Category: Politics

Uttam Dhillon, an Indian-origin lawyer serving in the White House, has been named the acting administrator of the drug enforcement administration (DEA), the agency that combats the smuggling and use of narcotics in the US. Dhillon has already started working on his new assignment.

“With one American dying of a drug overdose every nine minutes, there can be no doubt that we are facing the deadliest drug epidemic in our history,” US attorney general Jeff Sessions said on Monday. “The work of the drug enforcement administration is critical to fighting this crisis, and President (Donald) Trump and I are committed to continuing to give it the strong leadership it deserves. That is why I am pleased to appoint Uttam Dhillon as acting administrator.”

As deputy counsel and deputy assistant to Trump, Dhillon had been a part of the discussions that led to the firing of FBI director James Comey in May 2017.

Dhillon has had a long career battling drug traffickers and violent crime, according to the justice department. In 2006, he became the first director of the office of counternarcotics enforcement at the department of homeland security.

Prior to that, he served as an associate deputy attorney general in the justice department, in which role he headed the attorney general’s anti-gang coordination committee and led efforts to formulate policies and programs to combat violent crime and criminal gangs.

Dhillon earlier served as an assistant US attorney in California for more than six years.

Indian American attorney Uttam Dhillon, who has been serving in the White House since the advent of the Trump Administration, was appointed as the acting administrator of the Drug Enforcement Agency July 2.

Dhillon currently serves as Deputy Counsel and Deputy Assistant at the White House. He is perhaps best known as the White House attorney who tried to stop President Donald Trump from firing former FBI Director James Comey last year; Dhillon was concerned that if Comey were fired, the Trump presidency could be imperiled, because it would force the Justice Department to open an investigation into whether Trump was trying to derail the Russia investigation, reported The New York Times. Dhillon argued that the president needed cause to fire Comey; Trump went with the advice of a junior attorney who said Comey was like any other employee and could be fired for any reason.

Dhillon, who served in the Justice Department early in his career, worked for Comey from 2003-2006 as associate deputy attorney general. Comey was deputy attorney general from 2003-2005.

“With one American dying of a drug overdose every nine minutes, there can be no doubt that we are facing the deadliest drug epidemic in our history,” U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in an announcement released July 2.

“The work of the Drug Enforcement Administration is critical to fighting this crisis, and President Trump and I are committed to continuing to give it the strong leadership it deserves. That is why I am pleased to appoint Uttam Dhillon as Acting Administrator.”

“Uttam is a dedicated public servant who has served with distinction in the White House, the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, Congress, and as a career federal prosecutor taking on drug traffickers at the highest levels,” said Sessions in the announcement.

Dhillon will replace Robert Patterson, who has served as DEA administrator for 30 years. He began serving in the new role on the same day the announcement was made.

Dhillon has had a long career battling drug traffickers and violent crime, according to the statement released by the Attorney General’s office. In 2006, Dhillon was confirmed by the Senate as the first director of the Office of Counter-narcotics Enforcement at the Department of Homeland Security. In that role, Dhillon served as the primary policy advisor on counter-narcotics issues, focused on combating the connections between illegal drug trafficking and terrorism, and developed regional counter-narcotics strategies for DHS.

At the Justice Department, Dhillon chaired the Attorney General’s Anti-Gang Coordination Committee, and led efforts to combat violent crime and criminal gangs. Earlier on in his career, Dhillon worked as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Central District of California, and was appointed to the Justice Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force; he led a multi-agency effort to investigate violent gangs and major narcotics trafficking organizations.

Dhillon has also served as Chief Oversight Counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee.

Dhillon received his law degree from Boalt Hall School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley; an M.A. from the University of California, San Diego; and a B.A. from California State University, Sacramento.

Who do you think was considered the best president in American history? A team of experts was recently commissioned by C-SPAN to answer that question definitively and the results are fascinating. They ranked each president according to a number of different factors such as public persuasion, crisis leadership, international relations, and vision while in office. So which of the presidents since 1774 were the cream of the crop, the best of the best?

Presidential rankings tend to be subjective and divisive, but they also provide valuable insight into how historical views of presidents evolve over time. In the recent survey, nearly 200 political science scholars ranked US presidents on a scale of 0-100, from failure (zero) to average (50) to great (100). The totals were then averaged for each president and ranked from highest to lowest.

Here are the greatest US presidents, ranked according to current and recent members of the American Political Science Association: The top seven spots were unchanged from 2014, with Lincoln coming in first with an average rating of 95.03, followed by George Washington with an average of 92.59 and Franklin Delano Roosevelt with an average of 89.09. Barack Obama, Trump’s predecessor, ranked eighth—up 10 slots from 2014—with an average rating of 71.13. Ronald Reagan jumped two spots from 11th to ninth, with an average of 69.24. And Bill Clinton dropped from eighth to 13th, with an average of 64.25.

The 2017 version, which polled 91 historians, saw several presidents rise and fall in the rankings. Historians evaluated them based on 10 qualities of presidential leadership, including economic management, international relations, crisis leadership, public persuasion skills and whether they pursued equal justice for all. According to a C-SPAN survey of the historians, Barack Obama ranked as the 12th best president, getting good grades for his vision and setting an agenda, managing the economy, public persuasion, “pursuing equal justice for all” and “moral authority.”

Obama was docked for his diplomatic record, judged below-average in handling international relations. His marks for “relations with Congress” would have earned him an F — only a handful of presidents scored lower.

The least and the bottom ranking 44 is the current President, 44: Donald Trump. James Buchanan, who was at the helm as the United States careened into civil war, was dislodged from his position as our nation’s worst president by our current president, Trump.

According to Newsweek, “Donald J. Trump makes his ranking debut at the bottom of the list,” the survey states. “His average rating is 12.34, which is nearly three points lower than James Buchanan (15.09), who previously occupied the lowest rank.” Buchanan, who was America’s 15th president, oversaw the debate over slavery and saw the Union split apart after his successor, Abraham Lincoln, was elected.

Although he is the 45th president, Trump was rated as 44th best, which was the lowest ranking because the survey did not count Grover Cleveland’s nonconsecutive terms separately. Trump didn’t even rank well among self-identified Republicans and conservatives, coming in 40th.

After months of speculation and a flurry of last-minute European diplomacy, Donald Trump has taken perhaps the most consequential decision of his unconventional presidency with the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions on Iran in a deliberately provocative breach of the 2015 nuclear agreement. By torpedoing U.S. adherence to the accord, Trump has all but guaranteed its collapse, a move that opens the door to the unfettered resumption of Iran’s nuclear program and unleashes unpredictable escalatory pressures in an already volatile Middle East.\

The premediated American dismantling of an agreement that was the product of more than a decade of intense diplomacy and economic pressure marks a staggeringly counterproductive step. That it was undertaken over the vocal objections of Washington’s closest allies and without a clear strategy of mitigating the newly heightened risks of Iranian proliferation and conventional retaliation represents an abdication of American leadership on the international stage that is unparalleled in recent history.

Trump’s move represents an abdication of American leadership on the international stage that is unparalleled in recent history. Notably, it was precipitated by a president who could not even respond to a single, simple question, shouted by a reporter as Trump signed the order to re-impose sanctions with a flourish of his pen, about how his decision might make the country safer. That is the only question that matters: How is America safer now that the United States is unravelling its end of a bargain that curbed Iran’s nuclear activities?

A DEAL DISMEMBERED

Trump’s silence on this point illustrates more than simply his own limited familiarity with the complex issues at stake in the deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA, which he disparaged as “defective at its core.” It highlights the absurd logic that his administration has deployed in grappling with the challenges posed by Tehran. If the president truly believes that the JCPOA’s far-reaching inspections regime and its restrictions of 10, 15, and 25 years on various aspects of Iran’s nuclear activities are somehow insufficient to guard against Iran’s unshakeable yearning for a nuclear weapon, what risks then are posed by the evisceration of all constraints?

The inevitable consequence of American abrogation of the deal is the attrition of its constraints. American investment in negotiating a resolution to Iran’s nuclear ambitions—undertaken first by the George W. Bush administration and culminated by Barack Obama—furnished the requisite quid pro quo that persuaded Tehran to make historic concessions. Absent America, Tehran has ceded those ambitions for little more than European goodwill; trading diamonds for chocolates, as an influential Iranian politician once ridiculed a prior nuclear accord. Tehran walked away from that agreement, and over time it is sure to abandon the wreckage that remains of the JCPOA.

For Trump, the decision is all ego; dismembering the Iran deal satisfies a multiplicity of petty personal interests—in undoing his predecessor’s legacy, making good on his own campaign promises, and stroking his inflated sense of his own negotiating prowess as manifestly superior to Obama, who he charged with conceding “maximum leverage” in exchange for a “giant fiction.”

By contrast, for Trump’s advisors—most notably National Security Advisor John Bolton—and many others in Washington especially within the Republican policy establishment, the madness is the method. Guided by their mantra that Tehran only responds to force, Trump administration hawks have embraced the theory that the United States needs to be prepared to disrupt the status quo across the region, precisely because Iran has found it a conducive context for enhancing its own influence. They have no ready explanation for precisely how disruption will rebalance the regional power equation in America’s favor, and the only prior application of this strategic vision—the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq—is hardly a reassuring precedent.

THE VIEW FROM TEHRAN

For better or, as is likely, for worse, this “chaos theory” dovetails neatly with the array of possibilities available to Tehran in responding to the demise of the nuclear deal. Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, moved quickly to forestall any sense of a regime in crisis by taking to state television immediately after Trump concluded his own remarks. His reassurance was primarily aimed at his own jittery population, whose trepidations about mounting pressure had helped collapse the value of the domestic currency in recent months.

Iran can muddle through a considerable amount of economic pressure and turmoil, thanks to a diversified economy as well as long experience and well-honed tactics for mitigating and evading sanctions. But the reality is that despite profound international resentment over Trump’s tactics, the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions will present much of the world with only one viable choice, to abstain or wind down trade and investment with Tehran rather than risk U.S. penalties. European assurances to Tehran can do little to change the calculations of the private sector, especially when the upside rewards of opportunities in Iran remain modest in comparison to the potential liabilities.

And as the benefits of the deal wane, Tehran will contend with its own saber rattlers, whose worldview was shaped by the isolation and existential conflict of the revolution’s early years. They will seek to match American pressure with Iranian pushback and demonstrate the country’s capability to outmaneuver American forces on the range of battlefields across the region where they are in close proximity with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and its proxy militias.

Trump has repeatedly insisted that he will steer clear of embroiling America in yet another long, messy, costly conflict in the Middle East, but his decision to target the nuclear deal elevates the odds of Iranian escalation and, with it, even greater threats to U.S. interests and allies. The irony is acute; Trump derided the JCPOA because “it didn’t bring calm, it didn’t bring peace,” but undoing the deal will only inflame a region already riven by extremism and sectarian rivalries, making it harder for the United States to extricate itself as the president himself has promised. Until and unless the administration resolves the contradictions between the president’s maximalist objectives, his disinclination to take on the Iranians on the ground, and Washington’s divergence from its core allies on this question, Trump cannot hope to make progress on any element of the Iranian challenge.

Undoing the deal will only inflame a region already riven by extremism and sectarian rivalries. Trump peppered his speech with incongruous notes of triumphalism about his as-yet inconclusive diplomatic gambit toward North Korea as well as the expectation that Iran’s leaders “are going to want to make a new and lasting deal, one that benefits all of Iran and the Iranian people. When they do, I am ready, willing, and able. Great things can happen for Iran.” Although it might prove a clever gambit for managing the fallout, neither Rouhani nor his harder-line rivals in the security establishment are likely to take Trump up on his offer to “make Iran great again” by returning to the negotiating table. Given the widespread public support for the deal among Iranians, Trump’s announcement dealt a visceral blow to the national dignity well beyond the regime itself; no serious politician would survive an effort to engage with Washington any time soon.

GREAT EXPECTATIONS, DASHED

From the start, the inflated expectations underpinning the deal on both sides threatened its viability. Iran’s leadership promoted the nuclear deal as a total victory that meant the wholesale removal of economic restrictions and an expressway to diplomatic and economic revival. In reality, Iran faced a continuing web of U.S. sanctions, international trepidation, and a dysfunctional economy that resisted an easy jumpstart.

President Obama was far more circumspect in his rhetoric, taking care to describe the deal as resolving only one element of the threat posed by Iran. But his officials routinely posited that the deal could generate other avenues of cooperation with Iran, and the logic beneath the agreement’s time-limited restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program presupposed Iran’s evolution into a responsible and respected member of the international community. The reality turned out very differently there too, as Tehran maintained and in some cases intensified its efforts to extend its influence across the

The disconnect between the text of the deal and the aspirations attached to it set the stage for rising frustration and bitterness on both sides, paving the way for Trump’s demand to “fix” the agreement by fundamentally revising the trade-offs at its core. The increasingly frantic European efforts to provide the president with the appearance of a victory while leaving the essence of the agreement untouched proved in the end to be a wild goose chase.

Fine-tuning the JCPOA cannot alter the fact that it represented a transaction, not a transformation, as I noted the day after the deal was concluded in July 2015: Only the most credulous optimist can assert that a nuclear deal will somehow produce an Iranian epiphany about the horrific and destabilizing consequences of its assistance to Bashar Al Assad. Tehran’s approach to extending its regional influence, via the funding and direction of violent proxies across the region, will continue to exacerbate instability in Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and beyond, while fueling the geostrategic rivalry with Saudi Arabia and the related sectarian tensions. This week’s resumption of a trial of a Washington Post reporter underscores that Iran’s unjust detention of American citizens for months or even years will likely continue as well. The same streets where Iranians celebrated a deal yesterday were the scenes of anti-American and anti-Israeli protests, where both flags were burnt in effigy, only a few days ago.

With his announcement on Tuesday, Trump has jettisoned that transaction for the far more ambitious goal of Iran’s transformation. That will require far more than the stroke of a pen: For this gambit to succeed, the White House now has to devise a strategy that can compel or persuade Tehran to make unprecedented concessions on an array of vital security policies. When the nuclear agreement was first concluded, Rouhani described it as an “end and a beginning” for Iran. With Trump’s termination of the nuclear deal, the formidable challenge of trying to get more with less is just beginning.

Barack Obama won it. So did Jimmy Carter, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Now, President Donald Trump’s supporters are pushing for him to be the next U.S. leader to win the Nobel Peace Prize — a move that’s being met by smirks and eye rolls in Europe, where Trump remains deeply unpopular.

But that’s not stopping a growing list of champions from pushing the Nobel committee to consider Trump for the world’s most coveted diplomatic prize. “I’ve been talking about this for months,” said Indiana Rep. Luke Messer, praising the success of what he called Trump’s “Twitter diplomacy.” He’s one of 18 Republican lawmakers who penned a letter to Norwegian Nobel Committee chairman Berit Reiss-Andersen last week to “respectfully nominate President Donald J. Trump to receive the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his work to end the Korean War, denuclearize the Korean peninsula, and bring peace to the region.”

As is customary, lawmakers in the Nordic region where the Nobel is awarded refrain from commenting on possible nominees. But in Copenhagen, Denmark, there was little appetite for the prospect of a Trump win.

“Trump … the peace prize? You must be joking,” said Lene Larsen, a 46-year-old accountant before bursting out laughing. “Maybe it should be a sex prize or a prize for being unpopular.” Hasse Jakupsen, 52, said the prospects of a win were dim. “I am pretty sure the Norwegians can see through this. Being nominated does not mean that you actually get the prize. It is pretty ridiculous to have such hopes” of getting the prize.

The push comes as Trump is preparing for an historic summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, which will serve as the highest-stakes diplomatic test to date for a president whose unconventional approach to foreign policy has also prompted fears of nuclear winter. Trump scored a substantial win on Wednesday when he announced that three Americans who had been detained by Kim were on their way home to the U.S.

It remains far from clear, however, whether the North will ultimately agree to give up its nuclear weapons and allow independent inspectors to verify their compliance. Polling has shown Trump and many of the policies he’s championed to be broadly unpopular around the globe. The Pew Research Center has also found that the public’s trust in the U.S. president to do the right thing when it comes to international affairs has plummeted since Trump took office. And Sweden saw the largest drop from former President Barack Obama, who won the Nobel in 2009 less than a year into his presidency, to Trump, with 93 percent confident in Obama and just 10 percent in Trump.

But Trump supporters, including British politician Nigel Farage, argue that Obama won after having accomplished far less. “He got the Nobel Peace Prize for what he might do,” Farage, the former leader of the UK Independence Party, said on a London talk radio station last month. Farage, who campaigned alongside Trump, said Trump deserved the prize “for managing to get… talks going with North Korea, something that no U.S. president has ever, ever managed to do.

As a member of the European Parliament, Farage is among those who can nominate people for the prize, and said he would be setting up a petition to bolster Trump.

Nominations can come from university professors, directors of peace research and international affairs institutes, and former recipients, as well as members of national assemblies and national governments, among others.

To be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize of the year, nominations must be sent to the Norwegian Nobel Committee before Feb. 1 of the same year. There are currently 330 candidates for the 2018 prize, including 114 organizations. Nominations are required to be kept secret 50 years.

In January, Henrik Urdal, manager of the Peace Research Institute Oslo, told The Associated Press that Trump’s name had been submitted for the 2018 prize, but said the nomination lacked “a strong academic justification.” The leader of the independent Norwegian peace institute said Trump had been nominated by “an American player with the right to nominate a candidate,” but declined to name who.

And in March, the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which selects the prize winners, said someone using a stolen identity had nominated Trump. The Norwegian news agency quoted committee secretary Olav Njolstad as saying it appeared the same person was responsible for forging nominations in 2017 as well.

A Nobel for Trump would be a dramatic end to a confrontation that began with Trump taunting Kim, calling him “Little Rocket Man” and threatening to unleash “fire and fury” to destroy his country.

Mona Das, an Indian American mortgage broker, announced on April 17 that she is running for a seat in the Washington state Senate, aiming to unset a moderate Republican.

Mona Das, a Democrat, said that she is running in the state’s 47th Legislative District, to unseat incumbent Sen. Joe Fain. In an interview April 16 with The Seattle Times, Das said she dropped her Congressional bid earlier this year after facing steep odds in a crowded primary field. But during that campaign, people suggested she consider running against Fain, she said.

Mona Das is a small business owner who has seen the effects of unaffordable housing firsthand.  She is joining thousands of others across America who are responding to the call to serve their communities by running for public office.

“I am honored and excited to be running for State Senate as a Democrat. Sitting on the sidelines is no longer an option. It’s time we come together to chart a course for our future that is powerful and inclusive,” Das stated.

Das accused her opponent of voting for big property tax increases, and voted against legislation that would bring taxes down. “As a small business owner who works with families buying their first home, I have seen first-hand how big property tax increases are distressing many in our communities, even as our schools struggle to make ends meet,” said Das on her campaign Web site electmona.com.

“We can make this economy work better and make government work better for families. We can do more to create jobs, ease traffic congestion and make housing affordable,” said the Bihar native, who emigrated to the U.S. with her family when she was just eight months old.

In an interview with India-West last September, Das said she woke up Nov. 9, 2016, feeling a great deal of despair. It was the morning after a hugely unexpected presidential win by Donald Trump.

“I knew immediately that everything that was important to me and my community was under attack,” she said, noting that she was inspired to run for political office by Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Washington, the first Indian American woman elected to the House.

“So many of our voices are not being represented; our votes are being under-represented,” said Das, adding: “When I saw Pramila’s poster, I thought: ‘it has taken this long for people who look like us to be represented at the national level.’”

The founder of Moxy Mortgage attended the Women’s Campaign School at Yale University in 2015, which sparked her dreams of running for elected office.

Das is endorsed by King County Sheriff Mitzi Johanknecht. “No matter how tough times had been, the residents of this region are filled with hope that positive change is possible and that our elected leaders can hold themselves to a higher standard, said Johanknecht in a press statement.

“That they can truly represent us, and listen to us, and bring our ideas and challenges and yes, our hope, to the tables where decisions are made,” said Johanknecht. “I firmly believe that Mona Das has what it takes to deliver on that hope.”

Democrats currently have a one-seat edge in the Senate and a two-seat majority in the state House. Das and other Democrats are hoping for a national electoral wave that could extend down to local races to solidify their control of the Legislature, reported The Seattle Times.

Das serves on several boards that promote women entrepreneurship. She also serves on the board of Social Ignition, which promotes entrepreneurship for former inmates.

The world’s nuclear proliferation watchdog has welcomed the announcement by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) to suspend its nuclear and missile tests and shut down its Punggye-ri atomic test site.

 It added that the move should lead to a “sure, definite” and “irreversible” commitment to ban nuclear testing. “Saying is one thing, but until we have a signature and the ratification by the DPRK, to basically solidify the verbal commitment already to cease testing and close the nuclear test site, I think nothing can be for sure, definite, or irreversible,” Lassina Zerbo, Executive Secretary of the UN-partner Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO), told the media at a news briefing in Geneva today. “I can only welcome and hope for best.”

He also highlighted that the upcoming talks between United States President Donald Trump and DPRK Kim Jong-Un could present a unique opportunity for a lasting contribution to world peace. “It might be through this negotiation […] that we open up a situation where the DPRK ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.”

The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, or CTBT, bans all nuclear explosions, by everyone, everywhere. It has not yet entered into force despite having been opened for signature and ratification over 21 years ago.

Adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1996, the CTBT is nearly universal with 183 signatures and 166 ratifications. But 44 specific nuclear-capable nations need to ratify the Treaty before it enters into force. Of these, eight – China, Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, DPRK, Pakistan and the US – are still missing. The last country of the 44 to ratify this treaty was Indonesia, on 6 February, 2012.

Since the Treaty is not yet in force, the CTBTO is officially called the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.Go to Original – news.un.org

Hamilton County Clerk of Courts Aftab Pureval announced his addition to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC)’s Red to Blue list March 22, according to a press release.

As the first Democratic Hamilton County Clerk of Courts in over 100 years, Pureval faces a tough road ahead against Steve Chabot (R-OH), the current representative of Ohio’s 1st Congressional District. The Republican incumbent has represented the district since 2011, having previously done so between 1995 and 2009.

The DCCC, which targets highly competitive campaigns, chose 33 races nationwide to prioritize this election cycle. Pureval is the only candidate in Ohio to be added to the committee’s list.

As a result, the DCCC will provide resources for Pureval, including fundraising support and assistance in recruiting staff and volunteers for his campaign.

Following his candidacy announcement in January, Pureval captured the committee’s attention after mobilizing a sizable grassroots fundraising effort. The DCCC added him to their list of “Candidates Leading the Charge” in February, recognizing his former work as an antitrust litigator for the international law firm White & Case LLP.

Pureval later moved back to Hamilton Country, where he worked as a special assistant U.S. attorney for the Department of Justice. He then became an in-house counsel at the Cincinnati-based consumer good corporation Proctor & Gamble.

As part of Pureval’s platform, he reiterates his commitment to “defending women who have been hurt and abused and fight for equality for all.” Economically, he plans to “take on patronage, government waste and save taxpayers money.”

Additionally, Pureval voiced his intent to protect Social Security and work on rebuilding the Western Hills Viaduct to create more job opportunities.

Chabot, his opponent, is also committed to revitalizing the economy, controlling government spending and protecting Social Security. Chabot’s specific interests include health care reformation and expanding veterans’ aid.

Though many Democrats are hopeful that Pureval will emerge victorious on Election Day, Chabot has proven his ability to be re-elected for decades, having secured nearly 60 percent of the vote in the 2016 election.

Like most political races, there has been some tension between the two frontrunners. Chabot’s campaign spokesman criticized Pureval’s residence, saying he “lives in a $400,000 mansion in Hyde Park, which isn’t even in the district,” USA Today reported. By contrast, Chabot lives in Westwood on the west side of Cincinnati.

The Hamilton County auditor listed Pureval’s 2,277 square-foot home at $414,250 in 2015. Chabot’s 3,078 square-foot home, by comparison, was estimated at $111,280.

“Steve Chabot and Donald Trump have pursued a reckless agenda to throw millions of Americans off health care and add 1.5 trillion to the deficit,” Pureval said of Chabot in a press release. The statement suggests ties between the president and Chabot, whom Pureval said supported Trump’s efforts in legislature.

Though Pureval’s campaign has picked up steam in recent months, the road ahead is far from ending. Before Chabot and Pureval can go head-to-head, Pureval must win the upcoming Democratic primary on May 8.

Pureval, 35-year-old son of an India-born father and Tibet-born mother, made a name for himself in 2016 when he pulled off a surprising upset in Hamilton County, winning the county’s clerk of courts seat. The Indian American officially announced his plan to run for Congress Jan. 31 at Avondale, the Ohio-based urban agriculture nonprofit Gabriel’s Place.

The incumbent Chabot, 65, has served as the 1st Congressional District representative for 20 years. He was first elected in 1994 and was unseated in 2008 but won the seat back in 2010 thanks to redistricting which put GOP-leaning Warren County into the 1st District.

Pureval said at his campaign launching announcement that he intends to paint Chabot as a rubber stamp for President Donald Trump, according to a WVXU.org report.

The Ohio-born Pureval earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from Ohio State University. During his time at OSU, he served as student body president. Later, Pureval earned his law degree from the University of Cincinnati College of Law.

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley fired back last week against a Trump administration official who said she was suffering from “momentary confusion” when she announced new sanctions against Russia were imminent, saying, “With all due respect, I don’t get confused.”

A striking intra-administration quarrel splayed out in public when National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow told reporters during a briefing in Florida that Haley “got ahead of the curve” when she said the U.S. would be slapping new sanctions on Russia on Monday in retaliation for the country’s support for Syria’s Assad government after its latest suspected chemical attack.

Kudlow said additional sanctions are under consideration but have yet to be implemented and said of Haley: “There might have been some momentary confusion about that.”

The feud appeared to quiet down after the economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, called the Indian American diplomat to apologize April 17 afternoon, a White House official said. The official spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity to describe private discussions.

Haley had said, the U.S. would be slapping new sanctions on Russia April 16 in retaliation for the country’s support for Syria’s Assad government after its latest suspected chemical attack.

Kudlow, the director of the National Economic Council, said additional sanctions are under consideration but have yet to be implemented. Of Haley, he said, “There might have been some momentary confusion about that.” Haley then issued a terse statement to Fox News: “With all due respect, I don’t get confused.”

The White House had been struggling to explain Haley’s remarks amid reports that President Donald Trump put the brakes on the new sanctions. Several administration officials have disputed that characterization, saying Haley was out of the loop. Three senior administration officials said there were several attempts to get Haley to back off or clarify her comments, but she refused.

The officials said that, under the plan conceived last week, the sanctions would have been announced April 13, at the same time U.S., French, and British forces launched a missile strike on Syrian President Bashar Assad’s chemical weapons facilities. But the sanctions were not ready in time for Trump’s statement, so they were delayed.

The officials said a decision was then made to announce the sanctions as an answer to Russia’s response to the strikes. But that plan was re-evaluated and then put on hold over the weekend as it became clear that Russia’s response was less robust than anticipated. The officials were not authorized to discuss private administration deliberations publicly and spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity.

A National Security Council memorandum sent overnight April 13 said the new sanctions would be announced soon, but it did not specify a date. Over the next 36 hours, officials began to delve deeper into the proposed sanctions and decided to hold off on anything imminent, but Haley was unaware, the officials said.

On April 16, a new memo went out from the NSC saying that additional sanctions were under consideration, but no decision had been made. In the face of Haley’s refusal to clarify her April 15 remarks, draft language was sent to her suggesting again that she do so, the officials said.

Haley and her office ignored that, so the White House decided to push back, the officials said. The New York Times reports that Trump was annoyed with Haley for getting out in front of the policy, according to a White House official, and the president’s decision to reject sanctions left her hanging in public with her credibility on the line.

Haley has been one of the strongest critics in the administration of Russia’s behavior around the world, often speaking far more harshly than Trump would, but she has rarely been reined in publicly this way, reported the Times.

Trump has grown suspicious of her ambition, convinced that she had been angling for former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s position and increasingly wondering whether she wants his own job,” the Times noted April 17, adding, ”Republicans close to the White House whisper about the prospect of an alliance between Haley and Vice President Mike Pence, possibly to run as a ticket in 2020.”

In the year since the 2016 presidential election, one in five perpetrators of hate violence in the United States against various South Asian and Middle Eastern communities invoked President Donald Trump’s name, his administration’s policies or his campaign slogan during the attacks, a new report found.

The nonprofit group South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) released the report last week, which detailed increasing instances of hate violence and xenophobic political rhetoric from Election Day 2016 to Election Day 2017. The group documented more than 300 reported incidents targeting South Asian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Middle Eastern and Arab communities during that period.

“It’s heartbreaking.” Suman Raghunathan, executive director of SAALT, told HuffPost. “When you have people literally saying or leveraging the ‘Make America Great Again’ campaign slogan as they are violently assaulting our community members ― that for me draws a direct connection in a way that could not be clearer.”

SAALT documented 213 incidents of hate violence ― a more than 45 percent increase compared to the year leading up to the 2016 presidential election. The levels of violence mirror those seen the year after the 9/11 attacks, with 82 percent of the hate violence and xenophobic political rhetoric now motivated by Islamophobia, the group said.

“The 2016 United States presidential election cycle and ultimately the inauguration of President Donald Trump amplified a wave of hate violence against South Asian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Middle Eastern, and Arab communities to heights not seen since the year after the attacks of September 11, 2001,” it said.

The report noted that “Islamophobia and hate violence in the United States predate the September 11th era and have continued to escalate since.” It also said that “the dramatic surge in rhetoric rooted in anti-Black, anti-Muslim, and anti-immigrant sentiment in 2016 and 2017 has fueled a palpable and unparalleled atmosphere of hate and suspicion.”

The report said that Trump’s first year in office built on the “already disturbing surge in hate violence” documented in SAALT’s 2017 report “Power, Pain, Potential.” That report had documented 207 incidents of hate violence and xenophobic rhetoric aimed at South Asian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Middle Eastern, and Arab communities during the 2016 election cycle from Nov. 1, 2015 to Election Day on Nov. 8,2016.

SAALT’s most recent report covers the period Nov. 9, 2016 to Nov. 7, 2017. In the first year after the presidential election, SAALT documented 302 incidents and hate violence and xenophobic political rhetoric, “aimed at our communities.” SAALT said it was an increase of more than 45 percent from its previous analysis.

SAALT said violence against South Asian communities “is informed by the stated and implicit goals of the current administration, and is also the product of the longstanding and systemic injustice that underpins many of our nation’s systems and institutions.”

The report was funded by the Ford Foundation, Four Freedoms Fund, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, NOVO Foundation, Open Society Foundations, Proteus Fund, and the Voqal Fund.

There is a direct relationship between the advancement of a political agenda and the rise of hate and bigotry in America, according to Sen. Ben Cardin, the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, who keynoted a Capitol Hill briefing hosted by South Asians Leading Together (SAALT). The March 22 briefing coincided with the civil rights organization’s release of a report on hate violence.

“We see a rise of nationalism -good people who will go towards a nationalist candidate or government that says it’s our time and try to grow a moat” around people seen as “the other” in the country, he said. Cardin said this had alarming consequences because it gives political strength to policies that encourage bigotry and hate. He said a strong rise of anti-immigrant fervor and “the politics of that” becomes increasingly challenging. “We see the rise of violent acts and the number of crimes that are committed based upon hate,” he said.

The Maryland lawmaker said that for the first time since World War II governments contain elements that pursue these policies. And while hate crimes have occurred in the past, he said “we’ve never seen political support for policies that support” these kinds of hate and bigotry. “We are now seeing leaders of democratic countries that run on a nationalistic platform that encourage these activities. So, this is extremely alarming and very serious.”

Rep. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), one of the congressional cosponsors of the SAALT Capitol Hill briefing, stressed the importance of holding elected officials and equality for all,” said Suman Raghunathan, executive director of SAALT.

Raghunathan led a panel discussion that included Sim J. Singh, national advocacy manager of The Sikh Coalition; Maya Berry, executive director of the Arab American Institute; Becky Monroe, director of the Stop Hate Project, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights; and Darakshan Raja, co-founder of Justice for Muslims Collective. She said “our nation has now become a melting pot of hate stirred by a raft of divisive and destructive policies and political rhetoric” and this was a critical moment. “The White House bully pulpit has had a devastating impact, sometimes with fatal consequences to our communities,” she said.

After a year of threats and diatribes, U.S. President Donald Trump and third-generation North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un have agreed to meet face-to-face for talks in May this year about the North Korea’s nuclear program. Trump and Kim prompted jitters around the world last year as they exchanged bellicose insults over the North’s attempts to develop a nuclear weapon capable of hitting the United States. Pyongyang has pursued its nuclear program in defiance of U.N. Security Council resolutions.

“A meeting is being planned,” Trump said on Twitter after accepting an invitation to meet from Kim. There is no date or venue yet for the meeting although it could take place in May. A senior State Department official said the talks would likely only be a preliminary discussion about holding future negotiations. “The expectation is that the talks would lead to a discussion around a conclusion that we’re ready to engage in negotiations,” the official said.

The head of South Korea’s National Security Office, Chung Eui-yong, speaking in Washington, said Trump had agreed to meet the North Korean leader by May in response to Kim’s invitation. Kim had “committed to denuclearization” and to suspending nuclear and missile tests, Chung said.

U.S.-based experts say North Korea appeared to show last November that it has succeeded in developing a missile capable of delivering a nuclear weapon anywhere in the United States. Trump has derided Kim as a “maniac,” referred to him as “little rocket man” and threatened in a speech last year to “totally destroy” North Korea, a country of 26 million people, if it attacked the United States or one of its allies. Kim responded by calling Trump a “mentally deranged U.S. dotard.”

The Trump administration has led a worldwide push to tighten international sanctions on North Korea to choke off resources needed for its weapons programs. U.S. officials say the moves, which include restrictions on fuel supplies to North Korea, on its key coal exports, and to cut revenues it has received from tens of thousands of workers overseas, have begun to show signs of working.

It remains to be seen whether a summit, if it takes place, could lead to any meaningful breakthrough after an unusually provocative year. North Korea tested its most powerful nuclear weapon to date and test-launched three intercontinental ballistic missiles theoretically capable of striking the U.S. mainland.

The entire world is awaiting with caution, while several world leaders welcomed prospects for a possible thaw in the long standoff over North Korea’s nuclear weapons program on Friday, March 9^th  after U.S. President Donald Trump said he was prepared to hold an unprecedented meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

The invitation letter sent by Kim Jong Un and the immediate acceptance by Trump has taken the world by surprise. Successive American administrations have spent years on cautious, painstaking diplomacy with the Kim family dynasty, backed by a judicious mix of sanctions and bribes. After each deal was reached the North Koreans pocketed the aid and concessions on offer, broke their word and returned to their decades-long quest to develop nuclear weapons. At best, all that expertise and patience might have slowed North Korea’s path to a bomb by a few years.

But tension eased around last month’s Winter Olympics in South Korea, laying the groundwork for what would be the first meeting between leaders from North Korea and the United States, and the biggest foreign policy gamble for Trump since he took office in January last year.

News of the planned meeting was welcomed by China, which is North Korea’s largest trading partner and its sole major ally, though overall trade has fallen in recent months as U.N. economic sanctions take effect. President Xi Jinping told Trump in a phone call on Friday that he appreciates his desire to resolve the North Korea issue politically, Chinese state media said. Xi “hopes the United States and North Korea start contacts and dialogue as soon as possible and strive to reach positive results,” the report added.

Neutral Switzerland, which often hosts summits, said it was ready to facilitate the meeting. Sweden could also play a role. North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho will visit Sweden in the near future, Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter reported on Friday, quoting sources. The Swedish foreign ministry declined comment. Sweden’s embassy in Pyongyang represents U.S. interests, in the absence of U.S. diplomatic relations.

North Korea sees a Trump meeting as a chance to win relief from the sanctions as well as an opportunity to earn the international legitimacy that it seeks, the U.S.-based Council on Foreign Relations think tank said.

“For Kim, the prospect of an early summit with Trump provides the best prospect of removing international sanctions pressure while giving Kim room for maneuver to possibly keep his nuclear deterrent in place,” it said.

Vice President Mike Pence said the United States had made “zero concessions” and had “consistently increased the pressure” on North Korea. Some U.S. officials and experts worry North Korea could buy time to build up and refine its nuclear arsenal if it drags out talks with Washington.

The government of Japan remained cautious about the talks. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Trump, in a phone call, promised to continue to enforce sanctions until Pyongyang took “tangible steps … toward denuclearization,” the White House said in a statement.

Trump had agreed to meet Kim without any preconditions, a South Korean official said. “Kim Jong Un talked about denuclearization with the South Korean Representatives, not just a freeze,” Trump said on Twitter on Thursday night. “Also, no missile testing by North Korea during this period of time. Great progress being made but sanctions will remain until an agreement is reached.”

James Clapper, a career military intelligence officer who rose to become Director of National Intelligence during Barack Obama’s presidency, cautiously welcomed talk of a Trump-Kim summit. If still in office, he would recommend that the president go, he said. “But I would advise that he do something that doesn’t come easily to Donald Trump, which is to listen. We need to hear from Kim Jong Un himself what it would take for him to feel secure,” General Clapper told this blogger In 2014 the general was sent to Pyongyang on a secret mission to bring back two Americans being held in North Korea. While there, he recalled, the North Koreans had stressed their desire for a full-scale peace treaty with America, to replace the ceasefire that ended the Korean war. Yes, the former spy chief conceded, the North Koreans have ambitions to push American forces out of their region. But that is no reason not to talk. “I think they may be feeling confident now that whatever they have is enough that they would not be meeting the president as a supplicant.”

North and South Korea, where the United Sates stations 28,500 troops, are technically still at war after their 1950-53 conflict ended in a ceasefire, not a truce.

Analysts say Trump’s decision to accept Kim’s invitation for a summit and to do it by May could be linked in part to a desire to claim a significant achievement in his most difficult foreign policy challenge before the U.S. midterm elections in November.

Kim, on the other hand, seems desperate to save a sanctions-battered North Korean economy. Both leaders have interests in striking a big deal, said Cheong Seong-Chang, a senior analyst at South Korea’s Sejong Institute. Should it happen, the May summit between Trump and Kim will come shortly after a planned April meeting between Kim and South Korean President Moon Jae-in. It’s likely that North Korea will also push for summits with China, Russia and Japan later in the year to further break out of its isolation, Cheong said.

The 2018 nation-wide primaries leading to the general election began with the first primaries being held in the state of Texas on March 6ht. There were several Indian American candidates who had their names on the ballot.

The lone Indian American political candidate who had success in the March 6 primary elections throughout Texas, Sri Kulkarni. Seeking the Democratic nomination, he advanced to a May 22 runoff after earning 31.8 percent of the vote in Texas’ 22nd Congressional District. He will face Letitia Plummer, who finished second with 24.3 percent. There were five candidates in the race.

According to Texas election law, if a candidate does not get more than 50 percent of the votes, there will be a runoff between the top two finishers. If Kulkarni emerges as a winner in the runoff, he will run against the incumbent Republican representative Pete Olson.

If elected, Sri will become the first Indian American congressman from the state of Texas. He is one of the nearly two-dozen Indian Americans who are running for Congress this year.

Sri, who raised more than USD 96,000 in campaign donations, is hoping that the demographic diversity of the district it is a majority minority district  will favour him. He told PTI that he was running because of the anti- American policies of the Trump administration. 

“We are all grateful and could not have done this without y’all. Over 9,000 voters came out to support us and we are all truly humbled. When I began this journey, I aimed to bring reason, compassion and decency into our government. People said it was impossible. Many said it was risky. Others said it was pointless, but I knew I had to do something,” Kulkarni said in a Facebook post after the results came out.

“I resigned as a diplomat in the U.S. State Department, where I had served our country for 14 years. I met with and listen to thousands of people in District 22 on how to make that much needed change possible. We stand proud and celebrate the beautiful diversity of our unique neighborhoods. We have shown we can bridge our communities and have our voices represented,” he added.

According to his campaign website Kulkarni “is a proven leader who has been serving his family, community and country for his entire life” and while in Congress will focus on universal healthcare, veterans and national defense, climate change, gun violence, education, economic inequality, disaster relief, criminal justice reform and immigration reform.

“When I began this journey, I aimed to bring reason, compassion and decency into our government. People said it was impossible. Many said it was risky. Others said it was pointless, but I knew I had to do something,” he added. “I resigned as a diplomat in the U.S. State Department, where I had served our country for 14 years. I met with and listen to thousands of people in District 22 on how to make that much needed change possible. “We stand proud and celebrate the beautiful diversity of our unique neighborhoods. We have shown we can bridge our communities and have our voices represented,” he said.

Other Indian Americans and South Asian Americans were running for lower level offices. Juli Mathew advanced running unopposed for the Fort Bend County Court-at-Law No. 3 judge position.

Syed S. Ali moved on by running unopposed in the state’s 131st Legislative District for state representative on the GOP side. In the 93rd District, Nisha Mathews came up short in the Democratic primary for state representative, falling to Nancy Bean. Dinesh Mali failed to earn the Republican nomination for state representative in the 105th District, falling short to Rodney Anderson.

Goutam Jois, an Indian American attorney and activist, running for New Jersey’s 7th Congressional District, wants to fix shared values. “Washington is broken, and our shared values are under assault. As an attorney and an activist, I’ve fought to uphold those values – justice, fairness, and dignity – and won,” Jois says as reasons for wanting to represent the Congressional district from the Garden State, which has a sizable South Asian American population.

According to Jois, “I represented a young, unarmed, African-American man who was shot by police, and won at the Supreme Court. I secured asylum for a gay man from Jamaica, won a major First Amendment case for a police officer, and obtained landmark relief for the victims of Hurricane Sandy. I’ve organized national youth political conventions and was the Youth Governor of New Jersey. And I’ve worked with the family business, seeing firsthand what it takes to create jobs in the construction and infrastructure fields. If elected to represent New Jersey’s 7th Congressional District, I will bring that experience to Washington and work to expand opportunity, improve security, and strengthen our communities.”

Jois added that hard-working families need to know that the government will stand by its end of the social contract, speaking of security. He said he will fight for universal healthcare and policies to support working families, including paid family leave and raising the minimum wage.

And he added about strengthening the community that “we cannot allow anyone, least of all the president (Donald Trump), to divide us by race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, immigration status or anything else.”

Among his platform issues include the economy and jobs, women’s rights, the environment, education, civil rights, immigration, LGBTQ issues, veterans’ issues and data privacy.Jois said democracy is being skewed for three reasons.

In addition to successfully litigating police brutality, First Amendment and civil rights cases in the Supreme Court, the Harvard-trained lawyer has been a football coach and a stand-up comedian.

The son of Indian immigrants from Bangalore recently threw his hat into the ring, hoping to revive the democracy so treasured in the U.S. The Summit resident, the married father of two children, has hopes for the balloting on June 5.

“I would not say I was bitten by the political bug early in my life, but I can tell you I have always believed in democracy and its values and fought for them whether organizing student-centric activities in school, college or grad school. At every point, I have believed in the values of democracy and the hope that it generates. That is what I have been fighting for in my life, including now in the context of an electoral campaign,” Jois said.

The primary race for the 7th Congressional District in New Jersey is April 2. Other candidates outside of Jois in the Democratic Party field include Indian American Peter Jacob, who ran unsuccessfully in the 2016 election for the same seat; Tom Malinowski, Kurt Perhach, David Pringle and Linda Weber. The Republican incumbent Leonard Lance will be challenged by Lindsay Brown in the GOP primary with the winners moving on to the November general election.

Chicago IL: Press Conference for media was held On behalf of United States Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, at Mysore Woodlands on 2548 W. Devon Ave. Chicago, IL. At this press conference Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi covered a wide range of significant topics including his legislative accomplishments, future legislation agenda and other relevant current topics.

Democratic Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois has urged suburban Chicago residents to vote for Illinois primary election. “As I have said many times, if you don’t have a seat at the table, then you are on the menu. Registering to vote and voting ensures at your voice is heard and you have a proverbial seat at the table when important decisions are made affecting you.”

 “Indian-Americans and all suburban Chicago residents must register to vote to allow their voices to be heard,” he said and added, “As I have said many times, if you don’t have a seat at the table, then you are on the menu. Registering to vote and voting ensures that your voice is heard and you have a proverbial seat at the table when important decisions are made affecting you.”

Volunteers and friends of Krishnamoorthi helped register voters at the Itasca temple last week. The efforts at the event will be replicated by him elsewhere to help increase the number of registered voters in the Indian-American community.

Meanwhile, Raja Krishnamoorthi continued his incredible fundraising success by bringing in more than $650,000 in the 4th quarter of 2017. The first-term Member of Congress from the 8th District of Illinois that includes Chicago’s west and northwest suburbs has more than $3.31 million cash on hand to begin his re-election campaign as of the end of the fourth fundraising quarter that ended December 31.

“My constituents sent me to Washington to work every day on growing and strengthening the middle class, and that’s what we’ve done,” Krishnamoorthi said. “These resources will help us amplify that message to continue our important work in Congress. Krishnamoorthi and Republican Congressman Glenn “GT” Thompson of Pennsylvania are the two lead sponsors of bipartisan legislation that passed the House of Representatives unanimously to improve career and technical education, as well as to help give Americans the skills they need to compete for in-demand jobs.

The Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act (H.R. 2353) reauthorizes the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act and is the first major overhaul of the program since 2006.

“As President Trump said in his State of the Union speech, career and technical education is going to be a critical part of our country’s economy, and this legislation will help strengthen and modernize it,” Krishnamoorthi said. “The bill works to close the skills gap by pairing businesses and educators together to establish training programs to prepare students for in-demand careers.” The son of immigrants, Krishnamoorthi was elected to Congress in November 2016 with nearly 60 percent of the vote against his Republican opponent.

The Senate Commerce Committee voted to approve President Donald Trump’s four nominees to the Federal Trade Commission, who included Indian American Rohit Chopra, a spokeswoman for the committee said on February 28th.

The panel approved the nominations of Chopra, a Democrat; as well as antitrust lawyer Joe Simons, who will chair the commission; and Republicans Christine Wilson and Noah Phillips.

It was not immediately clear when the full Senate would vote on the nominations. Trump has been slow in filling the FTC posts, leaving the agency in the hands of two Obama appointees for more than a year into his term, according to a Reuters report.

The FTC works with the U.S. Justice Department to enforce antitrust law and investigates companies accused of deceptive advertising.

The FTC has been sharply criticized for settling with Google in early 2013 after a lengthy investigation into whether the company had manipulated search results to hurt rivals, among other offenses, the report said.

U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer has recommended that the White House nominate one of his top aides, Rebecca Slaughter, to the second Democratic seat, it added.

Chopra is a senior fellow at the Consumer Federation of America. His work there has focused on consumer protection issues facing young people and military families. He is widely regarded for his expertise in the student loan market. (See earlier India-West story here.)

He previously served as assistant director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, where he oversaw the agency’s work on behalf of students and young consumers. He was also named by the Secretary of the Treasury to serve as the CFPB’s Student Loan Ombudsman. Chopra later served as Special Adviser to the Secretary of Education to seek enhancements to student loan servicing and to develop stronger consumer protection standards.

Indian American Hirsh Singh announced on Tuesday, Feb. 27 that he will be running for Congress in New Jersey’s 2nd Congressional District, according to the Press of Atlantic City. Sing will be seeking to replace Republican Frank LoBiondo, who is not seeking re-election.

Singh, a Republican, said in a statement he wants to represent the district as a conservative and work to protect President Donald Trump’s agenda. “South Jersey deserves a conservative champion in Congress — someone who will defend the president’s agenda, fight to bring our fair share of tax dollars back to South Jersey, and stand up to Nancy Pelosi and the radical left,” Singh said. “The president’s agenda of slashing regulations, cutting taxes and returning decision-making to state and local governments is working to grow the economy and must be supported.”

In his statement Singh said that he plans to go against President Donald Trump’s agenda and protect his district from its effects. “The president’s agenda of slashing regulations, cutting taxes and returning decision-making to state and local governments is working to grow the economy and must be supported,” he added.

Singh had previously run for governor of New Jersey last year. However, he ended up losing the primary to Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno. Singh earned his engineering degree from the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) and has worked with NASA, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Pentagon and the United States military where he worked on missile defense systems, satellite navigation, drones, electronic warfare and aircraft safety.

“In the coming weeks, I look forward to meeting with the residents of the 2nd Congressional District, listening to their concerns and sharing my vision for a stronger and more prosperous South Jersey. We need a new voice in Washington who will fight for all of the residents of South Jersey,” Singh said in a statement.

Indian American Beej Das of Massachusetts, a 3rd Congressional District candidate minced no words when asked for specific opinions on politics and policy. Das sat down with The Sun’s editorial board last week to discuss his candidacy for U.S. Rep. Niki Tsongas’ seat, which will open when she retires at the end of her current term. His pitch to voters centered around one key word: “different.”

Das believes Congress should vote to overturn federal laws criminalizing marijuana. He thinks the Democratic party whose nomination he seeks was “tone deaf” in the previous election cycle and needs a new perspective to flourish. He finds President Donald Trump’s rhetoric on immigration “disastrous.”

And as Trump continues his push for a wall along the southern border, Das is clear that he would not agree, even in exchange for protections for DACA recipients who will soon be vulnerable to deportation.

“If the wall is nomenclature for tougher border security, nobody in the room is going to say no,” Das said. “(But) if the wall is a wall, it’s going to be a no. If it’s going to be a 30-foot wall, then no. That’s not who we are. The Berlin Wall fell for a reason. Let’s not construct a second one.”

Das sat down with The Sun’s editorial board Wednesday to discuss his candidacy for U.S. Rep. Niki Tsongas’ seat, which will open when she retires at the end of her current term. His pitch to voters centered around one key word: “different.”

Das described himself as a candidate who, despite never before running for elected office, could blend legal experience with business acumen to bring a fresh perspective to Congress. After graduating from law school at the University of Michigan, Das, a Democrat clerked for Judge Benson Everett Legg, a Republican appointee, on the federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Recently, the Indian American candidate announced in a campaign press release that he has raised $425,000 for his Congress run this year and currently has $550,000 cash on hand, according to the Lowell Sun. “I’m incredibly grateful for the number of individuals who believe in my campaign enough to support it financially. I’m particularly proud that more than half of our donations in the fourth quarter are small donations under $200. We were determined to raise the necessary funds for a competitive race that will allow us to run a grassroots campaign and meet as many voters as possible,” Das said in the release.

Das is a “constitutional lawyer by training, but an entrepreneur at heart” and has “built an innovative hotel company” which has over 100 full-time employees in three states, according to his website. Both of his parents came from India in the early 1960’s to study and build a better life for themselves, they eventually received their Ph.D.s at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst and his mom became a professor at Lowell State College while his dad became one of America’s top engineers, according to his website.

Das received his Political Science degree from Middlebury College in Vermont after he attended UMass Lowell and grew fond of politics in 1988 when he was the President of the Young Democrats as well as an early volunteer for Gov. Michael Dukakis.

He then went on to study law at the University of Michigan Law School in Ann Arbor before becoming a “federal law clerk to Hon. Judge Benson Everett Legg of the United States District Court for Maryland where I helped decide cases ranging from civil rights, affirmative action and discrimination, commercial disputes, intellectual property, to drugs and other criminal matters,” according to his website. Das then returned to UMass Lowell to teach classes on the sociology of law and started a career at a leading Boston law firm before joining the hotel business.