Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Guy Lamb, Criminologist / Senior Lecturer, Stellenbosch University
Crime researchers use murder (or homicide) rate per 100,000 as a crude measure of the general level of violent interpersonal crime globally. According to the United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime, South Africa’s murder rate of 45 per 100,000 (2023/24) is the second highest for countries that publish crime data.
The South African Police Service crime data shows that levels of attempted murder, armed robbery and robberies at homes have soared over the past 10 years. Other categories of violent crime, such as assault and sexual violence, also remain high.
High crime rates have had considerable negative effects on the country’s economy. The destructive impact of violent crime is estimated to cost the equivalent of 15 % of GDP.
In 2019, President Cyril Ramaphosa indicated that government would seek to reduce violent crime by 50% within a decade. The police budget increased by 24% from 2018/19 to 2024/25. But the murder rate increased by 25%, from 36 per 100,000 in 2018/19 to 45 per 100,000 in 2023/24.
I have spent 25 years researching violent crime and policing in South Africa. I also wrote a 2022 book, Policing and Boundaries in a Violent Society, and conducted various studies for the Institute for Security Studies.
In my view, the logical approach for government is to attend to the top 100 high crime areas. I’ll show why below. It must use the resources of the departments in its justice, crime prevention and security cluster to intervene in targeted, evidence-based ways, to combat and prevent crime.
Where crime is happening and what police are doing
Violent crime in South Africa has consistently been highly concentrated in a small number of urban areas. For example, 20% of all reported murders occur in just 30 policing areas (2.6% of the 1,149 policing areas). About 50% of all violent crime occurs in 100 policing areas (9% of the precincts).
But in South Africa, the approach to fighting crime has focused instead on arrests and on force. This is why increasing the funding hasn’t had results.
The police arrested around 1.5 million criminal suspects a year between 2019/20 and 2023/24. (The exception was 2020/1, with 2.8 million arrests due to COVID-19 lockdown violations.)
A negative outcome of this police action has been rising civil claims against police, amounting to R67.4 billion (US$3.6 billion) as of March 2024 (47,818 claims).
There is very little evidence to suggest that militarised policing reduces violent crime. It can actually contribute to declining public trust in the police. Only 27% of the population consider police trustworthy (from 47% in 1999).
Despite the police budget increasing in recent years, their effectiveness has been undermined by declining personnel numbers. In 2018, there were 150,639 police personnel. This has dropped to 140,048 in recent years. There has also been a substantial reduction in the police reserve force.
A gangster shows off his gun and ammunition at the Cape Flats, Cape Town.Rodger Bosch/AFP via Getty Images.
A further challenge is the high rate of recidivism (re-offending). An estimated 90% of offenders commit crime again after leaving prison.
Six actions for 100 worst areas
I argue that six things need to happen in the 100 worst crime areas:
reduce the number of firearms in circulation
improve the number of court-ready police dockets
improve place-based crime intelligence
reduce alcohol harms
provide rehabilitation and support services for offenders
boost community safety organisations.
Firearms control
Firearms are the leading weapon used in murders and in several categories of robberies. They are also commonly used in sexual violence, and feature in gangsterism and organised crime.
Confiscating illegal firearms and ammunition, and securing convictions for those found in possession of illegal firearms, will have a positive impact in the target areas.
This requires a close working relationship between police and the National Prosecuting Authority to collect appropriate evidence and prepare court dockets adequately.
Rulings by magistrates that declare certain people unfit to possess licensed firearms must be monitored regularly.
Court-ready police dockets
The National Prosecuting Authority has undergone reforms over the past six years to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system. As a result, it has secured high conviction rates for several categories of violent crimes. However, many police dockets lack sufficient reliable evidence for the prosecutors to present so as to secure convictions in court.
As the table below shows, the vast majority of recorded violent crime cases do not result in a court conviction.
Police officials in high crime areas are typically overwhelmed by the large number of criminal cases they need to investigate. That means only a small number of dockets that have a likelihood of securing a conviction are prepared.
More resources are needed to increase cooperation between the police and prosecutors.
Place-based crime intelligence
Better crime intelligence could result in better control of illegal firearms and higher quality police dockets.
Police crime intelligence and other departments in the justice and security cluster must cooperate and share information.
Alcohol harms
Several forms of violent crime are linked to excessive alcohol consumption. Unregulated alcohol outlets present the most risky context for committing violence. There is an opportunity for police, prosecutors (especially through the Community Prosecutions Initiative) and municipalities to collaborate to reduce alcohol related crime and harms in the top 100 high crime areas.
This requires more effective monitoring and policing of alcohol outlets to ensure better compliance with liquor laws.
Rehabilitation and support services for offenders
It is likely that recidivism rates would be reduced if former prisoners and their families had better rehabilitation services in the top 100 high crime areas. Studies suggest that the most effective and practical programmes are those that focus on substance abuse, restorative justice, mental health, education and income generation.
Such services could give former inmates a means to generate an income legally.
Community safety organisations
Studies have shown that crime can be reduced when police and other government entities work closely with community organisations to devise solutions.
Community police forums and neighbourhood watches are examples of these kinds of arrangements.
They can collect intelligence and help the authorities design and implement evidence-based crime prevention actions that focus on the areas where crime is concentrated, and on the situations that tend to drive crime.
– Violent crime in South Africa happens mostly in a few hotspots: police resources should focus there – criminologist – https://theconversation.com/violent-crime-in-south-africa-happens-mostly-in-a-few-hotspots-police-resources-should-focus-there-criminologist-248233
Crime researchers use murder (or homicide) rate per 100,000 as a crude measure of the general level of violent interpersonal crime globally. According to the United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime, South Africa’s murder rate of 45 per 100,000 (2023/24) is the second highest for countries that publish crime data.
The South African Police Service crime data shows that levels of attempted murder, armed robbery and robberies at homes have soared over the past 10 years. Other categories of violent crime, such as assault and sexual violence, also remain high.
High crime rates have had considerable negative effects on the country’s economy. The destructive impact of violent crime is estimated to cost the equivalent of 15 % of GDP.
In 2019, President Cyril Ramaphosa indicated that government would seek to reduce violent crime by 50% within a decade. The police budget increased by 24% from 2018/19 to 2024/25. But the murder rate increased by 25%, from 36 per 100,000 in 2018/19 to 45 per 100,000 in 2023/24.
I have spent 25 years researching violent crime and policing in South Africa. I also wrote a 2022 book, Policing and Boundaries in a Violent Society, and conducted various studies for the Institute for Security Studies.
In my view, the logical approach for government is to attend to the top 100 high crime areas. I’ll show why below. It must use the resources of the departments in its justice, crime prevention and security cluster to intervene in targeted, evidence-based ways, to combat and prevent crime.
Where crime is happening and what police are doing
Violent crime in South Africa has consistently been highly concentrated in a small number of urban areas. For example, 20% of all reported murders occur in just 30 policing areas (2.6% of the 1,149 policing areas). About 50% of all violent crime occurs in 100 policing areas (9% of the precincts).
But in South Africa, the approach to fighting crime has focused instead on arrests and on force. This is why increasing the funding hasn’t had results.
The police arrested around 1.5 million criminal suspects a year between 2019/20 and 2023/24. (The exception was 2020/1, with 2.8 million arrests due to COVID-19 lockdown violations.)
A negative outcome of this police action has been rising civil claims against police, amounting to R67.4 billion (US$3.6 billion) as of March 2024 (47,818 claims).
There is very little evidence to suggest that militarised policing reduces violent crime. It can actually contribute to declining public trust in the police. Only 27% of the population consider police trustworthy (from 47% in 1999).
Despite the police budget increasing in recent years, their effectiveness has been undermined by declining personnel numbers. In 2018, there were 150,639 police personnel. This has dropped to 140,048 in recent years. There has also been a substantial reduction in the police reserve force.
A further challenge is the high rate of recidivism (re-offending). An estimated 90% of offenders commit crime again after leaving prison.
Six actions for 100 worst areas
I argue that six things need to happen in the 100 worst crime areas:
reduce the number of firearms in circulation
improve the number of court-ready police dockets
improve place-based crime intelligence
reduce alcohol harms
provide rehabilitation and support services for offenders
boost community safety organisations.
Firearms control
Firearms are the leading weapon used in murders and in several categories of robberies. They are also commonly used in sexual violence, and feature in gangsterism and organised crime.
Confiscating illegal firearms and ammunition, and securing convictions for those found in possession of illegal firearms, will have a positive impact in the target areas.
This requires a close working relationship between police and the National Prosecuting Authority to collect appropriate evidence and prepare court dockets adequately.
Rulings by magistrates that declare certain people unfit to possess licensed firearms must be monitored regularly.
Court-ready police dockets
The National Prosecuting Authority has undergone reforms over the past six years to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system. As a result, it has secured high conviction rates for several categories of violent crimes. However, many police dockets lack sufficient reliable evidence for the prosecutors to present so as to secure convictions in court.
As the table below shows, the vast majority of recorded violent crime cases do not result in a court conviction.
Police officials in high crime areas are typically overwhelmed by the large number of criminal cases they need to investigate. That means only a small number of dockets that have a likelihood of securing a conviction are prepared.
More resources are needed to increase cooperation between the police and prosecutors.
Place-based crime intelligence
Better crime intelligence could result in better control of illegal firearms and higher quality police dockets.
Police crime intelligence and other departments in the justice and security cluster must cooperate and share information.
Alcohol harms
Several forms of violent crime are linked to excessive alcohol consumption. Unregulated alcohol outlets present the most risky context for committing violence. There is an opportunity for police, prosecutors (especially through the Community Prosecutions Initiative) and municipalities to collaborate to reduce alcohol related crime and harms in the top 100 high crime areas.
This requires more effective monitoring and policing of alcohol outlets to ensure better compliance with liquor laws.
Rehabilitation and support services for offenders
It is likely that recidivism rates would be reduced if former prisoners and their families had better rehabilitation services in the top 100 high crime areas. Studies suggest that the most effective and practical programmes are those that focus on substance abuse, restorative justice, mental health, education and income generation.
Such services could give former inmates a means to generate an income legally.
Community safety organisations
Studies have shown that crime can be reduced when police and other government entities work closely with community organisations to devise solutions.
Community police forums and neighbourhood watches are examples of these kinds of arrangements.
They can collect intelligence and help the authorities design and implement evidence-based crime prevention actions that focus on the areas where crime is concentrated, and on the situations that tend to drive crime.
Guy Lamb receives funding from the Research Council of Norway and the British Academy.
Protecting Competition Across 50 United States: Advocacy and Cooperation in Antitrust Enforcement
Good morning and thank you for that introduction. It was an honor to be invited to speak to you all this morning. Getting to speak to folks like you is one of the benefits of serving as the Acting Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust at the Department of Justice, which is both a challenging and rewarding role. Wow, have we been busy lately. In addition to an unprecedented litigation and investigation caseload, with the FTC last month we issued new guidelines for human resources professionals, two weeks ago we proposed revisions to our international guidelines and we’re finalizing revisions to our intellectual property guidelines. It’s an incredible time at the Antitrust Division.
On top of all that, I’ve had a fair number of these speaking opportunities lately, and I’ve been using them to discuss the great work the Antitrust Division has been doing. A few months ago I spoke about our successes in civil enforcement, and more recently I’ve talked about the tremendous work of our criminal enforcers and the successes we’ve had in building relationships with our international counterparts. I’ve intended these speeches not as exercises in chest-beating, but instead to be thoughtful assessments of where we are today, looking back over several decades of enforcement as we also look forward to the coming transition. With this speech, I’d like to complete that retrospective by focusing on two particularly important, related areas of the Antitrust Division’s work: cooperation with our counterpart state enforcers and competition advocacy at the state level.
I say state cooperation and competition advocacy are related because they both incorporate the recognition that, notwithstanding the hard work of the Antitrust Division and the FTC, protecting competition is not a job the federal government can or should do alone. Even as concentration has increased by certain metrics, our economy remains relatively disaggregated and threats to competition come in all shapes and sizes across our country.
Instead of just relying on prosecutorial work at the state and federal level, we combine enforcement with advocacy, and we partner with the states, other agencies and the business community to promote a competitive economy. The states feature prominently in that mission. As Alexander Hamilton told the New York Ratifying Convention: The “states must…be considered as essential component parts of the union.” That’s certainly true in antitrust enforcement, where they are essential component parts of the worthy effort to protect and promote competition throughout the American economy.
By the way I was going to do my best Lin Manuel Miranda impression for that Hamilton quote, but Bill MacCleod told me we weren’t allowed to rap at the Fall Forum.
Cooperative federalism works best on issues where the state and federal governments have a mutuality of interest, and that is certainly the case for antitrust enforcement. The states and the federal government each hope to preserve and promote the competitive process that is the central organizing principle of our free market economy—our mutual economic strength relies on competition playing out across connected local and national markets. While there may be some issues where state and federal goals diverge, antitrust is generally not one of them.
Then and Now – Antitrust Division Cooperation with State Antitrust Enforcers
Although we are united in our goal of promoting competition, I cannot say there are never disagreements on how to achieve that goal. As I’m sure you’ll hear today there are many perspectives on antitrust policy, and state enforcers share in that debate. There have been times in the past where those policy disagreements were stark. At the start of my career at the division, federal and state enforcers sometimes had very different views on how to apply the antitrust laws to promote competition. In that environment cooperation between state and federal enforcers was less common, and tensions occasionally arose from differing perspectives on how to approach important enforcement decisions.
More recently, however, agreement has been much more common than disagreement, and the cooperation between state and federal antitrust enforcers has been excellent. That success is no accident. Constant nurturing from a great many hardworking people in state and federal government – and attention at all levels, from our career staffs right up to the top of our organizations – have helped foster the productive working relationships we enjoy today.
Christine Varney set a great tone in her 2009 speech on state cooperation, and she advanced that cause when she brought on Mark Tobey as the Antitrust Division’s Special Counsel for State Relations and Agriculture. I have to give credit to Mark for his tireless efforts to make the partnership work well for the benefit of competition and the American consumer. I know Edith Ramirez has also helped drive the federal side of the partnership in her role at the FTC.
Meanwhile the state attorneys general have contributed to the relationship with a number of important advocates. I’d like to recognize the contributions of Vic Domen and Kathleen Foote, the current and immediately prior leaders of the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) Multistate Antitrust Task Force, who are both here today, along with many others working through the Task Force and in the antitrust sections of State Attorneys General throughout the country.
Successful Cooperation in Civil Antitrust Enforcement
These consistent efforts to nurture the federal-state relationship have paid real enforcement dividends. We’re proud at the division of our record of success. As I’ve talked about before, our civil program is going strong, blocking 43 anticompetitive deals in important consumer industries like wireless, broadband, software, and appliances. And we’ve brought a number of conduct cases in industries from publishing to high tech hiring to health care. Our state partners have featured prominently in many of those cases. I can fairly say that if you’ve recently used a health insurer, flown on a commercial airline, or paid a cell phone bill, then you’ve directly benefitted from cases where state cooperation played an important role.
The numbers bear out the level of cooperation we’ve enjoyed with our state partners. Each of the six civil trial sections in the division has worked on enforcement matters with the states; collectively we have worked with all 50 States plus Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico. In the last seven years we have brought 25 cases with the states resulting in settlement or final disposition after trial. Five others are pending.
The Apple e-books case is a remarkable example of effective federal-state cooperation. The Texas Attorney General’s Office opened the original investigation into the conduct of the e-book publishers and Apple and investigated for a period of time before calling the Antitrust Division. Early fact investigation work by Texas and Connecticut enabled the division to get up to speed quickly about the nature of the industry and the anticompetitive conduct that occurred. In fact, some testimony from early depositions taken by Texas and Connecticut proved to be very important in the liability phase of the trial. And, as a further result of productive coordination, the states’ economist testified at trial about price and output effects of the alleged conspiracy, testimony which worked in tandem with expert testimony from the division’s retained economist to tell a compelling economic story.
A short anecdote from that case illustrates quite concretely the benefits of federal-state cooperation. One of the best documents that provided evidence of the conspiracy to raise e-book prices – a document that wound up being featured in the opening paragraph of the Government’s Trial Brief – was found during document review by a staff attorney from the Arkansas Attorney General’s Office.
No less significant in e-books, the states, using their parens patriae authority, along with private class counsel, negotiated monetary relief totaling over $500 million from the publishers and Apple, returning over 200% of overcharges to e-book buyers. A novel feature of the relief is that consumers who purchased e-books during the damages period could opt to have their payouts transferred directly to customer accounts at the various online e-book stores.
The New York City tour buses case is another noteworthy example of federal-state cooperation. In that case, the division teamed up with the New York Attorney General’s Antitrust Bureau to examine the combination of the two largest hop-on, hop-off sightseeing tour bus companies in New York City at the time – the red buses and the blue buses. The merged entity, called Twin America, had an effective monopoly and seemed determined to try to evade antitrust scrutiny. At various points in time over a period of nearly three years Twin America tried to maneuver the case away from the New York Antitrust Bureau, such as by filing an application for transfer of federal licenses which would be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board. The New York Antitrust Bureau kept the matter alive over the course of these gyrations by filing opposition papers every step of the way.
Because of the New York Antitrust Bureau’s work, after the parties removed the jurisdictional impediment, our teams were in a position to conduct a brief investigation and then file a lawsuit in 2012 to unwind the combination and obtain disgorgement of profits obtained from a ticket price increase imposed on consumers by the merged firm. As it happens, that was one of my first matters in my first stint as Acting Assistant Attorney General, back before Bill Baer arrived in 2012. In 2015, after nearly three years of litigation, the parties entered into a joint federal-state settlement that provided substantial disgorgement under state and federal law and forced the parties to give up scarce tour bus stop authorizations from the City so that other firms could compete in the market.
A further illustration of how the division has opened up new and productive relationships with the states, in order to take advantage of unique state statutory powers, involves an initiative one of our Washington, D.C. criminal sections is now taking with the Georgia Department of Law. Under this plan, the division will work with the Consumer Protection Unit of the Georgia Department of Law to distribute nearly $1 million in restitution funds to victims of the real estate foreclosure auction bid-rigging cases brought in the Atlanta area. The Consumer Protection Unit has a long and successful record of returning overcharge damages to victims of all manner of consumer fraud cases and we sought to take advantage of those capabilities by partnering with them. A joint letter from the division and the Department of Law will soon go out to the first group of victims.
Formal Guidance to Shape Conduct and Foster Cooperation
Our cooperation on civil enforcement is bolstered by the formal and informal guidance the division provides through guidelines, workshops, and speeches, to name a few examples. This guidance helps illuminate our current practices and our thinking about critical issues of law and economics, and fosters communication between the division and our state counterparts. Plus, we think it’s just good government to be as transparent and predictable in our approach as possible—it’s the right thing to do.
Over the past several years, our non-litigating sections have been busy updating guidelines and developing new guidance to help educate and inform industry and fellow antitrust enforcers.
Two weeks ago, we released proposed updates to the International Guidelines. We added a chapter on international cooperation to reflect the growing importance of antitrust enforcement in the globalized economy, updated the discussion of the application of U.S. antitrust law to conduct involving foreign commerce, and provided examples that address the issues we most commonly encounter in our international efforts. We’re also updating our IP Guidelines, and are in the process of finalizing them based on the feedback we received through a public comment process.
About a month ago, we released new guidance for human resource professionals to educate them about how the antitrust laws apply to their job responsibilities and inform them of the division’s recent enforcement actions. As part of this guidance, we made clear that going forward employers who conspire to hold down wages or restrict hiring of each other’s workers will be investigated criminally and, if appropriate, prosecuted criminally. Naked “no-poaching” agreements or agreements to fix wages stamp out competition just like agreements to allocate customers or to fix product prices, violations of the law that the division has traditionally investigated criminally and prosecuted as hardcore cartel conduct. We hope this guidance will help HR professionals implement safeguards to prevent inappropriate discussions or agreements with other firms seeking to hire similar employees.
We expect these updates will facilitate even greater coordination with state enforcers in our efforts to protect competition.
State Legislative Efforts and Competition Advocacy
In addition to working with our counterpart antitrust enforcers in the offices of the State Attorneys General, we also work productively with state legislatures and regulatory bodies. Later today I understand there will be discussion about how state law and regulation can work to open, and unfortunately sometimes close, markets. It is important that state lawmakers are mindful of the consequences on competition of their actions and understand how legislation or policies can enhance or cripple competition.
The landscape within which state enforcers operate is different from the federal environment. State attorneys general face the challenge of balancing their role as enforcers of state and federal competition law with the obligation to counsel professional licensing and regulatory agencies about the potential to displace competition. They must balance their institutional role as advocates for free and fair markets with occasional pressure from state lawmakers to restrict markets and insulate local firms from emerging technologies and non-traditional competitors. Recognizing this tension, it can be helpful for the federal antitrust agencies to weigh in regarding proposed state and local legislation to seek to vindicate competition principles.
State officials sometimes seek our views on the competitive significance of state legislation and policies. We welcome those requests and are eager to share our expertise in a way that can help advance both legal frameworks and policies in the direction of more efficient and well-functioning markets, or to shape corporate behavior away from harmful anticompetitive conduct. Additionally, inherent in these competition advocacy efforts is fruitful dialogue and learning that advances the division’s expertise.
States can play a critical role in addressing and preventing anticompetitive conduct through their own legislative efforts. For example, in 2010 the Division sued Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan alleging that “most favored nation” provisions in its agreements with hospitals raised prices, discouraged discounts, and prevented competitive insurers from entering the market. About two years later, Michigan enacted a law that banned these harmful clauses. This move alleviated our concerns and now benefits competition and consumers throughout the state of Michigan. Several other states have also enacted similar legislation.
We have also weighed in over the years on how state regulatory or legislative actions can sometimes close markets off from competition. For example, the division, together with the FTC, has long supported repealing or scaling back state certificate of need laws. These laws typically require certain health care providers to obtain state approval before establishing new facilities, providing new services or making certain large capital expenditures. This can create barriers to competition by delaying or prohibiting entry and, as a result, can limit consumer choice and stifle innovation. We’ve shared these views most recently with officials in South Carolina, Virginia, Michigan, Illinois and Florida.
The division, often with the FTC, has also been active in educating legislatures about how scope of practice laws, which define the set of professionals allowed to perform particular services, can limit competition for consumer services. For example:
In Massachusetts and Puerto Rico we advocated for legislation expanding the scope of practice laws to permit optometrists to provide certain treatments for glaucoma, thereby expanding competition and access to care.
In the legal services realm, we have discouraged overly broad practice of law definitions that limit competition from non-lawyers for services that are not necessary to address legitimate and substantiated harms. In July, the division and the FTC encouraged the adoption of legislation in North Carolina that would provide consumers with the ability to use interactive software programs to fill out legal forms.
Similarly in the real estate industry, we’ve weighed in on the benefits of competition from brokers who offer “fee-for-service” options for consumers and have cautioned against restricting these new consumer-friendly competitive choices.
The division also recently submitted a statement on the potential anticompetitive effects of certain legislative proposals in California that would ban or limit contracts between court reporters or service firms and third parties, such as insurance companies, for multi-case contracts.
Whether advocating in favor of state laws that help keep markets open, or working to help state legislatures understand the negative impacts on competition their laws might cause, we have great respect for the state legislative process. While we as antitrust enforcers have a singular goal of competition, legislatures have to balance a host of potentially competing public policy goals that aren’t squarely in our purview. All we can hope to do is foster an increased understanding and a deeper appreciation for the competition dimension of those decisions. That’s the same approach we take in all the advocacy we do with other federal agencies and international enforcers as well.
Looking forward
I hope that what you’ve heard in these remarks is that the Antitrust Division works hard to promote competition not only in our own cases, but also through our cooperation with and advocacy before our state counterparts. And I also hope you’ve gotten some sense for the sustained commitment that this work requires from a great many talented people.
Our work advocating for competition with our state partners is never done. In just four days, trial will start in the Anthem/Cigna merger challenge brought by the division alongside 11 states and Washington, D.C. I won’t comment on pending cases, but we look forward to working with the states as that important matter proceeds.
With an eye toward the future, allow me to conclude with some suggestions on federal-state cooperation in the cases to come.
For practitioners, I suggest embracing federal-state cooperation. It’s not in anyone’s interest to have divergent federal and state investigations and enforcement outcomes. Grant waivers early in investigations, and encourage state participation in Civil Investigative Demand (CID) depositions and party meetings. These steps will often reduce the investigative burdens on your clients and foster a dialogue that will simplify resolution or settlement if possible under the circumstances.
For the federal and state enforcement agencies, I’d encourage continued investment in the relationships that make cooperation work. As I mentioned earlier, those relationships were not always as strong as they are today, and I really believe they benefit from constant nurturing. Today’s event provides a perfect opportunity for the kind of engagement that keeps our organizations connected, and I see many of our state counterparts out in the audience. I look forward to catching up with you all today—enjoy the Fall Forum.
Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for that warm welcome. I am so grateful to be here today. I also want to thank Lieutenant General [Robert] Caslen and Brigadier General [Diana] Holland for their tremendous leadership here at West Point, and for their gracious invitation to address the Cow Class of the Corps of Cadets. And I want to acknowledge my colleague, Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General [Bill] Baer, who is here with me today. Bill does a tremendous job of leading the Justice Department’s Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative, which is our most important program to secure the rights of our men and women in uniform.
What an honor it is to stand before you today in this venerable place. This campus is unlike any other in the United States – and not just because it’s the only one that Benedict Arnold once tried to sell to the British. Few institutions have had a greater hand in molding the United States into the nation it is today than West Point. Your fellow alumni include two distinguished presidents: Dwight Eisenhower, who I believe said that failing to make the West Point baseball team was one of his life’s greatest disappointments, and Ulysses S. Grant, who wrote in his memoirs that each year at West Point “seemed about five times as long” as a year back home. They may have grumbled about their time here by the Hudson – something I am sure you have never done – but this much is clear: the path that led them to the highest office in public service began right here at West Point.
There is no doubt that this institution has a proud and rich history. But West Point is not simply a monument to the past. It is a gateway to our future. And that is why I look on each of you with such great pride and excitement. Because each of you has taken that future into your hands. When you were not yet 18, you made a choice. You chose to embark on an education that demands more of you than almost any other institution demands of students your age. You made a choice to forego many of the traditional comforts of college for a more challenging path. Before you could even vote, you made a choice that for at least the next nine years, the watchwords of your life would be “Duty, Honor, Country.” That is an enormous testament to your character. And that is a tremendous gift to our nation.
I am moved by the sacrifices that you have made, and that you will make. The conflict of my childhood was Vietnam, a place that meant nothing to me until it reached into my world and took my family members away. It’s a history lesson now, but I still vividly remember my cousins and uncle going off to Vietnam, when I was a young girl. My father, a minister, had a family prayer service for them the night before they left. I remember being struck by the magnitude of their sacrifice. It was the first time I ever really knew someone who was prepared to give his or her life for an ideal – for someone else’s freedom. Their country had called and they had answered, and that was more important than their own comfort or safety. Over the years I watched as other family members, including my own brother, made the choice to serve their country in the armed forces. Their example has stayed with me throughout my life, and it has never been far from my mind during my years with the Department of Justice. That sense of sacrifice and devotion to a greater mission – which was instinctive to my family members who served, and which has brought all of you to West Point – is perhaps the most important ingredient I can think of in the creation of a leader. As a famous graduate of this school, General [Norman] Schwarzkopf, once said: “Leadership is a potent combination of strategy and character. But if you must be without one, be without strategy.”
And that is what I want to talk to you about today: why we need your character more than ever. It seems that our news cycles too frequently feature stories of rancor and division. Many of those stories give voice to those raising the question of what kind of leadership we want for our nation. I believe the answer to that question can be found here at West Point. And not simply because of your substantive knowledge, or your training to lead one of our most vital institutions in the most difficult of situations. Rather, it is because a West Point education is concerned not only with what you know, but with who you are. It is concerned not only with your mastery of strategy, but with your empathy and ability to understand those who are starkly different from you – whether they serve in your platoon or sit across from you at the negotiation table. It is concerned not only with your physical prowess, but with the resilience of your moral core. It is concerned not just with your sterling credentials, but your resolve to use those abilities to serve others. In short, I believe that your West Point education is giving you the very tools we need in all walks of life, military and civilian alike: the ability – and the responsibility – to bridge the gap among our fellow Americans.
It is clear why you are receiving this important and rigorous education. You will lead men and women through the most trying of circumstances. It will be up to you to show those in your command that their common goals transcend their individual differences. It will be up to you to ask them to do things they may not believe themselves capable of doing. It will be up to you to bring out the best in those you lead. And you will only be able to convince them to do those things if you do them yourself – exactly as you are learning to do here. And when you do that – when you realize that leadership is the ultimate form of service to and for others – then those in your command will surprise you, and themselves, with their selflessness, with their decency, and with their ability to join in a common cause. This is precisely the leadership that we also need, at this moment, in our national discourse, in our communities, and in our homes. Because as challenging as your military career will be, some of your greatest leadership challenges will come when you are out of uniform, in a world that doesn’t always exemplify the lessons you have learned here. How will you lead when a child you know is being bullied for being of a different race or religion? How will you lead when someone with whom you disagree needs your help? How will you lead when someone feels ignored or even targeted by the very government we are all sworn to serve? People will listen and look up to you. What will you say to them? Those are the times when you will truly lean on the lessons of this great institution – that true leaders speak up for those whose voice cannot be heard, protect the weak from the strong, and always focus on the common goals and principles that overcome our differences.
Being a leader often brings fulfillment, recognition and rewards. But it also brings unexpected moments. People once your peers may surprise themselves and you by not being completely happy for you, and that will hurt. Along with the acclaim you will also receive criticism, questioning your decisions, your motives, even your integrity, and that will sting. And, although it may be hard to believe – especially for you engineers out there – there will come a time when you will make mistakes, and disappoint others and yourself. We all fall down. It’s how you get up that tells the world who you are, even more than the rank on your sleeve. And how you respond to these challenges will confirm or deny everything that you have said about leadership in less fraught times. Because these are the times you show the content of your character. These are the times you must summon what is best in you – your courage, your integrity and your honor. These are the moments that count. These are the moments when you realize that true leadership focuses not on you, but on the institution you lead and the mission it serves.
In my life, I have been fortunate that that institution is the Department of Justice, and the mission is the protection of the American people and the upholding of the rule of law. And in my most difficult moments, first as a U.S. Attorney, and now as Attorney General of the United States, I have always been well served by reminding myself that my first responsibility is not to what others think of me, but to what my institution can do for others.
You have also committed to serving an institution: the U.S. military. I have no doubt that you will use your talents to uphold its proud traditions and to leave it an even stronger institution than you found it. We will be a safer and better people for your service defending our country and its values. But I also ask you to consider yourselves servants of these United States. The motto of this institution is not “Duty, Honor, Army” – although it will be, for a brief moment, on December 10. The motto is “Duty, Honor, Country.” And I want you to take that motto seriously. Because the division and disunity that we now see too often is symptomatic of a deeper pain in our people – pain that we must learn to heal. At a time when rhetoric and ideology divide us, and bitterness and mistrust tear at the fabric of our democracy, we need you to model service to a larger cause. We need you to remind us that our responsibility as Americans is to promote the welfare of all our people; to protect the vulnerable and the weak; and to ensure that the nation we leave for our children is better than the one our parents inherited. We need you to bring us back to the heart of our greatness, the beauty of our different voices, paths and faces coming together as one people. We need you to remind us of what we have achieved together, in the early motto of this great country: E pluribus unum. Out of many, one.
That is my challenge to you today: be leaders not just of our military, but of our country. Wherever life takes you beyond West Point – whether you stay in the armed forces for life, or whether you choose a different path – I challenge you to continue to be servant leaders. Inspire others to serve causes larger than themselves. Bring the lessons of sacrifice and selflessness that you have learned to our boardrooms, our classrooms, to the halls of Congress. Show the American people that “Duty, Honor, Country,” is a motto not only for the proud few who pass through West Point, but for every person, in every community. You are uniquely positioned to perform this essential work, and as I look out over this exemplary group of men and women, I am filled with hope: hope that we will continue marching together toward a brighter future; hope that we will transcend our divisions and bridge our divides; and hope that our nation’s best days still lie ahead.
I want to thank you all for having me here. I look forward to seeing everything you will achieve as you assume the heavy – and honorable – mantle of leadership.
May God bless you all, and shelter your dreams with his everlasting grace. May God bless all of our men and women in uniform, and hold their safety in the palm of his hand. And may God continue to bless the United States of America.
Thank you, Marc for that kind introduction and thank you for your leadership as United States Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa. I think you’ll agree with me that it’s one of the best jobs in the world.
This is a distinguished crowd. Thank you to:
Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller
Six U.S. Attorneys: Bryan Schroder, Trent Shores, Ron Parsons, Andrew Murray, Pete Deegan, and Marc Krickbaum
the head of our Office of Justice Programs and former U.S. Attorney for Northern Iowa, Matt Dummermuth,
Katie Sullivan, the head of our Office on Violence Against Women,
Darlene Hutchinson, the Director of our Office for Victims of Crime,
Assistant Agriculture Secretary Anne Hazlett,
Assistant Secretary Lance Robertson of HHS,
SEC Regional Director Joel Levin,
Postal Inspector Guy Cottrell,
Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration Nancy Berryhill,
Director Deborah Cox Roush of Senior Corps, and
A special thanks to all those who made this event possible, especially Toni Bacon, Andy Mao, Kate Peterson, and their teams at the Elder Justice Initiative and the Office for Victims of Crime.
Thank you all for being here for this summit. I think this turnout shows how important these issues are to the Department of Justice and to the Trump administration.
It’s good to be home. Des Moines is my home. This is where I played football, where I practiced law, where I prosecuted criminals as a United States Attorney, and it’s where I’m raising my family.
Iowa shaped my values.
One of those Iowa values is that we respect our elders. We recognize the debt that we owe to our parents and grandparents.
Many seniors in Iowa and across America spent their whole lives working, saving, and sacrificing so that they could enjoy a secure and peaceful retirement. And under President Trump their 401(k)s are looking good.
But criminals can try to take it all away with one phone call, one letter, or even one email.
Each year, an estimated $3 billion are stolen or defrauded from millions of American seniors. Through so-called grandparent scams, fake prizes or even outright extortion, criminals target our seniors to rob them of their hard-earned savings and their peace of mind.
And it appears as though this threat is only growing. The Senate Aging Committee’s Fraud Hotline received twice as many reports in 2016 as it received in 2015.
These fraud schemes can happen to anyone. And so I hope that no one will feel ashamed to come forward and report if they’ve been a victim. Some of my family members here in Iowa have received these phone calls. Some of you have, too.
At the Department of Justice, we acknowledge that rural areas are especially vulnerable to these crimes.
In tightly knit communities like the one I grew up in, people are generous and they develop a sense of trust with one another.
Criminals look at that and they see dollar signs.
Oftentimes local law enforcement in rural communities have to cover large areas of land with only a small number of officers. They don’t have the time or the resources to investigate fraud schemes that are often national or even international in scope.
Fortunately, the Department of Justice has their backs. As President Donald Trump has said, this administration supports state and local law enforcement 100 percent.
In this administration, we are well aware that 85 percent of law enforcement officers in this country serve at the state and local levels. We know that we can’t achieve our goals without them.
Over the past year we have taken historic new action to support our state and local partners and to keep our seniors safe.
This year our U.S. Attorneys’ offices have each designated an elder justice coordinator to help prevent crime by educating seniors about scams and other threats. Over just nine months, our elder justice coordinators participated in nearly 200 training, outreach, and coordination meetings attended by approximately 7,000 people.
Our elder justice coordinators are also customizing our strategy to protect seniors in their district and coordinating our prosecutions with state and local partners. That will help us complete more cases and secure more convictions.
In February, the Department conducted the largest elder fraud enforcement action in American history. We charged more than 200 defendants with fraud against elderly Americans and we brought civil actions against dozens more. The defendants in these cases allegedly stole from more than one million American seniors of more than half a billion dollars.
Just a few weeks ago, the Department extended a deferred prosecution agreement with a financial services company in Dallas. This company allegedly knew about criminals using their services for money laundering, but didn’t do anything about it. Some of their employees even took part in the schemes—including grandparent scams and fake prize scams targeting the elderly. In exchange for avoiding prosecution, the company is forfeiting $125 million which the Department will provide to the victims. The company has also agreed to implement anti-money laundering protections to prevent these crimes from ever happening again.
There are a lot of other cases that we could talk about—but I’ll just mention two right here in Iowa.
This year, a total of 33 defendants in Dubuque—11 at the federal level and 22 at the local level—have been convicted for a grandparent scam against a total of 285 American seniors. The defendants defrauding more than $750,000 and then wiring it to their co-conspirators in the Dominican Republic. Now they’ve been held accountable.
At the federal level, these cases were prosecuted by AUSA Tony Morfitt of our Elder Justice Task Force—Tony, great job.
In August, a jury convicted a man from outside of Des Moines for convincing elderly Iowans to sell off their investments and buy insurance from him. Instead of buying the insurance as promised, the defendant used most of the funds for personal expenses like remodeling his house and buying two new Harley Davidsons. I’m pleased to report that that house and those motorcycles have now been forfeited.
This case was investigated by the FBI and prosecuted by Adam Kerndt and Mikaela Shotwell. Great work.
These are important accomplishments. We have increased the resources dedicated to these cases and we have increased our effectiveness in prosecuting them.
But there is more to do. And so today I am announcing our next steps.
First of all, we are improving training for our U.S. Attorneys’ offices.
Earlier this year the Department’s Elder Justice Initiative published its Elder Abuse Guide for Law Enforcement or EAGLE. EAGLE contains helpful information for prosecutors, including overviews of state and local law as well as best practices for evidence collection, interviewing older adults, and for documenting elder abuse. EAGLE is free and available right now to every law enforcement officer in the country.
Today I am announcing that the next edition of our Journal of Justice Policy and the Law—formerly known as the USA Bulletin—will focus on Elder Justice. It will also be the longest bulletin we’ve ever published since we started it back in 1953. These bulletins are public, and so they can be used by state and local prosecutors as well as our U.S. Attorneys’ offices. That will provide the knowledge and insights of some of the top experts on elder justice to the prosecutors who are on the front lines.
Second, we are investing in services for seniors who have been victimized by criminals.
I am announcing today that over the next 11 months, our Office for Victims of Crime will provide nearly $18 million to help seniors who are victims of crime. These funds can be used for priorities like legal services, telephone hotlines, and housing for seniors who have lost their homes—which is something that happens all too often. We are using these OVC funds for a wider variety of services for seniors than ever before.
And finally, we are continuing to enforce the law aggressively and forcefully.
On October 1st, the Department began our Money Mule Initiative, which is a coordinated effort against the transnational criminal organizations who are defrauding our seniors.
We are hitting the fraudsters where it hurts—in the wallet.
Our prosecutors have found that fraudsters avoid using banks to launder the money they take from their victims. Instead, they launder it through so-called money mules—Americans who collect the money and then send it overseas.
Oftentimes these are co-conspirators—as in the Dubuque case that I mentioned a moment ago. But sometimes they are simply good people who have been tricked into thinking that they are doing charity work or working for a legitimate business.
Working with our Postal Inspectors, FBI agents, and other law enforcement partners, we have identified a number of these money mules across America. We have even been able to determine which ones have been tricked into this work and which ones are knowing and willful conspirators.
In the first case, we knock on their door and we explain to them what’s really going on. We ask them to sign a letter acknowledging that it’s wrong and promising to stop. That in itself is shutting off large quantities of money for the fraudsters.
And in the second case—when we determine that they are part of a conspiracy—we are filing civil actions and taking them to court.
Since October 1, we’ve taken action to stop 400 money mules across 65 districts. These involve everything from grandparent scams to romance scams, fake lotteries, IRS imposters, and fake tech support schemes.
The FBI and our Postal Inspectors have interviewed 300 money mules and sent 300 warning letters. We’ve charged 10 defendants and filed 25 civil actions. We’ve executed search warrants across America, including here in the Southern District of Iowa.
These are impressive numbers.
Our goal is to reduce crime and protect America’s seniors. And we have good reasons to believe that our work with our law enforcement partners is reducing crime and having a real impact on the seniors of this country.
The Postal Inspection Service has estimated that payments by mass mail fraud victims to foreign post office boxes has dropped by 94 percent since 2016—from 150,000 per month to approximately 10,000 per month now.
There are many causes for that, but that is a remarkable achievement—and I want to thank everyone who has played a role in our efforts.
We are going to keep up this pace.
We are going to continue to provide our prosecutors and our state and local partners with the resources that they need. And we’re going to keep putting fraudsters in jail.
I want to thank each of you again for your contribution to this effort. Each of us has a role to play—and certainly not just those of us in government. All of us can be on the lookout for fraud schemes and report suspected criminal activity.
If we do that—and if we remain vigilant—then we can ensure that every senior has the safety and peace of mind that they deserve.
“November Rain”: Antitrust Enforcement on Behalf of American Consumers and Taxpayers
Good morning, and thank you for the kind introduction. I’d like to thank the American Bar Association for your invitation to this year’s Fall Forum and Deb Garza for her leadership of the Section this year.
I find it hard to believe it’s been only a little more than a year since I was confirmed as AAG and spoke at last year’s Fall Forum. Over the past year, the Antitrust Division has been hard at work on behalf of American consumers. We made a number of significant enforcement actions this week, but before I turn to those, I’d like to update you on a few recent changes in the Front Office.
First, Michael Murray recently joined us from the Deputy Attorney General’s office, where he served as Associate Deputy Attorney General. Mike now will be a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Front Office, where he will be overseeing our Appellate Section and our 4A damage actions on behalf of the American taxpayer. Mike has significant appellate experience, including as a law clerk for Justice Anthony Kennedy.
In addition, our new acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economics is Jeff Wilder. Jeff received his Ph.D. from MIT and has distinguished himself as an outstanding economist serving as one of the leaders in the Division’s Economic Analysis Group, and we’re happy to have him join us in the Front Office.
Some of you may remember that at last year’s Fall Forum, I spoke about antitrust and deregulation. In those remarks, I focused on remedies, including our preference for structural remedies and our emphasis on making consent decrees more enforceable. I also discussed our commitment to the view that antitrust enforcement is law enforcement, not industrial regulation, and that the Antitrust Division should strive to accomplish its law enforcement mission in the most efficient and effective way possible. The Division has stood by those principles.
More recently, in a speech at Georgetown, I announced several improvements to the merger review process. We are making good on those changes as well. Today, we posted a model timing agreement and a model voluntary request letter on our website. Those documents increase transparency and predictability and will help merging businesses and their counsel know what to expect as part of the merger review process. We’ve also begun tracking the duration of merger reviews more carefully, so that we can monitor our performance and factors affecting it. You will recall our goal is to resolve investigations within six months of filing, provided that the parties cooperate and comply with our document and data requests during the entire process.
I would like to focus the remainder of my remarks today on four important settlements in the last week that reflect the Antitrust Division’s commitment to vigilant and effective antitrust enforcement.
As some of you may have seen, the Division announced just yesterday a set of global settlements with three South Korean companies. Those unprecedented settlements resolve criminal charges and civil claims arising from a bid-rigging conspiracy that targeted fuel supply contracts to U.S. military bases in South Korea. They are the result of tremendous hard work in parallel criminal and civil investigations by the Antitrust Division’s Washington Criminal I Section, the Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture Section, and the Fraud Section of the Civil Division. We were assisted ably by our partners at the FBI and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.
The United States currently maintains numerous military bases in South Korea, housing American soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors in the region. These military bases need fuel for various purposes, and two Department of Defense agencies, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES), contract with South Korean companies to supply fuel to the numerous U.S. military bases throughout South Korea.
Our investigation, which is ongoing, revealed that SK Energy, GS Caltex, Hanjin Transportation, along with other co-conspirators, rigged bids and fixed prices for fuel supply contracts issued by the U.S. military in South Korea for over a decade. They cheated the Military and American taxpayers out of precious limited resources. As a result of the conspiracy, the Department of Defense paid substantially more for fuel supply services. Although the immediate victim here was the U.S. military, the American taxpayer, you and me, ultimately footed the bill.
The three companies agreed yesterday to plead guilty to criminal charges under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and they will pay at least $82 million in criminal fines for their involvement in the conspiracy. Importantly, the three defendants have also agreed to cooperate with the ongoing criminal investigation of the conduct.
Robert Jackson, who is one of my legal heroes, recognized that bid rigging is particularly harmful to government purchasers. When he served as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division, Jackson broadly denounced arrangements that “compel purchasers to pay a price based on calculation, not competition,” and specifically emphasized that “[w]hatever the effect of this on private buyers, it completely destroys the mechanism set up by federal, state, and municipal governments to keep favoritism and corruption out of public buying.”
The harm Jackson recognized still exists today, and these settlements serve as an important reminder that the Justice Department and its law enforcement partners will investigate aggressively and prosecute without hesitation companies who cheat the United States government and the American taxpayer.
We did not stop there. We are committed to using all authorities Congress has granted to us to remedy antitrust injuries to the American taxpayer. Those tools include the authority conferred in Section 4A of the Clayton Act. Section 4A is an important but underused enforcement tool that allows the government to recover treble damages for antitrust violations when the government itself is the victim.
To that end, the Division established a parallel civil enforcement team, led by Kathy O’Neill and a group of capable litigators from the Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture Section to pursue parallel civil actions for damages. We negotiated separate civil resolutions with each of the three defendants on behalf of American taxpayers. We also worked alongside our partners in the Civil Division’s Fraud Section, who pursued charges against the defendants under the False Claims Act for making false statements to the government in connection with their conspiracy.
To resolve both the civil antitrust and the False Claims Act violations, these three defendants have agreed to pay an additional $154 million in total. They also have agreed to cooperate fully with the Division’s ongoing civil investigation and to implement effective antitrust compliance programs.
These historic cases mark the first significant settlements under Section 4A in many years. In fact, as far as we can tell based on our records, they are the largest settlements the government has ever recovered since the enactment of Section 4A.
Let me take a step back to review the history of Section 4A.
When Congress enacted the Sherman Act in 1890 and the Clayton Act in 1914, neither statute contained a provision specifically allowing the government to recover damages it suffered as a result of an antitrust violation. In 1939, the United States, led by Assistant Attorney General Thurman Arnold, brought its first-ever antitrust suit for damages on its own behalf. The government claimed authority to do so under Section 7 of the Sherman Act, which was the predecessor of Section 4 of the Clayton Act. As most of you know, Section 4 permits “any person” injured by an antitrust violation to recover the damages they suffered.
In that pioneering case, United States v. Cooper, the government alleged that eighteen defendants had “collusively fixed” bids that were “identical to the penny on eighty-two different sizes of tires” sold to the United States. The defendants successfully moved to dismiss the action on the question of whether the government is a “person” entitled to bring an action for damages under the statute. The Second Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court ultimately held that the United States is not a “person” entitled to sue.
In 1955, Congress amended the Clayton Act in response to the Court’s ruling in Cooper by adding Section 4A. As originally enacted, Section 4A allowed the government to recover only single damages, so that the government could recover damages where it was the victim of an antitrust violation.
At first, the Division used Section 4A aggressively, filing numerous cases for damages throughout the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1980s, however, the government brought only four cases under Section 4A—a remarkable decline from the prior two decades. Some attributed this drop, in part, to the Supreme Court’s Illinois Brick decision in 1978, because many of the cases brought in the ‘60s and ‘70s involved claims by the United States as an indirect purchaser. The government, however, increasingly purchases goods and services directly.
The next milestone came in 1990, when Congress amended the Clayton Act again to allow the government to seek treble damages in Section 4A cases.
Since 1990, a span of nearly thirty years, only three Section 4A cases have been filed. In 1991, the Division recovered $250,000 from two companies for rigging bids to purchase surplus gunpowder. In 1994, the Division filed suit against two defense contractors for entering into a “teaming” arrangement that eliminated competition in supplying the Department of Defense with cluster bombs. In that case, the Division recovered $4 million on behalf of American taxpayers and obtained an $8 million discount on the bid price. In 2012, the Division challenged collusion between two companies bidding on four natural gas leases at auctions run by the Bureau of Land Management. The Division recovered $275,000 from each company.
The American Taxpayer deserves to see a revitalization of the government’s Section 4A authority. This week’s settlements are only the first in that direction. Going forward, the Division will exercise 4A authority to seek compensation for taxpayers when the government has been the victim of an antitrust violation. We hope that these efforts will also deter future violations.
In light of our policy of seeking damages under Section 4A where available, I would like to address how parallel criminal and civil enforcement will proceed going forward.
First, the Division’s new focus on Section 4A enforcement will not require any changes to the Division’s leniency policy. The Division offers strong incentives to come forward to report criminal antitrust violations in exchange for leniency, and those incentives do not change when the government is harmed by the violation.
The Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004, better known as ACPERA, created another valuable incentive for leniency applications. Under ACPERA’s detrebling provision, those who successfully qualify for leniency will be subject only to single damages in follow-on civil suits, rather than treble damages. In addition, those who successfully qualify for leniency are not subject to joint and several liability.
This detrebling incentive will apply to any Section 4A claims brought by the government. We will also follow the underlying requirements for ACPERA in Section 4A cases: companies will need to cooperate with the civil team, as they would with any private plaintiff, in order to reap the detrebling benefits.
The bottom line is that the Division’s enforcement of Section 4A will increase the incentive for co-conspirators in cartel cases to come forward.
Separately, I should note that global resolutions like the ones announced yesterday should serve the interests of the parties as well. Cooperating companies subject to penalties under multiple statutes can gain certainty and finality. Employees, customers, and investors can resolve the problem and move on. This is consistent with the Department’s broader policies on coordination of corporate penalties.
Next, as we pursue Section 4A damages going forward, global resolutions of criminal and civil antitrust liability will help maintain a consistent policy on how to calculate civil damages. Yesterday’s settlements underscore this point. They provide that SK Energy, GS Caltex, and Hanjin each will pay an amount calculated to exceed the overcharge paid by the government. At the same time, the amount reflects both the value of the cooperation commitments each defendant made as a condition of settlement and the cost savings the Division realized by avoiding extended litigation.
As a general matter, if the government is required to litigate claims it brings under Section 4A, the government will seek treble damages. In addition, we anticipate that earlier cooperators will benefit by paying a lower multiple of damages, because the value of their cooperation is higher earlier in our investigation.
I will turn now to another significant settlement the Division filed this week, one which resolves a complaint against six broadcast television companies alleging that they engaged in widespread, unlawful sharing of non-public, competitively sensitive information. Along with the complaint, the Division filed proposed final judgments requiring the companies to cease such conduct and to undergo rigorous compliance and reporting measures for the next seven years.
We uncovered this conduct during our investigation into Sinclair Broadcasting Group’s proposed acquisition of Tribune Media Company, which has since been abandoned.
As we allege in the complaint, the defendants agreed in local broadcasting markets throughout the United States to exchange revenue pacing information and other competitively sensitive information. “Pacing” compares a broadcast station’s revenues booked for a certain time period to the revenues booked in the same point in the previous year. Pacing indicates how each station is performing versus the rest of the market and provides insight into each station’s remaining spot advertising for the period.
We discovered that the defendants had been exchanging pacing information either directly between stations or corporate headquarters, or indirectly through national representatives that help local stations sell advertisements to national advertisers. By exchanging this information, the broadcasters were better able to anticipate whether their competitors were likely to raise, maintain, or lower spot advertising prices, which in turn helped inform the stations’ own pricing strategies and negotiations with advertisers. As a result, the information exchanges harmed the competitive price-setting process.
We have not heard any legitimate pro-competitive justification for this conduct. We are therefore pleased that these companies recognized that a protracted investigation and litigation would serve no purpose, and we welcome their cooperation as our investigation continues. We also want to remind businesses, as well as the antitrust practitioners that advise them, that agreements between competitors to exchange competitively sensitive information can violate the antitrust laws and lead to a civil enforcement action even if the conduct does not amount to the type of hard core cartel conduct that the Antitrust Division prosecutes criminally.
Finally, this morning we announced the third significant enforcement resolution this week—a settlement with Atrium Health, formerly known as Carolinas Healthcare System. We were joined in the settlement by the North Carolina Attorney General’s Office, and we thank them for their partnership in this action. The settlement resolves over two years of civil antitrust litigation challenging the hospital system’s use of anticompetitive steering restrictions in its contracts with major health insurers. These steering restrictions prevented health insurers from promoting innovative health plans and more cost-effective healthcare providers.
Atrium is the dominant hospital system in the Charlotte, North Carolina metropolitan area. It used its market power to limit major health insurers’ ability to introduce plans designed to encourage consumers to choose cost-effective healthcare providers. Specifically, Atrium would agree to participate in a broad network plan only if the insurer would commit not to introduce other plans that would steer patients away from Atrium. The steering restrictions also deliberately constrained insurers from providing consumers with transparency into the comparative cost and quality of their healthcare alternatives.
Because the steering restrictions were in place, insurers could not introduce more innovative health insurance plans that create financial incentives for patients to use lower-cost healthcare services. Needless to say, competition for patients encourages healthcare providers to reduce costs, lower prices, and increase quality. These steering restrictions inhibited competition among healthcare providers to provide higher quality, lower-cost services.
The resolution prevents Atrium from enforcing the steering restrictions in its contracts with major health insurers. If approved by the Court, it will restore competition between healthcare providers in Charlotte, North Carolina.
I would like to make a broader point about the Division’s settlements this week. The consent decrees in all three cases, like all other decrees the Division has entered into the past 13 months, include specific new provisions designed to improve their enforceability.
These provisions (i) address the burden of proof in a civil contempt action by providing that the preponderance standard will apply; (ii) make defendants responsible for reimbursing the government for all costs it incurs in connection with enforcing the decree; (iii) allow the United States to seek a one-time extension of the term of the decree in the event of a violation, or to terminate the decree early if continuation is no longer necessary or in the public interest. Another provision addresses interpretation of the decree by stating that courts can enforce any provisions that are stated specifically and in reasonable detail, whether or not they are clear and unambiguous on their face.
The Division serves as a guardian of American consumers, and we act in the public’s trust. When the Division enters into a consent decree to resolve charges of anticompetitive conduct, we will hold parties’ feet to the fire and enforce the decrees.
Finally, last Friday, three defendants pled guilty to conspiring to rig bids and allocate the market in auctions of foreclosed properties in Palm Beach County, Florida. This case is unlike the Division’s prior foreclosure auction prosecutions because the auction occurred online rather than in-person, and the collusion occurred primarily by text message rather than in-person. It is a good illustration of the fact that while defendants may use new platforms and technologies to commit antitrust crimes, the Division too is evolving and stands ready to prosecute these crimes in the digital age.
The conspiracy took place in the aftermath of the financial crisis, which affected the housing market nationwide and the Florida real estate market in particular. Defendants and their affiliated business entities were the largest buyers of foreclosed properties in Palm Beach County. Together, the commerce affected by the defendants’ collusion was $25 million.
The Division began an investigation into possible collusion in online foreclosure auctions in Palm Beach County, Florida after receiving an anonymous citizen complaint that included a link to a YouTube video detailing the collusion.
Co-conspirators texted each other to coordinate their bidding and facilitate the conspiracy to obtain foreclosed homes at suppressed prices. Most commonly, bidders would agree to stop bidding or to refrain from bidding at their co-conspirators’ request. In some instances, they lowered bids for each other’s benefit.
After learning of the investigation, one of the defendants used and encouraged other co-conspirators to use a text messaging application to continue colluding. He believed that law enforcement would be unable to read or trace any messages sent through the application.
The three defendants were indicted by a grand jury in November 2017. Since then, all three have pleaded guilty.
I will conclude by taking this opportunity to highlight the outstanding attorneys and economists at the Antitrust Division. They are the core of executing the Division’s mission and work tirelessly in their commitment to protect competition and consumers.
It has been a busy year at the Antitrust Division. We have been working hard on behalf of America’s consumers and taxpayers, and look forward to continuing our efforts on their behalf in the year to come.
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
Before voting NO on Bondi’s nomination for Attorney General, Welch took to the Senate Floor to urge his colleagues to stand up against Trump’s illegal power grab
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, took to the Senate Floor late last night before voting against Pam Bondi’s nomination for Attorney General of the United States. Senator Welch cited President Trump’s lawlessness, and Ms. Bondi’s unwillingness to stand up against President Trump and preserve an independent Department of Justice. He called on his colleagues to stop enabling Trump’s illegal and cruel overreach of his authority.
Watch more here:
Senator Welch’s Committee and Subcommittee Assignments for the 119th Congress include:
Senate Committee on Finance
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, & Forestry
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Rural Development, Energy, and Credit
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on the Constitution
Senate Committee on Rules & Administration
Senator Peter Welch has spent the bulk of his life working to improve the lives of folks who too often get left behind. After fighting housing discrimination in Chicago, he enrolled in law school at the UC-Berkeley, and later settled in White River Junction, Vermont, where he worked as a public defender before founding a small law practice. He was first elected to represent Windsor County in the Vermont Senate in 1980. Senator Welch was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives where he served for 16 years before being elected to the Senate in 2022. In the Senate, he’s focused on lowering costs for Vermonters, making Washington work better for Vermont, and protecting civil rights and democracy in America and abroad.
Nasdaq Copenhagen London Stock Exchange Euronext Dublin Other stakeholders
Date 5 February 2025
Annual general meeting of Ringkjøbing Landbobank A/S
The bank will hold its annual general meeting at 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, 5 March 2025 at the ROFI Centre, Kirkevej 26, Rindum, 6950 Ringkøbing, Denmark.
Agenda as per the bank’s articles of association:
1. Election of chairperson
The board of directors proposes that Allan Østergaard Sørensen, attorney-at-law, chair the general meeting.
2.The board’s report on the bank’s activities in the previous year
The board of directors proposes that the board’s report on the bank’s activities in the previous year be adopted.
3.Presentation of the annual report for approval
The board of directors proposes that the annual report for 2024 be approved.
Further reference is made to the published annual report for 2024.
4.Decision on allocation of profit or covering of loss under the approved annual report
The board of directors proposes that the distribution of profit be approved.
Further reference is made to the published annual report for 2024.
5.Consultative vote on the remuneration report
The board of directors proposes that the remuneration report for 2024 be approved.
Further reference is made to the published remuneration report for 2024.
6. Approval of the remuneration of the board of directors for the current financial year
The shareholders’ committee and the board of directors propose that the remuneration of the board of directors for the current financial year be approved.
Further reference is made to the full proposals.
7.Remuneration policy
The board of directors proposes that the updated remuneration policy be approved.
Further reference is made to the full proposals.
8.Election of members to the shareholders’ committee
In accordance with the decision made by the bank’s annual general meeting held on 28 February 2024, the following members of the shareholders’ committee, whose terms of office end in 2025 and 2026, are resigning: Mette Bundgaard, Per Lykkegaard Christensen, Ole Kirkegård Erlandsen, Thomas Sindberg Hansen, Tonny Hansen, Kim Jacobsen, Morten Jensen, Kasper Lykke Kjeldsen, Lotte Littau Kjærgaard, Niels Erik Burgdorf Madsen, Martin Krogh Pedersen, Poul Kjær Poulsgaard, Kristian Skannerup, Allan Østergaard Sørensen, Jørgen Kolle Sørensen, Sten Uggerhøj, Lasse Svoldgaard Vesterby and Christina Ørskov.
In addition, Lars Møller and Yvonne Skagen must retire from the shareholders’ committee due to the age requirement in the articles of association.
The shareholders’ committee and the board of directors propose re-election of the following members, whose terms of office end in 2025 and 2026:
Mette Bundgaard, police superintendent, No, born 1966
Per Lykkegaard Christensen, farmer, Hjallerup, born 1959
Ole Kirkegård Erlandsen, butcher, Snejbjerg, born 1962
Thomas Sindberg Hansen, grocer, Kloster, born 1978
Tonny Hansen, former college principal, Ringkøbing, born 1958
Kim Jacobsen, manager, Aalborg, born 1969
Morten Jensen, attorney-at-law (Supreme Court), Dronninglund, born 1961
Kasper Lykke Kjeldsen, timber merchant, Højbjerg, born 1981
Lotte Littau Kjærgaard, manager, Holstebro, born 1969
Niels Erik Burgdorf Madsen, manager, Ølgod, born 1959
Martin Krogh Pedersen, CEO, Ringkøbing, born 1967
Poul Kjær Poulsgaard, farmer, Madum, born 1974
Kristian Skannerup, manufacturer, Tim, born 1959
Allan Østergaard Sørensen, attorney-at-law (High Court), Ringkøbing, born 1982
Jørgen Kolle Sørensen, sales representative and branch manager, Hvide Sande, born 1970
Sten Uggerhøj, car dealer, Frederikshavn, born 1959
Lasse Svoldgaard Vesterby, manager, Ringkøbing, born 1978
Christina Ørskov, manager, Gærum, born 1969
The shareholders’ committee and the board of directors propose the following for election:
Rasmus Alstrup, farmer, Videbæk, born 1985
Rikke Ahnfeldt Kjær, CFO, Gistrup, born 1980
Pia Stevnhøj Sommer, sales director, Lind, born 1979
In recruiting and proposing candidates for the shareholders’ committee (election and re-election), the committee and board of directors have focused on ensuring a diverse committee membership in terms of business experience, professional qualifications and expertise, gender, age etc.
9.Election of one or more auditors
In accordance with the audit committee’s recommendation, the shareholders’ committee and the board of directors propose that PricewaterhouseCoopers, Statsautoriseret Revisionspartner-selskab be re-elected as external auditor and sustainability auditor.
Further reference is made to the full proposals.
10. Authorisation for the board of directors to permit the bank to acquire its own shares
The board of directors proposes that it be granted authorisation to permit the bank to acquire its own shares, in accordance with current legislation, until the next annual general meeting, to a total nominal value of ten percent (10%) of the share capital, such that the shares can be acquired at current market price plus or minus ten percent (+/-10%) at the time of acquisition. Further reference is made to the full proposals.
11.Any proposals from the board of directors, the shareholders’ committee or shareholders
11.a. Proposed amendments to the articles of association
The shareholders’ committee and the board of directors propose the following amendments to the articles of association:
Art. 2a-2b: It is proposed that the authorisations in articles 2a and 2b be extended to 4 March 2030. If the proposal is approved, the wording of articles 2a and 2b of the bank’s articles of association will be changed to the following:
Art. 2a: “The general meeting has decided to authorise the board of directors to increase the share capital in one or more rounds by up to nom. DKK 5,341,347 with right of pre-emption for the bank’s existing shareholders. The capital increase shall be fully paid up in cash. The capital increase may be below the market price. This authorisation shall apply until 4 March 2030.”
Art. 2b: “The general meeting has decided to authorise the board of directors to increase the share capital in one or more rounds by up to nom. DKK 2,670,673 without right of pre-emption for the bank’s existing shareholders. The capital increase may be by cash payment or contribution of an existing company or specific asset values corresponding to the value of the shares issued. The capital increase shall be fully paid up at the market price ascertained by the board of directors. This authorisation shall apply until 4 March 2030.”
The background to the proposal is that the board of directors wants to ensure continued flexibility regarding the granting of authorisations to the board of directors.
The proposed amendments to the articles of association are also given in the full proposals to which we refer and which are available on the bank’s website, www.landbobanken.com.
11.b. Proposal to reduce the bank’s share capital by nom. DKK 1,315,042 by cancellation of itsown shares
The board of directors proposes a reduction in the bank’s share capital from nom. DKK 26,706,739 to nom. DKK 25,391,697 by cancellation of 1,315,042 nom. DKK 1 shares from the bank’s holding of its own shares of a nominal value of DKK 1,315,042.
Please note that, in accordance with section 188(1) of the Danish Companies Act, the purpose of the reduction in the bank’s share capital is payment to shareholders. The amount of the reduction has been used as payment to shareholders for shares acquired by the bank under the authorisation previously granted to the board of directors by the general meeting.
The share capital will consequently be reduced by nom. DKK 1,315,042 and the bank’s holding of its own shares will be reduced by 1,315,042 nom. DKK 1 shares. Please note that, in accordance with section 188(2) of the Danish Companies Act, the shares in question were acquired for a total sum of DKK 1,524,948,149. This means that, apart from the reduction in nominal capital, DKK 1,523,633,107 has been paid to shareholders.
The purpose of the board of directors’ proposed reduction of the share capital is to maintain flexibility in the bank’s capital structure.
If the proposal is adopted, the following changes will be made to articles 2, 2a, 2b and 2c of the articles of association: Art. 2: The amount of “26,706,739” will be changed to “25,391,697”, Art. 2a: The amount of “5,341,347” will be changed to “5,078,339”, Art. 2b: The amount of “2,670,673” will be changed to “2,539,169”, and Art. 2c: The amount of “5,341,347” will be changed to “5,078,339”.
11.c. Proposed authorisation for the board of directors or its appointee
The board of directors proposes that the board of directors, or its appointee, be authorised to report the decisions which have been adopted at the general meeting for registration and to make such changes to the documents submitted to the Danish Business Authority as the Authority may require or find appropriate in connection with registration of the decisions of the general meeting.
11.d. Proposal from a shareholder
Proposal from shareholder Poul Aksel Andersen, Hobro:
Reason for the proposal: The minutes of the 2024 annual general meeting state that: “In recruiting and proposing candidates for the shareholders’ committee (election and re-election), the committee and board of directors have focused on ensuring a diverse committee membership in terms of business experience, professional qualifications and expertise, gender, age etc.”
Despite this, it is evident from the minutes that all of the elected members of the shareholders’ committee in 2024 were in leading positions. The shareholders’ committee is therefore hardly representative of the bank’s shareholders or customers in terms of business experience, professional qualifications or expertise.
Proposal: It is proposed, that Ringkjøbing Landbobank’s work of recruiting and proposing of candidates in the future should focus on making the composition of the shareholders’ committee representative of the bank’s shareholders and customers; that the bank should make the process of admitting committee members transparent for all shareholders who might be interested in joining the shareholders’ committee; and that the bank’s work should focus specifically on ensuring that at least 25% of the members of the shareholders’ committee are employees without responsibilities for managing other staff.
The board of directors’ recommendation regarding the proposal:
The members of the bank’s board of directors are elected by the shareholders’ committee. Six of the eight current board members elected by the shareholders’ committee came from the membership of the shareholders’ committee. The shareholders’ committee is thus a recruitment channel for the board of directors. It is relevant, therefore, that the members of the shareholders’ committee possess the right competences for onward recruitment to the board of directors. In addition, the authorities nowadays impose a number of requirements on serving members of boards of directors of financial undertakings, including in relation to their competences, and there are also requirements regarding the collective competences of the plenary board of directors.
The board of directors, the board of directors’ nomination committee and the shareholders’ committee are already working to promote diversity in the shareholders’ committee.
The board of directors does not consider it appropriate to tie the board of directors’ nomination committee, the board of directors and the shareholders’ committee to a specific framework in future recruitment processes for nominations of candidates to the shareholders’ committee.
For the above reasons, the board of directors does not support the proposal.
Validity requirements for resolutions
The proposals under items 11.a. and 11.b. of the agenda require adoption by at least two-thirds (2/3) both of votes cast and of the share capital with voting rights represented at the general meeting. Other proposals can be adopted by simple majority vote, except item 5 on the agenda which is a consultative vote.
Amount of share capital and the shareholders’ voting rights and date of registration – the right to attend and vote at the general meeting
Please note that the amount of the share capital is nom. DKK 26,706,739 consisting of 26,706,739 nom. DKK 1 shares.
As for shareholders’ voting rights, each share of nom. DKK 1 carries one (1) vote when the share is recorded in the company’s share register, or when the shareholder has reported and documented their right. However, a shareholder may cast no more than 3,000 votes.
The right to attend and vote at the general meeting may only be exercised by shareholders who, by 11:59 p.m. on the date of registration, Wednesday, 26 February 2025, are listed as shareholders in the register of shareholders or have submitted a request to the bank, which the bank has received by that deadline, for inclusion in the register of shareholders.
Registration for the general meeting, questions and admission cards
Registration for the general meeting can be made
by contacting Euronext Securities A/S by phone +45 4358 8866 or email to CPH-investor@euronext.com or
by contacting one of the bank’s branches.
In accordance with the bank’s articles of association, the deadline for registering for the general meeting is 11:59 p.m. on Friday 28 February 2025, after which admission cards for the general meeting can no longer be ordered.
Shareholders or proxies may be accompanied by an adviser, provided the adviser’s attendance has been notified on time.
Shareholders may ask questions in writing about the agenda items or the bank’s position in general, to be answered at the general meeting. Questions may be sent by letter to Ringkjøbing Landbobank A/S, for the attention of: General Management, Torvet 1, 6950 Ringkøbing, Denmark, or by email to regnskab@landbobanken.dk.
Voting
Shareholders may attend and vote in person or by proxy at the general meeting. Postal voting is also possible before the general meeting.
Shareholders may grant proxy to the bank’s board of directors or a third party by 11:59 p.m. on Friday 28 February 2025. The proxy may be issued electronically on InvestorPortal at Euronext Securities, via the bank’s website www.landbobanken.com or in writing on a proxy form which is available from the bank’s branches.
If a written proxy is used, it must be completed and signed, and received at the bank by the above deadline, i.e. 11:59 p.m. on Friday 28 February 2025.
The proxy may be sent by post for the attention of: Accounts Department, Ringkjøbing Landbobank A/S, Torvet 1, 6950 Ringkøbing, Denmark, by email to regnskab@landbobanken.dk or by fax to +45 7624 4913.
Shareholders may also send a postal vote before the general meeting.
Postal votes may be cast electronically on InvestorPortal at Euronext Securities, via the bank’s website www.landbobanken.com or in writing on a postal vote form which is available from the bank’s branches.
If a postal vote is cast, the ballot paper must be returned for the attention of: Accounts Department, Ringkjøbing Landbobank A/S, Torvet 1, 6950 Ringkøbing, Denmark, by email to regnskab@landbobanken.dk or by fax to +45 7624 4913.
Electronic postal votes must be cast by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, 4 March 2025, by which time a postal ballot paper must also be received by the bank.
Exercising financial rights
Ringkjøbing Landbobank’s shareholders can choose Ringkjøbing Landbobank A/S as the account-holding institution for the purpose of exercising the financial rights through Ringkjøbing Landbobank A/S.
Further information
The annual report, agenda and full proposals with the proposed amendments to the articles of association, the remuneration report, other documents under section 99(1) of the Danish Companies Act and information on the collection and processing of personal data in connection with the annual general meeting will be published on the bank’s website www.landbobanken.com and made available for inspection by shareholders on Wednesday, 5 February 2025.
Recording and webcast
The general meeting will be recorded and the recording will subsequently be uploaded to the bank’s website, www.landbobanken.com.
The general meeting will also be webcast via the bank’s website, www.landbobanken.com and can be viewed by everyone. It will not be possible to ask questions or vote via the webcast.
Personal data
For details on the bank’s processing of personal data in respect of general meetings, please see Ringkjøbing Landbobank’s privacy policy for shareholders etc., which is available on the bank’s website, www.landbobanken.com.
Dividend
Any dividend is expected to be available in shareholders’ return accounts on 10 March 2025.
Yours sincerely
Ringkjøbing Landbobank
On behalf of the board of directors
Martin Krogh Pedersen Chair of the board of directors
View of the Rio Grande flowing through Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, photographed from the Paso Del Norte International Bridge.Paul Rarje/AFP via Getty Images
Immigration and border security will be the likely focus of U.S.-Mexico relations under the new Trump administration. But there also is a growing water crisis along the U.S.–Mexico border that affects tens of millions of people on both sides, and it can only be managed if the two governments work together.
Growing water use is already overtaxing limited supplies from nearly all of the region’s cross-border rivers, streams and aquifers. Many of these sources are contaminated with agricultural pollutants, untreated waste and other substances, further reducing the usability of available water.
As Texas-based scholars who study the legal and scientific aspects of water policy, we know that communities, farms and businesses in both countries rely on these scarce water supplies. In our view, water conditions on the border have changed so much that the current legal framework for managing them is inadequate.
Unless both nations recognize this fact, we believe that water problems in the region are likely to worsen, and supplies may never recover to levels seen as recently as the 1950s. Although the U.S. and Mexico have moved to address these concerns by updating the 1944 water treaty, these steps are not long-term solutions.
The Rio Grande flows south from Colorado and forms the 1,250-mile (2,000-kilometer) Texas-Mexico border. Kmusser/Wikimedia, CC BY-SA
Growing demand, shrinking supply
The U.S.-Mexico border region is mostly arid, with water coming from a few rivers and an unknown amount of groundwater. The main rivers that cross the border are the Colorado and the Rio Grande – two of the most water-stressed systems in the world.
The Colorado River provides water to more than 44 million people, including seven U.S. and two Mexican states, 29 Indian tribes and 5.5 million acres of farmland. Only about 10% of its total flow reaches Mexico. The river once emptied into the Gulf of California, but now so much water is withdrawn along its course that since the 1960s it typically peters out in the desert.
The Rio Grande supplies water to roughly 15 million people, including 22 Indian tribes, three U.S. and four Mexican states and 2.8 million irrigated acres. It forms the 1,250-mile (2,000-kilometer) Texas-Mexico border, winding from El Paso in the west to the Gulf of Mexico in the east.
The Colorado River flows through seven U.S. states and crosses into Mexico at the Arizona-California border. USGS
Other rivers that cross the border include the Tijuana, San Pedro, Santa Cruz, New and Gila. These are all significantly smaller and have less economic impact than the Colorado and the Rio Grande.
At least 28 aquifers – underground rock formations that contain water – also traverse the border. With a few exceptions, very little information on these shared resources exists. One thing that is known is that many of them are severely overtapped and contaminated.
Nonetheless, reliance on aquifers is growing as surface water supplies dwindle. Some 80% of groundwater used in the border region goes to agriculture. The rest is used by farmers and industries, such as automotive and appliance manufacturers.
Over 10 million people in 30 cities and communities throughout the border region rely on groundwater for domestic use. Many communities, including Ciudad Juarez; the sister cities of Nogales in both Arizona and Sonora; and the sister cities of Columbus in New Mexico and Puerto Palomas in Chihuahua, get all or most of their fresh water from these aquifers.
Precipitation patterns across the region are projected to be uncertain and erratic for the foreseeable future. This trend will fuel more extreme weather events, such as droughts and floods, which could cause widespread harm to crops, industrial activity, human health and the environment.
Under the 1906 treaty, the U.S. is obligated to deliver 60,000 acre-feet of water to Mexico where the Rio Grande reaches the border. This target may be reduced during droughts, which have occurred frequently in recent decades. An acre-foot is enough water to flood an acre of land 1 foot deep – about 325,000 gallons (1.2 million liters).
Allocations under the 1944 treaty are more complicated. The U.S. is required to deliver 1.5 million acre-feet of Colorado River water to Mexico at the border – but as with the 1906 treaty, reductions are allowed in cases of extraordinary drought.
Until the mid-2010s, the U.S. met its full obligation each year. Since then, however, regional drought and climate change have severely reduced the Colorado River’s flow, requiring substantial allocation reductions for both the U.S. and Mexico.
This agreement provides each nation with designated fractions of flows from the Lower Rio Grande and specific tributaries. Regardless of water availability or climatic conditions, Mexico also is required to deliver to the U.S. a minimum of 1,750,000 acre-feet of water from six named tributaries, averaged over five-year cycles. If Mexico falls short in one cycle, it can make up the deficit in the next five-year cycle, but cannot delay repayment further.
The U.S. and Mexico are struggling to share a shrinking water supply in the border region.
Since the 1990s, extraordinary droughts have caused Mexico to miss its delivery obligations three times. Although Mexico repaid its water debts in subsequent cycles, these shortfalls raised diplomatic tensions that led to last-minute negotiations and large-scale water transfers from Mexico to the U.S.
Mexican farmers in Lower Rio Grande irrigation districts who had to shoulder these cuts felt betrayed. In 2020, they protested, confronting federal soldiers and temporarily seizing control of a dam.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Mexican President Claudia Scheinbaum clearly appreciate the political and economic importance of the border region. But if water scarcity worsens, it could supplant other border priorities.
In our view, the best way to prevent this would be for the two countries to recognize that conditions are deteriorating and update the existing cross-border governance regime so that it reflects today’s new water realities.
Gabriel Eckstein is affiliated with the Permanent Forum on Binational Waters, International Association for Water Law, and International Water Resources Association.
Rosario Sanchez receives funding from the USGS under the Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Program Act. She is affiliated with Texas A&M University and the non-profit as a volunteer to the Permanent Forum of Binational Waters, the International Association of Hydrogeologists, and the International Water Resources Association.
APEDA strengthens exporter growth with new schemes for infrastructure, quality, and market development
India’s fruit and vegetable exports reach 123 countries, with 17 new market added in 3 years
The Department of Commerce through Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) provides financial assistance to its member exporters of APEDA from across the country, for export promotion of its Scheduled products, including for Fruits & vegetables, under Agriculture and Processed Foods Export Promotion Scheme of APEDA for the 15th Finance Commission Cycle (2021-22 to 2025-26) in following three broad areas:
Scheme for infrastructure Development – Financial assistance for setting up of packhouse facilities with packing / grading lines, pre-cooling unit with cold storage and refrigerated transportation etc., cable system for handling of crops like banana, pre-shipment treatment facilities such as irradiation, vapor heat treatment, hot water dip treatment and common infrastructure facilities, reefer vans and missing gap in the existing infrastructure of individual exporters.
Scheme for Quality Development – Financial assistance for purchase of laboratory testing equipment, installation of quality management system, handheld devices for capturing farm level coordinates for traceability and testing of water, soil, residues and pesticides etc.
Scheme for Market Promotion – The assistance covers participation of exporters in international trade fairs, organizing buyer seller meets and developing packaging standards for new products and upgrading the existing packaging standards.
The details of financial assistance guidelines are available at APEDA Website www.apeda.gov.in under the “Scheme” tab.
As a result of these initiatives, there has been a growth of 47.3%, in the volume of exports of fruits and vegetables between the period 2019-20 to 2023-24.
Export data of fruits and vegetables in last five years
Country:All
Product:Fresh Fruits & Vegetables
Value In USD Million
Qty In Thousand MT
Products
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
Fresh Fruits & Vegetables
1,282.43
1,342.13
1,527.63
1,635.95
1,814.58
2,659.48
3,148.08
3,376.25
4,335.68
3,911.95
Source: DGCIS
Growth in terms of Volume in the last five years =47.30%
Growth in terms of Value in the last five years= 41.50 %
The Government maintains the record of total exports of fruits and vegetables from India. The export figures of States are compiled on the basis of the State-of-Origin code reported by the exporters in the shipping bills. Thus, the state wise data of exports of Fruits and vegetables is not available as the same is not validated by DGCI&S. However, the major states producing Fruits and vegetables are Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Odisha, Karnataka.
India’s Export of Mango and Onion to World (By Variety)
Product
Variety
USD Million
Qty in MT
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
Mango
Other Mangoes
0.00
25.42
23.48
33.26
36.18
0.00
15795.09
17448.90
17257.28
23786.16
Kesar
0.00
2.92
6.91
4.97
11.25
0.00
983.73
2319.08
1749.97
3787.01
Alphonso (Hapus)
0.00
6.08
10.09
7.84
8.68
0.00
3195.86
5994.86
2829.76
2673.39
Banganapalli
0.00
1.46
3.01
2.00
3.20
0.00
830.55
1674.04
856.91
1081.68
Chausa
0.00
0.05
0.05
0.03
0.24
0.00
40.98
25.64
19.72
488.26
Langda
0.00
0.08
0.16
0.12
0.19
0.00
48.99
122.16
70.02
81.94
Dasheri
0.00
0.09
0.11
0.06
0.17
0.00
49.50
75.92
34.70
75.54
Totapuri
0.00
0.07
0.17
0.20
0.16
0.00
47.47
151.01
116.60
91.95
Mallika
0.00
0.03
0.09
0.06
0.07
0.00
41.40
61.16
28.81
38.17
Mangoes , Fresh/Dried,
56.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
49658.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Mangoes
56.11
36.20
44.07
48.54
60.14
49658.68
21033.57
27872.77
22963.77
32104.10
Onion
Other Onions Fresh of Chilled
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
434.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1606683.97
Rose Onions Fresh of Chilled
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
38.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
110755.38
Onions, Fresh/Chilled
324.20
378.49
460.56
561.38
0.00
1149896.84
1578016.57
1537496.85
2525258.35
0.00
Total Onions
324.20
378.49
460.56
561.38
473.72
1149896.84
1578016.57
1537496.85
2525258.35
1717439.35
Source: DGCIS
Note :- ITC HS Code with (*) mark of the Commodity is either dropped or re-allocated
In FY 2023-24, India’s exports of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables reached 123 countries. In the last 3 years, Indian fresh produce entered 17 new markets, some of which are Brazil, Georgia, Uganda, Papua New Guinea, Czech Republic, Uganda, Ghana etc. This has been achieved through a host of measures such as participation in international trade fairs, actively pursuing market access negotiations, organizing buyer seller meets etc.
Department of Commerce is working in close coordination with the MoA&FW in prioritizing agriculture products for market access negotiations to reach new markets. As a result, India has achieved new market access in following commodities in the last three years:
Indian Potatoes and Onions in Serbia
Baby corn and fresh banana in Canada
Pomegranate arils in Australia, USA, Serbia, and New Zealand
Whole pomegranates in Australia via Irradiation treatment
The barriers in accessing new markets differ from product to product and are dynamic in nature. Some of the major barriers in accessing new markets for fruits & vegetables are:
Long geographic distance from India raising the costs of logistics.
Delay in grant of market access by importing countries for certain products.
Stringent Phyto-sanitary requirements imposed by some importing countries.
Delay in registration of enterprises in certain countries.
To address the above issues, various steps are being taken by the Department of Commerce:
For expand market access to our products, MoA&FW & APEDA have identified key products and key countries for intensifying market access negotiations.
Development of Sea protocols for horticulture products to reduce logistic expenses and to enable larger volume of exports.
Regular follow up with the counterpart authorities of importing countries with support of our Missions abroad for registration of facilities and market access negotiations.
For meeting stringent Phyto-sanitary requirements, setting up of traceability system and a system of farmer and facility registration.
This information has been provided by the Union Minister of Commerce and Industry, Shri Piyush Goyal in a written reply in the Lok Sabha today.
Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –
Free shuttle buses to the Moskino cinema park have already made more than three thousand trips, the Deputy Mayor of Moscow for Transport and Industry reported Maxim Liksutov.
“In early autumn 2024, Vladimir Putin and Sergei Sobyanin opened
first of all “Moskino” cinema park in the Krasnopakhorsky district of the capital. For the convenience of visitors, in December we launched free shuttle routes to the cinema park. During this time, 12 modern buses have already made more than three thousand trips. Transport runs on the days the cinema park is open and departs from the final points every 25 minutes,” said Maxim Liksutov.
Two free routes start from the nearest metro stations: MK1 from Teply Stan and MK2 from Salaryevo. They are served by 12 modern large-class buses. The schedule was compiled taking into account the operating hours of the cinema park.
“In six months, the Moskino Cinema Park has become not only an interesting filming location, but also a popular cultural and recreational spot for Muscovites and guests of the capital. The launch of shuttles jointly with the Department of Transport and Development of Road Transport Infrastructure has largely helped us solve the problem of transport accessibility of the cinema park. Now visiting the new site has become not only interesting, but also comfortable,” said the Minister of the Moscow Government, head of the capital’s Department of Culture
In accordance with the objectives of the national project “Infrastructure for life” In Moscow, much attention is paid to the modernization of social and municipal infrastructure, including increasing the number of convenient public transport routes and updating rolling stock. In addition, within the framework of the national project, Moscow has begun developing the Central Transport Hub. It will become a single circuit with predictable suburban rail transport for more than 30 million residents of 11 regions of Russia.
The Moskino Cinema Park is part of Sergei Sobyanin’s Moscow — City of Cinema project and an object of the Moscow film cluster. The first stage of development has already been completed: 18 natural sites, four pavilions and six infrastructure facilities have been built, including the sets of Moscow Center, Moscow of the 1940s, Vitebsk Station, Yurovo Airport, Moscow Cathedral Square, Deaf Village, Partisan Village, County Town, Cowboy Town, St. Petersburg Bar and other sites.
The Moscow Film Cluster is an infrastructure facility, services and facilities for filmmakers, which are being developed by the Moscow Government within the framework of the Moscow — City of Cinema project. Its structure includes the Moskino film park, the Gorky Film Studio (sites on Sergei Eisenstein Street and Valdaisky Proyezd), the Moskino film factory, the Moskino cinema chain, the film commission and the Moskino film platform.
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne
Unfortunately, the bitumen roads, brick and concrete structures and roofing tiles in cities can absorb and retain vast amounts of heat, much of which is released after the sun has set. This creates what’s known as the urban heat island effect. In fact, temperatures can be significantly higher in cities than in surrounding or rural areas.
Trees and greenspace can drive down urban temperatures – but they must be able to draw water from the soil to achieve these massive cooling effects.
In other words, it can sometimes be helpful to water your trees during a heatwave.
How trees keep us cool (and no, it’s not just about shade)
Trees reduce urban temperatures in two significant ways. One is by the shade they provides and the other is through their cooling effect – and no, they’re not the same thing.
Water is taken up via a plant’s roots, moves through the stems or trunks and is then misted into the air from the leaves through little holes called stomata. This is called transpiration, and it helps cool the air around leaves.
Water can also evaporate from soil and other surfaces. The combined loss of water from plants and soil is called evapotranspiration.
The cooling effects of evapotranspiration vary but are up to 4°C, depending on other environmental factors.
Watering your trees
If heatwaves occur in generally hot, dry weather, then trees will provide shade – but some may struggle with transpiration if the soil is too dry.
This can reduce the cooling effect of trees. Keeping soil moist and plants irrigated, however, can change that.
The best time to irrigate is early in the morning, as the water is less likely to evaporate quickly before transpiration can occur.
You don’t need to do a deep water; most absorbing roots are close to the surface, so a bit of brief irrigation will often do the trick. You could also recycle water from your shower. Using mulch helps trap the water in the soil, giving the roots time to absorb it before it evaporates.
All transpiring plants have a cooling effect on the air surrounding them, so you might wonder if trees have anything special to offer in terms of the urban heat island effect and heatwaves.
Their great size means that they provide much larger areas of shade than other plants and if they are transpiring then there are greater cooling effects.
The surface area of tree leaves, which is crucial to the evaporative cooling that takes place on their surfaces, is also much greater than many other plants.
All that said, I don’t want to overstate the role of urban trees in heatwaves when soils are dry.
Some trees cease transpiring early as soils dry, but others will persist until they wilt.
Careful tree selection can help maximise the cooling effects of the urban forest. Trees that suit the local soil and can cope with some drying while maintaining transpiration can provide greater cooling
And, of course, it is important to follow any water restrictionrules or guidelines that may be operating in your area at the time.
Trees keep us cool
Despite the clear benefits trees can provide in curbing heat, tree numbers and canopy cover are declining annually in many Australian cities and towns.
Housing development still occurs without proper consideration of how trees and greenspace improve residents’ quality of life.
It is not an either/or argument. With proper planning, you can have both new housing and good tree canopy cover.
We should also be cautious of over-pruning urban trees.
Trees cannot eliminate the effects of a heatwave but can mitigate some of them.
Anything that we can do to mitigate the urban heat island effect and keep our cities and towns cooler will reduce heat-related illness and associated medical costs.
Gregory Moore is affiliated with Make Victoria Greener, which campaigns to preserve trees in Victoria.
Source: Australia Government Statements – Agriculture
5/02/2025
Who does this notice affect?
Stakeholders in the import and shipping industries—including vessel masters, freight forwarders, offshore treatment providers, Biosecurity Industry Participants, importers, customs brokers, principal agents and master consolidators.
What has changed?
Following identification of critical non-compliance, we have suspended Mert Pest Kontrol (AEI: TR4012SB) from AusTreat. The treatment provider has been listed as ‘suspended’…
Beyoncé appeared visibly astonished to hear her album Cowboy Carter had won best country album at this year’s Grammy Awards. Onstage, the singer offered a heartfelt reflection on musical genre:
I think sometimes genre is a code word to keep us in our place as artists and I just want to encourage people to do what they’re passionate about and stay persistent.
Beyoncé’s speech built on a more pointed critique of genre found in one of the tracks from her album, SPAGHETTII.
The track opens with a soundbite from Linda Martell, a pioneering Black country music singer who enjoyed commercial success in the 1960s, but whose career was marred by both overt racial abuse and accusations she didn’t “sound black”. In the soundbite, Martell says:
Genres are a funny little concept, aren’t they? […] In theory, they have a simple definition that’s easy to understand, but in practice, well, some may feel confined.
This description of confinement was echoed in 2024, when the Country Music Association Awards controversially excluded Cowboy Carter from the nomination process due to insufficient radio airplay, as per the award rules.
Media reports claimed some country radio stations refused to play, or were slow to play, Beyoncé’s new album because they didn’t recognise her as a country artist.
Debates about the usefulness of genre have been around for a while, and won’t disappear anytime soon. Beyoncé’s Grammy win presses us to consider the relevance of genre in the modern music world – and the extent to which these rigid definitions can be justified.
Is ‘genre’ useful in music?
On one level, genre is a simple and necessary mechanism for categorising different types of music. Genre encodes various aspects of music, including instrumentation, the time period it originates from, its emotional character, and the melodic, rhythmic and harmonic conventions it employs.
Terms such as jazz, rock, country, R&B, metal, hip-hop, folk and EDM are rich in meaning, and are routinely used as identity markers for performers – and for award categories at events like the Grammys. They also help us discuss our musical preferences, and teach and learn about music in educational settings.
At the same time, these terms remain fluid and contested. Research tracking the rise and fall of musical genres highlights the power genres have in shaping our understanding and experience of music.
Consider rock as an example. In the early 1950s, radio disc jockeys popularised the term rock’n’roll to describe a distinct style that drew from genres including rhythm and blues, gospel and country music, but which differed from each of these in character and function.
The societal adoption of rock’n’roll as a “new” genre wasn’t just driven by the features present in the music, but by its resonance with a teenage audience for whom it signalled rebellion, associations with sexuality and a merging of different American music cultures.
Just as Elvis Presley came to embody the genre, divergent practices gave rise to new and adapted terminology. “Rockabilly” (a style that combines elements of country and rock’n’roll) entered the lexicon. Rock’n’roll simply became “rock” and numerous adjectives such as “folk”, “psychedelic”, “progressive”, “punk”, “classic” and “hard” were attached to make sense of the continually evolving style.
I’d argue the music of Elvis Presley has little in common with the stoner rock band Kyuss, yet we group them in the same broad musical taxonomy.
Research has revealed significant inconsistencies in how people use and understand music genre terminology. Nonetheless, genre labels have historically been considered useful tools to communicate meaningful information about musical experiences.
So, what’s Beyoncé’s problem with genre?
Problems can arise for musicians when genres don’t simply describe musical practices, but work to control or distort them. Record labels have a profit imperative that incentivises artists to create music that’s easily categorised into well-established genres.
The risk this incentive poses to creativity has traditionally been offset by audiences demanding new and diverse music – alongside a flourishing independent musical culture that either ignores or is overtly antagonistic towards the generic preferences of large record labels.
That said, musicians are also pushed to adhere to narrow definitions of genre due to search functions in streaming services and methodologies used by music charts.
For example, the ARIA (Australian Recording Industry Association) charts’ code of practice lists six genre charts: core classical, country, crossover/classical, dance, hip hop/R&B, and jazz and blues. And while the ARIAs have a range of mechanisms to track record sales, the codification of these genres inevitably influences Australian musicians who wish to make a living from their music.
Beyond this, powerful cultural associations with certain genres can make their boundaries difficult to cross. Sometimes genre boundaries are rightly inflexible – particularly those associated with regional music-making or First Peoples’ cultures.
Cowboy Carter however, represents a rediscovery and celebration of Black country musicians. It draws attention to how these musicians were neglected because they didn’t align with prevailing assumptions about the genre.
The fact that Beyoncé’s choice to explore country music was in any way contentious emphasises this point. The foray by The Beatles’ drummer Ringo Starr into country music was, by contrast, uncontroversial.
Genre as a framework is, ultimately, necessary. It’s impossible to discuss music without some way of making sense of it all. Listeners, however, should recognise that rigid genre definition can distort creativity. They should also reflect on whether it may be distorting their listening habits, too.
Timothy McKenry does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) joined his colleagues in introducing the Jumpstarting Our Businesses by Supporting Students (JOBS) Act, legislation to help more Americans get good-paying jobs by allowing students to use federal Pell Grants—needs-based education grants for lower-income individuals—to pay for shorter-term job training programs for the first time. Currently, students can only use Pell Grants for two- and four-year colleges and universities. By expanding Pell Grant eligibility, the JOBS Act would help close the skill gap by allowing people to access job training they might otherwise be unable to afford but need for careers in high-demand fields.
“A college degree isn’t the one-size-fits-all solution to achieving the American dream,” said Sen. Tuberville. “Since I got to Congress, I’ve been focused on expanding workforce training and skills-based learning programs. Students should not be discouraged from entering the labor industry because they cannot afford the mandatory training. Alabama relies on these skilled workers, and Congress should be making it easier for them to pursue necessary training, not harder. This bill will open up more career opportunities for students in an evolving job market. I’m proud to join my colleagues in cosponsoring the JOBS Act.”
Joining U.S. Senator Tuberville in cosponsoring the legislation are U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), John Boozman (R-AR), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Steve Daines (R-MT), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), John Hoeven (R-ND), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Roger Wicker (R-MS), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).
The JOBS Actis supported by Advance CTE, the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC), the Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE), the Association of Community College Trustees (ACCT), the Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM), Business Roundtable, the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), the Exhibitions and Conferences Alliance (ECA), Higher Learning Advocates (HLA), HP Inc., the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), Jobs for the Future (JFF), the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, NAF, the National Association of Workforce Boards (NAWB), the National Association of Workforce Development Professionals (NAWDP), the National Skills Coalition (NSC), the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), Rebuilding America’s Middle Class (RAMC), and the Virginia Community College System.
Read full text of the legislation here.
BACKGROUND:
The JOBS Act would allow Pell Grants to be used for high-quality job training programs that are at least eight weeks in length and lead to industry-recognized credentials or certificates. Under current law, Pell Grants can only be applied toward programs that are over 600 clock hours or at least 15 weeks in length, rendering students in shorter-term high-quality job training programs ineligible for crucial assistance.
Specifically, the JOBS Act would amend the Higher Education Act by:
Expanding Pell Grant eligibility to students enrolled in rigorous and high-quality, short-term skills and job training programs that lead to industry-recognized credentials and certificates and ultimately employment in high-wage, high-skill industry sectors or careers.
Ensuring students who receive Pell Grants are earning high-quality postsecondary credentials by requiring that the credentials:
Meet the standards under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), such as meaningful career counseling and aligning programs to in-demand career pathways or registered apprenticeship programs,
Are recognized by employers, industry, or sector partnerships,
Align with the skill needs of industries in the state or local economy,
Are approved by the state workforce board in addition to the U.S. Department of Education.
Defining eligible job training programs as those providing career and technical education instruction at an institution of higher education, such as a community or technical college that provides:
At least 150 clock hours of instruction time over a period of at least eight weeks,
Training that meets the needs of the local or regional workforce and industry partnerships,
Streamlined ability to transfer credits so students can continue to pursue further education in their careers,
Students with licenses, certifications, or credentials that meet the hiring requirements of multiple employers in the field for which the job training is offered.
Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP, and Aging Committees.
Source: New South Wales Department of Primary Industries
Minister for Agriculture and Western NSW – Media Release
5 Feb 2025
Three NSW based animal welfare organisations will share in $2.45 million to fund the rehoming of animals following their contribution to important scientific research projects.
The Minns Labor Government’s Research Animals Rehoming Grant Program supports organisations to find forever homes for cats, dogs, guinea pigs and other animals after they have completed their involvement in research.
With this investment and a suite of initiatives, including the recent passing of the Puppy Farm Bill introducing mandatory regulation of dog breeders, the Government is delivering on its commitment to modernise and strengthen the state’s animal welfare environment.
The animal rehoming organisations to receive funding are:
Animal Welfare League (AWL) – $825,000 The AWL will continue its re-homing pilot program including building a wing at its site for dogs and cats from research establishments to transition them and then find new homes post-retirement.
Blacktown Animal Rehoming Centre – $800,000 The centre plans to build a “real life room” at their current facility. The room will simulate a home environment to allow animals previously used in research to undertake rehabilitation and help them move on to the next phase of their lives.
Liberty Foundation Australia – $825,000 Liberty Foundation will scale up its rehoming work with small animals such as guinea pigs, rabbits, rats and mice, including new education and volunteer programs to raise awareness and encourage more people to adopt an animal from research.
The Rehoming Grant Program funding is part of a broader $7 million investment to enhance positive welfare outcomes for animals, both during and after use in research, including identifying alternatives to replace animals in research.
The vast bulk of cats and dogs used in research are either part of programs designed to taste test new pet foods or as part of animal medicine test programs run through vet clinics with the approval of the animal’s owner.
Minister for Agriculture and Western NSW, Tara Moriarty said:
“The Minns Labor Government is committed to improving the welfare outcomes of all animals and in this case that of research animals.
“This $2.45 million in funding will make a real and proven difference and is dedicated to improving animal welfare outcomes by supporting specialist organisations to successfully rehome research animals.
“Effective rehoming requires education and a coordinated, cooperative approach, and that is why the NSW Government is supporting this by working with research, rehoming and animal welfare organisations to achieve the best outcome for research animals when they retire.”
NSW CEO Animal Welfare League Stephen Albin said:
“AWL NSW is pleased to be one of the recipients of funding from this important program, it will assist us rehome the animals that come into our care, regardless of their origins.
“Our commitment involves enhancing each animal’s socialisation skills by understanding their past, respecting their individual needs, and providing a safe and protected sanctuary here at our Kemps Creek Shelter.
“We offer every animal, including those from research, high-quality veterinary care, behavioural improvements, including walking animals four times daily, nutritional enhancement and careful matching with potential owners.
“Our unique ‘Hope to Love’ journey allows for prolonged stays demonstrating our dedication to animal welfare.”
Paula Wallace, Director Liberty Foundation Australia said:
“Liberty Foundation is delighted to be awarded funding as part of this unique grant program, which will help us provide a lifeline for animals moving from research establishments into the community.
“We know that small animals coming out of research settings can transition well into people’s homes as pets and companions and this funding means we can provide this opportunity to more animals.
“This funding comes at a crucial time, when more research establishments than ever before are wanting to work with us to provide the best possible outcomes for animals after their time in research.
“Funding like this is vital for small charities like Liberty Foundation to give us the helping hand we need to scale up our activities and share the wonderful message of rehoming with more people.”
Brad Bunting Mayor of Blacktown City said:
“This NSW Government grant will further support Blacktown City Council’s vision to help animals transition to happy, comfortable lives while changing community perceptions around rehoming pets.
“The ‘real life room’ at the Blacktown Animal Rehoming Centre (BARC) is a practical step toward easing the transition of retired research animals back into the real world, giving them the chance to live happy and comfortable lives.
“BARC is a state-of-the-art facility built to give animals the best chance at finding loving permanent homes. Designed with world-leading research, it sets a new standard for animal welfare, creating a welcoming space where pets in need and families searching for their perfect companion can come together.
MEDIA: Michael Salmon | Minister Moriarty | 0417 495 018
Milo Hartill is “Black, fat and f**gy”, according to the title of her new cabaret work.
Actor, model, influencer and one helluva singer, 24-year-old Hartill shines. Black, Fat and F**gy is an autobiographical show, tracing defining moments of Hartill’s life as a Black, fat and queer person who grew up in Western Australia and now works in show biz.
Centred in its name, the performance wades through aspects of her intersectional identity. This itself serves as a loose structure for the production: Blackness to fatness to queerness, with clear overlaps.
The unapologetic self
Hartill leans into stereotypes and tropes so hard she ultimately upends them.
An early moment has her teasing an audience member – importantly, a white audience member – with an invitation to touch her hair. It’s a stunning moment within the work as it plays out, an image potentially loaded with racism interjected into performance with subversive, tongue-in-cheek humour and support for the chosen audience member.
It leads immediately into a rendition of Solange’s Don’t Touch My Hair. Other featured songs include Chaka Khan’s I’m Every Woman, Frank Sinatra’s Something Stupid (performed with puppetry) and Whitney Houston’s I Have Nothing, with notable changes to the lyrics to fit the themes and tone of the show.
Hartill is supported onstage by Lucy O’Brien on piano, who regularly chimes in with commentary and humour. The duo share a strong bond, their rapport is apparent and endearing. Within the first minute of the show we are eating from the palm of their hands.
The duo read out examples of real, fat-phobic hate mail sent to Hartill’s social media inboxes.
As an artist and researcher in fat-centred performance, for me, this is one of the more interesting moments in the show. It unapologetically adopts a didactic mode of delivery, revealing to audiences the kinds of despicable, violent language directed at fat people.
Black, Fat and F**gy is an entirely unique, memorable and vital performance work. Matto Lucas/UMAC/Midsumma
Theatre audiences (and makers, especially) tend to despise these kinds of didactic moments, especially pertaining to identity politics, as it marks a shift from “showing” (with metaphor) to “telling” in its messaging.
But how else can performance give contextual significance to something without this kind of direct telling, especially when most audiences will not have an embodied experience of fatness to draw on and make inferences?
Unless you have directly seen or heard the unrelenting, unmitigated hate speech directed at fat bodies, it is difficult to capture or convey. The “unique” aspect of this language, laid bare by Hartill in performance, is that it is delivered with a sense of righteousness: that this person is in a way helping the fat person by shaming them.
Moments like this serve a vital function in how performance can, broadly, capture both actual experiences and associated feelings related to a topic, while aiming to impart some new knowledge or finding for its audience to take away, to sit with, to talk about and maybe go on to learn more on.
A beautiful mixed bag
This didactic mode of delivery is only fleeting within the show. Adopting a cabaret-style delivery (but with standard theatre seated rows), Black, Fat and F**gy weaves together aspects of musical theatre (songs), stand-up (humour) and drag performance (aesthetic): it is a queerly hybrid form.
The show is rough around the edges. The performance allows for a high level of improvisation and audience engagement, which can lead to stalled moments and interruptions of laughter. Performance scholar T.L. Cowan writes the improvisatory nature of cabaret informs a “cabaret consciousness” that “allows an audience to enjoy a show not in spite of the mixed-bag-ness of cabaret, but because of it”.
The mixed-bag-ness of Black, Fat and F**gy is its charm, and Hartill complements this style with a mixed-bag delivery of tricks from her deep repertoire of skills.
The show weaves together songs, stand-up and drag: it is a queerly hybrid form. Matto Lucas/UMAC/Midsumma
Black, Fat and F**gy is an entirely unique, memorable and vital performance work you should move to the top of your list of must-see Midsumma events. The production is a 70-minute-plus romp which will leave you crying, both from laughter and by acknowledging the current climate against Black, fat f*gs everywhere.
Black Fat and F**gy is at the Guild Theatre, University of Melbourne, for Midsumma Festival until February 6.
Jonathan Graffam-O’Meara does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) and U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT-03) introduced the Expanded Food Safety Investigation Act (EFSIA), legislation that would grant the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to collect microbial samples from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), also known as factory farms, during outbreaks or when there is a public health need.
Factory farming is at the heart of the spread of bird flu. The reintroduction of this legislation comes as public health experts raise alarms about the ongoing threat of H5N1, avian influenza, as variations continue to mutate, and in addition to persistent foodborne illness risks.
The CDC reports that 1 in 6 Americans suffer from foodborne illnesses annually, resulting in 128,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths. Many of these illnesses stem from bacteria and other microbes originating in animal agriculture. Over 55 percent of foodborne Salmonella cases are linked to animals and animal products. Harmful bacteria from animal production facilities also contaminate fields of produce, further endangering consumers.
Despite these clear threats, public health agencies currently lack the authority to conduct microbial sampling on factory farms, limiting their ability to investigate and prevent outbreaks. Investigators are frequently denied access to farms, obstructing efforts to pinpoint the source of outbreaks and implement safeguards.
“Every year, thousands of Americans fall victim to foodborne illnesses,” said Senator Booker. “Currently, the FDA lacks the jurisdiction to investigate outbreaks and identify the sources of contaminated food stemming from animal agriculture. This bicameral legislation will reduce the prevalence of foodborne diseases by empowering the FDA and other public health agencies to properly respond to and investigate outbreaks when they happen and get contaminated food off our grocery shelves.”
“It is clear that corporate consolidation has made our food system more vulnerable—not only to foodborne illness but also to emerging public health threats like H5N1,” said Representative DeLauro. “This crisis is exacerbated by a weak FDA, which lacks the authority to properly investigate outbreaks and remove contaminated food from the market. Under current law, multinational corporations can obstruct FDA foodborne illness investigations, delaying critical public health interventions. That cannot continue. That is why I am reintroducing the Expanded Food Safety Investigation Act, which will ensure FDA has the power to investigate corporate agribusinesses, respond effectively to public health threats, and protect American consumers.”
“The Expanded Food Safety Act would close a critical gap in our public health safety net by allowing outbreak investigators a chance to trace the source of outbreaks on large animal farms,” said Sarah Sorscher, Director of Regulatory Affairs at Center for Science in the Public Interest. “This common sense safeguard is long overdue and can help provide solutions to stop outbreaks at their source.”
The legislation is endorsed by American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), Animal Rights Initiative, Antibiotic Resistance Action Center at The George Washington University, Associated Humane Societies, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Ceres Community Project, Chilis on Wheels, Compassionate Action for Animals, Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Reports, Earthjustice, Environmental Working Group, Farm Forward, Farm Sanctuary, Food and Water Watch, Food Animal Concerns Trust, Friends of the Earth, Godspeed Horse Hostel Inc, Government Accountability Project, Iowa Environmental Council, KWT Consulting, Mercy For Animals, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Natural Resources Defense Council, Mercy For Animals, PIRG, San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility, Slow Food USA, STOP Foodborne Illness, Strategies for Ethical & Environmental Development (SEED), Texas Humane Legislation Network, Vegan Activist Alliance, and World Animal Protection.
Manhattan, KS, Feb. 04, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Landmark Bancorp, Inc. (“Landmark”; Nasdaq: LARK) reported diluted earnings per share of $0.57 for the three months ended December 31, 2024, compared to $0.68 per share in the third quarter of 2024 and $0.46 per share in the same quarter last year. Net income for the fourth quarter totaled $3.3 million, compared to $2.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2023 and $3.9 million in the prior quarter. For the three months ended December 31, 2024, the return on average assets was 0.83%, the return on average equity was 9.54% and the efficiency ratio was 70.0%.
For the year ended December 31, 2024, diluted earnings per share totaled $2.26 compared to $2.13 during 2023. Net earnings for 2024 totaled $13.0 million, compared to $12.2 million in 2023, or an increase of 6.3%. For the year ended December 31, 2024, the return on average assets was 0.83%, the return on average equity was 10.01% and the efficiency ratio was 69.1%.
2024 Performance Highlights
●
Fourth quarter loan growth totaled $50.5 million or an annualized increase of 20.1% over the prior quarter.
●
For the year, gross loans grew $103.7 million or 10.9%.
●
Net interest margin improved 21 basis points to 3.51% compared to 3.30% in prior quarter.
●
Deposits increased $53.3 million, or 16.6% annualized, from the prior quarter.
●
Total borrowings decreased $34.7 million in the fourth quarter.
●
A pre-tax loss of $1.0 million was realized in the fourth quarter to reposition a portion of the investment portfolio.
●
Credit quality remained good with net charge-offs totaling $219,000 in the fourth quarter.
In making this announcement, Abby Wendel, President and Chief Executive Officer of Landmark, commented, “During 2024, we experienced strong loan demand, especially for residential mortgages and commercial real estate loans. In the fourth quarter 2024, we saw strong growth in virtually all loan categories, with total gross loans increasing by $51 million or 20% (annualized). Total deposits also increased in the fourth quarter by more than $53 million, mostly due to seasonal growth in money market and interest checking accounts. The increase in deposits coupled with investment securities sales and maturities this quarter helped fund loan growth and reduce expensive short-term borrowings. For the year, net interest income grew 5.6% over the previous year while in the fourth quarter 2024 our net interest margin improved to 3.51%. Strategic investments in our people and product offerings resulted in higher non-interest expenses, particularly in the fourth quarter. Credit quality remained solid overall.”
Landmark’s Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.21 per share, to be paid March 5, 2025, to common stockholders of record as of the close of business on February 19, 2025. On December 16, 2024, the Company issued a 5% stock dividend to common stockholders, representing the 24th consecutive year that a stock dividend has been paid.
Management will host a conference call to discuss the Company’s financial results at 10:00 a.m. (Central time) on Wednesday, February 5, 2025. Investors may participate via telephone by dialing (833) 470-1428 and using access code 296482. A replay of the call will be available through February 12, 2025, by dialing (866) 813-9403 and using access code 817329.
Net Interest Income
Net interest income in the fourth quarter of 2024 amounted to $12.4 million representing an increase of $795,000, or 6.9%, compared to the previous quarter. The increase in net interest income was due mainly to lower interest expense on deposits and other borrowed funds. The net interest margin increased to 3.51% during the fourth quarter from 3.30% during the prior quarter. Compared to the previous quarter, interest income on loans increased $22,000 to $16.0 million due to higher average balances but partially offset by lower yields on loans. Average loan balances increased $24.5 million while the average tax-equivalent yield on the loan portfolio decreased 15 basis points to 6.28%. Interest on investment securities declined slightly due to lower balances while partially offset by higher earning rates. Compared to the third quarter 2024, interest on deposits decreased $480,000, or 8.2% mainly due to lower rates, while interest on other borrowed funds declined by $363,000, due to lower rates and balances. The average rate on interest-bearing deposits decreased 23 basis points to 2.25% while the average rate on other borrowed funds decreased 51 basis points to 5.10% in the fourth quarter.
Non-Interest Income
Non-interest income totaled $3.4 million for the fourth quarter of 2024, a decrease of $882,000 from the previous quarter. The decrease in non-interest income during the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily due to a $1.0 million loss on the sales of lower yielding investment securities mentioned above, while the third quarter of 2024 did not include any sales of investment securities. Additionally, lower sales of residential mortgages this quarter resulted in a decline of $182,000 in gains on sales of these mortgages. The decline in other non-interest income of $221,000 this quarter compared to the prior quarter resulted from sales of premises, equipment and foreclosed assets that did not re-occur in the current quarter. Partially offsetting those declines was an increase of $722,000 in bank owned life insurance income.
Non-Interest Expense
During the fourth quarter of 2024, non-interest expense totaled $11.9 million, an increase of $1.3 million compared to the prior quarter. The increase in non-interest expense was primarily due to increases of $470,000 in professional fees and $461,000 in compensation and benefits. The increase in professional fees this quarter was primarily due to higher consulting costs on several initiatives. The increase in compensation and benefits was attributable to an increase in employees and higher incentive compensation costs.
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)
Landmark recorded an income tax benefit of $886,000 in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to income tax expense of $867,000 in the prior quarter. The effective tax rate was (37.0%) in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to 18.1% in the third quarter of 2024. The fourth quarter of 2024 included the recognition of $1.0 million of previously unrecognized tax benefits, which reduced the effective tax rate.
Balance Sheet Highlights
As of December 31, 2024, gross loans totaled $1.1 billion, an increase of $50.5 million, or 20.1% annualized since September 30, 2024. During the quarter, loan growth was primarily comprised of commercial real estate (growth of $21.1 million), commercial (growth of $10.7 million), agriculture (growth of $8.6 million) and one-to-four family residential real estate (growth of $7.8 million) loans. Investment securities decreased $38.5 million during the fourth quarter of 2024 and included sales of $36.0 million in low-rate U.S. treasury securities offset by purchases of $18.0 million in market rate U.S. treasury securities. Pre-tax unrealized net losses on the investment securities portfolio increased from $13.3 million at September 30, 2024 to $20.9 million at December 31, 2024 mainly due to higher market rates for these securities at year end.
Period end deposit balances increased $53.3 million to $1.3 billion at December 31, 2024. The increase in deposits was mainly driven by an increase in money market and checking (increase of $71.3 million) but partially offset by declines in certificates of deposit (decrease of $9.2 million) and non-interest-bearing demand deposits (decrease of $8.6 million). The increase in money market and checking accounts was mainly driven by seasonal growth in public fund deposit account balances. Total borrowings decreased $34.7 million during the fourth quarter 2024. At December 31, 2024, the loan to deposits ratio was 78.2% compared to 77.6% in the prior quarter.
Stockholders’ equity decreased to $136.2 million (book value of $23.59 per share) as of December 31, 2024, from $139.7 million (book value of $24.18 per share) as of September 30, 2024. The decrease in stockholders’ equity was due to an increase in accumulated other comprehensive losses as the unrealized net losses on investments securities increased during the fourth quarter. The ratio of equity to total assets decreased to 8.65% on December 31, 2024, from 8.93% on September 30, 2024.
The allowance for credit losses totaled $12.8 million, or 1.22% of total gross loans on December 31, 2024, compared to $11.5 million, or 1.15% of total gross loans on September 30, 2024. Net loan charge-offs totaled $219,000 in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $9,000 during the third quarter of 2024. A provision for credit losses for loans of $1.5 million was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2024 compared to $650,000 in the third quarter of 2024.
Non-performing loans totaled $13.1 million, or 1.25% of gross loans at December 31, 2024 compared to $13.4 million, or 1.34% of gross loans at September 30, 2024. Loans 30-89 days delinquent declined to $6.2 million, or 0.59% of gross loans, as of December 31, 2024, compared to $7.3 million, or 0.73% of gross loans, as of September 30, 2024.
About Landmark
Landmark Bancorp, Inc., the holding company for Landmark National Bank, is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “LARK.” Headquartered in Manhattan, Kansas, Landmark National Bank is a community banking organization dedicated to providing quality financial and banking services. Landmark National Bank has 29 locations in 23 communities across Kansas: Manhattan (2), Auburn, Dodge City (2), Fort Scott (2), Garden City, Great Bend (2), Hoisington, Iola, Junction City, La Crosse, Lawrence (2), Lenexa, Louisburg, Mound City, Osage City, Osawatomie, Overland Park, Paola, Pittsburg, Prairie Village, Topeka (2), Wamego and Wellsville, Kansas. Visit www.banklandmark.com for more information.
Contact: Mark A. Herpich Chief Financial Officer (785) 565-2000
Special Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
This press release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the financial condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance and business of Landmark. Forward-looking statements, which may be based upon beliefs, expectations and assumptions of our management and on information currently available to management, are generally identifiable by the use of words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “intend,” “estimate,” “may,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should” or other similar expressions. Additionally, all statements in this press release, including forward-looking statements, speak only as of the date they are made, and Landmark undertakes no obligation to update any statement in light of new information or future events. A number of factors, many of which are beyond our ability to control or predict, could cause actual results to differ materially from those in our forward-looking statements. These factors include, among others, the following: (i) the strength of the local, national and international economies, including the effects of changing inflationary pressures and supply chain constraints on such economies; (ii) changes in state and federal laws, regulations and governmental policies concerning banking, securities, consumer protection, insurance, monetary, trade and tax matters, including changes in interpretation or prioritization; (iii) changes in interest rates and prepayment rates of our assets; (iv) increased competition in the financial services sector and the inability to attract new customers, including from non-bank competitors such as credit unions and “fintech” companies; (v) timely development and acceptance of new products and services; (vi) changes in technology and the ability to develop and maintain secure and reliable electronic systems; (vii) our risk management framework; (viii) interruptions in information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party services; (ix) changes and uncertainty in benchmark interest rates, including the timing of additional rate changes, if any, by the Federal Reserve; (x) the economic effects of severe weather, natural disasters, widespread disease or pandemics, or other external events; (xi) the loss of key executives or employees; (xii) changes in consumer spending; (xiii) integration of acquired businesses; (xiv) unexpected outcomes of existing or new litigation; (xv) changes in accounting policies and practices, such as the implementation of the current expected credit losses accounting standard; (xvi) the economic impact of past and any future terrorist attacks, acts of war, including the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the conflict in Ukraine, or threats thereof, and the response of the United States to any such threats and attacks; (xvii) the ability to manage credit risk, forecast loan losses and maintain an adequate allowance for loan losses; (xviii) fluctuations in the value of securities held in our securities portfolio; (xix) concentrations within our loan portfolio, large loans to certain borrowers, and large deposits from certain clients; (xx) the concentration of large deposits from certain clients who have balances above current FDIC insurance limits and may withdraw deposits to diversify their exposure; (xxi) the level of non-performing assets on our balance sheets; (xxii) the ability to raise additional capital; (xxiii) cyber-attacks; (xxiv) declines in real estate values; (xxv) the effects of fraud on the part of our employees, customers, vendors or counterparties; and (xxvi) any other risks described in the “Risk Factors” sections of reports filed by Landmark with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating forward-looking statements, and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements. Additional information concerning Landmark and its business, including additional risk factors that could materially affect Landmark’s financial results, is included in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited)
December 31,
September 30,
June 30,
March 31,
December 31,
(Dollars in thousands)
2024
2024
2024
2024
2023
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents
$
20,275
$
21,211
$
23,889
$
16,468
$
27,101
Interest-bearing deposits at other banks
4,110
4,363
4,881
4,920
4,918
Investment securities available-for-sale, at fair value:
U.S. treasury securities
64,458
83,753
89,325
93,683
95,667
Municipal obligations, tax exempt
107,128
112,126
114,047
118,445
120,623
Municipal obligations, taxable
71,715
75,129
74,588
75,371
79,083
Agency mortgage-backed securities
129,211
140,004
142,499
149,777
157,396
Total investment securities available-for-sale
372,512
411,012
420,459
437,276
452,769
Investment securities held-to-maturity
3,672
3,643
3,613
3,584
3,555
Bank stocks, at cost
6,618
7,894
9,647
7,850
8,123
Loans:
One-to-four family residential real estate
352,209
344,380
332,090
312,833
302,544
Construction and land
25,328
23,454
30,480
24,823
21,090
Commercial real estate
345,159
324,016
318,850
323,397
320,962
Commercial
192,325
181,652
178,876
181,945
180,942
Agriculture
100,562
91,986
84,523
86,808
89,680
Municipal
7,091
7,098
6,556
5,690
4,507
Consumer
29,679
29,263
29,200
28,544
28,931
Total gross loans
1,052,353
1,001,849
980,575
964,040
948,656
Net deferred loan (fees) costs and loans in process
(307
)
(63
)
(583
)
(578
)
(429
)
Allowance for credit losses
(12,825
)
(11,544
)
(10,903
)
(10,851
)
(10,608
)
Loans, net
1,039,221
990,242
969,089
952,611
937,619
Loans held for sale, at fair value
3,420
3,250
2,513
2,697
853
Bank owned life insurance
39,056
39,176
38,826
38,578
38,333
Premises and equipment, net
20,220
20,976
20,986
20,696
19,709
Goodwill
32,377
32,377
32,377
32,377
32,377
Other intangible assets, net
2,578
2,729
2,900
3,071
3,241
Mortgage servicing rights
3,061
3,041
2,997
2,977
3,158
Real estate owned, net
167
428
428
428
928
Other assets
26,855
23,309
28,149
29,684
28,988
Total assets
$
1,574,142
$
1,563,651
$
1,560,754
$
1,553,217
$
1,561,672
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Liabilities:
Deposits:
Non-interest-bearing demand
351,595
360,188
360,631
364,386
367,103
Money market and checking
636,963
565,629
546,385
583,315
613,613
Savings
145,514
145,825
150,996
154,000
152,381
Certificates of deposit
194,694
203,860
192,470
191,823
183,154
Total deposits
1,328,766
1,275,502
1,250,482
1,293,524
1,316,251
FHLB and other borrowings
53,046
92,050
131,330
74,716
64,662
Subordinated debentures
21,651
21,651
21,651
21,651
21,651
Repurchase agreements
13,808
9,528
8,745
15,895
12,714
Accrued interest and other liabilities
20,656
25,229
20,292
20,760
19,480
Total liabilities
1,437,927
1,423,960
1,432,500
1,426,546
1,434,758
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock
58
55
55
55
55
Additional paid-in capital
95,051
89,532
89,469
89,364
89,208
Retained earnings
56,934
60,549
57,774
55,912
54,282
Treasury stock, at cost
–
(396
)
(330
)
(249
)
(75
)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(15,828
)
(10,049
)
(18,714
)
(18,411
)
(16,556
)
Total stockholders’ equity
136,215
139,691
128,254
126,671
126,914
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
1,574,142
$
1,563,651
$
1,560,754
$
1,553,217
$
1,561,672
LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Consolidated Statements of Earnings (unaudited)
Three months ended,
Year ended,
December 31,
September 30,
December 31,
December 31,
December 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
2024
2024
2023
2024
2023
Interest income:
Loans
$
15,955
$
15,933
$
14,223
$
61,400
$
51,753
Investment securities:
Taxable
2,210
2,301
2,453
9,298
9,594
Tax-exempt
738
747
761
3,008
3,094
Interest-bearing deposits at banks
49
41
49
193
242
Total interest income
18,952
19,022
17,486
73,899
64,683
Interest expense:
Deposits
5,350
5,830
4,879
22,310
15,254
FHLB and other borrowings
737
1,100
1,203
3,886
4,048
Subordinated debentures
389
416
422
1,635
1,590
Repurchase agreements
77
72
96
344
499
Total interest expense
6,553
7,418
6,600
28,175
21,391
Net interest income
12,399
11,604
10,886
45,724
43,292
Provision for credit losses
1,500
500
50
2,300
349
Net interest income after provision for credit losses
10,899
11,104
10,836
43,424
42,943
Non-interest income:
Fees and service charges
2,710
2,880
2,763
10,742
10,220
Gains on sales of loans, net
522
704
255
2,386
2,269
Bank owned life insurance
976
254
242
1,723
913
Losses on sales of investment securities, net
(1,031
)
–
(1,246
)
(1,031
)
(1,246
)
Other
194
415
240
924
1,074
Total non-interest income
3,371
4,253
2,254
14,744
13,230
Non-interest expense:
Compensation and benefits
6,264
5,803
5,756
23,103
22,681
Occupancy and equipment
1,550
1,429
1,429
5,663
5,565
Data processing
452
464
462
1,889
1,940
Amortization of mortgage servicing rights and other intangibles
240
256
437
1,164
1,844
Professional fees
1,043
573
730
2,912
2,452
Valuation allowance on real estate held for sale
–
–
–
1,108
–
Other
2,325
2,034
1,748
8,240
7,501
Total non-interest expense
11,874
10,559
10,562
44,079
41,983
Earnings before income taxes
2,396
4,798
2,528
14,089
14,190
Income tax expense (benefit)
(886
)
867
(111
)
1,086
1,954
Net earnings
$
3,282
$
3,931
$
2,639
$
13,003
$
12,236
Net earnings per share (1)
Basic
$
0.57
$
0.68
$
0.46
$
2.26
$
2.13
Diluted
0.57
0.68
0.46
2.26
2.13
Dividends per share (1)
0.20
0.20
0.19
0.80
0.76
Shares outstanding at end of period (1)
5,775,198
5,776,282
5,751,475
5,775,198
5,751,475
Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic (1)
5,775,227
5,765,348
5,755,175
5,758,056
5,751,585
Weighted average common shares outstanding – diluted (1)
5,789,764
5,770,514
5,755,175
5,764,282
5,754,840
Tax equivalent net interest income
$
12,574
$
11,777
$
11,017
$
46,428
$
44,040
(1
)
Share and per share values at or for the periods ended September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2024 have been adjusted to give effect to the 5% stock dividend paid during December 2024.
LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Select Ratios and Other Data (unaudited)
As of or for the three months ended,
As of or for the year ended,
December 31,
September 30,
December 31,
December 31,
December 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
2024
2024
2023
2024
2023
Performance ratios:
Return on average assets (1)
0.83
%
1.01
%
0.67
%
0.83
%
0.80
%
Return on average equity (1)
9.54
%
11.95
%
9.39
%
10.01
%
10.70
%
Net interest margin (1)(2)
3.51
%
3.30
%
3.11
%
3.28
%
3.17
%
Effective tax rate
-37.0
%
18.1
%
-4.4
%
7.7
%
13.8
%
Efficiency ratio (3)
70.0
%
66.5
%
71.9
%
69.1
%
71.2
%
Non-interest income to total income (3)
25.9
%
25.5
%
24.3
%
25.3
%
25.1
%
Average balances:
Investment securities
$
409,648
$
428,301
$
463,763
$
432,928
$
486,268
Loans
1,010,153
985,659
934,333
974,293
891,487
Assets
1,568,821
1,562,482
1,555,742
1,558,236
1,535,694
Interest-bearing deposits
944,969
936,218
910,610
938,223
892,373
FHLB and other borrowings
57,507
77,958
84,408
70,226
74,210
Subordinated debentures
21,651
21,651
21,651
21,651
21,651
Repurchase agreements
12,212
10,774
13,785
12,216
18,361
Stockholders’ equity
$
136,933
$
132,271
$
111,560
$
129,944
$
114,339
Average tax equivalent yield/cost (1):
Investment securities
3.03
%
2.99
%
2.86
%
3.00
%
2.76
%
Loans
6.28
%
6.43
%
6.04
%
6.30
%
5.81
%
Total interest-bearing assets
5.34
%
5.38
%
4.97
%
5.28
%
4.71
%
Interest-bearing deposits
2.25
%
2.48
%
2.13
%
2.38
%
1.71
%
FHLB and other borrowings
5.10
%
5.61
%
5.65
%
5.53
%
5.45
%
Subordinated debentures
7.15
%
7.64
%
7.73
%
7.55
%
7.34
%
Repurchase agreements
2.51
%
2.66
%
2.79
%
2.82
%
2.72
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
2.52
%
2.82
%
2.54
%
2.70
%
2.13
%
Capital ratios:
Equity to total assets
8.65
%
8.93
%
8.13
%
Tangible equity to tangible assets (3)
6.58
%
6.84
%
5.98
%
Book value per share
$
23.59
$
24.18
$
22.07
Tangible book value per share (3)
$
17.53
$
18.11
$
15.87
Rollforward of allowance for credit losses (loans):
Beginning balance
$
11,544
$
10,903
$
10,970
$
10,608
$
8,791
Adoption of CECL
–
–
–
–
1,523
Charge-offs
(246
)
(153
)
(442
)
(659
)
(850
)
Recoveries
27
144
80
476
894
Provision for credit losses for loans
1,500
650
–
2,400
250
Ending balance
$
12,825
$
11,544
$
10,608
$
12,825
$
10,608
Allowance for unfunded loan commitments
$
150
$
300
$
200
Non-performing assets:
Non-accrual loans
$
13,115
$
13,415
$
2,391
Accruing loans over 90 days past due
–
–
–
Real estate owned
167
428
928
Total non-performing assets
$
13,282
$
13,843
$
3,319
Loans 30-89 days delinquent
$
6,201
$
7,301
$
1,582
Other ratios:
Loans to deposits
78.21
%
77.64
%
71.23
%
Loans 30-89 days delinquent and still accruing to gross loans outstanding
0.59
%
0.73
%
0.17
%
Total non-performing loans to gross loans outstanding
1.25
%
1.34
%
0.25
%
Total non-performing assets to total assets
0.84
%
0.89
%
0.21
%
Allowance for credit losses to gross loans outstanding
1.22
%
1.15
%
1.12
%
Allowance for credit losses to total non-performing loans
97.79
%
86.05
%
443.66
%
Net loan charge-offs to average loans (1)
0.09
%
0.00
%
0.15
%
0.03
%
-0.01
%
(1
)
Information is annualized.
(2
)
Net interest margin is presented on a fully tax equivalent basis, using a 21% federal tax rate.
(3
)
Non-GAAP financial measures. See the “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of this press release for a reconciliation to the most comparable GAAP equivalent.
LANDMARK BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Non-GAAP Finacials Measures (unaudited)
As of or for the three months ended,
As of or for the year ended,
December 31,
September 30,
December 31,
December 31,
December 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
2024
2024
2023
2024
2023
Non-GAAP financial ratio reconciliation:
Total non-interest expense
$
11,874
$
10,559
$
10,562
$
44,079
$
41,983
Less: foreclosure and real estate owned expense
(13
)
(23
)
(40
)
(47
)
(61
)
Less: amortization of other intangibles
(151
)
(171
)
(174
)
(663
)
(765
)
Less: valuation allowance on real estate held for sale
–
–
–
(1,108
)
–
Adjusted non-interest expense (A)
11,710
10,365
10,348
42,261
41,157
Net interest income (B)
12,399
11,604
10,886
45,724
43,292
Non-interest income
3,371
4,253
2,254
14,744
13,230
Less: losses on sales of investment securities, net
1,031
–
1,246
1,031
1,246
Less: gains on sales of premises and equipment and foreclosed assets
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) tonight took to the Senate floor to speak on President Trump and Elon Musk’s unconstitutional actions to dismantle the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and call on Congress to protect the agency, which has played an indispensable role in protecting the interests, security, and reputation of the United States around the globe.
Watch Senator Welch’s speech below:
Read Senator Welch’s remarks as delivered here.
Senator Welch’s Committee and Subcommittee Assignments for the 119th Congress include:
Senate Committee on Finance
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, & Forestry
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Rural Development, Energy, and Credit
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on the Constitution
Senate Committee on Rules & Administration
Senator Peter Welch has spent the bulk of his life working to improve the lives of folks who too often get left behind. After fighting housing discrimination in Chicago, he enrolled in law school at the UC-Berkeley, and later settled in White River Junction, Vermont, where he worked as a public defender before founding a small law practice. He was first elected to represent Windsor County in the Vermont Senate in 1980. Peter was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives where he served for 16 years before being elected to the Senate in 2022. In the Senate, he’s focused on lowering costs for Vermonters, making Washington work better for Vermont, and protecting civil rights and democracy in America and abroad.
Learn more about his work by visiting his website or by following him on social media.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
A record £2.65 billion will be committed to build or maintain up to 1,000 flood defences, protecting more than 66,000 properties.
Environment Agency: Ipswich Tidal Barrier
Tens of thousands of homes and business will be better protected from flooding as the government unveils a record package to build new flood defences and maintain and repair those already in place.
As part of the Plan for Change, the Government is committing a record two-year investment of £2.65 billion with 52,000 properties set to benefit from new defences by March 2026. To shore up creaking defences in need of repairs, funding will be reprioritised for investment in much-needed maintenance, benefitting a further 14,500 properties. This means a total of 66,500 properties will benefit from this funding.
With the frequency of extreme weather events only continuing to rise, leading to devastating impacts for people, homes, businesses and communities and costing the UK economy billions each year, decisive action to invest in adapting to climate change has never been more important.
As well as protecting families from the devastation of flooding, the investment supports economic growth by protecting businesses, supporting jobs, and supporting a stable economy in the face of the increasing risk of flooding as a result of climate change. It will also protect farmland which has been badly hit by recent storms, in turn helping to safeguard farm businesses and farmers’ profits.
This Government inherited flood assets in their poorest condition on record, as years of underinvestment and damaging storms left 3,000 of the Environment Agency’s 38,000 high-consequence assets at below the required condition.
The announcement comes as the Government’s Floods Resilience Taskforce meets today, with Floods Minister Emma Hardy joined by ministers from across government alongside representatives from the Met Office, Local Resilience Forums, and the National Farmers’ Union. They will look at further steps that can be taken to protect the 6.3 million properties in England at risk from flooding, and discuss lessons to learn from Storms Bert, Conall and Éowyn this winter.
Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Steve Reed said:
The storms this winter have devastated lives and livelihoods.
The role of any Government is to protect its citizens.
Under our Plan for Change, we are investing a record £2.65 billion to build and maintenance flood defences to protect lives, homes and businesses from the dangers of flooding.
Up to 1000 projects are set to receive a share of the funding. Projects receiving funding include:
Bridgwater Tidal Barrier Flood Defence Scheme in Somerset, which will receive £43 million.
The Derby Flood Risk Management Scheme “Our City Our River”, which is set to receive £35 million.
In the West Midlands, the Beales Corner project, which protects communities in Bewdley, will benefit from £2 million.
An additional £3.5 million for the Poole Bridge to Hunger Hill Flood Defences in Dorset
Support for property flood resilience schemes across Leicestershire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, receiving £2.5 million.
Essential maintenance will be made to defences across the country including:
Phase 3 of the Stallingborough Sea Defences along the Humber estuary, receiving over £7 million
A further £3.8 million will be spent to improve protection in Pevensey Bay, as part of work to repair local sea defences.
Environment Agency Chair Alan Lovell said:
The impact of flooding on our communities will only become greater as climate change brings more extreme weather, like Storms Bert, Conall and Éowyn.
With this new funding, we will work closely with the Government to deliver the vital projects that are needed across the country, ensuring our investment goes to those communities who need it the most.
Recognising many flood defence projects have stalled, £140 million from the investment programme will be prioritised for 31 projects that are ready for delivery, ensuring nearby communities are protected as soon as possible. The full list of schemes to benefit will be announced in the coming months.
In addition to providing this crucial funding, the Government will be focused on fixing the foundations of the nation’s flood defences and giving communities confidence that they will protect them. This year, £36 million is being spent to undertake urgent repairs to defences damaged in last winter’s extreme flooding events.
For the next year, a further £72 million will go towards maintaining and repairing assets, including those damaged in recent flood events, to ensure they are as resilient as possible and operate as expected.
Today’s Floods Resilience Taskforce will be hosted by Flood Re, a joint initiative between the Government and insurers aimed at making the flood cover part of household insurance policies more affordable.
The expert group’s discussions will focus on the national and local response to this winter’s flooding. It will also discuss further the long-term delivery of the Government’s flood resilience strategy and investment, including the planned review of the government’s funding formula for allocating money to flood and coastal erosion defence schemes.
Wider action to improve the nation’s flood resilience
The government is committed to delivering a refreshed and updated approach to flood defences, fit for the challenges we face.
The existing funding formula for allocating money to defences slows down the delivery of new schemes through a complex application process and neglects more innovative approaches to flood management – which is why a consultation to update the formula will be launched shortly.
In addition, to support rural communities impacted by flooding, more than £57 million has paid out to farmers impacted by severe weather between October 2023 and March 2024. The Farming Recovery fund has supported 12,700 businesses to cover the cost of restoring their farmland.
Elsewhere, the government has allocated £50 million to internal drainage boards (IDBs) as part of a one-off £75 million IDB Fund. This funding will empower IDBs to manage water levels effectively for agriculture and environmental needs, ensuring their crucial role in flood and water management is supported for years to come.
In addition, the Environment Agency has also confirmed that 34 natural flood management projects will move ahead to delivery. These projects, which are located across England, will use nature to increase the nation’s flood resilience. These projects, which are located across England, will use nature to increase the nation’s flood resilience.
Beneficiaries include Leicester City Council, which is working in partnership with Trent Rivers Trust to reduce flood risk across 13 locations in Leicestershire. Their work includes implementing blue green sustainable drainage at several schools, tree planting, and creating new wetlands to improve floodplain connectivity and increase flood water storage.
Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA), alongside a group of 37 senators, wrote to President Trump strongly condemning the President’s recent order to remove Inspectors General (IGs) from at least 18 government agencies and called on the President to immediately reinstate the officials. According to the Inspector General Independence and Empowerment Act, which was signed into law in 2022, the President is required to provide a 30-day notice and substantive reasons for removal in writing to Congress before an Inspector General can be removed. President Trump failed to alert Congress or provide substantive reasoning.
In Virginia, IGs have played key roles in much-needed oversight, including over the quality of the United States Postal Services’ work, and in responding to the horrific animal abuse committed by Envigo Global Services against 4,000 beagles in Cumberland County.
“These officials, which include those appointed by Presidents of both parties, including many during your first Administration, collectively conduct oversight of trillions of dollars of federal spending and the conduct of millions of federal employees,” wrote the senators. “Removing these non-partisan watchdogs without providing a substantive and non-political reason is not lawful, and undermines their independence, jeopardizing their critical mission to identify and root out waste, fraud, and abuse within federal programs.”
The senators continued, “While the President has the authority to remove Inspectors General from office, Congress has established clear requirements to ensure such removals are transparent and are not politicized. The law requires that the President provide a written 30-day notice to both Houses of Congress and include “the substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons for any such removal or transfer.” With respect to your firings Friday night, Congress has not received either the mandatory 30-day notice or a rationale for their removal. Because your actions violated the law, these Inspectors General should be reinstated immediately…”
IGs are responsible for providing independent oversight of federal programs and play a key role in improving government efficiency and effectiveness. IGs were removed from at least 18 departments and agencies, including Departments of Defense, State, Education, Transportation, Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Energy, Commerce, Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, and Treasury, and the Environmental Protection Agency, the Office of Personnel Management, the Small Business Administration, the Social Security Administration, and the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.
In addition to Warner and Kaine, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Gary Peters (D-MI), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Ed Markey (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Jack Reed (D-RI), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Rev. Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), and John Fetterman (D-PA).
The full text of the letter is available here and below.
Dear Mr. President,
Your decision Friday evening to remove Inspectors General (IGs) from at least 18 offices across government—including those overseeing the Departments of Defense, State, Education, Transportation, Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Energy, Commerce, Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, and Treasury, and the Environmental Protection Agency, the Office of Personnel Management, the Small Business Administration, and the Social Security Administration, as well as the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction—does not comply with current law and could do lasting harm to IG independence. These officials, which include those appointed by Presidents of both parties, including many during your first Administration, collectively conduct oversight of trillions of dollars of federal spending and the conduct of millions of federal employees. Removing these non-partisan watchdogs without providing a substantive and non-political reason is not lawful, and undermines their independence, jeopardizing their critical mission to identify and root out waste, fraud, and abuse within federal programs.
Inspectors General are responsible for providing independent oversight of federal programs by working to root out waste, fraud, and abuse and protect taxpayer dollars – oversight our federal agencies desperately need. They play a key role in improving government efficiency and effectiveness and have helped identify and recover billions of taxpayer dollars. IG independence is the foundation of this work, and IGs must be free of political influence so that they can carry out their important mission with integrity and credibility. The federal government and the American people count on these officials to operate in a professional and non-partisan way to hold our government accountable—regardless of who is in power. Without strong, qualified, and independent officials to lead these critical efforts, the Administration risks wasting taxpayer dollars, and allowing fraud and misconduct to go unchecked. For example, just this week the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued an unlawful memo directing agencies to pause nearly all federal grants and loans, which significantly disrupts the administration of over a trillion dollars of critical assistance to communities, businesses, and organizations across the country. It is especially vital to have independent watchdogs at each of these agencies to conduct oversight of the impacts of this unconstitutional and unprecedented directive.
While the President has the authority to remove Inspectors General from office, Congress has established clear requirements to ensure such removals are transparent and are not politicized. The law requires that the President provide a written 30-day notice to both Houses of Congress and include “the substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons for any such removal or transfer.” With respect to your firings Friday night, Congress has not received either the mandatory 30-day notice or a rationale for their removal. Because your actions violated the law, these Inspectors General should be reinstated immediately, until such time as you have provided in writing “the substantive rationale, including detailed and case-specific reasons” for each of the affected Inspectors General and the 30-day notice period has expired.
Lastly, if you believe it is necessary to place any of the affected IGs on administrative leave before the 30-day notice period has ended, the law requires that you submit a separate notification to Congress explaining how the IG presents a threat as defined in the Administrative Leave Act.
Source: United States Senator for Maine Susan Collins
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Susan Collins and Peter Welch (D-VT) introduced the Making Agricultural Products Locally Essential (MAPLE) Act and the Supporting All Producers (SAP) Act, two bipartisan, bicameral bills to support the Maine maple industry. Senator Angus King is a cosponsor of both bills.
“Maine is the third largest producer of pure maple syrup in the country, producing more than 575,000 gallons in a normal season, and bringing in more than $55 million to our state each year while supporting hundreds of local jobs,” said Senator Collins. “These bills support both local producers and consumers and make this market more accessible for all Mainers.”
The MAPLE Act would provide a new market for maple syrup producers while increasing seniors’ access to nutritious, locally sourced maple syrup products by adding maple syrup to the eligible products under the Seniors Farmers Market Nutrition Program (SFMNP). SFMNP gives low-income seniors access to locally grown fruits, vegetables, honey, and herbs at farmers’ markets, roadside stands, and community-supported agriculture programs. In addition to Senator King, the bill is cosponsored in the Senate by Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), and led in the House by Representatives Nick Langworthy (R-NY-23) and Joe Courtney (D-CT-02).
The SAP Act would require the U.S. Department of Agriculture to consult with maple producers when determining education and research priorities for the Acer Access and Development Program (Acer), a competitive grant program supporting research and education related to maple syrup production and sustainability in the industry. The House version of the bill is led by Representatives Langworthy and Becca Balint (VT-At-Large).
Concerning the first and second questions, the Commission cannot take position without further details. Both questions seem largely related to the interpretation of the national law, which the Commission cannot comment on.
Nevertheless, Article 345 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union expresses the principle of neutrality in relation to the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership.
This implies that public bodies, such as municipalities or regions, may also carry out economic activities and then constitute undertakings, as defined in the jurisprudence of the EU Courts.
However, the classification of such an entity as an undertaking is always relative to a specific activity. An entity that carries out both economic and non-economic activities is to be regarded as an undertaking only with regard to the former.
It follows that EU competition law, including EU State aid law, does not require to qualify a municipality or region that carries out different activities, some of them economic and some non-economic, as an undertaking with regard to all its activities, but only with regard to those that are economic in nature.
As such, these rules do not require to qualify the entirety of a municipality or region that, amongst many activities, also carries out the economic activity of primary agricultural production as a farmer, but rather only those activities that constitute such primary agricultural production.
Moreover, the Commission is committed to bring down electricity prices for households and businesses to support the energy transition and the Union’s competitiveness.
Therefore, the Commission is working on the Clean Industrial Deal and an Action Plan for Affordable Energy to be published in the first hundred days of this Commission, in line with the mission letters by the President of the Commission to the Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition[1] and to the Commissioner for Energy and Housing[2].
5 February 2025 – Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face – Boxer Mike Tyson famously said, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face”. He was simply pointing out in his own unique direct way, that sometimes things don’t go the way you think. There can be unintended consequences. Your opponent can counter punch, so a “plan b” can be useful!
The new USA government has a plan to use tariffs as a way of incentivising other countries to do things that are helpful to the USA. Things like curtail immigrants or drugs travelling over the border, or to shift their manufacturing jobs to America. The President has described the word “tariffs” as “the most beautiful word in the dictionary” so its clear he likes the idea of using tariffs. It does have some logic. Maybe this plan will work?
So, using emergency powers that enable quick action, rather than long winded trade negotiation processes, this plan is being implemented this week. First up, 10% tariff on goods from China, and energy products from Canada. Tariffs will be set at 25% for most other goods from Canada and Mexico. If these countries change their drug, migration and manufacturing policies, the USA will look to review the tariff levels. That’s the new deal.
New Zealand had its own tariffs for many years as was fashionable. But now we seek fair trade, with no tariffs or quotas, or other non-tariff trade barriers in our trading relationships. It matters to us as a small trading country at the bottom of the world. Multilateral co-operation and enforcement frameworks such as the World Trade Organisation are vital.
America, like many countries, has a long history of using tariffs. An excellent example of how things can end up like a punch in the face, as Mike Tyson would put it, is the passing of what was known as the “Smoot Hawley” Tariff Act on June 17, 1930. This raised tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods, despite a petition signed by 1,028 economists asking President Hoover to veto the legislation. He didn’t. The theory was it would save jobs in America and protect local producers from international competition following the “Black Thursday” share market crash on October 24, 1929.
But it didn’t make things better, it made things worse.
Americas trading partners punched back. They didn’t do nothing. They retaliated, just as Canada and Mexico now have. The world economy and geopolitics has evolved significantly since the great depression and what happened then may not happen now. However, history can perhaps provide some small insight as to how this might play out.
Wikipedia tells us that after the Smoot- Hawley passed – yes – USA imports did decrease by 66% from $4.4 billion in 1929, to $1.5 billion in 1933. So that must be good for domestic jobs and industries? Well no, because other countries punched back with their own tariffs, as well as sourcing their own imports from other countries rather than America.
As a result, USA exports also decreased 61% from $5.4 billion to $2.1 billion. GNP fell from $103.1 billion in 1929 to $75.8 billion in 1931, bottoming out at $55.6 billion in 1933, a drop of around 50% over four years.
So rather than create jobs, jobs were lost, and plenty of them. Unemployment was at 8% in 1930 when the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act was passed, but the new law failed to lower it. The unemployment rate jumped to 16% in 1931, and 25% in 1932–33. The factories that produced those export goods couldn’t sell their products, so staff lost their jobs.
Unemployment didn’t fall below early 1930s levels until the massive economic stimulus of World War 2.
As with any economy, there is always more than just one thing happening, but at that time, that is what happened in the USA. So how does this current fast changing situation effect New Zealand?
Unlike 100 years ago, we get impacted very quickly by the transmission of changes in our exchange rate, interest rates, commodity prices, share markets and trade flows. This then flows through our economy.
For example, if inflation goes up in America because of the new tariffs, international interest rates may go up, thus reducing the speed of any reductions on our mortgage rates. Dairy commodity prices might rise, but so too might international oil prices, pushing up our fuel prices and inflation. Our dollar may fall, making it cheaper for tourists to visit, but the cost of servicing our increasing national debt more expensive. Chinese built EVs may be more available and cheaper here as cars are diverted from the USA market.
There will be all sorts of positive and negative impacts, unintended consequences and unforeseen outcomes. It could be overall positive or overall negative for both America and New Zealand, but we just don’t know. We do know though that it creates more uncertainty, and that’s not helpful to anyone.
So will it be a punch in the face, as Mike Tyson suggests, or a pat on the back? Either way, we need to be fleet of foot and have a “Plan B”.
Conor English is a Director of Silvereye – a Wellington based Government relations firm, a former exporter, CEO of Federated Farmers, and Independent Advisor to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand.
Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)
WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) joined U.S. Senator John Hoeven (R-ND) in introducing a resolution under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal a rule proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) included in Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act that creates a new tax on natural gas production. The tax would increase our dependence on foreign nations for energy and cause higher energy costs for consumers. Last month, Senator Tuberville also joined U.S. Senator Ted Cruz in reintroducing legislation to repeal the Natural Gas Tax.
“For the last four years, Americans have felt the impacts of Bidenflation from the gas pump to the grocery store,” said Senator Tuberville. “Democrats have shut down our offshore drilling and made us reliant on foreign adversaries for our energy without considering the impact that it has on Americans’ daily lives. The last thing hardworking Americans need right now are more taxes and higher prices. I look forward to seeing this disastrous methane tax overturned and working with President Trump to make America energy independent once again.
Full text of the resolution can be read here.
Also joining Senators Tuberville and Hoeven in introducing the resolution are U.S. Senators Roger Marshall (R-KS), Mike Lee (R-UT), James Lankford (R-OK), Steve Daines (R-MT), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Katie Britt (R-AL), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), James Risch (R-ID), Rick Scott (R-FL), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Jim Justice (R-WV), John Kennedy (R-LA), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Tim Sheehy (R-MT), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Pete Ricketts (R-NE) and John Barrasso (R-WY).
BACKGROUND:
For the last four years, Senator Tuberville has helped introduce numerous pieces of legislation pushing back against the Biden administration’s war on American energy, citing the impacts rising energy costs would have on hardworking Americans and Alabamians that work in the Gulf of America’s energy industry. Senator Tuberville has also been vocal about how increased energy costs cut into farmers’ bottom lines and the need to bring down energy costs so that we can preserve our small family farms.
MORE:
Tuberville, Cruz Introduce Legislation Eliminating Natural Gas Tax, Bolstering American Energy Security
Tuberville, Cruz Introduce Legislation to Repeal Biden’s Natural Gas Tax for Unleashing American Energy
ICYMI: Tuberville in Fox News: How Congress Can Reverse Biden’s Radical Energy Agenda
Tuberville Blasts Biden Administration For Playing Politics With U.S. Energy
Tuberville Continues to Fight Biden Administration’s Rule Threatening Gulf’s Energy Sector
Tuberville Sponsors Legislation to Prevent Administration From Shutting Down Offshore Energy Development
ICYMI: Tuberville and NOIA President Sound Alarm on Biden Rule Proposal Threatening Gulf’s Energy Sector
Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP, and Aging Committees.
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
Heinrich named Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch
WASHINGTON — Today, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) announced his assignments on the Senate Appropriations Committee for the 119th Congress. Heinrich’s positions on the Appropriations Committee allow him to directly advocate for and deliver investments that improve New Mexicans’ safety, well-being, and quality of life.
“As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I have delivered hundreds of millions of dollars in investments to New Mexico, helping to lower costs for working families, grow local economies, and create jobs New Mexicans can build their families around. Our appropriations bills are essential to New Mexico’s economy. They support our local law enforcement, fire departments, hospitals, schools, newborns, elders and veterans, and help keep communities safe across New Mexico.
“I will stand up to anybody who tries to prevent investments I’ve secured from reaching New Mexicans. The Constitution is clear: the president cannot override, delay, or rescind Congress’s funding laws. Donald Trump’s attacks on federal funding for our state cannot stand.”
Heinrich has been assigned to the following Senate Appropriations Subcommittees:
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee
Energy and Water Development Subcommittee
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee
Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee
Legislative Branch Subcommittee
Heinrich will be Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch, which oversees the funding of:
Joint Committee on Taxation
Joint Economic Committee
Congressional Budget Office
Government Accountability Office
Architect of the Capitol
Books for the Blind and Physically Handicapped (Library of Congress)
Botanic Garden (Architect of the Capitol)
Capitol Police
Congressional Research Service (Library of Congress)
Copyright Office (Library of Congress)
Government Publishing Office
House of Representatives
John C. Stennis Center for Public Service, Training, and Development
Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies
Library of Congress
Office of Compliance
Office of Congressional Accessibility Services
Office of the Attending Physician
Open World Leadership Center Trust Fund
Senate
This will be Heinrich’s third Congress serving on the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations.
Heinrich’s Committee assignments for the 119th Congress:
In the 119th Congress, Heinrich is serving as Ranking Member for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) Committee. The ENR Committee plays a critical role in setting national energy policies and managing our nation’s public lands within the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Forest Service. The Committee also oversees the U.S. Department of Energy and has jurisdiction over U.S. territories and nuclear waste policy.
Heinrich will continue to serve on the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee.
Heinrich will also serve as Co-Chair of the Senate Artificial Intelligence (AI) Caucus, the Senate Fusion Energy Caucus, the Bicameral Electrification Caucus, the International Conservation Caucus, and the Senate Outdoor Recreation Caucus. Heinrich will serve as a member of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, Senate Democratic Hispanic Task Force, National Service Congressional Caucus, Congressional Dietary Supplement Caucus, and the Congressional Directed Energy Caucus.
Both Mexico and Canada managed to buy some time. After urgent phone calls with Trump on Feb. 3, their leaders each secured a one-month reprieve. But Mexico’s Claudia Sheinbaum and Canada’s Justin Trudeau also made it clear to their U.S. counterpart: If these tariffs go through, they’ll hit back with their own trade restrictions. The world is watching the opening moves of what could become another costly trade war.
As a professor of economics, I can explain why this poses significant risks to the U.S. economy and American consumers. Economic theory suggests that tariffs distort market efficiency, raising production costs while limiting consumer choice and increasing prices.
Who really pays for tariffs?
While politicians often frame tariffs as a way to punish other countries, they actually hit domestic consumers and businesses hardest. Whether they’re facing higher grocery bills or disruptions in manufacturing, Americans will feel the strain.
Worse yet, such measures commonly set off a cycle of retaliation. During past trade disputes involving the U.S., affected nations have responded with counter-tariffs on American products, including textiles, steel and agricultural goods. Such retaliatory efforts have led to sharp declines in U.S. exports.
History also shows that trade wars are self-defeating. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, which imposed tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods, prompted swift retaliation from trading partners and contributed to deepening the Great Depression.
Modern trade wars have other consequences
Modern trade wars hit closer to home than most Americans realize. The recent tariff threat against Colombia reveals why. In 2023, Colombian farmers supplied US$1.14 billion worth of fresh-cut flowers to U.S. florists. In a near-crisis that lasted a weekend, Trump threatened to slap steep tariffs on the South American nation, right when flower shops across America were stocking up for one of their busiest seasons: Valentine’s Day.
The same tariffs would have hit Colombian coffee too, affecting everything from neighborhood cafes to grocery store prices. This shows how modern trade disputes can instantly disrupt the everyday purchases Americans make.
Other key trading partners, including the European Union, have also come into the crosshairs. On Jan. 30, 2025, the president issued a stark warning to Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – the so-called BRICS nations – threatening 100% tariffs if they continued efforts to reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar as their reserve currency.
These threats can do more than alienate strategic partners; they risk accelerating dedollarization – pushing nations to develop alternative financial systems that weaken U.S. influence in global trade.
A more effective approach
Beyond causing immediate economic pain, constant tariff threats risk damaging America’s credibility as a reliable trading partner. The U.S. helped establish the rules-based international trading system, but regular tariff threats erode global trust and push trading partners to seek alternatives to the U.S. market.
I believe the path to maintaining America’s economic leadership lies in embracing a smarter, more strategic trade policy – one that builds alliances instead of breaking them. A strategy that prioritizes negotiation, fosters innovation and enhances competitiveness – and that doesn’t rely on protectionist tactics more often used by developing nations – would strengthen cooperation and stability, ensuring long-term economic prosperity.
Bedassa Tadesse does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi’s reply to the Motion of Thanks on the President’s Address in Lok Sabha The President’s address clearly strengthens the resolve to build a Viksit Bharat: PM
We have not given false slogans to the poor, but true development, A Government that has worked for all sections of society: PM
We believe in ensuring resources are spent towards public welfare: PM
Our Government is proud of the middle class and will always support it: PM
Proud of India’s Yuva Shakti; Since 2014, we have focused on the youth of the country and emphasized on their aspirations, today our youth are succeeding in every field: PM
We are leveraging the power of AI to build an Aspirational India: PM
An unwavering commitment to strengthening the values enshrined in our Constitution: PM
Public service is all about nation building: PM
Our commitment to the Constitution motivates us to take strong and pro-people decisions: PM
Our Government has worked to create maximum opportunities for people from SC, ST and OBC Communities: PM
Our Government has shown how to strengthen unity as well as care for the poor and downtrodden: PM
Emphasis on saturation is generating outstanding results:PM
In the last decade, unprecedented support has been given to the MSME sector: PM
Posted On: 04 FEB 2025 9:13PM by PIB Delhi
The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi replied to the Motion of Thanks on the President’s Address to Parliament in the Lok Sabha today. Addressing the House, the Prime Minister appreciated the contributions of all honorable MPs who participated in the discussions yesterday and today, noting that the tradition of democracy includes both praise where necessary and some negative remarks where needed, which is natural. Highlighting the great privilege of being given the opportunity by the people to express gratitude for the President’s address for the 14th time, he extended his respectful thanks to the citizens and acknowledged all participants in the discussion for enriching the proposal with their thoughts.
Remarking that as of 2025, a quarter of the 21st century has passed, Shri Modi noted that time will judge the achievements of the post-independence 20th century and the first 25 years of the 21st century. He emphasized that a detailed study of the President’s address reveals that it instills new confidence in the future 25 years and the vision of a developed India. The Prime Minister highlighted that the President’s address strengthens the resolve for a Viksit Bharat, creates new confidence, and inspires the general public.
The Prime Minister highlighted that in the last 10 years, 25 crore people had moved out of poverty, as revealed by many studies. He remarked that this effort was possible due to effective implementation of the schemes with devotion and utmost sensitivity by the Government towards the poor and the needy. He added that when people who are grounded and who know the ground reality, work for the people at the ground level, then change is inevitable and certain on the ground. “Our Government has not given false slogans to the poor, but true development”, said Shri Modi. He added that his was a Government that has worked for all sections of society by understanding the pain of the poor and aspirations of the middle-class with utmost passion, which was lacking in some people.
Noting that it was truly a despair to live in kachcha houses and huts during the monsoons, the Prime Minister said four crore houses were distributed to the poor till now by the Government. Highlighting the difficulties faced by women to defecate in the open, he added that the Government had built more than 12 crore toilets to alleviate the difficulties of women. Emphasising that the Government was focused on ensuring water in the taps of every house through the Har Ghar Jal scheme, the Prime Minister said that even after 75 years of Independence, around 75% or more than 16 crore houses lacked tap-water connections. He added that the Government had ensured 12 crore families tap water connection in the last 5 years and the work was progressing rapidly. Underlining the details of the work done for the poor in the President’s address, Shri Modi said while identifying a problem was not sufficient but was necessary to work with utmost devotion to ensure that a solution was found. He added that his Government, as seen in their work over the last 10 years as well as the President’s address, worked with devotion to ensure solution to the problems.
Highlighting the previous situation when out of every rupee spent, only 15 paise reaches the intended destination, the Prime Minister underscored that the Government’s model of “Bachat bhi, Vikas bhi”, meaning progress with savings, to ensure that the people’s money is used for the welfare of the people. He added that with the JanDhan-Aadhar-Mobile (JAM) Trinity, the Government started Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) and deposited around ₹40 lakh Crore in the bank accounts of the people. Underlining that around 10 crore Ghost beneficiaries were benefiting from the welfare schemes of the Government, the Prime Minister said that during the last 10 years, ghost beneficiaries were eliminated to ensure social justice and the actual beneficiaries were added through various schemes. He added that this had saved around ₹3 lakh crore from reaching the wrong hands. Shri Modi highlighted that the Government had extensively utilized technology in public procurement, bringing in transparency through the GeM (Government e-Marketplace) portal, which is now also being used by state Governments. The procurement made through the GeM portal has been more cost-effective compared to traditional procurement methods, resulting in a savings of ₹1,15,000 crore for the Government.
Shri Modi highlighted that the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan was initially ridiculed, with many treating it as a mistake or a sin. Despite the criticism, he proudly stated that due to these cleanliness efforts, in recent years, the Government has earned ₹2,300 crore by selling scrap from Government offices. The Prime Minister invoked Mahatma Gandhi’s principle of trusteeship, emphasizing that they are trustees of the public’s property and are committed to saving every paisa and using it properly.
Highlighting that the Government made a significant decision on ethanol blending, the Prime Minister acknowledged that India is not energy independent and relies on external sources. He said that the introduction of ethanol blending reduced the expenditure on petrol and diesel, resulting in savings of ₹1 Lakh crore. The Prime Minister emphasized that this amount has directly benefited the farmers, putting nearly ₹1 lakh crore into their pockets.
The Prime Minister remarked that while he talks about savings, newspapers used to be filled with headlines about scams worth lakhs and crores. He noted that it has been ten years since such scams have occurred, highlighting that the absence of these scams has saved the country lakhs of crores of rupees. These savings have been directed towards serving the public.
Emphasising that the various steps taken have resulted in savings of lakhs of crores of rupees, Shri Modi clarified that these funds were not used to build grand palaces but were instead invested in nation-building. He noted that the infrastructure budget was ₹1.8 lakh crore ten years ago before their tenure while today, the infrastructure budget stands at ₹11 lakh crore which the President in her address described how India’s foundation is being strengthened. The Prime Minister highlighted that strong foundations have been laid for development in areas like roads, highways, railways, and rural roads.
“Savings in the Government treasury are essential, as emphasized through the principle of trusteeship. However, it is equally important that common citizens also benefit from such savings”, said the Prime Minister. He highlighted that schemes should be designed to ensure public savings. Citing the Ayushman Bharat scheme, he mentioned that the expenses borne by citizens due to illnesses have significantly reduced. He stated that the Ayushman Bharat scheme has saved approximately ₹1.2 lakh crore for the people. Underscoring the importance of Jan Aushadhi Kendras, Shri Modi noted that for families with elderly members aged 60-70, medical expenses can be substantial and the Jan Aushadhi Kendras, providing an 80% discount on medicines, have helped families save around ₹30,000 crore on medical expenses.
Shri Modi highlighted UNICEF’s estimation that families with proper sanitation and toilets save approximately ₹70,000 annually. He emphasized the significant benefits that initiatives like the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, toilet construction, and access to clean water have brought to ordinary families.
Emphasizing that the “Nal se Jal” initiative has been praised by the WHO, the Prime Minister remarked that according to the WHO report, access to clean water through the initiative has saved families an average of ₹40,000 annually on medical expenses related to other diseases. He highlighted that there are many such schemes that have helped common citizens save on their expenses.
Highlighting that the distribution of free grain to millions of citizens has resulted in significant savings for families, Shri Modi said the PM Suryagarh free electricity scheme has saved families an average of ₹25,000 to ₹30,000 annually on electricity expenses. Additionally, any excess electricity generated can be sold for income. The Prime Minister emphasized the significant savings for common citizens through various initiatives. He mentioned the LED bulb campaign, noting that before their tenure, LED bulbs were sold for ₹400 each. Due to the campaign, the price dropped to ₹40, resulting in electricity savings and increased illumination. He added that this campaign has saved citizens approximately ₹20,000 crore. The Prime Minister highlighted that farmers who have scientifically utilized the Soil Health Card have benefited significantly, with savings of ₹30,000 per acre.
Touching upon the Income tax, the Prime Minister highlighted that over the past ten years, the Government has reduced income tax rates, thereby increasing savings for the middle class. He highlighted that in 2013-14, only ₹2 lakh was exempted from income tax while today, ₹12 lakh is completely exempt from income tax. The Prime Minister noted that throughout 2014, 2017, 2019, and 2023, the Government has continuously worked on providing relief and with the addition of a standard deduction of ₹75,000, salaried individuals will not have to pay any income tax on earnings up to ₹12.75 lakh from April 1st onwards.
Criticizing the previous dispensations for being disconnected from the ground realities and engaging in lofty talks, the Prime Minister further pointed out that the leaders who spoke about the 21st century were not even able to fulfill the needs of the 20th century. He expressed his pain at realizing that the country is 40-50 years late in accomplishing tasks that should have been completed decades ago. Shri Modi added that since 2014, when the public gave the opportunity to serve, the Government has focused extensively on the youth, emphasizing their aspirations and creating numerous opportunities for them. As a result, the youth are now proudly showcasing their talents and achievements. The Prime Minister highlighted the opening of the space sector, defense sector, and the launch of the Semiconductor Mission. To promote innovation, several new schemes have been introduced, and the Startup India ecosystem has been fully developed. Additionally, he highlighted that a significant decision in the current budget is the income tax exemption on incomes up to ₹12 lakh, which has garnered much attention. Furthermore, the Prime Minister announced the opening of the nuclear energy sector, which will have long-term positive impacts and outcomes for the nation.
Emphasizing the importance of AI, 3D printing, robotics, and virtual reality, and underscoring the efforts in the gaming sector, Shri Modi encouraged the nation’s youth to make India the capital of creative gaming worldwide, noting the rapid progress in this area. The Prime Minister remarked that for him, AI stands for not just Artificial Intelligence but also Aspirational India. He highlighted the initiation of 10,000 Atal Tinkering Labs in schools, where students are astonishing others with their robotics creations. The current budget includes provisions for 50,000 Atal Tinkering Labs. The Prime Minister also noted that India’s AI Mission has generated global optimism, and India’s presence on the world AI platform has become significant.
Underlining that this year’s budget includes investment in the domain of Deep Tech, the Prime Minister emphasized that to progress rapidly in the 21st century, which is entirely technology-driven, it is essential for India to advance quickly in the field of deep tech. He remarked that the Government is continuously working with the future of the youth in mind. However, he criticized certain political parties for deceiving the youth with promises of allowances during elections which they fail to fulfill. He stated that these parties have become a disaster for the future of the youth.
Remarking on the recent developments in Haryana, noting that the promise of providing jobs without any cost or intermediaries was fulfilled immediately upon forming the Government, the Prime Minister highlighted this as a testament to their commitment. He celebrated Haryana’s historic third consecutive victory, marking it as a significant achievement in the state’s history. Similarly, the Prime Minister acknowledged the historic results in Maharashtra, noting the unprecedented number of seats held by the ruling party, attributing this success to the blessings of the people.
The Prime Minister referenced the President’s address, which extensively discussed the completion of 75 years of the Constitution. He emphasized that in addition to the articles of the Constitution, its spirit must be lived and we stand by it. Shri Modi remarked that it is a tradition for the President to outline the Government’s activities of the past year in their address, similar to how Governors present the activities of their respective states in their speeches. He emphasized that the true spirit of the Constitution and democracy was demonstrated when Gujarat celebrated its 50th anniversary, and he was serving as the Chief Minister. He added that during the Golden Jubilee year, he made a significant decision to compile all the speeches given by Governors in the assembly over the past 50 years into a book, which is now available in all libraries. He noted that his administration took pride in publishing these speeches. He underscored their commitment to living by, dedicating themselves to, and understanding the spirit of the Constitution.
The Prime Minister remarked that in 2014, when they came to power, there was no recognized opposition party, as none had secured the required number of seats. Many laws allowed the Government to operate independently, and several committees stipulated the inclusion of the Leader of the Opposition, but there was none. The Prime Minister highlighted that, in adherence to the spirit of the Constitution and the values of democracy, they decided to invite the leader of the largest party in the meetings, despite the absence of a recognized opposition. This demonstrated their commitment to the essence of democracy. Shri Modi remarked that in the past, Prime Ministers would handle files independently. However, his administration has included the Leader of the Opposition in these processes and even enacted laws to ensure their participation. The Prime Minister noted that when the Election Commission is formed, the Leader of the Opposition will be part of the decision-making process, demonstrating their commitment to living by the Constitution.
Highlighting that in Delhi, several places have private museums created by families, Shri Modi noted that when it comes to utilizing public funds, it is important to live by the spirit of democracy and the Constitution. He mentioned the creation of the PM Museum, which showcases the lives and work of all Prime Ministers, from the first to his predecessors. The Prime Minister expressed his desire for the families of the great leaders featured in the PM Museum to visit and suggest additions to enrich the museum further, inspiring the younger generation. He emphasized that living for oneself is common, but living for the Constitution is a higher calling that they are committed to.
“When power is used for service, it leads to nation-building, but when power becomes a legacy, it destroys people”, said the Prime Minister. He emphasized that they adhere to the spirit of the Constitution and do not engage in divisive politics. He highlighted the importance of national unity and recalled the creation of the world’s tallest statue, the Statue of Unity, dedicated to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel as their commitment to living by the Constitution drives their actions.
Expressing his concern that it is unfortunate that some people are openly using the language of urban Naxals, Shri Modi highlighted that those who speak this language and challenge the Indian State can neither understand the Constitution nor the unity of the country.
Highlighting that for seven decades, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh were deprived of constitutional rights, the Prime Minister noted that this was an injustice to both the Constitution and the people of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. By revoking Article 370, the Prime Minister highlighted that the people of these regions now receive the same rights as other citizens of the country. He emphasized that they understand and live by the spirit of the Constitution, which is why they make such strong decisions.
Stressing that the Constitution does not allow for discrimination, Shri Modi criticized those who live with a biased mindset, pointing out the difficulties imposed on Muslim women. By abolishing triple talaq, the Prime Minister stated that they have given Muslim daughters their rightful equality as per the Constitution.
Emphasizing that whenever their Government has been in power, they have worked with a long-term vision, the Prime Minister expressed concern over the divisive language used by some, driven by despair and hopelessness. He noted that their focus has always been on those who are left behind, as envisioned by Mahatma Gandhi. Shri Modi highlighted the creation of separate ministries, such as for the Northeast and for tribal affairs under Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s leadership, demonstrating their commitment to inclusive development.
Highlighting that India’s southern and eastern coastal states have significant fishing communities, Shri Modi emphasized the importance of considering the well-being of these communities, including those in small inland water areas. The Prime Minister highlighted that it is their Government that created a separate ministry for fisheries to address the needs of fishermen and support their livelihoods.
Pointing out the potential within the marginalized sections of society, the Prime Minister remarked that by focusing on skill development, new opportunities can be created, leading to a new life for their aspirations. This led to the creation of a separate Ministry for Skill Development. He also highlighted that the primary duty of democracy is to provide opportunities to even the most ordinary citizens. To enhance and strengthen India’s cooperative sector, which connects crores of people, the Government has created a separate Ministry for Cooperatives. The Prime Minister noted that this demonstrates their vision.
The Prime Minister remarked that discussing caste has become fashionable for some people and for the past 30-35 years, OBC MPs from various parties have been demanding constitutional status for the OBC Commission. He added that it was their Government that granted constitutional status to the OBC Commission. He highlighted that the Backward Classes Commission is now part of the constitutional framework.
The Prime Minister remarked that they have worked steadfastly to provide maximum opportunities for SC, ST, and OBC communities in every sector. He posed important questions to the nation, asking if there has ever been a time when three MPs from the same SC family served in Parliament simultaneously, or three MPs from the same ST family at the same time. He highlighted the stark difference between the words and actions of some individuals, indicating a vast gap between their promises and reality.
The Prime Minister highlighted there is a need for the empowerment of SC and ST communities while noting the importance of maintaining unity without creating social tensions. He provided an example by noting that before 2014, there were 387 medical colleges in the country. Today, the number has increased to 780, resulting in a rise in available seats. He pointed out that before 2014, there were 7,700 MBBS seats for SC students. After ten years of work, the number has increased to 17,000, thereby significantly improving opportunities for the Dalit community to become doctors, without creating social tensions and while respecting each other’s dignity. Shri Modi highlighted that before 2014, there were 3,800 MBBS seats for ST students. Today, this number has increased to approximately 9,000. He also noted that before 2014, there were fewer than 14,000 MBBS seats for OBC students. Today, this number has risen to approximately 32,000, enabling 32,000 OBC students to become doctors. The Prime Minister highlighted that over the past ten years, a new university has been established every week, a new ITI has been opened every day, and a new college has been inaugurated every two days. He emphasized the significant increase in opportunities for SC, ST, and OBC youth.
“We are committed to ensuring 100% saturation of all schemes so that no beneficiary is left out”, exclaimed Shri Modi. He highlighted that everyone who is entitled to benefits should receive them, rejecting the outdated model where only a few are favored. The Prime Minister criticized the politics of appeasement and stated that to build a developed India, the country must move away from appeasement to a path of satisfaction. He stressed that every section of society should receive their due without any discrimination. According to him, achieving 100% saturation means true social justice, secularism, and respect for the Constitution.
Stressing that the spirit of the Constitution is to ensure better health for all, Shri Modi noted that today is Cancer Day, and health is being discussed extensively across the country and the world. He remarked that some individuals, driven by political selfishness, are obstructing the provision of healthcare services to the poor and elderly. The Prime Minister noted that 30,000 hospitals, including specialized private hospitals, are connected to the Ayushman Bharat scheme, offering free treatment to Ayushman cardholders. However, certain political parties, due to their narrow mindset and flawed policies, have closed the doors of these hospitals to the poor, affecting cancer patients. Citing a recent study by the public health journal Lancet, which stated that timely cancer treatment has begun under the Ayushman scheme, Shri Modi emphasized the Government’s seriousness in cancer screening and treatment, highlighting that early diagnosis and treatment can save cancer patients. The Lancet credited the Ayushman scheme, noting significant progress in this direction in India.
Highlighting the significant step taken in this budget to make cancer medicines more affordable, Shri Modi mentioned it was an important decision that will benefit cancer patients, especially on Cancer Day. He urged all honorable MPs to utilize this benefit for patients in their constituencies. He noted the challenges faced by patients due to the limited number of hospitals and announced the decision to establish 200 daycare centers. These centers will provide substantial relief to both patients and their families.
Touching upon the discussions on foreign policy addressed during the President’s speech, the Prime Minister noted that some individuals feel the need to speak on foreign policy to appear mature, even if it harms the country. He suggested that those truly interested in foreign policy should read the book “JFK’s Forgotten Crisis” by a renowned foreign policy scholar. The book details important events and discussions between India’s first Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, and then US President John F. Kennedy during challenging times.
The Prime Minister expressed his disappointment at the disrespect shown towards the President, a woman from a poor family, following her address. He emphasized that he understands political frustration, but questioned the reasons behind such disrespect towards the President. Remarking that India is moving forward by embracing the mantra of women-led development, leaving behind regressive mindsets, Shri Modi emphasized that if women, who constitute half of the population, are given full opportunities, India can progress at twice the speed. His conviction has only strengthened after 25 years of working in this field. He highlighted that in the past ten years, 10 crore women, primarily from marginalized and rural backgrounds, have joined self-help groups (SHGs). These women’s capabilities have increased, their social status has improved, and the Government has enhanced their assistance up to ₹20 lakh to help them further their work. The Prime Minister noted that these efforts have had a highly positive impact on the rural economy.
Highlighting the discussion of the Lakhpati Didi campaign in the President’s address, the Prime Minister noted that since the formation of the new Government for the third time, over 50 lakh Lakhpati Didis have been registered. He remarked that since the inception of this initiative, approximately 1.25 crore women have become Lakhpati Didis, and the goal is to make three crore women Lakhpati Didis through economic programs. The Prime Minister noted the significant psychological shift in villages, where women operating drones, known as Namo Drone Didis, have changed the community’s perception of women. These Drone Didis are earning lakhs of rupees by working in fields. He also highlighted the role of the Mudra Yojana in empowering women, with crores of women entering the industrial sector for the first time and taking on entrepreneurial roles.
Emphasising that out of the 4 crore homes provided to families, approximately 75% have been registered in the names of women, the Prime Minister emphasized “this change is laying the foundation for a strong and empowered 21st-century India”. “The goal of a developed India cannot be achieved without strengthening the rural economy”, exclaimed the Prime Minister. He emphasized the importance of agriculture in the rural economy and noted that farmers are a strong pillar of developed India. Over the past decade, the agriculture budget has increased tenfold since 2014, marking a significant jump.
The Prime Minister remarked that before 2014, farmers faced difficulties and even police action when demanding urea. He added that they had to stand in long queues overnight, and fertilizer meant for farmers often ended up in black markets. Shri Modi said today, farmers receive ample fertilizer. He added that during the COVID-19 crisis, supply chains were disrupted, and global prices soared. Shri Modi said that despite India’s dependency on imported urea, the Government managed to bear the cost. He added that a bag of urea costing the Government ₹3,000 is provided to farmers at less than ₹300. He highlighted that their continuous efforts ensure maximum benefits for farmers.
“In the past ten years, ₹12 lakh crore has been spent to ensure affordable fertilizer for farmers and through the PM Kisan Samman Nidhi, about ₹3.5 lakh crore has been directly transferred to farmers’ accounts”, said Shri Modi. He highlighted the record increase in MSP and stated that procurement has tripled over the past decade. He noted that farmer loans have been made more accessible and affordable, with a threefold increase in the amount of credit provided. Shri Modi emphasized that during natural disasters, farmers were previously left to fend for themselves, but under the PM Fasal Bima Yojana, ₹2 lakh crore has been disbursed to farmers. He highlighted the unprecedented steps taken in irrigation over the past decade, referencing Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’s comprehensive and inclusive vision for water management. He mentioned that over 100 major irrigation projects, pending for decades, have been completed to ensure water reaches farmers’ fields. The Prime Minister noted that Dr. Ambedkar advocated for river linking, a vision that went unfulfilled for years. Today, projects like the Ken-Betwa Link Project and the Parvati-Kalisindh-Chambal Link Project have commenced. He also shared his successful experience in Gujarat with similar river-linking initiatives.
“Every Indian should dream of seeing Made in India food packets on dining tables around the world”, said the Prime Minister. He expressed joy that Indian tea and coffee are now gaining popularity globally, and turmeric has seen a surge in demand post-COVID period. He noted that in the coming times, Indian processed seafood and Bihar’s makhana will also make their mark worldwide. The Prime Minister highlighted that India’s millets, known as Shri Anna, will enhance India’s reputation in international markets.
Stressing the importance of Future Ready cities for a developed India, Shri Modi noted that the country is rapidly urbanizing, which should be seen as an opportunity rather than a challenge. He highlighted that the expansion of infrastructure leads to the creation of opportunities, as increased connectivity boosts possibilities. The Prime Minister mentioned the inauguration of the first Namo Rail connecting Delhi and Uttar Pradesh and expressed his experience of traveling on it. He stressed the need for such connectivity and infrastructure to reach all major cities in India, reflecting the nation’s future direction. He remarked that Delhi’s metro rail network has doubled, and now metro networks are expanding to Tier-2 and Tier-3 cities. The Prime Minister proudly highlighted that India’s metro network has surpassed 1,000 kilometers, with an additional 1,000 kilometers currently under development, showcasing the rapid progress. He highlighted several initiatives taken by the Indian Government to reduce pollution, including the introduction of 12,000 electric buses across the country, providing a significant service to Delhi as well.
Mentioning the expansion of the Gig Economy in major cities, with lakhs of young people joining, the Prime Minister announced the registration of gig workers on the e-Shram portal and the provision of an ID card upon verification. He also stated that gig workers would benefit from the Ayushman scheme, ensuring they have access to healthcare. He estimated that there are currently around one crore gig workers in the country and emphasized the Government’s ongoing efforts to support this sector.
The Prime Minister highlighted the significant job opportunities presented by the MSME sector, emphasizing its potential for employment. He remarked that small industries symbolize a self-reliant India and contribute immensely to the country’s economy. The Government’s policy focuses on simplicity, convenience, and support for MSMEs, with an emphasis on Mission Manufacturing to boost the manufacturing sector and create jobs for young people through skill development.
Mentioning that several initiatives have been launched to improve the MSME sector, Shri Modi said that the MSME criteria established in 2006 were updated twice in the past decade, with significant upgrades in 2020 and in this budget. He highlighted the financial support provided to MSMEs, addressing the challenge of formal financial resources, and the special support given to the MSME sector during the COVID crisis. The Prime Minister noted the focus on industries like the toy and textile sectors, ensuring cash flow and providing loans without collateral, resulting in job creation and job security. He mentioned the introduction of customized credit cards and credit guarantee coverage to ease the business operations of small industries. He proudly shared that before 2014, India imported toys, but today, Indian toy manufacturers are exporting toys worldwide, with a significant reduction in imports and a 239% increase in exports. The Prime Minister highlighted that various sectors operated by MSMEs are gaining global recognition, with Made in India products like clothing, electronics, and electrical goods becoming part of daily life in other countries.
The Prime Minister emphasized that the dream of a developed India is not just a dream of the Government but the dream of 140 crore Indians. He highlighted that India is moving forward with great confidence and urged everyone to contribute their energy towards realizing this dream. He noted that there are global examples of countries becoming developed within 20-25 years, and India, with its demographic advantage, democracy, and demand, can achieve the same by 2047, when India celebrates 100 years of independence.
The Prime Minister stressed the need to achieve greater goals and remain committed to creating a modern, capable, and developed India for many years to come. He called on all political parties, leaders, and citizens to prioritize the nation above all and work together towards the dream of a developed India. Concluding his address, the Prime Minister expressed his gratitude and thanked the President for the address and extended his appreciation to the members of the House.
APEDA’s financial assistance schemes boosts 47.3% surge in India’s fruit and vegetable exports APEDA strengthens exporter growth with new schemes for infrastructure, quality, and market development
India’s fruit and vegetable exports reach 123 countries, with 17 new market added in 3 years
Posted On: 04 FEB 2025 7:58PM by PIB Delhi
The Department of Commerce through Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) provides financial assistance to its member exporters of APEDA from across the country, for export promotion of its Scheduled products, including for Fruits & vegetables, under Agriculture and Processed Foods Export Promotion Scheme of APEDA for the 15th Finance Commission Cycle (2021-22 to 2025-26) in following three broad areas:
Scheme for infrastructure Development – Financial assistance for setting up of packhouse facilities with packing / grading lines, pre-cooling unit with cold storage and refrigerated transportation etc., cable system for handling of crops like banana, pre-shipment treatment facilities such as irradiation, vapor heat treatment, hot water dip treatment and common infrastructure facilities, reefer vans and missing gap in the existing infrastructure of individual exporters.
Scheme for Quality Development – Financial assistance for purchase of laboratory testing equipment, installation of quality management system, handheld devices for capturing farm level coordinates for traceability and testing of water, soil, residues and pesticides etc.
Scheme for Market Promotion – The assistance covers participation of exporters in international trade fairs, organizing buyer seller meets and developing packaging standards for new products and upgrading the existing packaging standards.
The details of financial assistance guidelines are available at APEDA Website www.apeda.gov.in under the “Scheme” tab.
As a result of these initiatives, there has been a growth of 47.3%, in the volume of exports of fruits and vegetables between the period 2019-20 to 2023-24.
Export data of fruits and vegetables in last five years
Country:All
Product:Fresh Fruits & Vegetables
Value In USD Million
Qty In Thousand MT
Products
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
Fresh Fruits & Vegetables
1,282.43
1,342.13
1,527.63
1,635.95
1,814.58
2,659.48
3,148.08
3,376.25
4,335.68
3,911.95
Source: DGCIS
Growth in terms of Volume in the last five years =47.30%
Growth in terms of Value in the last five years= 41.50 %
The Government maintains the record of total exports of fruits and vegetables from India. The export figures of States are compiled on the basis of the State-of-Origin code reported by the exporters in the shipping bills. Thus, the state wise data of exports of Fruits and vegetables is not available as the same is not validated by DGCI&S. However, the major states producing Fruits and vegetables are Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Odisha, Karnataka.
India’s Export of Mango and Onion to World (By Variety)
Product
Variety
USD Million
Qty in MT
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
2019-20
2020-21
2021-22
2022-23
2023-24
Mango
Other Mangoes
0.00
25.42
23.48
33.26
36.18
0.00
15795.09
17448.90
17257.28
23786.16
Kesar
0.00
2.92
6.91
4.97
11.25
0.00
983.73
2319.08
1749.97
3787.01
Alphonso (Hapus)
0.00
6.08
10.09
7.84
8.68
0.00
3195.86
5994.86
2829.76
2673.39
Banganapalli
0.00
1.46
3.01
2.00
3.20
0.00
830.55
1674.04
856.91
1081.68
Chausa
0.00
0.05
0.05
0.03
0.24
0.00
40.98
25.64
19.72
488.26
Langda
0.00
0.08
0.16
0.12
0.19
0.00
48.99
122.16
70.02
81.94
Dasheri
0.00
0.09
0.11
0.06
0.17
0.00
49.50
75.92
34.70
75.54
Totapuri
0.00
0.07
0.17
0.20
0.16
0.00
47.47
151.01
116.60
91.95
Mallika
0.00
0.03
0.09
0.06
0.07
0.00
41.40
61.16
28.81
38.17
Mangoes , Fresh/Dried,
56.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
49658.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Mangoes
56.11
36.20
44.07
48.54
60.14
49658.68
21033.57
27872.77
22963.77
32104.10
Onion
Other Onions Fresh of Chilled
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
434.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1606683.97
Rose Onions Fresh of Chilled
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
38.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
110755.38
Onions, Fresh/Chilled
324.20
378.49
460.56
561.38
0.00
1149896.84
1578016.57
1537496.85
2525258.35
0.00
Total Onions
324.20
378.49
460.56
561.38
473.72
1149896.84
1578016.57
1537496.85
2525258.35
1717439.35
Source: DGCIS
Note :- ITC HS Code with (*) mark of the Commodity is either dropped or re-allocated
In FY 2023-24, India’s exports of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables reached 123 countries. In the last 3 years, Indian fresh produce entered 17 new markets, some of which are Brazil, Georgia, Uganda, Papua New Guinea, Czech Republic, Uganda, Ghana etc. This has been achieved through a host of measures such as participation in international trade fairs, actively pursuing market access negotiations, organizing buyer seller meets etc.
Department of Commerce is working in close coordination with the MoA&FW in prioritizing agriculture products for market access negotiations to reach new markets. As a result, India has achieved new market access in following commodities in the last three years:
Indian Potatoes and Onions in Serbia
Baby corn and fresh banana in Canada
Pomegranate arils in Australia, USA, Serbia, and New Zealand
Whole pomegranates in Australia via Irradiation treatment
The barriers in accessing new markets differ from product to product and are dynamic in nature. Some of the major barriers in accessing new markets for fruits & vegetables are:
Long geographic distance from India raising the costs of logistics.
Delay in grant of market access by importing countries for certain products.
Stringent Phyto-sanitary requirements imposed by some importing countries.
Delay in registration of enterprises in certain countries.
To address the above issues, various steps are being taken by the Department of Commerce:
For expand market access to our products, MoA&FW & APEDA have identified key products and key countries for intensifying market access negotiations.
Development of Sea protocols for horticulture products to reduce logistic expenses and to enable larger volume of exports.
Regular follow up with the counterpart authorities of importing countries with support of our Missions abroad for registration of facilities and market access negotiations.
For meeting stringent Phyto-sanitary requirements, setting up of traceability system and a system of farmer and facility registration.
