Congress
Laura Loomer hammers Trump ally for backing Medicaid cuts
Far-right activist Laura Loomer is going after a prominent conservative health policy expert and former Trump administration official for his proposals to overhaul Medicaid — stoking larger intraparty tensions at a pivotal moment for negotiations over President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”
In a social media post Monday, Loomer called Brian Blase, the president of Paragon Health Institute, a “RINO Saboteur” for helping draft a letter circulated by 20 House conservatives that advocated for deep cuts to Medicaid in the GOP’s domestic policy megabill.
His role in writing the missive was first reported by Blue Light News.
“In a shocking betrayal of President Donald Trump’s unwavering commitment to America’s working-class families, and his promise to protect Medicaid, [CEO Brian Blase] … is spearheading a dangerous campaign to undermine the Republican Party’s midterm prospects,” Loomer said on X.
Fiscal hawks believe cuts to the safety net program will deliver necessary savings to finance President Donald Trump’s desired package of tax cuts and extensions, border security spending, energy policy and more. But Trump has also continued to insist there will be no provisions included in the bill that would result in cutting Medicaid benefits — though he hasn’t detailed how that might be the case.
Loomer accused Blase of “currently pressuring congressional Republicans to defy the President’s ironclad pledge to protect Medicaid — a program critical to the heartland voters who propelled Donald Trump to his election victories.”
Blase worked in Trump’s first administration as a special assistant to the president on the National Economic Council. He’s one of the most influential conservative health policy thinkers in Washington, frequently writing op-eds in the Wall Street Journal and publishing a mountain of policy papers pushing Medicaid reform.
In a statement Tuesday, Blase defended himself and his work.
“I am proud to have served President Trump for two and a half years at the White House, leading the implementation of his health care agenda,” Blase said “Paragon shares the president’s commitment to reducing waste, fraud, and abuse in government programs and reversing the harmful health policies of the Biden administration — like California’s $10 billion scheme to put illegal immigrants on Medicaid.”
A Paragon spokesperson said last week the group sent a list of Medicaid reform principles to policymakers and that it “It appears that the excellent letter by [Texas GOP Rep.] Chip Roy and colleagues incorporated some of our ideas.”
It’s significant that Loomer would make Blase a target: She has a history of crusading against people she sees as disloyal to Trump, having in the past personally persuaded the president to fire several top national security officials over their perceived lack of sufficient fealty.
The situation also speaks to the broader friction within the Republican Party between the moderate and the populist wings — which are wary of benefit cuts — and the more traditional conservative faction — bent on making major changes to safety-net programs.
The divide has threatened to imperil the package central to Trump’s agenda as Republicans are under immense pressure to find savings for the bill.
Roy and a handful of House Republicans who are in touch with Blase are full-steam ahead to force GOP leaders to pursue deeper cuts across Medicaid and other safety-net programs, which they argue need massive reforms to curb long-term spending.
Freedom Caucus members met Tuesday morning to discuss reconciliation and to try to push back on attacks that they’re gutting Medicaid, according to three Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter.
Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.
Rep. Lori Trahan on Wednesday unveiled a discussion draft for a bill that would make artificial intelligence developers liable when their products cause harm.
The legislation comes after OpenAI’s agents escaped containment and autonomously hacked into AI platform Hugging Face and accessed U.S. government websites.
The Clear Liability for Artificial Intelligence Misconduct Act aims to make it easier for those harmed by so-called rogue AI to bring claims against developers. Trahan’s bill does not preempt new state laws on AI liability — historically a prerequisite for attracting Republican support in the House.
“When someone breaks the law and hurts you, you can take them to court. That shouldn’t change just because the wrongdoer is an AI agent,” Trahan (D-Mass.) said in a statement. “Developers have already built systems capable of acting on their own and causing real damage. The CLAIM Act makes sure they answer for what their systems do.”
Legal experts have warned that existing laws require proof of intent or negligence, standards that can be difficult to show in court when AI models go rogue.
Trahan’s bill would ensure AI developers are unable to argue that their AI systems are incapable of intent. Instead, courts “would presume an AI system acted with the state of mind a person taking the same actions would have had.”
Trahan spokesperson Francis Grubar said work on the CLAIM Act began almost immediately after theJuly introduction of the FRONTIER Act, legislation with Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) that would grant the government power to restrict the deployment of AI models deemed to pose catastrophic risks. While that bill aims to prevent serious harms before they happen, Grubar said the CLAIM Act would address how to impose accountability for existing damages.
Unlike an AI liability proposal announced last week by Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Trahan’s legislation would not amend the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Grubar said the CLAIM Act would instead impose clearer liability on a broader range of harms, as well as autonomous or AI-enabled cyberattacks.
The CFFA, an anti-hacking law that bars individuals from accessing a computer without consent, requires proof of intent to hack into a computer system, which can’t be as easily applied to AI agents.
The Hugging Face incident, along with a flurry of other disclosed hacking incidents by rogue AI agents from OpenAI and other AI developers, has sparked a debate over how companies should be held legally liable for their AI systems.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, in an interview with Blue Light News’s Decoded podcast, said there should be a new “liability framework” to hold developers accountable for AI-powered cyberattacks. His comments come after White House officials like Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton, who was recently appointed as AI czar by President Donald Trump, previously said that existing product liability laws are sufficient for now in addressing AI’s risks.
Vice President JD Vance will take questions from Michigan voters in a CBS News town hall airing Oct. 17 as the Trump administration prepares a closing message to voters ahead of the midterms.
The town hall comes amid a blitz of campaign events for Vance and President Donald Trump as their party faces multiple headwinds that could cost them control of the House and Senate.
Michigan’s Senate contest between Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers has become one of the cycle’s closely watched battleground contests. Michigan also has several competitive House races and will elect a new governor for the first time in eight years.
Vance campaigned in Michigan with Rogers, gubernatorial nominee John James and Mike Bouchard Jr., the GOP nominee in the 10th Congressional District, at an Aug. 31 rally in Sterling Heights. Rep. Lisa McClain also appeared at the event.
The one-hour special, moderated by “CBS Evening News” anchor Tony Dokoupil, will be recorded earlier in the week. Vance and Dokoupil will discuss issues facing voters, including affordability, tariffs, immigration, health care, artificial intelligence, the war with Iran and the state of American democracy, according to CBS News.
The two were scheduled for a town hall interview in March, but the vice president postponed due to the war with Iran.
The vice president’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Sen. Maria Cantwell, the top Democrat on the Commerce Committee with vast jurisdiction over artificial intelligence policy, outlined six AI safety principles Wednesday morning — tenets she believes should underpin any legislation to stave off the greatest threats posed by the rapidly-evolving technology.
“To manage risks from advanced AI systems we need clear safety standards, continuous testing, and reporting of serious failures,” the Washington Democrat said in a statement. “America can lead the world in AI by building systems that are not only more capable, but safer and more secure.”
Cantwell’s framework would encompass six priority areas: enforceable safety standards for frontier models, continuous testing, disclosure and oversight, public-private partnerships, protection for children and workers and adherence to U.S.-led global standards.
To directly address risks posed by the technology, her framework would have federal experts at the National Institute of Standards and Technology and other agencies establish clear federal rules to address harms, with specialized standards for open-source AI models to reduce risks of catastrophic misuse.
The senator is also recommending that the federal government provide developers with guidance on how to accelerate U.S. leadership on AI without sacrificing basic safety protocols.
On testing, Cantwell argues the government and independent experts should provide constant oversight and “continually scrutinize and stress test covered AI models,” particularly when sensitive information or secure facilities are involved.
She also says AI systems must have built-in safeguards to ensure they halt self-modification that could bypass safety controls. And she states that advanced models should not be released until they have undergone an independent, comprehensive audit — similar to outside auditors examining a company’s financial statements.
Cantwell, a former tech executive, has for years pursued similar priorities. But her new framework comes ahead of a midterm election that could return control of the Senate to Democrats, handing Cantwell back of the Commerce Committee gavel.
It also comes as lawmakers are under pressure to regulate the AI industry but are showing few signs that they will be able to reach consensus, across the aisle or even within their own party.
Senators had hoped for hearings, markups and briefings on AI legislation before leaving Washington until after the November elections, but little progress was made. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the current Commerce Committee chair, has continued to say he intends to hold a markup on AI-related bills but has punted multiple times, saying senators have yet to reach agreement on any bipartisan measure.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) have been trying to cut a deal on legislation to prevent and contain catastrophic risk from runaway AI technology, but bill text has so far failed to materialize.
Cantwell’s approach laid out Wednesday morning would be stricter and more comprehensive than what Thune and Klobuchar are expected to ultimately produce, based on similar legislation they have offered in the past.
Her approach of “constant oversight and vigilance” would also serve as a contrast to that of GOP leaders, who have consistently called for a “light touch” regulatory regime.
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words