White House unveils new AI regulations for federal agencies
The Biden administration announced the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is rolling out new artificial intelligence (AI) regulations for federal agencies, building off the president’s executive order last year that requires AI developers to share certain information with the government. In a press call Wednesday afternoon, Vice President Kamala Harris said the new series of regulations, which include mandatory risk reporting and transparency rules informing people when agencies are using AI, would “promote the safe, secure and responsible use of AI.” “When government agencies use AI tools, we will now require them to verify that those tools do not endanger the rights and safety of the American people,” Harris said. “I’ll give you an example. If the Veterans Administration wants to use AI in VA hospitals to help doctors diagnose patients, they would first have to demonstrate that AI does not produce racially biased diagnoses.” EXPERTS CALL BIDEN EXECUTIVE ORDER ON AI A ‘FIRST STEP,’ BUT SOME EXPRESS DOUBTS Federal agencies will also be required to appoint a chief AI officer to oversee technology used in their departments “to make sure that AI is used responsibly.” Every year, agencies will also have to provide an online database listing their AI systems and an assessment of the risks they might pose. Harris said the new regulations were shaped by leaders in the public and private sectors, including computer scientists and civil rights leaders. A White House fact sheet says the new policy will “advance equity and civil rights and stand up for consumers and workers.” STATE AGS WARN BIDEN AI ORDER COULD CENTRALIZE CONTROL OVER TECH, BE USED FOR ‘POLITICAL ENDS’ OMB Director Shalanda Young said the new AI policy will require agencies to “independently evaluate” their uses of AI and “monitor them for mistakes and failures and guard against the risk of discrimination.” “AI presents not only risks but also a tremendous opportunity to improve public services and make progress of societal challenges like addressing climate change, improving public health and advancing equitable economic opportunity when used and overseen responsibly,” Young said on the press call. Each federal agency could use different AI systems and will need to have an independent auditor assess its risks, a senior White House official said on the call. The Biden administration has been taking more steps recently to curtail potential dangers of AI that could put users’ data at risk. In October, President Biden signed what the White House called a “landmark” executive order that contains the “most sweeping actions ever taken to protect Americans from the potential risks of AI systems.” WHITE HOUSE UNVEILS AI EXECUTIVE ORDER, REQUIRING COMPANIES TO SHARE NATIONAL SECURITY RISKS WITH FEDS Among them is requiring that AI developers share their safety-test results — known as red-team testing — with the federal government. Last month, a coalition of state attorneys general warned that Biden’s executive order could be used by the federal government to “centralize” government control over the emerging technology and that that control could be used for political purposes, including censoring what they may deem as disinformation. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP In a letter to Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes, a Republican, and 20 other state attorneys general, warned that the order would inject “partisan purposes” into decision-making, including by forcing designers to prove they can tackle “disinformation.” “The Executive Order seeks — without Congressional authorization — to centralize governmental control over an emerging technology being developed by the private sector,” the letter states. “In doing so, the Executive Order opens the door to using the federal government’s control over AI for political ends, such as censoring responses in the name of combating ‘disinformation.’” Fox News’ Greg Norman and Adam Shaw contributed to this report.
Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, raise a $25 million bulwark for Biden as Dems fret over Trump poll advantage
Facing a polling deficit with seven months to go until the November election, President Biden on Thursday will receive some help from his two most recent Democratic predecessors in the White House. Biden will team up with former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton at a fundraising extravaganza in New York City that the president’s campaign says will bring in over $25 million for his re-election bid. The star-studded event will include what’s being billed as an “armchair conversation” with the three presidents moderated by late night TV talk show host Stephen Colbert and musical performances from Lizzo, Queen Latifah, Ben Platt, Cynthia Erivo, and Lea Michele. The campaign says over 5,000 people will attend the gathering, which is being held at the storied Radio City Music Hall in midtown Manhattan. CAN TRUMP LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD WITH BIDEN IN 2024 FUNDRAISING FIGHT? Tickets range from $225 – to get in the door – to $100,000 for a photo with all three presidents – and up to $250,000-$500,000 to attend an intimate reception with Biden, Obama, and Clinton. The fundraising haul will help Biden boost his already formidable cash advantage over his Republican challenger, former President Donald Trump. “The numbers don’t lie: today’s event is a massive show of force and a true reflection of the momentum to reelect the Biden-Harris ticket,” campaign co-chair Jeffrey Katzenberg touted in a statement. And Katzenberg argued that “this historic raise is a show of strong enthusiasm for President Biden and Vice President Harris and a testament to the unprecedented fundraising machine we’ve built.” WHAT THE LATEST FOX NEWS NATIONAL POLL SHOWS IN THE BIDEN-TRUMP REMATCH Just as important, the teaming up of the three presidents is intended as a show of force to rally the Democratic base behind Biden. “This is a great event that showcases the Mount Rushmore of modern Democratic presidents,” longtime Democratic strategist Maria Cardona told Fox News. Cardona, a veteran of the Clinton White House who later served as a surrogate for Obama’s two presidential campaigns and Biden’s 2020 election and reprising that role this year, said the three presidents “will make an unequivocal statement of how meaningful the Democratic agenda has been to this country and to American families.” While the president holds the upper hand over his predecessor in the fundraising battle in their election rematch, Trump currently enjoys the early edge over Biden in public opinion polling – both in most national surveys and in many of the surveys in the six key battleground states the incumbent narrowly carried to win the White House in 2020. REPUBLICANS TOP DEMOCRATS IN THIS KEY MOTIVATING FACTOR IN THE BIDEN-TRUMP REMATCH That includes a five-point advantage for Trump over Biden in both a head-to-head and a five-way ballot match up in a Fox News national poll conducted March 22-25 and released on Wednesday. The fundraiser comes less than a week after Obama spent a couple of hours at the White House, meeting with his former vice president. But it was far from a social gathering. The two presidents, joined by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, headlined an organizing call highlighting the 14th anniversary of the landmark healthcare law known as the Affordable Care Act. Obama’s stop at the White House comes as he reportedly has warned Biden that the 2024 rematch with Trump will be extremely close. Senior Obama adviser Eric Schultz emphasized that the former president “will do all he can” to support Biden and “he looks forward to helping Democrats up and down the ballot make the case to voters this fall.” “Our strategy will be based on driving impact, especially where and when his voice can help move the needle,” Schultz added in a statement. The Trump campaign pilloried the fundraiser, with spokesman Steven Cheung arguing that the event is a sign the president needs to “trot out some retreads like Clinton and Obama.” The 81-year-old Biden, who four years ago made history as the oldest American ever elected president, will continue to face questions about his mental and physical durability, even his recent vigorous State of the Union address. The president also needs to show that he can energize younger voters, progressives, and Black and Latino Americans, who are all key parts of the Democratic base. Biden is also facing primary ballot box protests – materializing in “uncommitted” votes – over his support for Israel in its war in Gaza against Hamas. But the former president is also dealing with plenty of problems. Trump, who last year made history as the first president or former president to face criminal charges, now faces four major trials and a total of 91 indictments – including federal cases on his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and on handling classified documents. There’s also a massive civil fraud judgment that Trump is appealing. He will have to juggle his appearances in court with his time on the campaign trail. The 77-year-old Trump will also need to court the sizable block of Republican voters who backed Nikki Haley in the GOP nomination race. The former U.N. ambassador and South Carolina governor was Trump’s last remaining rival before she ended her White House campaign earlier this month. Haley’s support is shining a spotlight on Trump’s weakness with suburban and highly educated voters. Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub
Lok Sabha polls 2024: Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman declines BJP ticket, says ‘don’t have…’
Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman joined the BJP in 2008 and has served as a national spokesperson for the party since 2010. Sitharaman was born in Madurai, Tamil Nadu, on August 18, 1959.
Bhopal Lok Sabha constituency: Check polling date, candidates list, past election results
On May 7, during the third phase of the Lok Sabha election, Bhopal will cast its ballot.
Biden White House quietly intervening in international labor dispute over legal objections
The White House is escalating a labor dispute at a major mine in central Mexico, an action backed by powerful labor unions, but it could have a devastating effect on workers and the economy. The United States Trade Representative (USTR), which is housed in the White House, is pursuing the case by leveraging a little-used tool in the 2020 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). The Rapid Response Labor Mechanism (RRM), is a provision that allows the government to take enforcement action against factories if they fail to comply with domestic freedom of association and collective bargaining laws. As part of its effort, the USTR successfully convened the first-ever RRM tribunal to review concerns brought by labor officials in the U.S. and Mexico. “This announcement upholds the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to creating a more level playing field for workers to feel empowered and using every enforcement tool at our disposal to safeguard workers’ rights,” U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai said after her office filed its initial motion to convene the RRM tribunal. BIDEN ADMIN SCRUBS WEBPAGE SHOWING HOW TAXPAYERS FUND UNION ACTIVITIES However, the process has faced considerable pushback from the Mexican government, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the owner of the mine, Grupo Mexico, which has argued the U.S. government doesn’t have jurisdiction in the dispute. Critics have also warned the process, which is expected to conclude with a ruling as early as Friday, has lacked transparency. The case dates back more than a decade and a half when, in 2007, the powerful Mexican miners’ union Los Mineros went on strike at Grupo Mexico’s San Martin mine in Sombrerete, Zacatecas, which produces a high quantity of Mexico’s lead, zinc and copper supplies. The strike was related, in part, to safety conditions at the site. According to legal filings reviewed by Fox News Digital, the San Martin mine reopened 11 years later, in 2018, when the mine’s operator struck a deal with Los Trabajadores Coaligados, a coalition of workers that voted to return to work and end the strike. In June 2023, the Mexican Conciliation and Arbitration Board, a government panel, confirmed in a ruling that the strike was over and San Martin could operate as normal. REPUBLICANS WARN BIDEN ADMIN’S FOREIGN FARM WORKER RULE IS ‘GIVEAWAY TO BIG LABOR’ Still, that same month, USTR invoked the USMCA’s RRM and requested the Mexican government review whether workers at the mine were being denied their rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining. The request was in response to a petition filed by Los Mineros alongside the AFL-CIO and the United Steel Workers (USW). On Aug. 22, 2023, despite Mexico’s assertion that the case was outside the scope of the USMCA, USTR formally requested the first-ever RRM tribunal. “USTR should have never brought this RRLM case because it is jurisdictionally defective, and there has been no denial of rights at the mine,” said Jonathan Stoel, a partner at the law firm Hogan Lovells, which represents the San Martin mine. “The RRLM process since the June 2023 petition has been conducted unfairly by the U.S. government and has been rife with procedural violations. “The U.S. government’s own documents that were made public as a result of our FOIA request revealed that USTR rejected a similar petition containing the same facts in 2020 and confirmed that this petition is more about politics than alleged labor violations.” BIDEN ADMIN SLOW-WALKING GAS PIPELINE SUPPORTED BY LABOR UNIONS THAT WOULD EXPAND ENERGY ACCESS Those documents, reviewed by Fox News Digital, show USTR officials in the Trump administration expressed skepticism about invoking the RRM in the case. The revelation came in an October 2020 memo sent to then-U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. In filings submitted to the RRM tribunal convened by the U.S. last year, the San Martin mine has echoed some of those same concerns, arguing its facility falls outside the USMCA’s jurisdiction since its products are not exported to the U.S. and that the labor dispute predates the signing of the trade agreement. Rep. Carol Miller, R-W. Va., a member of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, penned a letter to Tai in late January, saying the RRM process has a limited scope and warning against abusing the provision. “Once again, Joe Biden is failing to promote fair trade or prioritize U.S. trade interests,” Miller told Fox News Digital in a written statement. “The Biden administration’s choice to use RRM to reopen already settled labor disputes that have no impact on American industry demonstrates a lack of seriousness in their trade agenda.” SOME GEORGIA WORKERS WOULD FIND IT HARDER TO BECOME UNION MEMBERS UNDER A NEW BILL And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation, filed a brief in the case, saying it was concerned about the broader implications of a North American nation invoking the RRM in the future. “The U.S. government’s pursuit of this case violates a central principal upon which the U.S. legal system was built. The principle is that laws do not have retroactive effect unless the lawmakers expressly specify otherwise,” the chamber’s November brief stated. “The facts upon which the U.S. government relies to support its case involving the San Martín mine occurred before the USMCA was negotiated, prior to the USMCA’s passage by the U.S. Congress, and prior to its entry into force.” Overall, the case, which may ultimately lead to the forcible closure of the San Martin mine, could have a major impact on the local economy in Sombrerete and Mexico’s economy at large. The mine employs about 1,000 workers and, last year, the mine produced more than 1.4 million tons of lead, zinc, copper and silver, key minerals for a wide variety of technologies and products, according to financial filings. And it could further benefit Los Mineros General-Secretary Napoleon Gomez Urrutia, who is facing criminal charges and was ordered by a Mexican court to pay $54 million in an alleged embezzlement scheme, Mexico Business News previously reported. One of Los Mineros’ demands
Whitmer faces backlash for controversial program helping migrants after illegal immigrant charged with murder
Michigan Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is facing intensified heat from critics over her state’s “newcomer rental subsidy” giving up to $500 to landlords that rent to migrants following the alleged murder of a woman by an illegal immigrant in Michigan. “Many refugees and other newcomers face critical housing challenges, and this program will increase access to better and more affordable housing opportunities while supporting a more rapid social integration to refugees and other newcomer populations to Michigan,” Michigan’s state website states regarding the program that was reported on this week by The Midwesterner. The website explains that the Newcomer Rental Subsidy program “provides Refugees and other Newcomer population-eligible households with rental assistance up to $500 per month for up to 12 months, with eligibility based on immigration status and household income.” In order to be a beneficiary of the program, applicants must have an “eligible immigration status” that includes refugees, asylees, special immigration visa holders, victims of human trafficking, Cuban and Haitian entrants, Afghan nationals, or Ukrainian humanitarian parolees. BORDER PATROL HAS ARRESTED 6,400 ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WITH CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS, 178 GANG MEMBERS IN FY24 Guidance from the state says that an individual or household can be a part of the program for up to 12 months and that single individual or households with two individuals can receive a credit of $300 per month that rises to up to $500 per month in households of up to six individuals. Landlords are issued payments through a system known as SIGMA and they have a choice to receive payments electronically or by check. “Payments will be made in three-month installments; first payment will be issued upon the application being approved,” the guidance explains. “Additional payments will be made thereafter.” DEMOCRATS IN DENIAL ON CRIMES OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. HERE’S THE REALITY THE REST OF AMERICA CAN’T IGNORE Whitmer’s critics blasted the program and raised safety concerns in light of several high profile instances of crimes being committed by illegal immigrants including a recent murder in Michigan believed to have been carried out by a man in the United States unlawfully. “Gretchen Whitmer is enabling Joe Biden’s open border policies by handing out cash to anyone who will take in unvetted illegal immigrants, undoubtedly risking the safety of our neighborhoods and communities,” Tudor Dixon, who ran as a Republican for governor against Whitmer in 2022, told Fox News Digital. “After the murder of Ruby Garcia less than a week ago, Whitmer should immediately cancel this program and demand Biden secure the border for the good of Michigan citizens.” Brandon Ortiz-Vite, an illegal immigrant who was deported to Mexico in 2020, was recently charged with felony murder, open murder, carjacking, carrying a concealed weapon and felony use of a firearm after the body of 25-year-old Ruby Garcia was discovered on U.S. 131 in downtown Grand Rapids earlier this month. “Rather than focus on border security and safe communities, the Whitmer administration appears to be focused on covering up our state’s population loss by subsidizing housing for not only refugees but anyone who has filed an application for asylum, over half of which are routinely rejected,” Michigan GOP State Representative Andrew Fink, who recently sponsored a bill that essentially bans sanctuary cities, told Fox News Digital. Fox News Digital reached out to Whitmer’s office multiple times for comment but did not receive a response. Fox News Digital’s Kyle Morris contributed to this report
Trump preps swing state expansion as questions arise over 2024 preparedness
FIRST ON FOX: Over the next month and a half, former President Trump’s campaign will be opening dozens of new offices in seven pivotal swing states, complete with hundreds of newly hired staffers, Fox News has learned. As President Biden and Trump appear headed for a rematch in November, the two will likely put a lot of energy into the seven swing states — Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and North Carolina — that could decide the election. In the latest Fox News Poll, the two were in a virtual dead heat in Pennsylvania, with Trump leading Biden 49% to 47%. The difference is within the margin of error. In Arizona, Trump won in a five-way matchup with Biden, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Jill Stein and Cornel West, posting 43% to Biden’s 39%. BILL MAHER VOWS TO DO ‘EVERYTHING HE CAN’ TO MAKE SURE TRUMP LOSES ELECTION Trump’s forthcoming changes to swing state campaign infrastructure comes as Biden criticizes Trump over his infrequent presence in key locations. Trump spent time in Iowa, South Carolina and New Hampshire during the Republican primaries as Biden began ramping up his campaign for the general election. With several criminal cases pending against Trump, time spent on the road campaigning could be limited, and critics have said Trump is slow to ramp up his ground game. BIDEN TEAM SEEKS TO PIN ‘BASEMENT’ CAMPAIGN REPUTATION ON TRUMP Michigan Republican Party Chairman Pete Hoekstra told The Associated Press this week the RNC and Trump campaign had yet to invest in building up the election effort in what promises to be a critical state come November. “We’ve got the skeleton right now,” Hoekstra told The Associated Press. “We’re going to have to put more meat on it.” His observation coincided with news President Biden’s re-election effort had opened 100 new offices and enlisted over 350 new staff members in Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania, adding to the already established swing state staffers working on the ground. “Donald Trump claiming he has a plan to build a battleground state operation while they don’t have money, lay off state staff and close community centers feels eerily similar to some other imminent Trump plans that never came to fruition, like the long promised infrastructure week or his Obamacare replacement. We’ll believe it when we see it,” Biden campaign spokesperson Seth Schuster said in a statement to Fox News Digital. But the RNC and Trump’s campaign pushed back on the idea that they’re behind schedule. “We don’t feel the need to talk about the tactics because we lead with our candidate — he’s a winning candidate,” Republican National Committee spokeswoman Danielle Alvarez said in an interview with Fox News Digital. “We are doing all the tactics,” Alvarez emphasized. “We are raising the money. We are deploying the assets. It all is happening.” She explained that Trump and the RNC aren’t always going to publicize the steps being taken to ensure victory. RFK JR IS THE MOST POPULAR INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE IN THE LAST 30 YEARS: KATIE PAVLICH “We win when we lead with our candidate. They lose when they lead with their candidate,” she added. Alvarez claimed the Democratic Party “cannot put their guy out there” and is forced to lead “with their tactics.” Trump’s campaign noted that the infrastructure it expects to roll out in critical states over the next 30 to 45 days is early compared to past cycles. Usually, a non-incumbent presidential nominee is not definite until the RNC convention in the summer, and the committee and campaign do not merge until then. WHAT NBC’S RONNA MCDANIEL DEBACLE REVEALS ABOUT THE STATE OF JOURNALISM TODAY Earlier this year, it was revealed that, in 2023, the RNC posted its worst fundraising since 2013, only pulling $87.2 million and reporting roughly $8 million in available cash on hand. In the month of January, Trump saw his cash on hand dwindle to $30 million, while his spending outpaced his fundraising. Biden’s campaign brought in $42 million in the same period and boasted a $130 million war chest for the general election. However, last month, both the committee and Trump’s campaign saw improvement. The RNC pulled in $10.6 million, while making gains in cash on hand in February. Trump’s campaign managed to rake in over $20 million last month, boosted by primary victories, while also upping his cash on hand to $42 million. While fundraising appeared to bounce back as Trump’s campaign merges with the committee, concerns over Trump’s financial situation still remain. The former president has been ordered to make various payments in his criminal cases. The RNC and campaign further pushed back at suggestions action hasn’t taken place sooner in the key states due to legal fees for the former president and poor fundraising hauls. Both the committee and campaign expressed confidence, noting that all assets are in line to cover all costs. They conceded that the Democrats are expected to enjoy a monetary advantage but claimed Trump doesn’t need as much money to win. Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
Supreme Court throws a curve ball in hearing on legality of abortion pills
The pro-choice movement had every reason to be nervous about the Supreme Court hearing. After all, this was the same high court that overturned 50 years of precedent by overturning Roe, and by a 6-3 conservative majority. Now, two years later, the same court was getting a crack at an increasingly popular form of medical abortions with the pill called mifepristone. HOW THE MEDIA DOWNPLAYED TRUMP’S MAJOR VICTORY ON THE MASSIVE BOND BUT PLAYED UP HIS NEW YORK TRIAL DATE Who could stop the justices if they decided to ban these pills, which are especially important in states where abortion has been banned or severely restricted? With a single ruling, the court could tip the scales in favor of the pro-life movement by cutting off this lifeline for millions of women. But it didn’t turn out that way. Based on the audio of Tuesday’s oral arguments, most justices across the ideological spectrum are opposed to outlawing these pills. With the exception of Sam Alito and Clarence Thomas, leaders of the anti-Roe wing, the justices made clear that they don’t want to get into this fight. More than two decades after the FDA approved the use of mifepristone as safe and effective, it looks like the drug will remain widely available. WHY THE TRUMP BOND CRISIS LOOKS LIKE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO RUIN HIM When you have Ketanji Brown Jackson and Neil Gorsuch embracing the same point, that is the judicial equivalent of a flashing green light. Abortion has been a difficult subject for Republicans in the post-Roe era. Democrats have won numerous special elections with candidates who ran heavily on the issue. On Tuesday, one such Democrat flipped a Republican seat in the Alabama House. In my Mar-a-Lago interview with Donald Trump, he said Republicans who take too hard a line on abortion, such as opposing exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother, are destined to lose. In embracing a ban on abortions after 16 weeks of pregnancy, later modified to 15 weeks, he said something that stuck with me: “You have to follow your heart. But you also have to get elected.” The stakes are high in the Supreme Court case because mifepristone is now used in 60 percent of all abortions in America. The skeptical justices expressed concern about the impact on federal regulation if they substituted their views on complicated subjects overseen by the likes of the Food and Drug Administration. Jackson said there is a “significant mismatch” between the claims made by the anti-abortion doctors and their lawsuit “seeking an order preventing anyone from having access to these drugs at all.” Added Gorsuch: “This case seems a prime example of turning what could be a small lawsuit into a nationwide legislative assembly on an FDA rule or any other federal government action.” The advantage of these pills is that patients can order them mailed to their homes, even in states with highly restrictive laws. If SCOTUS were to uphold the appellate ruling, patients would have to obtain the pills in person, and could only use them for seven weeks. Most of the justices seemed united on the fundamental question of standing – that is, the eligibility to sue. They pressed both sides on whether the plaintiffs had such standing. SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE’S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE DAY’S HOTTEST STORIES If the high court decides they don’t, they don’t have to deal with any of the more nettlesome questions and can dismiss the case. But that could prove to be only a temporary reprieve. If the next lawsuit is filed by people with clear standing, that exit ramp would be closed to the justices. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP As long as there are lawyers and strong moral feelings on both sides, this sort of litigation will drag on, the legacy of a new and supercharged abortion environment.
Nanakmatta Gurudwara Kar Sewa Pramukh killed, SIT formed to investigate: Uttarakhand Police
Kar Seva Pramukh was shot dead by two bike-borne assailants around 6:30 am on Thursday.
Former US Senator Joe Lieberman dies at age 82: Media reports
Joe Lieberman, Al Gore’s running mate during the hotly contested 2000 presidential election, has died at age 82 after suffering complications from a fall. United States media announced his death on Tuesday afternoon, citing a family statement. One of the few high-profile independents in the US political sphere, Lieberman largely caucused with the Democratic Party during his four terms as a senator, representing the state of Connecticut. But he identified as a centrist, and towards the end of his career, he embraced the No Labels movement, an organisation that shirks the traditional two-party system in favour of “common ground”. Lieberman, however, was part of the Democratic presidential ticket in 2000, when Gore – then-vice president under Bill Clinton – raced for the White House himself. When Gore chose Lieberman as his vice presidential candidate, the senator became the first Jewish running mate to represent a major party in the general elections. The decision also catapulted Lieberman into one of the most divisive presidential races in recent history. The Gore-Lieberman ticket won the popular vote – but it lost the crucial Electoral College, the metric the US uses to decide who wins the presidency. Instead, Republican George W Bush emerged victorious in that race, after the US Supreme Court ruled to end a recount effort in the pivotal swing state of Florida. An estimated 537 votes separated Bush and Gore in the state. Lieberman’s career in national politics, however, came to an end in 2013, after he announced his retirement. For years, he had faced criticism for his hawkish approach to the US’s war in Iraq. He has, however, continued to exercise influence as a political lobbyist, lawyer and advocate for groups like No Labels. Al Gore and Joe Lieberman rally together for the US presidency in Jackson, Tennessee, on October 25, 2000 [File: Stephan Savoia/AP Photo] Senate career Lieberman started his national political career in 1988, earning his first US Senate win with an unconventional ticket. He ran as a Democrat but was backed by prominent conservatives like pundit William F Buckley Jr. A New York Times article that year captured the surprise at the odd-couple pairing: “Buckleys Are Backing A Democrat?” But the alliance proved to be a fruitful one. Lieberman – who had previously served as a state senator – squeaked out a narrow win against three-time incumbent Republican Lowell Weicker Jr, who was considered the favourite to win. Once in office, Lieberman continued to work both sides of the aisle. In 1990, for instance, he rallied bipartisan support for amendments to strengthen the Clean Air Act. He also championed efforts to restrict violence in video games, pledging to develop a government rating system for the industry if it did not do so itself. “Few parents would buy these games for their kids if they really knew what was in them,” Lieberman told reporters in 1993. His advocacy helped forge the Entertainment Software Rating Board, a self-regulating arm of the gaming industry. It was one of many moves Lieberman made in his attempts to represent the moral high ground in the US cultural discourse. Another example came in 1998 when then-President Clinton found himself engulfed in long-running sexual assault allegations and questions of misconduct. As details about Clinton’s extramarital relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky emerged, Lieberman condemned the president on the Senate floor in a high-profile speech. He is sometimes credited as the first prominent Democrat to speak out publicly against Clinton’s actions. “Such behaviour is not only inappropriate,” Lieberman said of Clinton. “It is immoral, and it is harmful.” He ultimately voted with his fellow Democrats in Clinton’s Senate trial, opting not to remove the president from office. Joe Lieberman leaves the White House after a visit on May 17, 2017 [File: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP Photo] A hawkish track record Critics often cite Gore’s decision to choose Lieberman as his running mate in the 2000 presidential race as an effort to distance the Democratic ticket from the scandal of the Clinton years. It was also an appeal to the political centre: Lieberman had backed several traditionally conservative issues, including by supporting school voucher programmes, something many Democrats feared would imperil funds for public schools. Though the Gore-Lieberman ticket ultimately failed to win the presidency in 2000, Lieberman still managed to hang onto his Senate seat that year: Connecticut law allowed him to run in both races at the same time. But the attacks on September 11, 2001, would highlight Lieberman’s track record for hawkishness – something that would ultimately lead to his political decline. Lieberman had previously shown a hawkish streak: In 1991, he co-sponsored a bill that authorised the use of military force in the Gulf War. He also backed the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act, which supported efforts to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. He was one of only two Senate Democrats to do so. So when the administration of Republican President Bush announced its intention to invade Iraq in 2003, as part of his post 9/11 “war on terror”, Lieberman was a vocal supporter. In an interview with CBS’s Face the Nation, he echoed talking points that Hussein was harbouring weapons of mass destruction, and therefore the invasion was necessary. “We know he had enormous quantities that were never accounted for. And that’s why we’ve got to continue to look for them,” Lieberman said. Those claims, however, were later shown to come from flawed or exaggerated intelligence reports. Lieberman also helmed efforts to create the Department of Homeland Security, another part of the US’s response to the 9/11 attacks. Its mission was to “secure the United States from terrorist threats or attacks”, but critics warned it would violate civil rights protections and other civilian privacy measures. Speaking to the New York Times in 2005, Lieberman acknowledged that his stance on the 2003 Iraq invasion had sown division in the Democratic Party. “Some Democrats said I was being a traitor,” he told the newspaper, though he credited some of the backlash to the