Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday that only a negotiation between House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and President Biden can deliver a resolution to the fight over the debt ceiling, and indicated the Senate would end up accepting any deal reached by House Republicans and the White House.

McConnell said slim Democratic majority in the Senate makes it highly unlikely that the Senate could pass any resolution to the debt ceiling that the GOP-led House could accept. For that reason, he said it’s up to McCarthy and Biden to find a way forward.

‘I can’t imagine any kind of debt ceiling measure that could pass the Senate would also pass the House,’ McConnell told reporters. ‘In this current situation, the debt ceiling fix, if there is one… will have to come out of the House.’

‘So I think it’s entirely reasonable for the new speaker and his team to put spending reduction on the table,’ he added. ‘I wish him well in talking to the president. That’s where a solution lies.’

McConnell’s prediction reflects the reality of a 51-49 Senate that needs 60 votes to pass legislation. Even if nine Senate Republicans went along with Senate Democrats to approve a debt ceiling hike, that agreement would go nowhere in the House, where Republicans are demanding significant spending cuts before agreeing to raise the borrowing limit.

Similarly, Senate Democrats are unlikely to break ranks and support a Senate Republican debt ceiling hike that calls for spending cuts.

So far, House Republicans have called on President Biden to negotiate a deal that allows a debt ceiling hike and cuts spending. But Biden and the White House have said they will not negotiate, and are warning that Republicans are threatening an economic disaster by demanding a debt ceiling hike with conditions.

Several Democrats have warned that GOP demands will lead to economic ruin. Tuesday morning, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., imagined the worst-case scenario of a debt default as a result of GOP demands for spending cuts.

‘Listen to what could happen if we default,’ Schumer said on the Senate floor. ‘Interest rates will go up on mortgages, on car loans, on credit cards. Pensions, the money people had put aside, will lose billions. So will IRAs and 401(k)s in all likelihood. Home values will decline because when mortgage interest rates go up, people are willing to pay less for homes.’

Republicans have said they have no interest in allowing the government to default on what it owes, and that the two parties have worked before to agree to new spending terms during a debt ceiling debate. The GOP also says the growing $31.4 trillion debt is as much a threat to U.S. security as a possible default.

‘We have several months to reach a bipartisan deal, which Congress has successfully done numerous times in past debt ceiling negotiations,’ House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, told Fox News. ‘While defaulting on our debt is an unrealistic outcome, bankrupting the country and our children’s future is a real and irreparable scenario.’

President Biden on Tuesday said he is tired of trickle-down economics in a meeting with Democratic congressional leaders.

‘I want the wealthy to continue to be able to do well. But, look, I’m tired of this trickle-down economics,’ he said. ‘I want to build this economy from the bottom up, the middle out, and when that happens poor folks have a shot, the middle class does well and the wealthy never get hurt.’

Biden has criticized Republican economic policies in the past. In October 2022, he blasted what he termed as ‘mega MAGA trickle down.’

‘If Republicans get their way, the deficit is going to soar. The tax burden is going to fall on the middle class,’ Biden warned Friday. ‘And Republicans are working really hard. And this was kind of — I have to admit every once in a while they surprise me. They have three — not one, not two — three plans to cut Social Security benefits. Three plans. It’s not going to stop there.’

During Tuesday’s meeting, which included Vice President Kamala Harris and other senior Democratic leaders, he said Republicans were serious about cutting Social Security and Medicare. 

‘I love their 30 percent sales tax,’ Biden said. ‘We want to talk a lot about that but look, I have no intention of letting the Republicans wreck our economy, nor does anybody around this table in my view.’

A new bill introduced in the Connecticut state legislature would allow illegal immigrants to vote in the Constitution State, marking the latest push in a number of states to broaden voting to include non-citizens.

The legislation would amend the state’s constitution to ‘allow undocumented immigrants who are residents of the state to be admitted as electors for purposes of voting in municipal and state elections.’

State Rep. Juan Candelaria, who introduced the proposal for the amendment, told the Hartford Courant that he didn’t expect the bill to pass this time, but to open a debate for the future.

‘When we talk about undocumented individuals, they are part of our fabric of this nation and of the state…They’re part of the community and they should have a voice,’ Candelaria said. ‘People might not be amicable to this idea, and I respect that opinion, but at least by having the process, we can have the dialogue and we can have the debate. And that’s all I want.’

Republicans in the chamber immediately opposed the bill, with the Republican House leader telling the outlet that the proposal was ‘completely outrageous.’

‘I think that the fact that we have open borders and now we are potentially opening up elections to non-citizens completely erodes our sovereignty in this country and in our state,’ Rep. Vincent Candelora said.

The bill marks the latest push to allow non-citizens, sometimes including illegal immigrants, to vote in some elections.

Last year the Washington D.C. city council voted to advance a bill that would allow noncitizens to vote, if they were otherwise qualified to vote. That sparked significant pushback from federal lawmakers on the Hill – who moved to block it.

On Monday, Vermont’s state Supreme Court ruled that noncitizens may continue to vote in municipal elections in Vermont’s capital city of Montpelier,

In 2021, the Democrat-controlled Vermont Legislature approved two separate bills to change the municipal charters of Montpelier and Winooski to allow legal residents who are not U.S. citizens to vote in local elections. Republican Gov. Phil Scott vetoed the measures but the Legislature overrode his vetoes. Republicans filed a lawsuit, saying the moves were unconstitutional.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A new wealth tax being pushed by California Democrats is the latest of several recent measures in the Golden State to tax the rich — and not the last one in the works.

Last week, Democrat Assemblyman Alex Lee introduced a bill in California that would impose an annual 1.5% tax on those with a ‘worldwide net worth’ above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024.

As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop, and those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%.

The legislation is a modified version of a wealth tax approved in the California Assembly in 2020 that the Democrat-led state Senate declined to pass.

The current version just introduced includes measures to allow California to impose wealth taxes on residents even years after they left the state and moved elsewhere.

According to experts, the wealth tax is one of several proposals in the state to target high-income earners.

‘The wealth tax California Democrats are now pushing is the sort of class warfare that California voters rejected last year when they voted down Proposition 30, a tax hike on high earners that, like the proposed wealth tax, was touted as a way to make the rich pay higher taxes,’ Patrick Gleason, vice president of state affairs at the Americans for Tax Reform, told Fox News Digital.

Proposition 30 was a 2022 ballot measure that would’ve raised the state’s top income tax rate — already the highest in the nation at 13.3% — beyond 15%. About 58% of voters rejected the tax hike.

Despite the resounding defeat, however, another effort to raise California’s top marginal tax rate has already made it onto the ballot for the 2024 election. The measure, officially titled the California Pandemic Early Detection and Prevention Initiative, would raise the top marginal state income tax rate from its current level to 14.05% on earnings above $5 million. The new top rate would remain in effect for 10 years.

The proposed tax hike made it to the ballot with the help of Guarding Against Pandemics, a nonprofit founded and led by Gabe Bankman-Fried, the brother of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried. The group dedicated millions of dollars to a campaign to get the statewide initiative that would tax California’s wealthiest residents and fund public health initiatives on the ballot,  the Los Angeles Times has repored. 

Gabe Bankman-Fried stepped down as director in November, three days after FTX filed for bankruptcy.

It’s unclear whether Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom will support the 2024 measure. His office didn’t respond to a request for comment. The governor opposed Proposition 30.

In a separate proposal last year that never passed, lawmakers sought to add to the 13.3% rate a 1% surcharge to gross income of more than $1 million, 3% on income over $2 million, and 3.5% on income above $5 million.

However, Democrats in California haven’t just been pushing for tax hikes on the rich — many such efforts have been targeted at the entire state. 

Last year, for example, lawmakers introduced a bill that would impose a 25% tax on the profits from a home resold within three years after being bought, the Los Angeles Times noted at the time.

Perhaps most striking, California legislators passed and Newsom signed into law major tax increases on employers right in the heart of the COVID-19 pandemic, in the summer of 2020. Among other measures, the law for the next three years suspends the ability of taxpayers to deduct net operating losses, which occur when one’s deductions for the year are more than their income for the year, and limits business tax credits to $5 million per year.

According to the California Tax Foundation, the law amounts to a ‘$9.2 billion tax increase over three years ($4.4 billion in 2020) on California employers by limiting and suspending tax laws that were intended to help struggling businesses and support California jobs.’

Despite such taxes, California faces a massive $22.5 billion budget deficit this year — after the state enjoyed a large surplus last year. Lee, who introduced the most recent wealth tax, hopes his bill can address the current deficit.

‘This is how we can keep addressing our budgetary issues,’ he told the Los Angeles Times. ‘Basically, we could plug the entire hole.’

Economists differ over the point at which raising taxes can become counterproductive in terms of raising government revenue. What’s clear, however, is that people are leaving high-tax states — including California.

Indeed, the 10 highest tax states lost nearly 1 in 100 residents in net domestic migration between July 2021 and July 2022, while the 10 lowest tax states gained almost 1 in 100, according to a recent analysis by James Doti, president emeritus and economics professor at Chapman University. 

Meanwhile, the U-Haul Growth Index, which measured more than two million one-way trips last year, found that the only other state with more than 30 million residents, California, ranked last on the index as demand for trucks out of the Golden State spiked.

The exodus from California, particularly of high-income earners, could prove problematic for the government’s coffers as the top 0.5% of taxpayers pay 40% of California’s state income tax, according to recent figures.

H.D. Palmer of the California Department of Finance said in a recent interview with California Public Radio that in 2020, 1% of the total number of income tax returns that were filed were responsible for more than 49% of all the personal income tax that was paid in that year.

Several top Democratic lawmakers, who voted for more federal oil and gas leasing in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), were quick to criticize Republican legislation Tuesday that would similarly tether future Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) releases to additional leasing.

The lawmakers — Reps. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and Kathy Castor, D-Fla. — explained during a press call Tuesday afternoon that they were willing to support more leasing in some cases even after they criticized such leasing as a handout for the fossil fuel industry. The three Democrats have all previously taken hard-line stances against new fossil fuel production on federal lands and waters.

‘In terms of the Inflation Reduction [Act], in terms of the piece of legislation where we voted for mandated sales, it’s the process of balance,’ Grijalva, the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, said in response to a question from Fox News Digital during the call. ‘There is no balance to H.R. 21 and [the IRA] provided the most resources historically to deal with the real issue of the climate crisis and climate action associated with those resources. That was the balance, that was the investment.’ 

‘There is no investment in H.R. 21 and, in fact, there’s a retraction. So that’s the difference,’ he continued. ‘The difference is compromise, trying to meet in the middle, doing some balancing to try to get the larger investment into climate action and I’m glad we did it.’

The Democrats organized the call to attack H.R. 21, the Strategic Production Response Act, a Republican-led bill that would require the Department of Energy to only tap the SPR when there is a severe energy supply interruption and not until the Interior Department (DOI) issues a plan to increase oil and gas production on federal lands and waters. The legislation is slated for a floor vote later this week.

However, despite their criticism of the Strategic Production Response Act, Grijalva, Pallone and Castor all voted in favor of the IRA which President Biden signed into law in August. 

The IRA, which was authored by Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., requires the federal government to reinstate Lease Sale 257, an offshore lease sale stretching across 80 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico, and to hold three other offshore lease sales that the Biden administration had canceled over climate concerns. 

The bill also tethers new renewable energy leases to additional fossil fuel leases. Under the bill, the DOI is prohibited from issuing wind or solar permits unless it issued an onshore oil and gas permit during the previous 120-day period and at least two million acres of land was leased for oil and gas development during the previous year.

‘What we’re trying to do as Democrats, with the Inflation Reduction Act as our primary vehicle, is to encourage renewables — wind, offshore wind, solar and other renewable resources through tax credits and other means that we put in the Inflation Reduction Act. That’s one of the reasons that we support it,’ Pallone, the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, told Fox News Digital during the call Tuesday. 

‘So, we’re trying to be responsible — move away from fossil fuels and at the same time that you’re still pumping more fossil fuels.’

Pallone also reiterated a common critique of proposals to increase fossil fuel production on federal lands, saying that there are currently thousands of unused leases held by energy companies.

And Castor, the former chairwoman of the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, added that there were no ‘redeeming qualities’ in the Strategic Production Response Act.

‘There’s no comparison whatsoever. H.R. 21 — there are no redeeming qualities here,’ Castor said. ‘It is a big giveaway to Big Oil and polluters. The Republicans are trying to camouflage it as tied to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The Inflation Reduction Act is a landmark piece of legislation and while it does have some resource development pieces in it, it is the most significant investment in clean energy climate resilience in the history of America.’ 

‘Over time, I’m hopeful that our Republican colleagues will break how they have to genuflect to the polluters and really become partners with us in solving the climate crisis, bringing down costs for consumers, because cleaner energy is cheaper energy — protecting our federal lands that people enjoy, that are needed for clean air, clean water, the biodiversity of species,’ she continued. ‘So there’s simply no comparison.’

After the IRA was introduced, several environmental groups blasted the legislation saying it would worsen climate change and pad oil industry profits.

‘This is a climate suicide pact,’ Brett Hartl, the government affairs director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said in July. ‘It’s self-defeating to handcuff renewable energy development to massive new oil and gas extraction.’ 

‘Friends of the Earth stands in solidarity with the climate justice and environmental justice organizations and communities that are expressing deep concern or opposition to the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022,’ Erich Pica, the president of Friends of the Earth, added at the time.

Republicans in Maine said Tuesday they will propose a host of legal changes to try to cap the surging cost of home heating in the state.

Maine is heavily dependent on heating oil, and the cost of that has doubled over the past two years, Republican members of the state Senate said. All told, electricity rates have increased 165% in recent years, the senators said.

The senators said they will propose reforms to the Maine Public Utilities Commission as well as a number of acts to try to expand options for home energy creation. The announcement came about three weeks after the Maine Legislature signed off on $450 relief checks to help residents with winter heating costs.

Republicans said Tuesday that the relief checks, proposed by Democratic Gov. Janet Mills, don’t address the structural changes the state needs in how it approaches home heating.

‘Skyrocketing energy costs are crushing Maine families and small businesses,’ said Sen. Matt Harrington. ‘Maine people deserve more than a $450 check.’

One of the Republican proposals would promise more transparency and accountability during the bidding process used by the public utilities commission. Another would remove a 100-megawatt limit on hydropower, Harrington said.

Republicans are also planning bills to promote use of geothermal exchange heating and cooling systems, and to allow a variance for outdoor wood boilers. Members of the party said those moves would open up new options for residents.

The GOP also wants to reform the way Maine uses net metering, which is a financial incentive used to encourage solar power. Republicans in the state have often characterized the program as inequitable.

Democrats control both houses of the Maine Legislature as well as the governor’s office, which puts Republican legislation at a disadvantage. However, both parties agree the state needs solutions to bring down the cost of home energy.

Gov. Mills favors a multi-step approach to lowering energy costs that includes diversifying Maine’s energy sources, weatherizing more homes and businesses and installing more efficient heating and cooling technology systems, said Anthony Ronzio, a spokesperson for the Governor’s Energy Office.

‘It is important to note that Maine’s high energy prices are driven by the volatility of global energy markets and made worse by Maine’s overreliance on fossil fuels,’ he said.

Two Florida residents were indicted by the U.S. Department of Justice on Tuesday for attacks on crisis pregnancy resource centers, becoming the first of such indictments following the Supreme Court’s leaked draft opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Caleb Freestone, 27, and Amber Smith-Stewart, 23, allegedly conspired to prevent reproductive health services facility employees at a clinic in Winter Haven, Florida from providing services, according to the indictment.

Both suspects are accused of targeting the pregnancy resource facility in Winter Haven and vandalizing it with spray-painted threats such as, ‘If abortions aren’t safe than niether [sic] are you,’ ‘YOUR TIME IS UP!!,’ ‘WE’RE COMING FOR U,’ and ‘We are everywhere.’

ABORTION IS ‘GRUESOME SIGN’ OF WHAT SOCIETY HAS FORGOTTEN, SAYS CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP 

Winter Haven was not the only clinic Freestone and Smith-Stewart targeted. In fact, the indictment alleges they also targeted facilities in Hollywood, Florida and Hialeah, Florida.

By spray-painting the threats, Freestone and Smith-Stewart violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances, or FACE, Act. President Bill Clinton signed the act in 1994 and prohibits the use of any type of force or intimidation against anyone seeking an abortion, anyone exercising their First Amendment right of religious freedom, or intentionally damaging or destroying a reproductive healthcare facility or place of worship.

Freestone and Smith-Stewart allegedly used threats of force to intimidate and interfere with the employees at a reproductive health services facility in Winter Haven on the basis that they were providing those services.

The duo also allegedly violated the FACE Act by damaging the facility with spray-painted threatsbecause the facility provides reproductive health services.

Both Freestone and Smith-Stewart face up to 12 years in prison, three years of supervised release and fines up to $350,000 if convicted.

Several parties are involved in the investigation and prosecution of this case, including the FBI Tampa Field Office, the Miami Police Department, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lisa Thelwell and Trial Attorneys Sanjay Patel and Laura-Kate Bernstein of the Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section.

The DOJ has come under fire for arrests of pro-life activists last year, in the wake of a number of yet unsolved attacks on crisis pregnancy centers.

Democrat New York Gov. Kathy Hochul says rehiring unvaccinated health care workers is not the ‘right answer’ despite the vaccination mandate being overturned and the state suffering from a major health care worker shortage.

‘I don’t think the answer is to have someone who comes in, who’s sick, be exposed to someone who can give them COVID-19. I don’t know if that’s the right answer, but I’m pretty sure it’s not. So, we’re exploring our options,’ Hochul told local media Tuesday after being asked about bringing back unvaccinated health care workers. ‘But I think everybody who goes into a health care facility or a nursing home should have the assurance and their family member should know that we have taken all steps to protect the public health. And that includes making sure those who come in contact with them at their time of most vulnerability, when they are sick or elderly, will not pass on the virus.’

NEW YORK SUPREME COURT REINSTATES ALL EMPLOYEES FIRED FOR BEING UNVACCINATED, ORDERS BACK PAY 

A reporter pushed back, asking Hochul if there were other precautions, like wearing a mask, to allow unvaccinated health care workers back into hospitals.

‘I cannot put people into harm’s way, because when you go into a health care facility, you expect that you’re not going to come out sicker than you went in. I think that’s something every New Yorker would expect,’ Hochul said.

In a Jan. 19 letter, a group of 10 lawmakers expressed concern to Hochul about the severe staffing shortages they say have been exacerbated by the mandate.

‘Decades of healthcare experience are being left on the sidelines or pushed into other states as a result of the mandate,’ the Republican lawmakers wrote in the joint letter. ‘This is even more noteworthy given that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control director has publicly stated that the vaccine cannot prevent transmission.’

Lawmakers wrote the letter days after a state Supreme Court judge struck down the mandate on Jan. 13, calling it ‘null, void and of no effect.’

In his ruling, Judge Gerard Neri said the governor and the New York State Department of Health overstepped their authority by making the requirement permanent because the COVID-19 vaccine is not included in the state’s public health law.

PFIZER COVID VACCINE SAFETY IS ‘CLEARLY SOMETHING WE HAVE TO TAKE SERIOUSLY’: DR. MARC SEIGEL 

‘The mandate is beyond the scope of respondents’ authority and is therefore null, void and of no effect,’ Neri said.

Following the ruling, the state health department said Saturday that it is ‘exploring its options’ after the ruling.

Since Sep. 27, 2021, the state has required health care workers across New York to be vaccinated against the COVID-19 or be terminated. In the wake of the mandate, thousands of health care workers at nursing homes, hospitals and other health providers have been terminated, furloughed or forced to resign because they would not comply with the mandate creating a void in the industry.

New York’s health care system is in desperate need of staff, with reports of ambulances waiting for hours at local emergency rooms to unload patients.

A Wisconsin judge considered Tuesday whether to make clear that local election officials can accept absentee ballots missing parts of a witnesses address, the latest legal fight in the battleground state where Republicans oppose the acceptance of partial addresses.

The case was brought by the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin last fall, weeks before the midterm election. The crux of the lawsuit, and another similar pending case, rests with how much of a witness address needs to be present in order for an absentee ballot to count.

Wisconsin law says if the witness address is missing, the ballot can’t be counted. But state law does not define what constitutes missing. The bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission hasn’t said what constitutes a missing address. But it has issued guidance on what constitutes an address, saying it must contain three elements: a street number, street name and municipality.

‘There’s no definition of missing out there, which means (the election commission) is failing the clerks, it’s failing the people of Wisconsin by not determining what it should mean for purposes of ballot counting,’ argued Dan Lenz, an attorney for the League of Women Voters.

The Republican-controlled Legislature argues that an address is ‘missing’ if any one of those three elements is not present. The League of Women Voters asserts that only ballots completely missing an address, not just one part of it, should not count. The league argues that the state’s 1,800-plus local election clerks are making different decisions about what constitutes an address, adding that could lead to ballots being tossed in one place while being counted in another.

The Legislature asked the judge to dismiss the claim seeking a court order defining what constitutes a missing address. The Legislature argues that local elections clerks, not the state elections commission, should have been the ones sued.

Dane County Circuit Judge Nia Trammell said Tuesday following brief oral arguments that she intends to issue a written ruling within a month.

In 2016, the elections commission said that local election clerks could fill in missing information address information to ensure the ballots are counted. But a judge in September sided with Republicans and ruled that election clerks aren’t allowed to fill in missing information. Waukesha County Circuit Judge Michael Aprahamian did not rule on what constitutes an address, leading to the League of Women Voters lawsuit.

The league is represented by Fair Elections Center and Law Forward, law firms that have represented liberal groups suing over voting rights in Wisconsin.

Trammell and another Dane County judge refused to take emergency action in the weeks leading up to the November election to clarify the absentee ballot address issue, saying it would cause confusing heading into the election.

A similar lawsuit is pending, brought by the liberal group Rise Inc., which encourages students to vote. The suit seeks a ruling that partial addresses must be accepted on absentee ballots.

Very few ballots are returned in Wisconsin with missing or incomplete witness addresses.

The Legislative Audit Bureau in 2021 reviewed nearly 15,000 absentee ballot envelopes from the 2020 election across 29 municipalities and found that 1,022, or about 7%, were missing parts of their witness addresses. Only 15 ballots, or 0.1%, had no witness address.

Republican lawmakers on Tuesday chided President Biden for prioritizing a ‘woke ideology’ at the expense of the southern border crisis. 

Reps. Ashley Hinson of Iowa and Jim Banks of Indiana held a press conference Tuesday to ‘spotlight’ what they regarded as the ‘absolute failures of the Biden administration’ regarding addressing the border. 

‘We need to call out these failures and their woke ideology and their misplaced priorities, especially when it comes to what’s happening at our southern border,’ Hinson said, flanked by other Republican lawmakers. 

Hinson noted that illegal immigrant encounters topped more than 250,000 in December – 17 of whom were on the terror watch list, and ten of whom were sex offenders in the Del Rio Sector alone. 

All this, she said, has come about as Mexican drug cartels have made billions off of fentanyl and meth that is shipped into the country and killing Americans. 

Hinson said Biden’s meeting with Mexican President Andres Manual Lopez Obrador in Mexico City earlier this month was a missed opportunity to address this crisis. 

‘What commitments did they publish immediately following that meeting? Topping the list, diversity equity, and inclusion, climate change, and integrating gender perspectives into disaster response,’ she said. ‘That’s what they came up with to present to the American people,’ she said, adding that Americans ‘have no patience for these woke priorities.’ 

Rep. Banks noted that the six pillars of agreement between President Biden, President Lopez Obrador, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did not once mention the word fentanyl. 

The six pillars are: DEI, or ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion, climate change and the environment, competitiveness, migration and development, health, and regional security.

‘Ninety-seven days ago from today I wrote President Biden asking for a meeting to discuss the deadly fentanyl crisis and share with him more than 100 obituaries that parents who have lost their children to fentanyl sent to my office,’ Banks said. 

‘In the 97 days that Joe Biden has ignored my request to meet and talk about securing our border from the flow of fentanyl, the White House had time to meet with [a] transgender activist, the Golden State Warriors, and even George Clooney. So that tells you a lot about where the Biden administration priorities are.’ 

President Biden visited the southern border for the first time in early January, about a month after claiming during a visit to Arizona that he was not going to the borer ‘[b]ecause there are more important things going on.’ 

The White House has defended itself against repeated criticism from Republican lawmakers that Biden is not taking the border issue seriously. 

Earlier this month, the White House said border security and immigration are issues the president takes ‘very seriously since day one’ and blamed Republican political stunts for slowing down progress. 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for additional comment.