Feed aggregator

Trump Backs Senate GOP Bill To Give Americans $1,500 Checks For Health Care — Here’s Who Qualifies

Matzav -

A Republican proposal in the Senate that would route up to $1,500 directly into Americans’ health savings accounts has quickly earned President Trump’s enthusiastic backing.

Speaking with reporters aboard Air Force One, the president made clear why the idea appeals to him. “I like the concept. I don’t want to give the insurance companies any money,” he said, blasting the industry for its practices. “They’ve been ripping off the public for years,” he continued, calling Obamacare “a scam to make the insurance companies rich. … Billions and billions of dollars is paid directly to insurance companies.”

The legislation had been expected to reach the Senate floor this week. Its aim is to relieve the financial pressure on roughly 24 million people insured under Obamacare, many of whom are facing higher out-of-pocket costs.

A key feature of the bill is a direct cash allotment into health savings accounts: $1,000 for eligible Affordable Care Act enrollees aged 18 to 49, and $1,500 for those aged 50 to 64.

Eligibility hinges on several factors, including income. Individuals and families must earn no more than 700% of the federal poverty level to receive the benefit — meaning a single enrollee could qualify with income up to $109,550, and a family of four could qualify with income as high as $225,050.

In addition, only those enrolled in bronze-level plans — about one-third of ACA participants — or catastrophic plans are included. These plans come with steep deductibles but differ in premium costs: bronze plans can require paying up to 40%, while catastrophic plans generally carry minimal premiums.

The proposal sets aside as much as $10 billion for these health savings account payments. It explicitly bars any of the funds from being used on abortions or gender-reassignment procedures. Certain legally present immigrants may also qualify.

Notably, those on silver, gold, or platinum Obamacare plans — which offer higher coverage in exchange for higher premiums — do not qualify for the HSA deposits. The same exclusion applies to people insured through their employers, as well as those covered by Medicare or Medicaid.

Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of the bill’s architects, praised the president’s stance. “I absolutely agree with President Trump that we need to redirect subsidies from insurance companies and give patients the power,” he told The Post. He added, “Republicans want real solutions that actually make health care affordable and put money in families’ pockets. I applaud the President for his leadership on this issue.” Cassidy teamed up with Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo of Idaho to introduce the bill.

The Senate is expected to weigh this proposal Thursday alongside an $83 billion Democratic measure that would extend every Obamacare subsidy for another three years — a vote Democrats secured through last month’s shutdown-ending agreement.

The debate lands at a time when Trump is shifting his economic messaging ahead of the 2026 midterms, unveiling a slate of populist policies that include possible $2,000 tariff rebate checks and $1,000 Trump savings accounts for children.

Voters, meanwhile, continue to feel the squeeze of the roughly 20% cumulative inflation tied to Joe Biden’s term. Prices increased another 3% over the past year, according to the newest Bureau of Labor Statistics release.

The White House has rejected claims that tariffs are fueling higher consumer prices. Officials point instead to historic private-sector investment in U.S. manufacturing and a rebalancing of global trade agreements that they say benefits American workers.

At a Pennsylvania event earlier the same day, Trump underlined his economic message once more, declaring he has “no higher priority than making America affordable again.” He also defended his trade policies, telling attendees, “If we didn’t have tariffs, you would have no steel. We wouldn’t have one steel mill anywhere in the United States, and that would be really bad for national security.”

Addressing energy costs, he reminded the crowd, “When energy comes down, your other prices come down.”

He then highlighted tax relief already set to take effect. “We’re also putting thousands of dollars in the pockets of hard-working Pennsylvanians with the largest tax cuts in American history: That’s no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security for our great seniors,” he said. “And all of that kicks in on Jan. 1.”

The administration also framed the health-care legislation as part of its broader effort to fight runaway medical costs. White House spokesman Kush Desai criticized the opposing party’s approach. “The current system is not working to deliver health care at reasonable prices for everyday Americans. Democrats’ push to maintain these high prices by giving more money to insurance companies is not a real solution for President Trump,” he said.

Desai noted the president’s focus on negotiating with drug manufacturers and cracking down on systemic waste. “The President has instead focused on lowering prescription drug costs by hammering out deals with pharmaceutical companies, as well as taking on waste, fraud and abuse in the system to deliver results for patients, and will continue to deliver policy solutions that lower costs in the healthcare market for the American people.”

{Matzav.com}

Israel Pressures Islamic Jihad for Return of Final Hostage’s Remains as Mediation Reaches Breaking Point

Yeshiva World News -

Israeli officials issued a sharply worded demand Wednesday after determining that Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives know the location of the remains of St.-Sgt.-Maj. Ran Gvili, the last Israeli hostage whose body has not been recovered from Gaza. The revelation has injected renewed tension into ongoing negotiations and threatens to halt the next phase of the […]

Jewish Delegation Makes First Visit to Aleppo Synagogues in Decades

Yeshiva World News -

A Jewish delegation visited two historic synagogues yesterday in Aleppo’s Al-Jamiliya and Bab al-Nasr neighborhoods, the first such visit in decades. The sites, including the old Jewish school, had been locked for many years and were opened under heavy security, with streets closed during the visit. The delegation recently received permission from the Syrian government, […]

Judge Blocks Trump’s National Guard Deployment in LA

Matzav -

A federal court has once again stepped into the standoff between Washington and Sacramento, with U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ordering that California must regain authority over its National Guard units currently stationed in Los Angeles. His ruling on Wednesday temporarily blocks the Trump administration from continuing to deploy those troops without the state’s consent, though he paused the injunction until Monday.

State officials had gone to court arguing that the circumstances used to justify the troop activation were no longer relevant. When President Donald Trump initially assumed command of the California National Guard in June, more than 4,000 service members were mobilized. By late October, that presence had dwindled dramatically, leaving only “a 100 or so troops” positioned in the Los Angeles area, California noted.

The administration defended the continued deployment, insisting that Guard forces were still needed to bolster security around federal staff and facilities. “U.S. Justice Department lawyers said the administration still needed Guard members in the Los Angeles area to help protect federal personnel and property.” Requests for comment submitted to the White House on Wednesday were not answered.

The political confrontation intensified when the Republican administration extended the mission through February and pushed to send California Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, as part of a broader attempt to move federal forces into cities governed by Democrats—despite repeated objections from local officials.

California maintained throughout the legal battle that the Guard was being conscripted into service as a presidential security arm, contrary to long-standing restrictions on domestic military involvement. “California argued that the president was using Guard members as his personal police force in violation of a law limiting the use of the military in domestic affairs.”

The origins of the dispute trace back to large demonstrations against Trump’s expanded immigration enforcement. In response, Trump assumed command of the Guard without a gubernatorial request—the first such move in decades—and placed troops around a downtown Los Angeles federal detention center where protesters had gathered. Units were also assigned to accompany immigration agents during arrests in surrounding neighborhoods.

California quickly filed suit, prompting Judge Breyer to initially issue a temporary restraining order requiring control of the Guard to revert to the state. That ruling was later frozen by an appellate court panel while the case proceeded.

For its part, the administration argued that the judiciary had no authority to interfere with the president’s determination that unrest surrounding the protests amounted to conditions in which “violence during the protests made it impossible for him to execute U.S. laws with regular forces and reflected a rebellion, or danger of rebellion.”

After a full trial, Breyer concluded in September that the federal deployment violated the governing statutes. His decision aligned with rulings from other courts that had similarly blocked attempts to send National Guard units to Portland and Chicago as part of the administration’s urban enforcement strategy.

{Matzav.com}

Religious Zionist Party: No Final Stance Yet on Chareidi Draft Framework

Matzav -

Intense consultations inside the Religious Zionist party — including a gathering of its leading rabbonim — have led to a developing consensus that the faction may ultimately support the government’s proposed draft law, even though it grants wide exemptions to the chareidi tzibbur. The matter drew unusual public scrutiny, prompting the party to convene a serious, in-depth gathering on Tuesday to address the wave of criticism over the possibility of backing the bill.

At the closed-door meeting, party MKs sat together with rabbonim, who were invited to express their views on the bill’s long-term consequences for Klal Yisroel. Among those who came to weigh in were Rabbi Chaim Gantz, Rabbi Chananel Etrog, Rabbi Shimon Cohen, Rabbi Chaim Wolfson, Rabbi Eliyahu Blumenzwieg, Rabbi Yaakov Medan, Rabbi Yoel Manovitch, Rabbi Eyal Greiner, Rabbi Yigal Levenstein, Rabbi Yehuda Sadan, Rabbi Shmuel Haber, and Rabbi Eliezer Shinwald.

The party later explained that the purpose of the gathering was to “examine ways to enable significant chareidi enlistment to the IDF,” particularly given the sharp disagreements over the proposed framework. A range of perspectives was voiced. Some argued that the bill was unlikely to produce meaningful results on the ground, while others cautioned that pushing it through without revisions could weaken trust between the party and its core dati leumi supporters — especially after repeated commitments to the Hesder yeshivos were, in their view, not adequately honored.

By the end of the discussion, the assembled rabbonim had reached a unified recommendation: the party should insist on substantial amendments. Party chairman Minister Bezalel Smotrich accepted the guidance of the rabbonim and committed to pursue changes that would reshape the proposal into one that is workable, fair, and aligned with the party’s responsibilities to the tzibbur.

In its statement, the party emphasized that it will continue the internal dialogue and intends to push for revisions that ensure any final law includes genuine, actionable mechanisms to encourage chareidi enlistment, while safeguarding Torah values and maintaining respect for those who already serve.

As public speculation intensified, the party released a follow-up announcement clarifying: “Contrary to various reports, no practical decisions have yet been made, and the faction is formulating its demands and conditions for supporting the law. The meeting was held as part of an in-depth learning process for faction members and rabbis, focusing on the law, its implications, and ways to correct historical injustices and encourage haredim to enlist in the IDF. At the meeting, various opinions were expressed, both by the rabbis and the faction members, and it was agreed that the discussions would continue.”

The faction underscored that its only guiding principle is the protection of Am Yisroel: “Even now, the entire faction is determined to vote only for a law that will lead to real and swift enlistment of chareidim to the IDF, in order to meet Israel’s security needs and ease the burden on the combat soldiers and their families. The Religious Zionist party, which represents the sector that serves the most, is committed to changing the current situation in practical terms and will make its decisions solely based on the merits of the matter, detached from campaigns and political interests from all sides. The faction has only one consideration before its eyes: the security of Israel and the religious and national obligation of IDF service for all parts of the nation,” the statement concluded.

{Matzav.com}

Pages

Subscribe to NativUSA Portal aggregator