arlington is, famously, the biggest city in the country without a mass transit system.

A: Arlington doesn’t have a transit problem as much as North Texas has a transit problem.The problem is the transit authorities were developed to address transportation within certain regions, but not necessarily throughout the (whole) North Texas region.

The Dallas system moves people in and out of downtown Dallas, and the Fort Worth system moves them in and out of downtown Fort Worth?

Exactly right.

You worked the stadiums as a police officer – what did you learn about crowd control from that experience?

Crowds feed off of each other. Yeah, you know, if you take a small issue … and you handle it in a horrifically aggressive manner, you can spark a much bigger issue.

I think understanding crowds and the controlling of crowds is an art and a skill that takes highly trained people. I would argue that Arlington PD probably does it better than most, because we have more experience in it than almost any city around.

The Rangers won the World Series (in 2023), and we had over 700,000 people hit the streets in Arlington, and about 10 arrests were made with 700,000 people on the streets. I think that speaks volumes for how our PD handled the crowds.

Does having an international crowd change the dynamics at all?

The Netherlands have a tradition of doing a fan march, and that’s where they bring tens of 1000s of fans, and they march to the stadium. Not all of those fans will necessarily have tickets to get in, but that’s part of their tradition and their celebration, and all that.

So we’ve had to coordinate with the Netherlands and work with them on doing the fan march, talking to them about what is involved in that, and helping them understand here’s what the laws are here in Texas.

I’m probably going to go out there for the Netherlands fan march and participate with it, because culturally speaking, this is so important for Arlington.

And will they be waiving the open container laws during the fan march?

Ah, don’t get me lying.