Connect with us

INTERNACIONAL

Teenage cancer patient’s final fight becomes law as House passes landmark pediatric bill

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A teenage girl who spent her final years advocating for young people battling cancer is forever memorialized in history, thanks to a key bill passed by the House of Representatives.

Advertisement

Mikaela Naylon was just 16 when she died five years after being diagnosed with osteosarcoma, a rare form of bone cancer.

Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, who helped lead the landmark legislation that became her namesake, said Mikaela spent much of that time fighting to give fellow children a chance to survive cancer.

He told Fox News Digital that he viewed childhood cancer patients as «the best advocates» for their cause, calling them his «better angels.»

Advertisement

TRUMP SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDER TO HARNESS AI IN FIGHT AGAINST CHILDHOOD CANCERS

The House of Representatives memorialized Mikaela Naylon on Monday after she passed away following a five-year battle with osteosarcoma, a rare form of bone cancer. (Naylon Family)

«Mikaela was a great example of that,» McCaul said. «She was very sick. She’d just undergone radiation and chemotherapy. She wasn’t feeling very well, and I could tell. But she still made the effort to come to Washington, to go to members’ offices and advocate for the legislation.»

Advertisement

The Mikaela Naylon Give Kids A Chance Act is aimed at expanding children’s access to existing cancer therapy trials, as well as incentivizing development of treatments and solutions for pediatric cancer.

It reauthorizes funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to support pediatric disease research through fiscal year 2027, and extends the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) ability to expedite review of drugs aimed at helping certain pediatric illnesses.

FORMER NBA STAR TEAMS UP WITH GOP LAWMAKER TO HELP YOUNG CHILDREN SUFFERING FROM STUTTERING DISORDER

Advertisement

«It’s probably one of the most rewarding things I’ve done is to not only draw awareness to childhood cancer by forming the [Childhood Cancer Caucus] and then having an annual summit, but to be able to pass legislation that results in saving children’s lives. I don’t think there’s anything more important than that,» McCaul said.

Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas

Rep. Mike McCaul, R-Texas, walks off the floor after the House of Representatives failed to elect a new Speaker of the House on the first round of votes at the U.S. Capitol Building on Oct. 17, 2023. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

His bill passed the House unanimously on Monday, with both Republicans and Democrats speaking out in strong support for the legislation.

Mikaela’s family was in attendance to watch both its passage and the speeches lawmakers gave in favor of it.

Advertisement

«Nothing will take the place of her. But it helped fill kind of a void, an emptiness they have right now. And they’re very proud of that, that her legacy is carried on through this legislation,» McCaul, who also gave the Naylon family a tour of the U.S. Capitol, said.

Mikaela’s parents Kassandra and Doug, and her brother Ayden, told Fox News Digital that she had «faced every day with hope, purpose and a fierce determination to make the world better for the kids who would come after her.»

Capitol Building

The U.S. Capitol Building pictured at sunset on Jan. 30, 2025. (Emma Woodhead/Fox News Digital)

«She believed that all children, no matter how rare their diagnosis, deserve access to the most promising treatments and a real chance at life. This legislation reflects that mission,» the Naylon family told Fox News Digital.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

They thanked McCaul as well as Reps. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., and Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., for championing the bill, as well as advocacy groups who also helped shepherd it forward.

«Their commitment ensures that Mikaela‘s voice, and the voices of so many brave children like her, will forever be heard in the halls of Congress,» the family said.

Advertisement

house of representatives politics,health,politics,cancer

INTERNACIONAL

El ataque Irán: escaso apoyo en Estados Unidos a la ofensiva militar lanzada por Donald Trump contra el régimen de los ayatollahs

Published

on


El ataque de Estados Unidos e Israel contra objetivos en Irán ejecutado desde el sábado no encuentra por ahora apoyo entre los estadounidenses, según los primeros sondeos confeccionados tras la “Operación Furia Epica” lanzada por el presidente Donald Trump, que tiene el riesgo de prolongarse en un año crucial en el que se vota para las legislativas.

Según consignó una encuesta de Reuters/Ipsos iniciada tras el inicio de los ataques, apenas un 27% de los estadounidenses apoya los bombardeos, mientras que 43% los desaprueba y 29% dice no estar seguro. El dato más significativo no es solo la falta de consenso, sino el escepticismo generalizado en un año atravesado por las elecciones del 3 de noviembre, donde Trump pone en juego su respaldo legislativo y corre el riesgo de perder la Cámara de Representantes, lo que complicaría el final de su mandato.

Advertisement

Otro sondeo de SSRS para la cadena CNN realizado tras el lanzamiento de la ofensiva señaló que casi seis de cada diez estadounidenses desaprueban estas acciones militares y temen que se produzca un conflicto militar a largo plazo.

Además, el 60% dijo que no cree que Trump tenga un plan claro para manejar la situación y el 62% opinó que debería obtener la aprobación del Congreso para cualquier acción militar futura.

La encuesta de Reuters mostró que el 56% de los estadounidenses piensa que Trump, que también ha ordenado ataques en Venezuela, Siria y Nigeria en los últimos meses, está “demasiado dispuesto a usar la fuerza militar” para avanzar los intereses estadounidenses.

Advertisement

La gran mayoría de los demócratas —el 87%— compartían esta opinión, al igual que el 23% de los republicanos y el 60% de las personas que no se identifican con ninguno de los dos partidos políticos. Este último dato es relevante porque el de los independientes es el electorado que suele definir las elecciones de medio término.

Las encuestas cerraron antes de que el ejército estadounidense anunciara el domingo las primeras bajas popias en la operación. Al menos cuatro militares han muerto y cinco más han resultado gravemente heridos desde los ataques, que sumieron a Oriente Medio en un nuevo conflicto impredecible. Trump prometió “vengar” la muerte de los militares, pero advirtió que “lamentablemente habrá más víctimas estadounidenses” en una guerra que estima que se extendería por cuatro semanas.

Mientras que el 55% de los republicanos dijo aprobar los ataques y el 13% desaprobaba, la encuesta de Reuters/Ipsos encontró que el 42% del partido de Trump dijo que sería menos probable que apoyaran la campaña contra Irán si esto provoca que «tropas estadounidenses en Oriente Medio sean asesinadas o heridas».

Advertisement

En las legislativas la política exterior rara vez es el principal motor del voto, salvo en escenarios de guerra prolongada o crisis con bajas estadounidenses. Pero sí puede moldear percepciones sobre liderazgo, estabilidad y prioridades.

Para Trump, el riesgo político no es tanto el ataque en sí como una eventual escalada. Si el conflicto se amplía, hay un número considerable de víctimas estadounidenses o se disparan los precios del petróleo —con impacto directo en la inflación— el costo político podría crecer rápidamente.

Históricamente, los presidentes pueden beneficiarse de un breve “rally around the flag” (agruparse alrededor de la bandera), o una suba de popularidad ante un ofensiva de este tipo, pero ese efecto suele ser efímero si no hay resultados claros o si el conflicto se prolonga.

Advertisement

«El riesgo político depende del resultado», dijo el estratega republicano de Michigan Jason Roe a Político. «Si rompemos Irán sin que lleguen ataques terroristas a Estados Unidos ni daño a aliados en la región, será una victoria política para Trump. … Si esto se convierte en un conflicto prolongado, o acaba con tropas sobre el terreno, será un problema».

El recuerdo de la invasión a Irak

Puede servir la comparación con la invasión a Irak en 2003. En ese momento, bajo la presidencia de George W. Bush, el apoyo público inicial fue ampliamente mayoritario. Encuestas de entonces mostraban niveles de respaldo superiores al 60% para la acción militar, impulsados por el clima posterior al 11-S y la narrativa sobre armas de destrucción masiva.

Advertisement

Sin embargo, ese respaldo comenzó a erosionarse a medida que la guerra se prolongó y no aparecieron las armas prometidas. Para 2005-2006, con miles de bajas estadounidenses y un conflicto empantanado, la opinión pública se había vuelto mayoritariamente crítica. Las elecciones legislativas de 2006 terminaron con una fuerte derrota republicana y el control demócrata de la Cámara de Representantes, en buena medida como reacción al desgaste de Irak.

Un análisis de los primeros días tras los ataques muestra que el presidente enfrenta embates en tres frentes:

Advertisement

1) Constitucional, porque legisladores de la oposición demócrata sostienen que el uso de la fuerza debió pasar por el Congreso.

2) Estratégico, ya que analistas advierten sobre el riesgo de escalada regional.

3) Electoral y económico porque cualquier efecto sobre interrupción de cadena de suministro o combustibles, mercados o inflación puede erosionar apoyo en distritos competitivos.

Advertisement

4) Interno, porque su propio partido republicano, que ha venido mostrando grietas en varios temas como aranceles, no está firmemente encolumnado tras la ofensiva. Han surgido voces disidentes incluso desde el mundo MAGA, que siente que con el involucramiento en tantos conflictos externos Trump ha traicionado su promesa de “America first”.

De hecho, alrededor del 45% de los encuestados, incluidos el 34% de los republicanos y el 44% de los independientes, dijeron que serían menos propensos a apoyar la campaña contra Irán si los precios del combustible o del petróleo aumentaran en Estados Unidos.

Sobre todas las cosas, los datos de las encuestas de los últimos meses continúan mostrando que las principales preocupaciones de los estadounidenses están fronteras adentro: siguen siendo la economía, el costo de vida, la inmigración y el acceso a servicios básicos. La inflación, aunque moderada respecto a picos anteriores, es una ansiedad persistente en la clase media. El empleo y los salarios pesan más en la decisión de voto que los conflictos en el extranjero, salvo que estos impacten directamente en el bolsillo o en la seguridad nacional inmediata.

Advertisement

En ese sentido, el efecto político del ataque dependerá menos del gesto militar inicial y más de lo que ocurra después: si hay represalias, si sube el combustible, si se movilizan tropas o si, como prometió Trump, el conflicto se resuelve pronto sin demasiadas bajas.

Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Trump sends official notification to Congress on strikes against Iran

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump on Monday sent an official notification to Congress about the U.S. strikes against Iran, in which he attempted to justify the military action in the now expanding conflict in the Middle East.

Advertisement

In a letter obtained by FOX News, Trump told Senate President Pro Tempore Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, that «no U.S. ground forces were used in these strikes» and that the mission «was planned and executed in a manner designed to minimize civilian casualties, deter future attacks, and neutralize Iran’s malign activities.»

This comes after joint U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran on Saturday as part of Operation Epic Fury, triggering a response from Tehran and a wider conflict in the region. The strikes killed the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other military leaders.

President Donald Trump on Monday sent an official notification to Congress about the U.S. strikes against Iran. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Advertisement

Trump wrote that it is not yet possible to know the full scope of military operations against Iran and that U.S. forces are prepared to take potential further action.

«Although the United States desires a quick and enduring peace, not possible at this time to know the full scope and duration of military operations that may be necessary,» Trump wrote. «As such, United States forces remain postured to take further action, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats and attacks upon the United States or its allies and partners, and ensure the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ceases being a threat to the United States, its allies, and the international community.»

«I directed this military action consistent with my responsibility to protect Americans and United States interests both at home and abroad and in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests,» he added. «I acted pursuant to my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive to conduct United States foreign relations.»

Advertisement
A person watches a smoke plume rise in the distant in Tehran, Iran on March 2, 2026.

A general view of Tehran with smoke visible in the distance after explosions were reported in the city, on March 2, 2026, in Tehran, Iran. (Contributor/Getty Images)

Trump said he was «providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution,» as some Republican and Democrat lawmakers attempt to restrain the president’s military action, which they affirm is unconstitutional without congressional approval.

The president also accused Iran of being among the largest state sponsors of terrorism in the world and purported that the «Iranian regime continues to seek the means to possess and employ nuclear weapons,» even after the White House said in June that precision strikes at the time «obliterated» Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.

US SURGES FORCES TO MIDDLE EAST AS PENTAGON WARNS IRAN FIGHT ‘WILL TAKE SOME TIME’

Advertisement
Iranian demonstrators protest against the U.S.

A person holds an image of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as Iranian demonstrators protest against the U.S.-Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, Feb. 28, 2026.  (Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«As I previously communicated to the Congress, Iran remains one of the largest, if not the largest, state-sponsors of terrorism in the world,» Trump said in the letter on Monday. «Despite the success of Operation MIDNIGHT HAMMER, the Iranian regime continues to seek the means to possess and employ nuclear weapons. Its array of ballistic, cruise, anti-ship, and other missiles pose a direct threat to and are attacking United States forces, commercial vessels, and civilians, as well as those of our allies and partners.»

«Despite my Administration’s repeated efforts to achieve a diplomatic solution to Iran’s malign behavior, the threat to the United States and its allies and partners became untenable,» he continued.

Advertisement

Fox News’ Tyler Olson contributed to this report.

Related Article

Trump admin warned lawmakers Israel was 'determined to act with or without us' before massive Iran strikes

war with iran,iran,middle east,conflicts,donald trump,politics

Advertisement
Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Iran nuclear talks ‘didn’t pass the smell test’ before Trump launched strikes, says Vance

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Vice President JD Vance confirmed Monday that negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program collapsed after U.S. officials concluded Tehran’s claims «did not pass the smell test,» prompting President Donald Trump to authorize Operation Epic Fury.

Advertisement

Speaking on «Jesse Watters Primetime,» Vance said U.S. envoys — including Steve Witkoff, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Jared Kushner — had conducted rounds of «deliberate» talks in Geneva with the Iranian delegation.

The discussions were aimed at curbing Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief and averting a broader conflict, he said, but ultimately broke down.

«But the Iranians would come back to us and they’d say, ‘Well, you know, having enrichment for civilian purposes, for energy purposes, is a matter of national pride,’» Vance said.

Advertisement

Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi, President Donald Trump’s Special Representative for the Middle East, Steve Witkoff and U.S. negotiator Jared Kushner meet ahead of the U.S.-Iran talks, in Muscat, the capital of Oman, on Feb. 06, 2026.  (Oman Foreign Ministry/Anadolu via Getty Images)

«And so we would say, ‘OK, that’s interesting, but why are you building your enrichment facilities 70 feet underground? And why are you enriching to a level that’s way beyond civilian enrichment and is only useful if your goal is to build a nuclear bomb?’» he said.

«Nobody objects to the Iranians being able to build medical isotopes; the objection is these enrichment facilities that are only useful for building a nuclear weapon,» Vance clarified.

Advertisement

«It just doesn’t pass the smell test for you to say that you want enrichment for medical isotopes, while at the same time trying to build a facility 70 to 80 feet underground,» he explained.

TRUMP DECLARES ‘I GOT HIM BEFORE HE GOT ME’ AFTER IRAN’S SUPREME LEADER KILLED IN STRIKE

A missile being launched from the deck of a U.S. Navy ship into the sky.

This image from video provided by U.S. Central Command shows a missile being launched from a U.S. Navy ship in support of Operation Epic Fury on Saturday, Feb. 28, 2026. (U.S. Central Command via AP)

Vance spoke as Operation Epic Fury ended its third day. Launched on Feb. 28, U.S. and Israeli forces carried out coordinated precision strikes deep inside Iran aimed at crippling Tehran’s missile arsenal and nuclear infrastructure.

Advertisement

A key issue had been Iran enriching uranium to high levels, including material around 60% purity — a fraction of weapons-grade but far above limits set under the 2015 nuclear deal — keeping international alarm high over proliferation risks.

«We destroyed Iran’s ability to build a nuclear weapon during President Trump’s term,» Vance told Watters. «We set them back substantially. But I think the President was looking for the long haul,» he said.

«Trump was looking for Iran to make a significant long-term commitment that they would never build a nuclear weapon, that they would not pursue the ability to be on the brink of a nuclear weapon.»

Advertisement

FIRES RAGE AT IRAN’S BANDAR ABBAS NAVAL HEADQUARTERS, STRAIT OF HORMUZ TRAFFIC STALLED

Vice President JD Vance gestures while speaking in front of American flags

Vice President JD Vance speaks with Breitbart News Washington bureau chief Matthew Boyle at Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium, Nov. 20, 2025, in Washington.  (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)

«He wanted to make sure that Iran could never have a nuclear weapon, and that would require fundamentally a change in mindset from the Iranian regime.»

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

«The President is not going to rest until he accomplishes that all-important objective of ensuring that Iran can’t have a nuclear weapon, not just for the next few years, not just because we obliterated for dough or some other.»

«There’s just no way that Donald Trump is going to allow this country to get into a multiyear conflict with no clear end in sight and no clear objective,» Vance added while describing that the administration would prefer to see «a friendly regime in Iran, a stable country, a country that’s willing to work with the United States.»

Advertisement

Related Article

Why Trump invoked regime change in attacking Iran, and the media must learn from past mistakes



war with iran,ali khamenei,donald trump,jd vance,iran

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tendencias