Asian American congressman leads Democrats on new House CCP committee

Rep. Raja Raja Krishnamoorthi will play a key role in new House committee.

Members of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus got what they wanted when House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries named three Asian American members, to serve on the House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party.

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill, will head the Democrats on the new committee. He'll be joined by Democratic Representatives Ro Khanna of Silicon Valley and Andy Kim of New Jersey.

Rep. Michelle Steel, a Korean American Republican representing parts of Orange County, California, is the only other Asian American on the committee with the responsibility investigating and developing policy to address the United States’ economic, technological, and security competition with the Chinese Communist Party.

One of the first items on the committee is the Chinese balloon flying across the United States. Although the Chinese say it is a weather balloon gone off course, US intelligence and military authorities claim that it has the capabilities of spying on "sensitive" facilities in the US.

In a show of bipartisanship, Select Committee on the CCP Chairman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Ranking Member Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) today released the following statement regarding the suspected Chinese spy balloon flying over the United States.

“The Chinese Communist Party should not have on-demand access to American airspace. Not only is this a violation of American sovereignty, coming only days before Secretary Blinken’s trip to the PRC, but it also makes clear that the CCP’s recent diplomatic overtures do not represent a substantive change in policy. Indeed, this incident demonstrates that the CCP threat is not confined to distant shores—it is here at home and we must act to counter this threat.”

One of the reasons CAPAC urged Jeffries to appoint CAPAC members on the committee is the concern that anti-Chinese rhetoric from the committee could fan the flames of racism plaguing AANHPI communities since the Donald Trump regime.

“We cannot forget that rhetoric used around economic competition with Asian countries has resulted in the verbal and physical harassment and even murder of Asian Americans here at home," cautioned Rp. Judy Chu, CAPAC chair. "Since March 2020 and former President Trump’s sustained references to the coronavirus as the ‘China virus,’ over 11,500 hate crimes and incidents against Asian Americans have been reported."

"I know that our CAPAC Members will stand ready to call out xenophobic anti-China rhetoric that we know exacerbates anti-Asian hate and violence against our communities. I know that our CAPAC Members will stand ready to call out xenophobic anti-China rhetoric that we know exacerbates anti-Asian hate and violence against our communities."

Krishnamoorthi, who is also a senior member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, is the lead Democrat on the Averting the National Threat of Internet Surveillance, Oppressive Censorship and Influence, and Algorithmic Learning by the Chinese Communist Party Act (ANTI-SOCIAL CCP Act), which protects Americans by blocking and prohibiting all transactions from any social media company in, or under the influence of, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and several other foreign adversaries.

In the 117th Congress, the Indian American congressmember led bipartisan legislation that was signed into law, called the Gathering and Reporting Assessments Yielding Zero Overlooked Nefarious Efforts (Gray Zone) Act, which requires the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to produce a National Intelligence Estimate on different aspects of gray zone activities - actions that fall between ordinary statecraft and open warfare - that the PRC employs. Congressman Krishnamoorthi was also the lead Democrat on the bipartisan Transparency for Malign Chinese Investments in Global Port Infrastructure Act, which requires the DNI to study and report to Congress information related to Chinese global investments in port infrastructure.

"At a time when anti-Asian hate and violence are on the rise, it’s essential that this committee focuses its vital work on protecting all Americans from the threat posed by the CCP, while avoiding dangerous rhetoric that fuels the types of xenophobia that have endangered members of the Asian American and Pacific Islander community,” added Krishnamoorthi.

EDITOR'S NOTE: For additional commentary, news and views from an AANHPI perspective, follow @DioknoEd on Twitter.

Most AAPI lawmakers endorse call for impeachment inquiry against Trump

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi called for an impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump.

Asian American lawmakers had varying reactions to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's announcement that the House would be moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump.

"The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law," said Pelosi Tuesday (Sept. 24).

The California lawmaker said the House will move forward with an official impeachment inquiry against Trump over a whistleblower complaint and the his alleged push to get Ukraine to investigate a political opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden's son. The allegations against Hunter Biden were found false and without merit.

Trump maintains he's done nothing wrong, tweeting that the inquiry was the latest episode in what he's called "a total witch hunt." AAPI legislators endorsed Pelosi's action.

"I commend Speaker Pelosi for launching an official impeachment inquiry across six committees," said Congressman Ted Lieu, a member of the judiciary committee that investigates Trump. "This whistleblower complaint is a big deal."

The impeachment inquiry stems from a whistleblower complaint alleging Trump sought help in digging up dirt on his political rival, Vice President Joe Biden, from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a phone call between the two last summer.

Lieu said Congress needs to see the full complaint as soon as possible.

Trump maintains he's done nothing wrong, tweeting that the inquiry was the latest episode in what he's called "a total witch hunt," said Lieu.

“From Day 1 of his presidency, Donald Trump has been motivated by two things: protecting himself and making money. Speaker Pelosi is right to hold this dangerous chief executive accountable,” stated Hawaii's Sen. Mazie Hirono, who first called for Trump's impeachment the day after the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller earlier this year.

Rep. Judy Chu, chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, tweeted: 

Virginia's Rep. Bobby Scott, who is of Filipino descent, issued a lengthy statement, that reads in part:

“Unfortunately, after the Mueller report found multiple instances of obstruction of justice committed by the President, after the President has continued to profit from foreign business transactions in violation of the Emoluments Clause, and after failing to sanction violations of the Hatch Act, recent events cannot be ignored. The President has now admitted to sacrificing national security for his own political gain and then violating the law by refusing to provide to Congress the whistleblower complaint submitted to the Intelligence Community Inspector General. That is just the latest example of this president violating the law and constitutional norms, and this violation undermines our national security. 

“Every Member of Congress swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. I therefore support Speaker Pelosi’s call for a formal impeachment inquiry. It is the only appropriate course of action given the severity of recent events. Additionally, the Trump Administration must make the entire whistleblower complaint available to Congress immediately so we can consider its contents along with the evidence of other impeachable offenses that the president has committed.”

Filipino American Congressman TJ Cox of California's Central Valley endorsed the Pelosi action in a series of tweets.

"More and more people are coming onboard," Ro Khanna, who represents California's 17th congressional district, said during an interview with CNN's S.E. Cupp on Saturday evening. "And I think this incident with Ukraine may be the straw that breaks the camel's back," he suggested.

"I am ready to vote on impeachment," Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-WA, said, adding that there are a few committees still putting some "remaining pieces" together. "But what we're seeing now is incredibly serious, incredibly grave." 

Rep. Grace Meng, D-NY, and vice chair of the DNC tweeted:

Sen. Kamala Harris, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for President, has long called for impeachment proceedings against Trump.

"I strongly believe that it is long past due that we begin impeachment proceedings against this President," Harris said. "He's pressured a foreign leader, the Ukraine President, to dig up dirt on a political opponent, in the 2020 presidential election. He urged a foreign country to attack our democracy in the 2016 presidential election. He gave classified information to Russian officials in May of 2017."

Andrew Yang, who was not in favor of impeaching Trump until the Ukraine matter came to light, changed his mind Tuesday.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), the third Asian American running for POTUS, was one of the few Democrats who didn't support Pelosi's decision to proceed with the impeachment process. said Wednesday (Sept. 25) that the partial transcript of President Trump's call with Ukraine’s president released by the Trump administration doesn’t show a “compelling” case for impeachment.

“Most people reading through that transcript are not going to find that extremely compelling cause to throw out a president that won an election in 2016,” the Democratic presidential candidate told Hill.TV.

The Hawaii representative maintained that impeachment will only deepen the “hyperpartisan divides,” and argued that most people will only see it as another politically-motivated move by Democrats to oust Trump.

__________________________________________________________________

AAPI Congress members react to U.S. missle attack on Syria

Many of the victims of the chemical weapons attack were children.

WHAT NEXT? Does Donald Trump's missile attack against a Syrian airfield constitute a change of his stated "America First" policy or was it just an emotional response to the horrific videos and pictures of child victims of Syrian President Bashar Assad's use of chemical weapons? 

Was Trump's use of military force constitutional? Are the victims of chemical attacks more sympathetic than the thousands who have been displaced because of the civil war in Syria; many who have washed up on shore (including children) because of the hazardous crossings of the Aegean Sea separating Syria from Europe?

Those are critical questions being asked by AAPI members of Congress and their peers that need to be answered.

The morning after the attack, Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif, appeared on MSNBC. “Clearly, the president can take limited actions that the Congress has authorized such as going against terrorists who were involved with 9/11 or in terms of Iraq when Congress authorized the use of force in 2002, but there’s been no congressional authorization to launch 59 cruise missiles at a country that has not attacked us. Donald Trump’s action ... was unconstitutional. He should not do it again,” he told interviewer Katy Tur.

SCREEN CAPTURE

Rep. Ted Lieu was a guest on MSNBC.

Lieu, a member of the House Foreign Relations Committee, was asked if he would have voted for authorization if Trump had come to Congress. “I might have if he would have articulated a strategy, and that is one of my fundamental problems with what he did. There has been no coherent strategy from the Trump administration. Last week, they signaled they were OK with Assad even though he had previously killed hundreds of thousands of people in Syria and used chemical weapons. Last night, they attacked the Assad regime. We need to know what is the Trump administration thinking and what is their long-term strategy in Syria?”

“Saying that it’s a proportional response ignores the fact that any kind of a response that involves military use should have come to congress for us to talk through," added Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-WA. "You’re ignoring the ramifications of what happens after this response.”

The Trump administration has no Syria plan. The administration’s message has been inconsistent on Assad with U.N. Secretary Nikki Haley saying one thing, then Sec. of State Rex Tillerson saying another, then a somewhat different perspective coming from the White House.

“We as a nation must begin an in-depth discussion on behalf of our men and women in uniform regarding our role in this conflict.," said Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois. "Now that we find ourselves in this position, it is my duty as a U.S Senator—and as a combat Veteran—to raise several fundamental questions: What was the legal justification for last night’s strike? Is our goal to prevent future war crimes against the Syrian people or to remove Assad from power? What should our military and political strategy to achieve that goal be? What are the true costs of that strategy—in both dollars as well as human lives? And finally, are the American people as well as our allies prepared to support our efforts if things go wrong? Because in war, they always do.

“All of us were appalled to see Syrian children foaming at the mouth—dying—as a result of Assad’s use of chemical weapons," said Duckworth."We should not forget that this Administration made it harder for the victims of Assad’s barbarity to escape their suffering by slamming our doors on those fleeing this humanitarian crisis.

"After weeks of sending dangerously mixed signals on Syria, the President owes it to our troops who are now in greater danger to clearly and unequivocally outline the long-term strategic end state he is seeking to achieve in Syria and the region. He owes it to the American people to answer each of these questions and he must ensure they have a voice, through their representatives in Congress, in any further use of force in carrying out his strategy.” 

Sen. Mazie K. Hirono, D-Hawaii, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, agreed with Duckworth. "President Trump must present a coherent strategy for addressing the ongoing situation in Syria, including our own responsibility in confronting the humanitarian catastrophe and refugee crisis.” 

Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., a progressive first-term member who represents Silicon Valley, broke with Democratic leadership led by Rep. Nancy Peolosi and Don Shumer who seemed to approve of the action. 

“Let's be blunt: The problem with process arguments is it's not the substantive question,” Khanna said. “The question is: Where do you stand on issues of war and peace? Do you believe it's more unilateral military intervention? Did we learn the lessons of Iraq and Libya and that we should not be engaged? I wish the Democratic Party would speak to the substance of that issue.”

SCREEN CAPTURE

Califoria's Rep. Ro Khanna was interviewed by MSNBC's Joy Reid about the missile attack on Syria.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, broke from the general assumption that Assad had ordered the chemical weapon attack on his own people. She appeared on CNN, telling Wolf Blitzer that she’s “skeptical” that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ordered a chemical weapons attack in the province of Idlib in an area of northern Syria that is controlled by al-Qaida-linked rebels.

On Thursday, she issued a statement: “If President Assad is indeed guilty of this horrible chemical attack on innocent civilians, I will be the first to call for his prosecution and execution by the International Criminal Court,” she said in the statement. “However, because of our attack on Syria, this investigation may now not even be possible. And without such evidence, a successful prosecution will be much harder.”

However, the next day on CNN, she went even further in expressing her skepticism of Assad's culpability.

For her statements, she was criticized by former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden. They called on Hawaiians to vote Rep. Tulsi Gabbard out of office. 

###

AAPI Congressmembers vow to fight Trumpcare

SUPPOSEDLY, the American Health Care Act known as Trumpcare, will be voted on Friday (March 24). Despite pressure from the White House, a number of Republicans will be voting against it. They will be joined by Democrats in the House of Representatives, including the AAPI lawmakers below.

The House was scheduled to vote on the act Thursday (March 23) but it was apparent that there were not enough votes for its passage so the GOP leadership postponed the vote until for Friday. 

RELATED: Trumpcare vote postponed

A last minute meeting with the radical conservatives who want to eliminate parts of Trumpcare and moderates, who pushed for keeping elements of Obamacare, apparently failed to change any minds as of late Thursday night.

The promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Healthcare Act instituted during President Obama's tenure, was a major plank during Trump's presidential campaign. The pending defeat of Trumpcare will be seen as a major defeat for the White House resident and puts into question the leadership of Speaker of the House Rep. Paul Ryan, who crafted and introduced the AHCA.

On the anniversary of Obamacare, California's Sen. Kamala Harris delivered a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate even though the Senate is not voting on this version of Trumpcare.

“Ultimately, I believe this bill isn’t just about medicine or math— I believe this is about morals," said Harris, the first Indian/American woman elected to the Senate. "The plan that the House is voting on today is a value statement. And it’s not a good one. As our former President said about the ACA, ‘This is more than just about health care. It’s about the character of our country. And it’s about whether or not we look out for one another.’ So I think we need to take a good and hard look in the mirror and ask: who are we as a country? Are we a country that cuts the deficit by cutting care for our most vulnerable? Let’s look in the mirror and ask - are we a country that gives tax breaks to insurers while giving higher medical bills to patients? Are we a country that tells seniors, and cancer patients, and women—‘you’re on your own?’ Are we a country that sees healthcare as a privilege for a few or a right for all? And I believe that’s what we have to decide.”

Others used social media to convey their views. (If links don't work, copy and paste and Google.)

Still unconstitutional: Critics lambast Trump's new Muslim ban

When the first Muslim Ban executive order was first implemented in January, protests like the one above at
San Francisco International Airport, broke out across the country

NO MATTER how you try to couch it, yesterday's "new" Executive Order restricting travel from six Muslim-dominated countries is still a Muslim ban.

The executive order signed by Mr. Trump is being called "Muslim Ban 2.0" by its critics.

“This replacement order is the same hate and fear with new packaging,” explained Amnesty International executive director Margaret Huang. “It will cause extreme fear and uncertainty for thousands of families by, once again, putting anti-Muslim hatred into policy. No amount of editing can make this executive order anything but what it is – blatant bigotry. There are real threats to security, but this bigoted order will do nothing to make the country safer”

The new executive order unveiled today is supposed to be more defensible than the first EO signed last January. The constitutionality of that deeply flawed earlier order is being challenged by the courts after lawsuits were filed in Washington state. The new EO makes moot all the legal challenges against it.

The new EO will still halt admissions to the U.S., effective March 16, of nationals from six Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen) for at least 90 days (Iraq is no longer included in the travel ban.) It replaces the Jan. 27 travel ban that suspended the immigrant and nonimmigrant entries of individuals of seven Muslim-majority countries. Civil rights organizations and state attorney generals have vowed to challenge the new order but the new order, which was vetted and designed to meet the legal standards may be more difficult to undo.

“The Trump administration has conceded that its original Muslim ban was indefensible," said Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. "Unfortunately, it has replaced it with a scaled-back version that shares the same fatal flaws. The only way to actually fix the Muslim ban is not to have a Muslim ban. Instead, President Trump has recommitted himself to religious discrimination, and he can expect continued disapproval from both the courts and the people.

“What's more, the changes the Trump administration has made, and everything we've learned since the original ban rolled out, completely undermine the bogus national security justifications the president has tried to hide behind and only strengthen the case against his unconstitutional executive orders.”

Besides dropping Iraq among the targeted countries, other major changes of the new travel restrictions include: 

• dropping current visa and green card holders from the ban;
• dropping Iraq from the list of targeted countries;
• dropping the language that would favor Christians over Muslims;
• reducing the total number of refugees allowed into the U.S.

While the new EO was being drafted, Trump's own Department of Homeland Security issued a study that concluded that terrorists could not predicted on the basis of national origin and that refugees were not radicalized when they first entered the country.

“This order has nothing to do with national security, and everything to do with encouraging fear of Muslims," said Rep. Judy Chu, chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC). 

"Omitting one country from the list does not eliminate the need to provide the American people with meaningful evidence supporting this ban," agreed Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif. "The White House had more than a month to develop their case, and has failed to provide actual justification based on facts. 

“The tweaks made today do not make this order any less unconstitutional or immoral than the last," said Chu. "No individual from any of the countries named in this order has committed an act of terror in the United States. And worse, he’s particularly targeting refugees – some of the most vulnerable and least dangerous people in the world. 

"If President Trump truly wants to make America safer, he will drop this fanatical and ideological war against Islam, stop his plans to gut the budget of the State Department, and listen to the advice of national security and law enforcement officials who have warned against isolating the Muslim community in this way. As it stands, this updated order is still a policy of cruelty and bigotry and I will continue to resist it as an elected Representative and as an American citizen.”

Other AAPI lawmakers and advocacy organizations weighed in their opposition to the ban:

“The Trump Administration’s repackaging is merely a second attempt to revise his unconstitutional policy. This is the same ban, driven by the same hazardous discrimination that weakens our ability to fight terror. Revised language won't change what this executive order is: an act that prohibits people from entering the U.S. based on their religion or refugee status. The public and courts rejected the Trump administration's first attempt at this, and it must do so again.” - Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif.

“This scaled-back order represents a partial victory for Americans fighting for the rights of immigrants in the U.S. and directly responds to several immigration cases and scenarios brought forward in CAIR’s anti-ban lawsuit. As White House Adviser Steven Miller promised, this watered-down ‘Muslim Ban 2.0’ was retooled to achieve the same unconstitutional policy outcome as the first deeply-flawed order. We believe this desired policy outcome is in fulfilment of now-President Trump’s campaign pledge to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. This order stills stigmatizes the faith of Islam and Muslim. It does not make America any safer, but does make America LESS great. - Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)

"As the country closes the door on immigrants and refugees, our communities and allies have a responsibility to resist and fight back against these attacks. The struggle against the growing anti-immigrant, anti-Black/Brown, and anti-Muslim sentiment needs to happen both nationally and locally because we know we’re better than this. We stand by our immigrant, refugee, and Muslim communities and all people of color who are impacted by these hateful policies, and we will not stand down. To remain silent is to be complicit in this institutionalized form of hate.” - Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance, AFL-CIO (APALA)

“When the first Muslim ban came down, we were on the ground in airports across the country and we are ready again to fight this administration's continued attempts to roll back Constitutional protections for immigrant communities. We are not going to sit idly by as this administration attempts to unilaterally roll back Constitutional protections for immigrant communities, who are valued members of our diverse society.” - Elica Vafaie of Advancing Justice | Asian Law Caucus.

“As studied by the CATO Institute, the chances of being killed by a refugee committing a terrorist act is 1 in 3.6 billion. For perspective, the chances of being struck by lightning twice is 1 in 9 million. That’s why members of Trump’s own administration recognize that banning women and children fleeing from terrorist groups isn’t just morally bankrupt—it’s bad for national security. It hands our real enemies like ISIL and al-Qaeda a powerful recruiting tool and undermines our relationships with partners abroad.” - Rep. Ted Leiu, D-Calif.

"It continues to single out Muslim majority countries only, drastically limits and suspends refugee resettlement, and deeply affects our relationships with countries around the world. It continues to do nothing to make our country safer, alienates our allies and gives extremists propaganda for recruitment." - Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash.    

"This is a bad second swing at an executive order that is just as un-American and xenophobic as the first version that was struck down by multiple courts. As Americans, we do not close our doors to those who are fleeing persecution, or target people based on their faith," - Rep. Ami Bera, D-Calif.  

“[The President] made some small changes…but it’s still basically a Muslim ban. It's still a ban based on one's religion, and every time our country has targeted a minority group for discriminatory treatment, we have been proven to be very, very wrong, and the President is wrong in this instance.” - Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii

"Like the original, this executive order sends a terrible message to our allies while giving our enemies new evidence that America is incapable of differentiating between extremists and the billions of peaceful Muslims living at home and abroad. I also continue to be horrified by this administration’s hostility toward refugees of all faiths fleeing unspeakable violence and oppression. America’s withdrawal from the ongoing humanitarian crisis is a stain on our conscience and will put more destabilizing pressure on our European allies, which will make America less safe in the months and years to come. By mixing cruelty and incompetence, this executive order accurately reflects the first two months of the Trump administration.” - Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif.

"While the administration tweaked the language of the initial order to give it a veneer of legal justification, we believe that the Muslim/Travel Ban 2.0 will not make our country safer and are confident that its discriminatory intent and impact will be challenged again in the courts." - Annie Wang, staff attorney, Asian Ameircan Legal Defense Education Fund.

"As the country closes the door on immigrants and refugees, our communities and allies have a responsibility to resist and fight back against these attacks. The struggle against the growing anti-immigrant, anti-Black/Brown, and anti-Muslim sentiment needs to happen both nationally and locally because we know we’re better than this. We stand by our immigrant, refugee, and Muslim communities and all people of color who are impacted by these hateful policies, and we will not stand down. To remain silent is to be complicit in this institutionalized form of hate.” - Johanna Puno Hester, APALA National President and Assistant Executive Director of the United Domestic Workers, AFSCME Local 3930

###

2016 Elections: Congress will have the most AAPI members in its history

By Louis Chan
REPRINTED FROM ASAM NEWS

THERE WILL be more Asian American & Pacific Islander members of Congress as a result of the Nov. 8 elections.

Fourteen AAPI voting members of Congress were elected, surpassing the previous record of 12.

Those elected include California Attorney General Kamala Harris who will become the first Indian/American woman elected to the U.S. Senate. She beat Rep. Loretta Sanchez almost two-to-one.

Harris is already looking forward to her job in the Senate.

“Whatever the results of the presidential election tonight, we know that we have a task in front of us,” Harris told her cheering supporters early in the night. “We know the stakes are high. When we have been attacked and when our ideals and fundamental ideals are being attacked, do we retreat or do we fight? I say we fight!”

Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Chicago), a purple heart veteran of the Iraq War, won election to the U.S. Senate to represent the state of Illinois by beating incumbent Senator Mark Kirk 54 percent to Kirk's 40 percent.

“Just as I try every day to live up to the sacrifice my buddies made to carry me off that battlefield, I will go to work in the Senate looking to honor the sacrifice and quiet dignity of all those Illinoisans who are facing challenges of their own,” she said Tuesday night.

Three Asian/American women will now serve in the U.S. Senate. The other will be Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono, who became the first Asian/American woman elected to the Senate in 2012.

New to Congress will be Pramila Jayapal who beat fellow Democrat Brady Walkinshaw for the 7th Congressional district in Washington state 57 percent to 43 percent. Jayapal becomes the first Indian/American woman elected to the House of Representatives. Just like Harris, Jayapal, who was endorsed by Bernie Sanders, looked toward working under a Trump presidency.

“If our worst fears are realized, we will be on the defense as of tomorrow,” she said. “We will have to fight for social justice as never before.”

Another newcomer to Congress will be Democrat Stephanie Murphy who beat 12-term incumbent John Mica in the 7th District of Florida 51 percent to 49 percent.

She is the first Vietnamese/American woman elected to Congress. “Tonight, the people of central Florida rejected partisan deadlock and dysfunction and embraced a new approach,” said Murphy. “In Congress, I will work with both Democrats and Republicans, and I will always put people over politics.”

In California, high-tech entrepreneur Ro Khanna defeated eight-time incumbent Mike Honda 60 percent to 40 percent in California’s Santa Clara County. Honda was saddled by an ethics investigation that dates back to his 2014 reelection. He is accused of using his staff during taxpayer time to work on his reelection.

Replacing Tammy Duckworth in the House of Representatives will be S.Raja Krishnamoorthi. He beat Pete DiCianni 58 percent to 42 percent for the 8th District seat in Illinois.

Colleen Hanabusa returns to Congress to represent District 1 in Hawaii. She once held the seat, but gave it up to run for the U.S. Senate. She replaces the late Mark Takei who died of cancer earlier this year.

Reelected to Congress were Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Sacramento), Rep. Judy Chu (D-Los Angeles County), Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Santa Monica), Rep. Mark Takano (D-Rivrside County), Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY), Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) and Rep. Ami Bera(D-Sacramento County).