INTERNACIONAL
Lawmakers reveal whether Americans should pick up the Medicaid tab for illegal immigrants
California has a $6.2 billion budget deficit for Medicaid services, and Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s latest budget proposal projects the state will spend a staggering $8.4 billion to cover Medi-Cal, the state’s version of Medicaid, for illegal immigrants in 2024-2025.
Two new reports by the Bureau of Economic Analysis found the U.S. economy has become increasingly reliant on government handouts. Entitlements are growing faster than tax receipts and wages. Private wages grew by $67 billion in early 2025, while government payments to recipients surged by $162 billion.
In North Carolina and California, growth in Medicaid benefits was the leading contributor to increased personal income. Coverage for undocumented immigrants under California’s $6.2 billion budget gap for Medi-Cal is contributing to the surge in personal income.
Fox News Digital asked lawmakers on Capitol Hill if taxpayers should have to pick up the Medicaid tab for illegal immigrants. Popular progressive senators Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; Michael Bennett, D-Colo.; and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., refused to say whether illegal immigrants are entitled to Medicaid benefits funded by U.S. taxpayers.
NEWSOM ASKS FOR NEARLY ANOTHER $3B FOR STATE HEALTH PROGRAM OVERWHELMED BY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
Popular progressives, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., right, refused to say whether illegal immigrants are entitled to Medicaid benefits funded by U.S. taxpayers when asked by Fox News Digital. (Fox News Digital )
Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, who was tapped by moderate Republican Gov. Mike DeWine to replace Vice President JD Vance in the Senate this year, told Fox News Digital it should be illegal for Americans to fund healthcare for illegal immigrants.
NEWSOM CONCEDES SKYROCKETING HEALTHCARE COSTS FOR ILLEGALS ARE ‘PARTIAL’ CONTRIBUTOR TO MEDICAID PROBLEM
«That cost should be transferred back to the state of California if that’s the decision that they made. If people are here illegally, the taxpayers of this country should not be footing the bill for their healthcare when we can barely pay our own bills here in this country and people are going without. So, this is an astonishing thing that California would decide to do. Clearly, the leaders of that state are tone deaf because that’s not what the American public wants,» Husted said.
Rep. Maria Salazar, R-Fla., who serves on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and on Small Business, said she doesn’t support any federal funding for federal programs for illegal immigrants.
«We need to see those numbers,» Salazar said. «I’m not in favor of any undocumented migrants in the United States using any type of federal funding or federal programs, because if you are not documented, you cannot be using any of the government or the federal government services.
«But I need to know what are the numbers. I do believe that in construction, hospitality and agriculture, the illegals, the undocumented are giving a lot to the economy.»
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, a fiscal conservative who serves on economic and commerce committees, said programs like Medicaid are solely for U.S. citizens.
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, questions President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Secretary of State, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., during his Senate Foreign Relations confirmation hearing at Dirksen Senate Office Building Jan. 15, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
«They’re certainly not there for illegal aliens. And this is costing the American people a lot of money. So, yeah, that is a problem, and it’s one we need to fix,» Lee said.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said he has questions about the policy and wants to know more about the substance of Medicaid benefits for undocumented immigrants and «whether it applies in emergency situations where somebody’s life may be at stake.»
Another Northeast Democrat, Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J., said he is more concerned «we’re not taking away Medicaid from people with disabilities, seniors that need long-term care» before discussions begin on expanding resources.
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., during a campaign event with Donald Trump, not pictured, at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee Nov. 1, 2024. (Jim Vondruska/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said it could «threaten the benefits for disabled children.»
Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., a Trump loyalist, said California made a «conscious decision» to allow taxpayers to pick up the tab on healthcare for illegal immigrants.
«They fully realize and appreciate that the federal government does not have one single penny to spend until the taxpayer sends that penny into the treasury,» Blackburn said.
Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., said California needs to realize the impact its policies have on other states.
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference Oct. 6, 2022, in San Francisco. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
«A lot of people in Wyoming are living paycheck to paycheck. They’re struggling to pay for things they used to be able to take for granted, like food and gasoline. And it’s absolutely wrong that one state can expand its benefits to illegals, and my state has to pay for it,» Lummis said.
«Cost increases to the Medicaid program are driven by multiple factors, including expansion, increased enrollment for all populations and pharmacy costs,» a spokesperson for Newsom said when reached by Fox News Digital for comment.
Newsom’s office emphasized that Medi-Cal covers approximately 15 million Californians, which accounts for more than one-third of the state’s population. Program costs have more than doubled in the past decade, according to the governor’s office.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Given Medi-Cal’s size, Newsom’s office said even a 1-2% increase in drug prices or hospital visits could mean billions of dollars in additional costs for the program, and states across the country and political spectrum are facing their own rising Medicaid expenses, specifically Pennsylvania and Indiana.
Politics,California,House Of Representatives,Senate,Gavin Newsom
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Trump administration on Monday said it has started a new process to block Harvard University’s eligibility for federal grant money and its ability to enter into new federal contracts — yet another salvo from Trump officials as they continue to target the nation’s oldest and wealthiest university.
The Department of Health and Human Services notified Harvard President Alan Garber in a letter Monday that it has initiated the debarment process for the university — a move that would render the school ineligible to receive federal grant money or enter into new federal contracts.
HHS officials cited allegations of antisemitism brought against the university and what Trump officials argued is the school’s failure to comply with recommendations from a federal antisemitism task force earlier this year.
FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ATTEMPT TO FREEZE MORE THAN $2 BILLION IN HARVARD FUNDS
Harvard President Alan Garber addresses the crowd during the university’s 373rd commencement ceremony. (Craig F. Walker/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
The familiar refrain has been at the center of a months-long legal fight between Trump officials and Harvard lawyers, who sparred over efforts to comply with recommendations from a federal task force earlier this year.
Trump officials have argued the school has not done enough to comply with the task force recommendations; Harvard has countered that the effort amounts to an unconstitutional «pressure campaign» from the administration to influence and exert control over its academic programs.
It’s unclear how long the debarment process will take, and these efforts are often preceded by a shorter-term period of suspension, according to data from HHS’s Office for Civil Rights.
Still, if successful, the effort could threaten billions of dollars in funding for Harvard at an already vulnerable time for the university.
The debarment process, if successful, could eventually «blacklist» Harvard from doing business with the government in any capacity — including blocking its ability to accept billions in federal research funds and to sign new contracts with federal agencies.
CONTINUED COURT FIGHTS COULD PUT HARVARD IN UNWINNABLE POSITION VS TRUMP
Graduates celebrate during Harvard University’s 374th commencement ceremony on May 29, 2025. (Craig F. Walker/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
Harvard’s lawyers have reportedly struggled to negotiate with the Trump administration in ongoing settlement talks, weeks after a judge in Boston sided with Harvard and ordered the administration to restore billions in funding to the school.
The news comes just weeks after a federal judge in Boston sided with Harvard in ruling that the Trump administration had acted illegally in freezing more than $2.2 billion in federal research funding that had been allocated to Harvard.
In an 84-page summary judgment earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs rejected the Trump administration’s assertion that it was attempting to strip Harvard of billions in federal funding due to allegations of antisemitism, or the university’s failure to comply with the recommendations of a federal antisemitism task force.
«A review of the administrative record makes it difficult to conclude anything other than that defendants used antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country’s premier universities,» Burroughs said in her decision.
HARVARD PRESIDENT SAYS HE HAS ‘NO CHOICE’ BUT TO FIGHT TRUMP ADMINISTRATION
Hundreds of graduates walk out of Harvard’s 2024 commencement in Harvard Yard to call attention to the plight of Palestinians on May 23, 2024, in Cambridge, Mass. (Craig F. Walker/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
Harvard lawyers sued the Trump administration in April over its attempts to freeze billions in federal funding and block other grant money — which they argued in court amounts to an unconstitutional «pressure campaign» designed to influence and exert control over its academic programs.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The New York Times reported that the Trump administration is likely to appeal the ruling, though the time frame for the appeal and the next steps for challenging the summary judgment remain unclear.
politics,donald trump,white house,national security,education,federal courts
Chile avanza silenciosamente en un proyecto de infraestructura digital que podría tener implicaciones profundas para la soberanía de datos en América Latina. Se trata del llamado “Chile–China Express”, un cable submarino propuesto que conectaría las costas chilenas con Hong Kong. Aunque a simple vista podría parecer un emprendimiento técnico más en la expansión global de las telecomunicaciones, lo cierto es que este plan se diferencia por la opacidad con la que se lo ha manejado y por los riesgos que se desprenden de la legislación china en materia de seguridad cibernética e inteligencia. La discusión trasciende los límites de Chile, pues cualquier país que interconecte sus redes con ese tendido quedaría expuesto a las obligaciones que empresas chinas mantienen con el Estado de Pekín.
La pregunta de fondo es por qué Chile necesitaría otro cable transpacífico cuando ya se encuentra en marcha el Humboldt, un proyecto desarrollado por Google junto con la empresa estatal Desarrollo País y la Oficina de Correos y Telecomunicaciones de la Polinesia Francesa. El Humboldt, cuya traza conecta Valparaíso con Sídney pasando por Tahití, fue anunciado públicamente, con cronograma, inversión y socios claramente identificados.
En contraste, el Chile–China Express aparece en registros de la industria como una iniciativa “en progreso” a cargo de Inchcape/ISS, con escasa información disponible sobre su financiamiento, consorcio y términos contractuales. La ausencia de convocatoria abierta y el bajo nivel de transparencia constituyen la primera señal de alarma.
El problema central es que no se trata de un cable cualquiera, sino de un proyecto que coloca a China en posición de controlar nodos de transmisión estratégica. Desde 2017, China cuenta con un marco legal que obliga a empresas y ciudadanos a cooperar con los servicios de inteligencia. La Ley de Ciberseguridad (CSL) establece requisitos de almacenamiento local, auditoría y transferencia de datos para operadores de infraestructura crítica.
A su vez, la Ley de Inteligencia Nacional exige la colaboración activa de cualquier empresa, dentro y fuera del país, con las actividades de inteligencia del Estado. En la práctica, esto significa que datos que circulen por infraestructura gestionada por empresas chinas pueden ser puestos a disposición de Pekín sin que los usuarios ni los Estados interconectados tengan forma de impedirlo.
En el caso de Chile, la vulnerabilidad no se limita a su territorio. Argentina, Brasil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Perú o Ecuador podrían ver parte de su tráfico enrutado por el Chile–China Express. La naturaleza transnacional de los cables convierte a este proyecto en un asunto regional y no solo doméstico. Así como las decisiones de endeudamiento de Ecuador en la década pasada tuvieron consecuencias en toda la cuenca del Pacífico, pues influyeron en los flujos de petróleo hacia Asia–Pacífico, el control chino de la infraestructura digital en Chile podría comprometer la seguridad de datos de millones de latinoamericanos.
La opacidad no es nueva en los acuerdos con China. Un estudio de AidData analizó más de un centenar de contratos de deuda con países de América Latina y África y concluyó que incluyen cláusulas de confidencialidad extraordinarias, restricciones de divulgación y garantías de pago por fuera de los mecanismos multilaterales como el Club de París. Infobae documentó cómo, en Ecuador, los préstamos chinos estaban respaldados en la entrega de crudo y contenían condiciones poco usuales que limitaban la transparencia. El patrón es claro: la política exterior china recurre al secretismo como herramienta para blindar sus intereses.
A la dimensión jurídica se suma la dimensión de inteligencia. Informes de Safeguard Defenders han documentado la existencia de más de 50 “estaciones de policía” chinas en el extranjero, incluidas algunas en América Latina. Estas oficinas, presentadas como centros de servicios para ciudadanos chinos en el exterior, han sido denunciadas por operar como mecanismos de vigilancia y coerción sobre la diáspora, en ocasiones presionando a personas a regresar a China bajo amenazas. Varios gobiernos de Europa y América han abierto investigaciones. El cable submarino, en ese contexto, no puede analizarse de manera aislada: forma parte de un ecosistema de herramientas de control extraterritorial que combina infraestructura digital, presencia física y presión diplomática.
El discurso de las autoridades chinas suele presentarse en clave de beneficio económico inmediato. Inversiones en plantas industriales, promesas de generación de empleo y transferencia de tecnología acompañan a estos proyectos. Pero la experiencia chilena muestra que muchas de esas promesas se han quedado en el papel. En 2021, se anunciaron inversiones de la farmacéutica Sinovac en Antofagasta y Santiago, así como proyectos de BYD y Tsingshan para instalar plantas de baterías de litio. Años después, ninguno de esos planes se ha concretado plenamente; algunos han sido suspendidos, otros retirados. Reuters y El País han confirmado que al menos dos de esas iniciativas fueron canceladas o congeladas.
En contraste, los proyectos gestionados con empresas occidentales han mostrado mayor transparencia en su ejecución. El Humboldt de Google, con cronograma claro y participación de entidades estatales chilenas, ilustra una forma distinta de negociar, más cercana a los estándares internacionales de gobernanza. Esto no significa que los cables controlados por actores occidentales estén exentos de riesgos, pero sí que sus condiciones contractuales han sido más accesibles para el escrutinio público.
El debate sobre el Chile–China Express toca además un punto crucial: la gobernanza digital. Al igual que en las decisiones de endeudamiento externo, las democracias deben decidir si aceptan acuerdos que limitan su capacidad de control sobre sectores estratégicos. La transparencia es el primer requisito para tomar decisiones informadas, y su ausencia es el síntoma más evidente de que lo que está en juego no es solo conectividad, sino soberanía.
La Ley de Ciberseguridad de China (CSL) obliga a los operadores de infraestructura crítica a almacenar localmente los datos y a cooperar con las autoridades chinas en caso de solicitudes de seguridad nacional. Esto incluye el derecho del Estado a realizar auditorías y requerir la entrega de información.
En cambio, La Ley de Inteligencia Nacional es una norma que complementa la CSL al exigir que cualquier organización o ciudadano “apoye, asista y coopere” con la labor de inteligencia del Estado. La ley no distingue entre actividades domésticas y en el extranjero, lo que amplía el alcance de la obligación.
El Humboldt conecta Chile con Oceanía con socios identificados. El Chile–China Express aparece como proyecto en progreso con destino Hong Kong. La duplicidad de rutas hacia Asia, una con Estados Unidos y otra con China como actores principales, refleja la competencia geopolítica por controlar la infraestructura digital en la región.
El trasfondo es geoestratégico: para Pekín, la infraestructura digital es la nueva columna vertebral de su influencia global. El Decimocuarto Plan Quinquenal de Informatización Nacional lo establece de forma explícita: China aspira a dominar las telecomunicaciones mundiales, no solo como proveedor de equipos, sino como operador de los canales de transmisión . El cable Chile–China Express, más allá de su utilidad comercial, se inscribe en ese objetivo.
INTERNACIONAL
‘Kamala is brat’: Harris reveals how scripted her failed 2024 campaign was with star-studded events
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
It took 27 drafts and coaching from «Barbie» director Greta Gerwig to perfect former Vice President Kamala Harris’ National Democratic Convention speech, Harris revealed in her book «107 Days.»
Harris’ book has pulled back the curtain on her short-lived presidential campaign, unveiling the celebrity cast of characters who boosted her campaign in public and behind the scenes.
«At 5:29 p.m., staff alerted me that the British singer-songwriter Charli XCX had posted: Kamala is brat. Brat was the title of her latest album and identified me with her brand: edgy, imperfect, confident, embracing. From then on, our rebranded Kamala HQ social media site was awash in her signature color, lime green, and posts supporting us used that color,» Harris wrote in her book, detailing the night former President Joe Biden suspended his reelection campaign.
As well as Charli XCX’s signature chartreuse filling Harris’ timeline, her presidential campaign quickly gained traction online as videos of Harris set to songs like Chappell Roan’s «Femininomenon» circulated on TikTok. But social media wasn’t the only medium Harris was honing in on, revealing in her new book that an Oscar-nominated director coached her through DNC speech prep.
KAMALA HARRIS MENTIONS MICHELLE OBAMA ONLY THREE TIMES IN 300-PAGE BOOK. HERE’S WHAT SHE SAID
Former Vice President Kamala Harris released her book «107 Days» about her short-lived presidential campaign on Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2025. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
«I did twenty-seven drafts of my convention speech. I knew what was riding on it,» Harris said in her book.
Harris admitted that Gerwig, the «Little Women» and «Barbie» director, helped her rehearse. «When you speak about your family, see their faces,» Harris recalled that Gerwig had advised.
OBAMA, PELOSI, OTHER TOP DEMS RESISTED INSTANT HARRIS ENDORSEMENT CITING NEED TO ‘EARN IT,’ ‘HIKING’ EXCUSE
The former vice president also admitted to working with a professional voice coach.
«She was very serious about her job, but she wanted me to stand there and emit animal noises,» Harris said, explaining that she enlisted her team to join her in making «weird hums, grunts, and trills» to prepare for the DNC speech.
Musical artist Beyonce, right, and former Vice President Kamala Harris, left, embrace on stage during a campaign rally on Friday, Oct. 25, 2024, in Houston. (AP Photo/Annie Mulligan)
In the book, Harris said delegates at the convention wore T-shirts paying homage to her career or dissing President Donald Trump, and she said merchandise referencing Charli XCX’s «Kamala is brat» message was everywhere.
Weeks later with just a few days until Election Day, when Harris appeared on a podcast episode of «The Checkup with Doctor Mike,» Harris lamented that she was «ambushed by an unscheduled in-depth interview, with no notice, at the end of a nineteen-hour day.»
Harris said her team «knew I insisted on being well prepped, to inquire into the style of the show, the nature of the interviews the host did, the areas of likely questioning.» She said her team failed to give her a «briefing sheet so I could knock it out of the park.»
«What the f— was that?» the Democratic nominee said she asked her staff after the interview, while Grammy-winning artist Cardi B was delivering an introductory speech for Harris at a rally in Wisconsin.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris is seen as a guest on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on July 31, 2025. (Scott Kowalchyk/CBS via Getty Images)
During Harris’ first rally in Atlanta after Biden dropped out of the race, she said Megan The Stallion was selected as the opener and Quavo as the introductory speaker as a way to «liven up» her solo campaign, «broaden the cultural appeal, and bring more creativity and fun.»
«There was a question about whether I should have any celebrities at my rallies,» Harris recalled in the book. «Did it seem too California, too Hollywood?»
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Harris recognized Taylor Swift’s «thoughtful endorsement» on Instagram the night of her debate against Trump, when the «Eras Tour» star called herself a «Childless Cat Lady» in a nod to comments by Vice President JD Vance.
Throughout Harris’ 107-day campaign, she was endorsed by countless celebrities, many who campaigned for her against Trump, including Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey, Eminem, Bruce Springsteen, Lizzo, Jennifer Lopez, Julia Roberts, Stephen Curry and Billie Eilish, to name a few.
kamala harris,joe biden,elections,democratic party,biden pushed out
Alerta para Caputo: empiezan a recalentarse los precios tras el regreso de la brecha del dólar
Los gremios del PAMI activan un paro de tres días para exigir una recomposición salarial
Trump admin renews effort to exclude Harvard from billions in federal research grants
Lee Seung-Woo, la gran promesa surcoreana de La Masia, ¿regreso a Europa?
Qué dijo Javier Milei sobre Karina Milei y José Luis Espert ante las denuncias por presunta corrupción
Pocos lo saben: por qué el chocolate negro se derrite más lento que el chocolate de leche
Mario Massaccesi confesó toda la verdad detrás de su fuerte pelea con Paula Bernini
Flor Jazmín Peña reveló la profunda crisis que tuvo por culpa de Nico Occhiato
Mirtha Legrand bloqueó a una famosa periodista en WhatsApp y ella está desesperada para que le vuelva a hablar
Francos apuntó al gobierno de Kicillof por el triple femicidio narco: “¿Qué dirá la gente que votó a Magario?»
POLITICA3 días agoFrancos apuntó al gobierno de Kicillof por el triple femicidio narco: “¿Qué dirá la gente que votó a Magario?»
- POLITICA2 días ago
Emilia Orozco: “Si vuelve el kirchnerismo, todo el esfuerzo que hicieron los argentinos se va a tirar a la basura”
- POLITICA3 días ago
Ciudad vs. provincia. Los recelos y los negocios que reveló el triple crimen de Florencio Varela
