Category: Americas

  • MIL-OSI USA: NIH researchers identify brain circuits responsible for visual acuity

    Source: US Department of Health and Human Services – 2

    Wednesday, June 4, 2025

    Studies demonstrate the effect of retinal injury on visual processing pathways, providing insights for the development of vision restoration therapies.

    Visual processing involves interactions between neurons in the eye and brain allowing us to see the world around us. These pathways originate in the retina, which converts light energy into electrical signals that are transmitted to the brain’s visual processing centers. Axons from retinal ganglion cells form the optic nerve, which connects to the lateral geniculate nucleus of the thalamus, a relay center in the brain that transmits signals to the visual cortex – a part of the brain that processes those signals into images.

    Researchers at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have identified which brain circuits are vital for visual acuity and how they are affected by damaged retinal cells. While vision restoration therapies, such as stem-cell and gene therapies, aim to replace or repair damaged cells in the eye, it is critical to understand how brain circuits involved in vision are affected by retinal cell loss. Study results suggest that targeting these circuits may be necessary to achieve optimal recovery of visual function, and have significant implications for the development of future vision restoration therapies that address visual pathways beyond the retina. The study published today in The Journal of Neuroscience.
    “A huge amount of progress has been made in repairing the eye, however little attention has been paid to the functional consequences beyond the eye,” said the study’s lead investigator, Farran Briggs, Ph.D., senior investigator at NIH’s National Eye Institute (NEI). “Brain circuits downstream of damaged or dying retinal cells in the eye may also undergo some loss of function following changes to their retinal inputs.”
    Visual processing involves interactions between neurons in the eye and brain allowing us to see the world around us. These pathways originate in photoreceptor cells in the retina that convert light energy into electrical signals, which are then transmitted to the brain’s visual processing centers. When retinal cells become damaged due to injury or disease, vision is often impaired. In a process known as neuroplasticity, the brain undergoes functional changes to adapt to a retinal injury or disease/degeneration. A person who experiences vision loss, for example, may have a resulting “blind spot” in a portion of their field of view.
    Current therapies target retinal cells, however, retinal cells represent just the initial stage in a multi-step pathway that converts light into the complex images we perceive.
    Scientists aimed to understand how neurons downstream of the retina are affected by damage to retinal ganglion cells (RGCs), which receive signals from other retinal cells and transfer to the brain. RGCs connect to neurons in a relay center in the brain, known as the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN), that transmits signals to the visual cortex, where those signals are processed into images. The study examined two types of LGN cells that respond to different types of visual information and form parallel processing pathways: X-LGN neurons, which contribute to visual acuity, and Y-LGN neurons, which contribute to motion perception.
    Investigators examined the effects of retinal cell loss on the X and Y visual processing pathways by using an animal model in ferrets. Following injury to the RGCs in the retina, recordings of LGN neuronal responses were conducted to evaluate the impact on X and Y pathways. They found that X-LGN neurons didn’t respond properly to visual stimuli, whereas Y-LGN neuron responses remained largely intact. These findings suggest that retinal cell loss affects downstream visual pathways differently, with the X pathway being notably impacted while the Y pathway remains relatively unaffected, suggesting higher sensitivity of visual acuity pathways to degeneration of the retina.
    “Vision restoration therapies may need to target circuits that are responsible for visual acuity in addition to the retina. Such therapies could include training therapies, such as video games, that provide interactive feedback or other vision behavioral therapies,” Briggs said.
    Future studies could use the model of RGC loss to investigate retinal degeneration and visual deficits in neuropsychiatric illnesses like schizophrenia. The research group aims to understand the marked changes in visual perception that occur during this disease.
    This work was supported by the in-house research program at NIH/NEI.
    About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation’s medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.
    NIH…Turning Discovery Into Health®
    Reference
    Yang, J., et al. (2025). “Differential impact of retinal lesions on visual responses of LGN X and Y cells.” The Journal of Neuroscience: DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0436-25. 2025.

    Institute/Center

    National Institutes of Health (NIH)

    Contact

    NIH Office of Communications
    301-496-5787

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: NIH researchers conclude that taurine is unlikely to be a good aging biomarker

    Source: US Department of Health and Human Services – 2

    Thursday, June 5, 2025

    Findings show this amino acid did not longitudinally decline with age
    Scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have found that levels of circulating taurine, a conditionally essential amino acid involved in multiple important biological functions, is unlikely to serve as a good biomarker for the aging process. In blood samples from humans, monkeys, and mice, scientists found that circulating taurine levels often increased or remained constant with age. Analysis of longitudinal data showed that within individual differences in taurine levels often exceeded age-related changes. Researchers also found that taurine levels were inconsistently associated with health outcomes across age, species, and cohorts, suggesting that declining taurine is not a universal marker of aging. Instead, its impact may depend on individual physiological contexts shaped by genetic, nutritional, and environmental factors. Results are published in Science.
    Taurine recently gained popularity as dietary supplement due to recent research that found supplementation with taurine improved multiple age-related traits and extended lifespan in model organisms (worms and mice). However, there is no solid clinical data that shows its supplementation benefits humans.
    “A recent research article on taurine led us to evaluate this molecule as a potential biomarker of aging in multiple species,” said Rafael de Cabo, Ph.D., study co-author and chief of the Translational Gerontology Branch at NIH’s National Institute on Aging (NIA).
    Researchers measured taurine concentration in longitudinally collected blood from participants in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (aged 26-100), rhesus monkeys (aged 3-32 years) and mice (aged 9-27 months). Taurine concentrations increased with age in all groups, except in male mice in which taurine remained unchanged. Similar age-related changes in taurine concentrations were observed in two cross-sectional studies of geographically distinct human populations, the Balearic Islands Study of Aging (aged 20-85) from the Balearic region of Mallorca, and the Predictive Medicine Research cohort (aged 20-68) from Atlanta, Georgia, as well as in the cross-sectional arm of the Study of Longitudinal Aging in Mice.
    “We used longitudinal, cross-species data across the lifespan under normal conditions aimed to clarify how taurine levels change with age as a biomarker for aging, a key advance for aging research,” added Maria Emilia Fernandez, Ph.D., study co-author and postdoctoral fellow of the Translational Gerontology Branch at NIA.
    Researchers also found that the relation between taurine and muscle strength or body weight was inconsistent. For example, analyses of gross motor function highlight the limitations of considering solely circulating taurine changes as indicative of biological aging, as comparatively low motor function performance can be associated either with high or low concentrations of taurine, whereas in other cases, no relation at all is found between these variables.
    “Identifying reliable biomarkers to predict the onset and progression of aging and functional decline would be a major breakthrough, enabling more effective, personalized strategies to maintain health and independence into old age,” emphasized Luigi Ferrucci, M.D., Ph.D. study co-author and scientific director at NIA.
    This study was funded by the in-house research program at NIH/NIA.
    About the National Institutes of Health (NIH): NIH, the nation’s medical research agency, includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH is the primary federal agency conducting and supporting basic, clinical, and translational medical research, and is investigating the causes, treatments, and cures for both common and rare diseases. For more information about NIH and its programs, visit www.nih.gov.
    NIH…Turning Discovery Into Health®
    References
    R. de Cabo, M. E. Fernandez, et al. Is taurine an aging biomarker? Science. 2025. DOI: 10.1126/science.adl2116.

    Institute/Center

    National Institute on Aging

    Contact

    NIH Office of Communications and Public Liaison
    301.496.5787

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ANNVILLE – Keystone State ChalleNGe Academy for At-Risk Teens Graduates Latest Class

    Source: US State of Pennsylvania

    June 14, 2025Annville, PA

    ADVISORY – ANNVILLE – Keystone State ChalleNGe Academy for At-Risk Teens Graduates Latest Class

    The latest class of the Keystone State ChalleNGe Academy (KSCA) for teens will graduate on their way to a brighter future. The cadets successfully completed the 22-week residential phase of the program and will now embark on a 24-month mentorship phase in their home communities.

    Dr. George M. Schwartz (Brig. Gen. Ret.) will be the commencement speaker.

    The KSCA provides Pennsylvania teens who are struggling an opportunity to learn skills such as self-discipline, leadership, and responsibility through an engaging, safe, and structured residential experience. Cadets are guided to improve their academic standing, regain credits, and increase their potential for future employment or further their high school or post-secondary education.

    WHAT:
    Keystone State ChalleNGe Academy’s graduation

    WHEN:
    Saturday, June 14, 2024, 10 A.M.

    WHERE:
    Bldg. 8-80 Bearty Ave.
    Fort Indiantown Gap, Annville, PA

    NOTE: All media interested in covering the graduation should contact Angela Watson at watsona@pa.govor 717-507-7000 today to arrange easy access to the event.

    DIRECTIONS: All visitors must enter through the main gate. All other entrances and exits to Fort Indiantown Gap are permanently closed.
    Take I-81 North and get off at exit 85B Indiantown Gap. This will put you on 934 north to the main gate. You must show a state- or federally-issued identification card to enter the installation.
    Continue through the access point to the first light, and take a right onto Service Rd. Next, take a right onto Bearty Ave. Then turn right on Bellamy Ave. to Bldg. 8-80. More information here: https://www.ftig.ng.mil/Gate-Construction/.

    NOTE: Commonwealth Media Services will film the graduation ceremony and distribute video through PAcast after the event.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: The Launch of SoloChain: The World’s First Blockchain Specifically Designed for Agentic Transactions and DePIN Mining

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TORTOLA, British Virgin Islands, June 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The world welcomes SoloChain, the first blockchain designed for agentic transactions and DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure) mining. With a focus on facilitating real-world asset integration, equitable token distribution, and smart automation, SoloChain is built upon three pillars:

    • Transaction Mining
    • DePIN Mining
    • Agentic AI Automation

    Transaction Mining: Equitable Rewards Without the Hardware Hurdle

    Most blockchain networks use miners and validators to protect the chain, but how they split rewards can be murky or biased toward insiders. Bitcoin uses the most transparent and merit-based system, but its dependence on costly hardware and complexity excludes many.

    SoloChain revolutionizes token releases and reward systems by providing the fairness and transparency of Bitcoin’s model, minus the complexity and expense of infrastructure. Users receive $SOLO tokens simply for engagement in the network — token distribution is made more democratic, inclusive, and accessible.

    Main Benefit: All user activity on SoloChain is rewarded, equating real user activity to network value.

    DePIN Mining: Enabling Tokenized Infrastructure

    The Real-World Asset (RWA) landscape is transforming as DePIN assets take centre stage. Unlike traditional RWAs, such as real estate, which face significant friction in tokenization—DePIN assets like GPUs, weather sensors, and edge devices are blockchain-native by design, making them inherently compatible with decentralized infrastructure.

    SoloChain provides an integrated environment for DePIN projects to tokenize their infrastructure, stake and restake these assets on-chain, and unlock new funding models through Mining.fun (more on this at the bottom)

    Key Differentiator: SoloChain doesn’t merely enable DePIN — it supercharges it through a native execution layer, rewarding engagement and driving real-world use.

    Agentic AI: Enabling Onchain Automation

    As the SoloChain network matures, early adopters manually stake, restake, and interact with DePIN assets. But the vision goes far beyond manual labour.

    Enter Agentic AI.

    SoloChain is actively building toward a future where AI agents autonomously manage network operations, such as:

    • Reallocating DePIN assets for optimal yield
    • Restaking into high-growth pools
    • Driving ecosystem expansion based on predictive analytics

    This agentic infrastructure transforms how users engage — minimizing effort while maximizing value.

    SoloChain in Action: DePIN Growth Meets Execution Layer

    Built on Caldera’s modular rollup stack, SoloChain is engineered for scalable, real-world deployment. It unlocks an execution layer purpose-built for decentralized physical infrastructure—coordinating programmable, permissionless assets like compute units and IoT devices directly on-chain.

    As highlighted in the 2024 State of DePIN report:

    • $50B+ total DePIN market cap
    • 13M+ connected devices
    • $500M+ annualized revenue

    Despite this massive potential, the on-chain execution layer has long been missing. SoloChain fills that gap, using a transaction-mining model that rewards real-world contributions over speculation.

    Stake infrastructure. Run autonomous agents. Launch and mine tokens with actual impact—only on SoloChain.

    Mining.Fun Testnet Is Now Live

    Mining.fun is a revolutionary launchpad that enables anyone to create tokens through its transaction mining curve system—a transparent mechanism where users stake tokens in customizable pools to earn rewards aligned with bespoke mining curves. This approach incentivizes authentic, long-term community participation while discouraging predatory behavior. Unlike Pump.fun’s volatile “pump-and-dump” approach, Mining.fun prioritizes fairness and sustainability: its mining curves prevent front-running and whale manipulation, reward early supporters progressively (not disproportionately), and create organic price discovery through continuous staking rather than artificial scarcity. The result is a fundamentally superior platform where both memecoins and utility tokens thrive through equitable mechanics rather than exploitative hype.

    No presales. No insider allocations. Just clean, on-chain token creation aligned with actual user activity.

    Ready to build the next big thing? Head to Mining.fun and launch or mine your token today.

    Learn More

    Contact Details:

    Solo Tech
    Mark Makate
    contact@solo.tech

    Disclaimer: This content is provided by SoloChain. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice. Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed. Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility. Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.

    Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/22be683e-a5a1-499f-ad33-462b05d20809

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congressman Burlison Reintroduces Bill to Cut Burdensome Propane Regulations

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Eric Burlison (R-Missouri 7th District)

    Washington, D.C. — Congressman Eric Burlison (MO-07) reintroduced the Propane Accessibility and Regulatory Relief Act to exempt propane tanks with a capacity of up to 126,000 pounds from burdensome federal regulations.

    In 2006, Congress authorized the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish the Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) to identify and regulate high-risk chemical facilities. However, when setting the threshold for regulation, DHS arbitrarily chose a limit of 60,000 pounds for propane—creating an unnecessary and costly burden for propane retailers and users across the country.

    Congressman Burlison stated: 
    This is a classic case of Washington overreach. Small propane businesses in Southwest Missouri and across the country are forced to pass those costs on to American families. These regulations are wasteful, time consuming, and costly. My bill puts policy back in line with reality.

    Industry support for the legislation:

    National Propane Gas Association: 
    The National Propane Gas Association commends Congressman Eric Burlison for introducing The Propane Accessibility and Regulatory Relief Act. A GAO study conducted in 2021 has highlighted the duplicative nature of the Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program. Compliance with these regulations escalates operational expenses for the propane industry, thereby leading to higher costs for end users, particularly those residing in rural communities. Moreover, this program discourages the expansion of on-site propane storage, which could mitigate the risk of potential supply disruptions during peak demand months. The Propane Accessibility and Regulatory Relief Act offers a pathway to alleviate CFATS compliance obligations, ease supply chain limitations, and bolster energy security in rural America.

    Missouri Propane Gas Association: 
    “The Missouri Propane Gas Association is grateful for Congressman Eric Burlison’s Propane Accessibility and Regulatory Relief Act. Our industry’s safety record for more than a century underscores a commitment to ensuring product security and compliance with national standards. However, the former CFATS guidelines have arbitrarily designated threshold amounts of reportable propane that do not reflect an accurate risk environment yet require onerous and expensive investments to comply. H.R. 6022 adjusts that threshold to maintain an appropriate level of oversight without adding unnecessary compliance costs that are ultimately passed on the customers.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Pfluger Introduces Bill to Keep Foreign Adversaries and Terrorist Sympathizers Out of America

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11)

    Pfluger Introduces Bill to Keep Foreign Adversaries and Terrorist Sympathizers Out of America

    Washington, June 11, 2025

    WASHINGTON, DC—As first reported in Fox News, Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11) introduced legislation today to keep foreign adversaries and terrorist sympathizers out of America.

    The Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act would expand current U.S. law to prohibit members, officers, officials, representatives, and spokesmen of Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Palestine Islamic Jihad from entering, or remaining in, the U.S. The bill would also apply to aliens who endorse or espouse terrorist activities conducted by any of these U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO).

    “There is no place in America for foreign adversaries or terrorist sympathizers,” said Rep. Pfluger. “As our nation faces a disturbing rise in antisemitic and illegal alien terror attacks, along with increasing pro-Hamas sentiment on our college campuses, we must take action to ensure our borders are secure from those wishing harm against Americans. I’m proud to introduce the Terrorist Inadmissibility Codification Act today to take a critical step in that effort.”

    Read more about the legislation in Fox News HERE or by clicking the image below.

    Rep. Pfluger’s legislation is supported by Representatives Michael McCaul (TX-10) and Derek Schmidt (KS-02).

    Read the full text of the legislation here.

    Background:

    Following the October 7thterrorist attacks in Israel, pro-Hamas demonstrations have continued to sweep across the U.S., including by foreign nationals. Under federal law, individuals who endorse or espouse terrorist activity are inadmissible. Current law explicitly states that members of certain groups, including the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), are not permitted in the U.S. However, the PLO is not the only group that should be banned in our nation.

    This law expands that list to Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Palestine Islamic Jihad, ensuring that all affiliates of these groups are categorically banned from entry or residency in the U.S. The bill also clarifies and expands the scope to include not only direct members but also those who publicly endorse or espouse terrorist activities, banning these individuals from receiving a visa or admission to the U.S.

    This bill would close potential loopholes by making the ban statutory and explicit rather than relying solely on regulatory or administrative designations.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Larsen Releases Statement on Israel Striking Iran

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Rick Larsen (2nd Congressional District Washington)

    Larsen Releases Statement on Israel Striking Iran

    Washington, D.C., June 13, 2025

    Today, Representative Rick Larsen released the following statement:

    “The recent targeted Israeli attack on Iran was not indiscriminate or random. Israel has a right to self-defense and, with Trump administration’s faltering efforts at negotiations with Iran, the country determined it needed to act to protect its people. The United States should stand with Israel at this time.

    “Iran understands that Israel can demonstrate its will to defend itself. I now call on both countries to take steps to de-escalate and for the United States and Iran to continue negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program, preferably involving the international community which previously resulted in strict limitations on the Iranians.”

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Brian Daly Named Director of Division of Investment Management

    Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

    The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that investment management industry leader Brian T. Daly will become the new Director of the Division of Investment Management, effective July 8.

    Mr. Daly brings decades of experience serving in prominent roles at global law firms and investment management firms while advising fund managers and sponsors on regulatory compliance.

    For the past four years, he has been a partner in the investment management practice at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP in New York, where he has guided investment advisers and other clients on their legal and compliance programs, policies, and procedures as well as counseling on fund and management company formation, operational and trading issues, contentious matters, and management company transactions.

    “Brian has deep familiarity with all levels of the investment management industry, and I look forward to working with him as we address smart, effective oversight of the industry and its relationships with investors,” said SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins. “I am looking forward to working with Brian on common-sense regulation that does not impose unnecessary burdens and genuinely embraces the public comment process.”

    Mr. Daly said, “I’ve long respected and appreciated the SEC’s commitment to regulatory oversight while advising clients on compliance and providing public comment from the investment management point of view during agency rulemaking. I am optimistic about this new day at the SEC and eager to get to work with Chairman Atkins and my new colleagues to ensure regulatory compliance by investment advisers and fund managers while tailoring rulemakings within our statutory authority.”

    Prior to Akin, Mr. Daly spent nearly a decade as a partner in the investment management group of Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, advising investment advisers and fund managers on legal, compliance, and operational issues and matters. He was also a founding equity partner of Kepos Capital, a quantitative investment management company, while he served as chief legal and compliance officer. Among other prior positions, Mr. Daly served in general counsel and chief compliance officer positions at Millennium Partners, a Carlyle Group liquid markets fund manager, and Raptor Capital Management. He also taught legal ethics at Yale Law School and served on the board of directors of the Managed Funds Association.

    Mr. Daly earned his J.D., with distinction, from Stanford Law School, where he was an associate editor on the Stanford Law Review and the editor-in-chief of the Stanford Journal of International Law. He received his B.A., magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from Catholic University and his M.A. from the East-West Center at the University of Hawaii.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General James Announces Election Protection Hotline Ahead of June Primary Election

    Source: US State of New York

    EW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced that the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) will make its Election Protection Hotline available for the June 24, 2025 primary election and during the early voting period, which runs from Saturday, June 14 through Sunday, June 22. The hotline will be available to troubleshoot and resolve a range of issues encountered by voters, including issues voting by absentee ballot, early mail ballot, or in-person at their polling place. A guide addressing frequently asked questions is also currently available to assist voters with, among other things, the absentee and early mail ballot process and voter registration issues.

    “New Yorkers deserve to feel safe about casting their ballots when they head to the polls for this month’s primary,” said Attorney General James. “Free and fair elections are foundational to our democracy. Whether you choose to vote absentee, during early voting, or on election day, my office’s Election Protection Hotline is here to help voters every step of the way.”

    New Yorkers are protected from voter intimidation, deception, suppression, and obstruction under state and federal law. Attorney General James urges voters experiencing election-related problems while voting to call the OAG hotline at (866) 390-2992 or submit a complaint online to request assistance. The telephone hotline will be open between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. during early voting (Saturday, June 14 through Sunday, June 22), and between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m. on Election Day, Tuesday, June 24. The hotline will also be available on the day before and after Election Day, Monday, June 23 and Wednesday, June 25, between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. Written requests for assistance may be submitted at any time through the online complaint form. Hotline calls and written requests for assistance are processed by OAG attorneys and staff.

    The OAG has operated its Election Protection Hotline since November 2012. During previous elections, OAG fielded hundreds — and sometimes thousands — of complaints from voters across the state and worked with local election officials and others to address issues. The OAG has also taken legal action to protect against voter registration purges and to ensure that voters have adequate and equitable access to vote early as required by law.

    All registered voters have the right to accessible elections. On Election Day, polls are required to be continuously open from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m., and if voters are in line before closing, they must be allowed to vote. In addition, all registered voters have the right to vote free from coercion or intimidation, whether by election officials or any other person.

    The OAG will receive and respond to election complaints relating to any of the statutes that OAG enforces, including the New York Voting Rights Act, which upholds fair, open, and accessible elections.

    The OAG Election Protection Hotline is being coordinated by the Voting Rights Section, headed by Section Chief Lindsay McKenzie, with Assistant Attorneys General Bethany Perskie, Edward Fenster, Derek Borchardt, Rebecca Culley, Martin Ascher, Roni Druks, and Jerry Vattamala, Senior Voting Rights Analysts Turquoise Baker and Jake Moore, Voting Rights Analysts Chris Chin and Chris Leaverton, and Administrative Assistant 1 Lyric Landon. The Voting Rights Section is part of the Civil Rights Bureau, overseen by Bureau Chief Sandra Park and Deputy Bureau Chief Travis England. The Civil Rights Bureau is a part of the Division for Social Justice, which is led by Chief Deputy Attorney General Meghan Faux and overseen by First Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Levy. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Belmont Stakes Racing Festival Returning to Saratoga

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul and the New York Racing Association, Inc. (NYRA) today announced that the Belmont Stakes Racing Festival will return to historic Saratoga Race Course in June 2026 for a third and final year to allow for the on-time and uninterrupted construction of a new Belmont Park in Elmont, N.Y.

    “New York is home to world class sports and entertainment and this final chapter of the Belmont Stakes at Saratoga Race Course honors our rich racing heritage while paving the way for a bold, new future at Belmont Park,” Governor Hochul said. “Bringing the race back to Saratoga next year will once again expand the audience for this storied leg of the Triple Crown and ensure fans continue to enjoy the full experience.”

    The announcement follows the recently concluded 2025 Belmont Stakes Racing Festival which was highlighted by Sovereignty’s victory in Saturday’s 157th running of the Grade 1, $2 million Belmont Stakes presented by NYRA Bets.

    The reimagined Belmont Park remains on schedule to open to the public in September 2026. While NYRA had previously left open the possibility of hosting a Belmont Stakes in a partially completed facility with a limited number of fans, the decision to return to Saratoga Race Course for the 2026 Belmont Stakes Racing Festival will allow the event to be unhindered by various restrictions made necessary by ongoing construction.

    New York Racing Association President and CEO Dave O’Rourke said, “Saratoga has served our fans and stakeholders extremely well as the temporary home of the Belmont Stakes during the construction of a new Belmont Park on Long Island. As we prepare for the opening of the new Belmont Park in the fall of 2026, NYRA is pleased to bring the Belmont Stakes to Saratoga for a third and final time next June. Belmont Park will always be the home of the Belmont Stakes and we look forward to its return to the newly reimagined Belmont in 2027.”

    Empire State Development President, CEO and Commissioner Hope Knight said, “Bringing the Belmont Stakes Festival to Saratoga Race Course the past two years has introduced new audiences and new visitors to Saratoga Springs and its surrounding communities, which supports our local small businesses and the Upstate tourism economy. By granting Saratoga a third opportunity to host the third leg of racing’s Triple Crown, even more fans will be inspired by this unique circumstance and plan a trip to experience the excitement, the history and the pageantry firsthand.”

    State Senator Joseph P. Addabbo, Jr. said, “The decision to once again bring the Belmont Stakes Racing Festival to Saratoga in 2026 demonstrates a strong commitment to both preserving tradition and ensuring the successful modernization of Belmont Park. This transition period has enabled top-notch racing to continue while providing an economic boom for Saratoga and enhancing the experience for horse racing fans. I look forward to the grand reopening of a state-of-the-art Belmond Park in 2027 and the continued economic and social impact these premier racing events bring to our state.”

    Assemblymember Carrie Woerner said, “Saratoga Springs and Saratoga Race Course hosted two successful Belmont Stakes Racing Festivals and we are thrilled to be hosting the exciting third leg of the Triple Crown again. Once the reimagined Belmont Park opens, New York will be home to the most state-of-the-art and the most historical Thoroughbred racetracks in the country. I am already looking forward to next year and the bright future of this heritage sport in our state.”

    Chairman of the Saratoga County Board of Supervisors and Town of Clifton Park Supervisor Phil Barrett said, “Saratoga County has proudly partnered with many organizations to support events coinciding with the Belmont Stakes. We have been proud to host the Belmont and the event has drawn people to our county, providing the opportunity to showcase our recreational, cultural, and historical attractions. We will begin planning for 2026 with NYRA and partner organizations to deliver the best possible experience!”

    City of Saratoga Springs Mayor John Safford said, “It has been an honor and a privilege for Saratoga Springs to host The Belmont over the past two years. The exceptional collaboration between NYRA, the Chamber, Discover Saratoga, and other dedicated community partners has created a memorable experience for all who visited our city. We are excited to continue these strong partnerships and welcome an additional year of the Belmont in Saratoga for 2026.”

    Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce President Todd Shimkus said, “It’s been an honor for the local and regional community to help serve as stewards for the Belmont Stakes during the construction of the new Belmont Park, and we are excited to do so for one final year. The Chamber and our partners are already working on plans for a third Belmont on Broadway kick-off concert in 2026 to support the Belmont Stakes Racing Festival.”

    Saratoga Economic Development Corporation President Greg Connors said, “In Saratoga County, we couldn’t be more grateful and appreciative to both the Governor and NYRA for bringing back to Saratoga in 2026 the Belmont Stakes Racing Festival. The substantial economic impact on not only Saratoga but the Capital Region is significant. Historically, the traditional Saratoga meet contributes an estimated $9M dollars per day to the local economy. And, with our partners in government, business and community development sectors, we have worked as a team, for the last 2 years, to showcase our community to the world and the world class thoroughbred racing industry, that Saratoga County and the City of Saratoga Springs is capable and ready to handle such a historic horse racing event of national and international interest. For one last time in 2026, Saratoga County is excited to welcome the world back to the Belmont Stakes Racing Festival at the Saratoga Race Course.”

    Discover Saratoga President Darryl Leggieri said, “We are absolutely thrilled to welcome the Belmont Stakes Racing Festival back to Saratoga in 2026 for the third consecutive year. Hosting this iconic event is not only a tremendous honor—it’s a testament to Saratoga County’s ability to safely and successfully accommodate major events on a national scale. The Belmont Stakes brings a remarkable boost to our local economy and provides incredible exposure for our community, our small businesses, and the world-class hospitality that defines Saratoga. We’re grateful to Governor Hochul and the New York Racing Association for their continued confidence in Saratoga as a premier destination for racing and tourism.”

    The 2026 Belmont Stakes presented by NYRA Bets will be held Saturday, June 6. The race will once again be contested at 1.25 miles in 2026, rather than the traditional 1.5 miles due to the configuration of Saratoga’s main track.

    In the coming weeks, Saratoga Race Course will serve as the home to a special July 4th Racing Festival which is traditionally held at Belmont Park. The four-day event will take place Thursday, July 3 to Sunday, July 6 and will serve as a prelude to the traditional 40-day Saratoga summer meet which gets underway on Thursday, July 10 and will continue through Labor Day, Monday, September 1. New York State and the NYRA are currently redeveloping Belmont Park, with a $455 million capital construction project transforming the facility into a world-class racing and entertainment destination.

    Last month, Governor Hochul announced Belmont Park will host the Breeders’ Cup in 2027 for the first time in twenty years. It will be the fifth time New York will host the Breeders’ Cup after hosting in 1990, 1995, 2001, and 2005. The Breeders’ Cup at Belmont Park will be held Oct. 29-30, 2027. All race dates are pending approval by the New York State Gaming Commission. For more information, visit belmontstakes.com.

    About the New York Racing Association, Inc.

    NYRA is a not-for-profit corporation franchised by New York State to conduct thoroughbred racing at Aqueduct Racetrack, Belmont Park and Saratoga Race Course. NYRA tracks are the cornerstone of New York State’s horse racing economy, which is responsible for 19,000 jobs and more than $3 billion in annual statewide economic impact.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Southern Baptists’ call for the US Supreme Court to overturn its same-sex marriage decision is part of a long history of opposing women’s and LGBTQ+ people’s rights

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Susan M. Shaw, Professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, Oregon State University

    A worship session at the 2025 Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting on June 10, 2025, in Dallas. AP Photo/Richard W. Rodriguez

    The Southern Baptist Convention has lost 3.6 million members over the past two decades and faces an ongoing sexual abuse crisis. At its June 2025 annual meeting, however, neither of those issues took up as much time as controversial social issues, including the denomination’s stance on same-sex marriage.

    The group called for the overturning of Obergefell v. Hodges – the Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage – and the creation of laws that “affirm marriage between one man and one woman.”

    Messengers – Southern Baptists’ word for delegates from local churches – also asked for laws that would “reflect the moral order revealed in Scripture and nature.”

    They also decried declining fertility rates, commercial surrogacy, Planned Parenthood, “willful childlessness,” the normalization of “transgender ideology,” and gender-affirming medical care.

    This detailed list targeting women’s and LGBTQ+ rights was justified by an appeal to a God-ordained created order, as defined by Southern Baptists’ interpretation of the Bible.

    In this created order, sex and gender are synonymous and are irrevocably defined by biology. The heterosexual nuclear family is the foundational institution of this order, with the father dominant over his wife and children – and children are a necessity if husbands and wives are to be faithful to God’s design for the family.

    The resolution, On Restoring Moral Clarity through God’s Design for Gender, Marriage, and the Family, passed easily in a denomination that was taken over from more moderate Southern Baptists by fundamentalists in the early 1990s, largely in response to women’s progress in society and in the denomination.

    Southern Baptists were always conservative on issues of gender and sexuality. As I was entering a Southern Baptist seminary in the early 1980s, the denomination seemed poised to embrace social progress. I watched the takeover firsthand as a student and then as a professor of women and gender studies who studies Southern Baptists. This new resolution is the latest in a long history of Southern Baptist opposition to the progress of women and LGBTQ+ people.

    Opposing LGBTQ+ rights

    Throughout the late 1960s and early 1970s, many Southern Baptists began to embrace the women’s movement. Women started to attend Southern Baptist seminaries in record numbers, many claiming a call to serve as pastors. While Southern Baptist acceptance of LGBTQ+ people lagged far behind its nascent embrace of women’s rights, progress did seem possible.

    Then in 1979, a group of Southern Baptist fundamentalists organized to wrest control of the denomination from the moderates who had led it for decades.

    Any hope for progress on changes regarding LGBTQ+ rights in the denomination quickly died. Across the next two decades, advances made by women, such as being ordained and serving as senior pastors, eroded and disappeared.

    The SBC had passed anti-gay resolutions in the 1970s defining homosexuality as “deviant” and a “sin.” But under the new fundamentalist rule, the SBC became even more vehemently anti-gay and anti-trans.

    In 1988, the SBC called homosexuality a “perversion of divine standards,” “a violation of nature and natural affections,” “not a normal lifestyle,” and “an abomination in the eyes of God.”

    In 1991, they decried government funding for the National Lesbian and Gay Health Conference as a violation of “the proper role and responsibility of government” because of its encouragement of “sexual immorality.”

    Predictably, across the years, the convention spoke out against every effort to advance LGBTQ+ rights. This included supporting the Boy Scouts’ ban of gay scouts, opposing military service by LGBTQ+ people, boycotting Disney for its support of LGBTQ+ people, calling on businesses to deny LGBTQ+ people domestic partner benefits and employment nondiscrimination to protect LGBTQ+ people, and supporting the Defense of Marriage Act that limited marriage to a woman and a man.

    Targeting same-sex marriage

    The gender and sexuality topic, however, that has received the most attention from the convention has been marriage equality. Since 1980, the SBC has passed 22 resolutions that touch on same-sex marriage.

    The SBC passed its first resolution against same-sex marriage in 1996 after the Hawaii Supreme Court indicated the possibility it could rule in favor of same-sex marriage. The court never decided the issue because Hawaii’s Legislature passed a bill defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

    In 1998, the convention amended its faith statement, the Baptist Faith and Message, to define marriage as “the uniting of one man and one woman in covenant commitment.”

    The denomination passed its next resolution in 2003 in response to the Vermont General Assembly’s establishment of civil unions. The resolution opposed any efforts to validate same-sex marriages or partnerships, whether legislative, judicial or religious.

    In 2004, after the Massachusetts Supreme Court allowed same-sex marriages in that state, the convention called for a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. It reiterated this call in 2006.

    When the California Supreme Court struck down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, the SBC passed another resolution in 2008 warning of the dire consequences of allowing lesbians and gay men to marry, as people from other states would marry in California and return home to challenge their states’ marriage bans.

    In 2011, the convention offered its support for the Defense of Marriage Act, followed in 2012 by a denunciation of the use of civil rights language to argue for marriage equality.

    Delegates at a Southern Baptist Convention meeting in 2012 in New Orleans.
    AP Photo/Gerald Herbert

    The resolution argues that homosexuality “does not qualify as a class meriting special protections, like race and gender.”

    When Obergefell was before the Supreme Court, the SBC called on the court to deny marriage equality. After Obergefell was decided in favor of same-sex marriage, the convention asked for Congress to pass the First Amendment Defense Act, which would have prohibited the federal government from discriminating against people based on their opposition to same-sex marriage. That same resolution also offers its support to state attorneys general challenging transgender rights.

    Opposing transgender people

    Messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention listen to remarks by its president, Clint Pressley, during the 2025 SBC annual meeting in Dallas.
    AP Photo/Richard W. Rodriguez

    This was not the first time the SBC had spoken about transgender issues. As early as 2007, the denomination expressed its opposition to allowing transgender people to constitute a protected class in hate crimes legislation.

    In 2014, the convention stated its belief that gender is fixed and binary and subsequently that trans people should not be allowed gender-affirming care and that government officials should not validate transgender identity.

    In 2016, the denomination opposed access for transgender people to bathrooms matching their gender identities. In 2021, the convention invoked women’s rights – in a denomination famous for its resistance to women’s equality – as a reason to undermine trans rights.

    In its resolution opposing the proposed Equality Act, which would have added sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classifications, the SBC argued, “The Equality Act would undermine decades of hard-fought civil rights protections for women and girls by threatening competition in sports and disregarding the privacy concerns women rightly have about sharing sleeping quarters and intimate facilities with members of the opposite sex.”

    This most recent resolution from June 2025 returns to the themes of fixed and binary gender, a divinely sanctioned hierarchical ordering of gender, and marriage as an institution limited to one woman and one man. While claiming these beliefs are “universal truths,” the resolution argues that Obergefell is a “legal fiction” because it denies the biological reality of male and female.

    Going further, this resolution claims that U.S. law on gender and sexuality should be based on the Bible. The duty of lawmakers, it states, is to “pass laws that reflect the truth of creation and natural law – about marriage, sex, human life, and family – and to oppose any law that denies or undermines what God has made plain through nature and Scripture.”

    By taking no action on sexual abuse while focusing its efforts on issues of gender and sexuality, the convention affirmed its decades-long conservative trajectory. It also underlined its willingness to encourage lawmakers to impose these standards on the rest of the nation.

    Susan M. Shaw 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.

    ref. Southern Baptists’ call for the US Supreme Court to overturn its same-sex marriage decision is part of a long history of opposing women’s and LGBTQ+ people’s rights – https://theconversation.com/southern-baptists-call-for-the-us-supreme-court-to-overturn-its-same-sex-marriage-decision-is-part-of-a-long-history-of-opposing-womens-and-lgbtq-peoples-rights-258883

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Protecting the vulnerable, or automating harm? AI’s double-edged role in spotting abuse

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Aislinn Conrad, Associate Professor of Social Work, University of Iowa

    AI can help maximize resources in strapped systems trying to protect vulnerable people – but it can also risk replicating harm or privacy violations. Courtney Hale/E+ via Getty Images

    Artificial intelligence is rapidly being adopted to help prevent abuse and protect vulnerable people – including children in foster care, adults in nursing homes and students in schools. These tools promise to detect danger in real time and alert authorities before serious harm occurs.

    Developers are using natural language processing, for example — a form of AI that interprets written or spoken language – to try to detect patterns of threats, manipulation and control in text messages. This information could help detect domestic abuse and potentially assist courts or law enforcement in early intervention. Some child welfare agencies use predictive modeling, another common AI technique, to calculate which families or individuals are most “at risk” for abuse.

    When thoughtfully implemented, AI tools have the potential to enhance safety and efficiency. For instance, predictive models have assisted social workers to prioritize high-risk cases and intervene earlier.

    But as a social worker with 15 years of experience researching family violence – and five years on the front lines as a foster-care case manager, child abuse investigator and early childhood coordinator – I’ve seen how well-intentioned systems often fail the very people they are meant to protect.

    Now, I am helping to develop iCare, an AI-powered surveillance camera that analyzes limb movements – not faces or voices – to detect physical violence. I’m grappling with a critical question: Can AI truly help safeguard vulnerable people, or is it just automating the same systems that have long caused them harm?

    New tech, old injustice

    Many AI tools are trained to “learn” by analyzing historical data. But history is full of inequality, bias and flawed assumptions. So are people, who design, test and fund AI.

    That means AI algorithms can wind up replicating systemic forms of discrimination, like racism or classism. A 2022 study in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, found that a predictive risk model to score families’ risk levels – scores given to hotline staff to help them screen calls – would have flagged Black children for investigation 20% more often than white children, if used without human oversight. When social workers were included in decision-making, that disparity dropped to 9%.

    Language-based AI can also reinforce bias. For instance, one study showed that natural language processing systems misclassified African American Vernacular English as “aggressive” at a significantly higher rate than Standard American English — up to 62% more often, in certain contexts.

    Meanwhile, a 2023 study found that AI models often struggle with context clues, meaning sarcastic or joking messages can be misclassified as serious threats or signs of distress.

    Language-processing AI isn’t always great at judging what counts as a threat or concern.
    NickyLloyd/E+ via Getty Images

    These flaws can replicate larger problems in protective systems. People of color have long been over-surveilled in child welfare systems — sometimes due to cultural misunderstandings, sometimes due to prejudice. Studies have shown that Black and Indigenous families face disproportionately higher rates of reporting, investigation and family separation compared with white families, even after accounting for income and other socioeconomic factors.

    Many of these disparities stem from structural racism embedded in decades of discriminatory policy decisions, as well as implicit biases and discretionary decision-making by overburdened caseworkers.

    Surveillance over support

    Even when AI systems do reduce harm toward vulnerable groups, they often do so at a disturbing cost.

    In hospitals and elder-care facilities, for example, AI-enabled cameras have been used to detect physical aggression between staff, visitors and residents. While commercial vendors promote these tools as safety innovations, their use raises serious ethical concerns about the balance between protection and privacy.

    In a 2022 pilot program in Australia, AI camera systems deployed in two care homes generated more than 12,000 false alerts over 12 months – overwhelming staff and missing at least one real incident. The program’s accuracy did “not achieve a level that would be considered acceptable to staff and management,” according to the independent report.

    Surveillance cameras in care homes can help detect abuse, but they raise serious questions about privacy.
    kazuma seki/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    Children are affected, too. In U.S. schools, AI surveillance like Gaggle, GoGuardian and Securly are marketed as tools to keep students safe. Such programs can be installed on students’ devices to monitor online activity and flag anything concerning.

    But they’ve also been shown to flag harmless behaviors – like writing short stories with mild violence, or researching topics related to mental health. As an Associated Press investigation revealed, these systems have also outed LGBTQ+ students to parents or school administrators by monitoring searches or conversations about gender and sexuality.

    Other systems use classroom cameras and microphones to detect “aggression.” But they frequently misidentify normal behavior like laughing, coughing or roughhousing — sometimes prompting intervention or discipline.

    These are not isolated technical glitches; they reflect deep flaws in how AI is trained and deployed. AI systems learn from past data that has been selected and labeled by humans — data that often reflects social inequalities and biases. As sociologist Virginia Eubanks wrote in “Automating Inequality,” AI systems risk scaling up these long-standing harms.

    Care, not punishment

    I believe AI can still be a force for good, but only if its developers prioritize the dignity of the people these tools are meant to protect. I’ve developed a framework of four key principles for what I call “trauma-responsive AI.”

    1. Survivor control: People should have a say in how, when and if they’re monitored. Providing users with greater control over their data can enhance trust in AI systems and increase their engagement with support services, such as creating personalized plans to stay safe or access help.

    2. Human oversight: Studies show that combining social workers’ expertise with AI support improves fairness and reduces child maltreatment – as in Allegheny County, where caseworkers used algorithmic risk scores as one factor, alongside their professional judgment, to decide which child abuse reports to investigate.

    3. Bias auditing: Governments and developers are increasingly encouraged to test AI systems for racial and economic bias. Open-source tools like IBM’s AI Fairness 360, Google’s What-If Tool, and Fairlearn assist in detecting and reducing such biases in machine learning models.

    4. Privacy by design: Technology should be built to protect people’s dignity. Open-source tools like Amnesia, Google’s differential privacy library and Microsoft’s SmartNoise help anonymize sensitive data by removing or obscuring identifiable information. Additionally, AI-powered techniques, such as facial blurring, can anonymize people’s identities in video or photo data.

    Honoring these principles means building systems that respond with care, not punishment.

    Some promising models are already emerging. The Coalition Against Stalkerware and its partners advocate to include survivors in all stages of tech development – from needs assessments to user testing and ethical oversight.

    Legislation is important, too. On May 5, 2025, for example, Montana’s governor signed a law restricting state and local government from using AI to make automated decisions about individuals without meaningful human oversight. It requires transparency about how AI is used in government systems and prohibits discriminatory profiling.

    As I tell my students, innovative interventions should disrupt cycles of harm, not perpetuate them. AI will never replace the human capacity for context and compassion. But with the right values at the center, it might help us deliver more of it.

    Aislinn Conrad is developing iCare, an AI-powered, real-time violence detection system.

    ref. Protecting the vulnerable, or automating harm? AI’s double-edged role in spotting abuse – https://theconversation.com/protecting-the-vulnerable-or-automating-harm-ais-double-edged-role-in-spotting-abuse-256403

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Colorado’s fentanyl criminalization bill won’t solve the opioid epidemic, say the people most affected

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Katherine LeMasters, Assistant Professor of Medicine, University of Colorado Boulder

    The people most impacted by Colorado’s fentanyl criminalization bill have divergent views on the role of the legal system in curbing the opioid epidemic. Erik McGregor/GettyImages

    Colorado passed the Fentanyl Accountability and Prevention Bill in May 2022. The legislation made the possession of small amounts of fentanyl a felony, rather than a misdemeanor.

    Felonies are more likely than misdemeanors to result in a prison sentence.

    Time in prison is associated with an increased risk of fatal overdose in the year after release. People with felonies on their record often struggle to find a job or rent an apartment.

    In 2023, lawmakers in 46 states passed legislation similar to Colorado’s. They introduced more than 600 bills related to fentanyl criminalization and enacted over 100 other laws to attempt to curb the opioid epidemic.

    Possession of small amounts of ketamine, GHB and other criminalized drugs is also a felony in Colorado.

    I’m an assistant professor of medicine, social epidemiologist and community researcher who studies mass incarceration as a public health threat. I am a member of the Right Response Coalition, which advocates for community rather than criminal-legal responses to behavioral health needs in Colorado. Recently, my work has focused on how increasing criminal penalties for fentanyl possession in Colorado affects the individuals and communities most impacted by such laws.

    Our team conducted 31 interviews with Colorado policymakers, peer support specialists, law enforcement, community behavioral health providers and people providing behavioral health in prisons and jails to explore a variety of perspectives on Colorado’s Fentanyl Accountability and Prevention Bill and the role of the criminal-legal system in addressing substance use and overdose.

    Most of our interviewees agreed that criminalization alone wouldn’t solve the opioid epidemic.

    “You can’t incarcerate yourself to sobriety,” said a rural law enforcement officer. “You can’t incarcerate yourself out of the drug problem in America.”

    Criminalization of drug use

    Incarceration and substance use are deeply intertwined. The U.S. houses one-quarter of the world’s incarcerated population – largely due to policies created during the “war on Drugs” of the 1980s. The war on drugs included mandatory minimum sentencing for drug-related charges and “three strikes” laws that lengthened sentences after multiple charges.

    Today, one-fifth of the U.S. incarcerated population has a drug-related charge.

    People recently released from incarceration are more likely to overdose than the general public because their tolerance is greatly reduced following forced abstinence and there are not enough community-based treatment options.
    Erik McGregor/GettyImages

    Incarceration is often seen as a deterrent, but research shows it is not actually associated with reduced drug use. Instead, people recently released from incarceration are more likely to die of a fatal overdose and face a high likelihood of reincarceration.

    Perspectives of front-line workers

    All 31 of the participants in our study supported policies to prevent fentanyl overdoses. However, most thought that use of police and incarceration as avenues to do so was misguided.

    We spoke to some individuals who felt the bill was appropriate, but most felt that increased criminalization perpetuates stigma against people who use drugs. They also saw the law as ignoring the root causes of the opioid epidemic, which include a lack of voluntary community-based treatment options. They also said the law creates stressful law enforcement encounters that can perpetuate drug use as a coping mechanism.

    “It just seems like there’s no getting away from [the police], they’re everywhere,” said an urban peer support specialist. “I got arrested by the same cops, I don’t know how many times. And then it makes you want to try to be avoidant or run because they’re not going to help you.”

    Participants worried that the policy has an inadvertent chilling effect, deterring individuals from calling 911 when an overdose occurs.

    “Most people with substance abuse are not trying to report anything or get help for fear of going to jail,” one rural provider said. “It’s so stigmatized that everyone’s just scared to do that.”

    Study participants worried that the Colorado fentanyl criminalization bill will deter people from reporting an overdose for fear of being arrested.
    Spencer Platt/GettyImages

    Participants largely thought that counties were using incarceration as a default treatment setting and that it wasn’t an ideal solution.

    “[I] don’t want to see [people] incarcerated, but I don’t want ‘em to die either,” said an urban peer support specialist.

    The people we interviewed pointed to a lack of community-based care options that could come before people are incarcerated. Those options include substance use treatment centers, mental health services and community health centers.

    Substance use treatment

    Colorado’s fentanyl bill did more than just increase penalties. It also provided additional funding for a state naloxone program and required that all jails provide medications for opioid use disorder.

    Along with increasing penalties, Colorado’s bill increased access to naloxone, an opioid-reversal drug.
    Hyoung Chang/GettyImages

    These medications include methadone, buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone. All are part of an established public health strategy shown to reduce overdose deaths and opioid use. They’re also shown to increase engagement with non-jail-based treatment and reduce reincarceration.

    However, jail capacity and the lack of treatment options based in one’s community play a large role in which medications are offered and to whom. For example, only 11 out of Colorado’s 46 counties with a county jail have an opioid treatment program in the community that can dispense methadone. Therefore, some facilities do not offer all medications, or only offer medications to individuals with an active prescription or to certain populations such as pregnant people.

    Investing in community solutions

    Based on our study’s findings, my study co-authors and I believe increased criminal penalties should not be the solution for linking individuals to treatment. Instead, there should be more investment in long-term community solutions.

    One such solution is Denver’s Substance Use Navigation Program. The program sends behavioral health specialists to emergency calls to prevent legal involvement when someone is experiencing distress related to mental health, poverty, homelessness or substance use. In many cases, those individuals are then routed to services rather than jails.

    Our findings also lead us to believe there is a need for more participatory policymaking processes when it comes to fentanyl legislation, and that policymakers should more closely work with the people who will be most impacted by new legislation. Most of our participants agree.

    “[I] don’t think that [the] state realized how difficult it is,” said a rural provider about giving medication-assisted treatment in jail, an increasing need as more people are arrested for fentanyl possession. “They probably should come here and visit us.”

    Katherine LeMasters received funding from the Colorado Department of Human Services, Behavioral Health Administration. Katherine LeMasters is part of the Right Response Coalition.

    ref. Colorado’s fentanyl criminalization bill won’t solve the opioid epidemic, say the people most affected – https://theconversation.com/colorados-fentanyl-criminalization-bill-wont-solve-the-opioid-epidemic-say-the-people-most-affected-256661

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Data on sexual orientation and gender is critical to public health – without it, health crises continue unnoticed

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By John R. Blosnich, Associate Professor of Social Work, University of Southern California

    As part of the Trump administration’s efforts aimed at stopping diversity, equity and inclusion, the government has been restricting how it monitors public health. Along with cuts to federally funded research, the administration has targeted public health efforts to gather information about sexual orientation and gender identity.

    In the early days of the second Trump administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention took down data and documents that included sexual orientation and gender identity from its webpages. For example, data codebooks for the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were replaced with versions that deleted gender identity variables. The Trump administration also ordered the CDC to delete gender identity from the National Violent Death Reporting System, the world’s largest database for informing prevention of homicide and suicide deaths.

    For many people, sexual orientation and gender identity may seem private and personal. So why is personal information necessary for public health?

    Decades of research have shown that health problems affect some groups more than others. As someone who has studied differences in health outcomes for over 15 years, I know that one of the largest health disparities for LGBTQ+ people is suicide risk. Without data on sexual orientation and gender identity, public health cannot do the work to sound the alarm on and address issues that affect not just specific communities, but society as a whole.

    Clinicians are concerned about the purging of health data that is essential to patient care.

    Alarms and benchmarks

    Health is determined by the interplay of several factors, including a person’s genetics, environment and personal life. Of these types of health information, data on personal lives can be the most difficult to collect because researchers must rely on people to voluntarily share this information with them. But details about people’s everyday lives are critical to understanding their health.

    Consider veteran status. Without information that identifies which Americans are military veterans, the U.S. would never have known that the rate of suicide deaths among veterans is several times higher than that of the general population. Identifying this problem encouraged efforts to reduce suicide among veterans and military service personnel.

    Studying the rates of different conditions occurring in different groups of people is a vital role of public health monitoring. First, rates can set off alarm bells. When people are counted, it becomes easier to pick up a problem that needs to be addressed.

    Second, rates can be a benchmark. Once the extent of a health problem is known, researchers can develop and test interventions. They can then determine if rates of that health problem decreased, stayed the same or increased after the intervention.

    My team reviewed available research on how sexual orientation and gender identity are related to differences in mortality. The results were grim.

    Of the 49 studies we analyzed, the vast majority documented greater rates of death from all causes for LGBTQ+ people compared with people who aren’t LGBTQ+. Results were worse for suicide: Nearly all studies reported that suicide deaths were more frequent among LGBTQ+ people. A great deal of other research supports this finding.

    Without data on sexual orientation and gender identity, these issues are erased.

    Lost data costs everyone

    Higher death rates among LGBTQ+ people affect everyone, not just people in the LGBTQ+ community. And when suicide is a major driver of these death rates, the costs increase.

    There are societal costs. Deaths from suicide result in lost productivity and medical services that cost the U.S. an estimated $484 billion per year. There are also human costs. Research suggests that for every suicide death, about 135 people are directly affected by the loss, experiencing grief, sadness and anger.

    President Donald Trump’s targeting of research on sexual orientation and gender identity comes at a time when more Americans than ever – an estimated 24.4 million adults – identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. That’s more than the entire population of Florida.

    LGBTQ+ people live in every state in the country, where they work as teachers, executives, janitors, nurses, mechanics, artists and every other profession or role that help sustain American communities. LGBTQ+ people are someone’s family members, and they are raising families of their own. LGBTQ+ people also pay taxes to the government, which are partly spent on monitoring the nation’s health.

    Stopping data collection of sexual orientation and gender identity does not protect women, or anyone else, as the Trump administration claims. Rather, it serves to weaken American public health. I believe counting all Americans is the path to a stronger, healthier nation because public health can then do its duty of detecting when a community needs help.

    John R. Blosnich receives funding from the National Institutes of Health. He is affiliated with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), however all time and effort into writing this piece was done outside of his work with the VA. The opinions expressed are those of Dr. Blosnich and do not necessarily represent those of his institution, funders, or any affiliations.

    ref. Data on sexual orientation and gender is critical to public health – without it, health crises continue unnoticed – https://theconversation.com/data-on-sexual-orientation-and-gender-is-critical-to-public-health-without-it-health-crises-continue-unnoticed-255380

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI USA: At Hearing, Warren Questions Trump Treasury Secretary on Hypocrisy of Adding to National Debt to Pay for Tax Giveaways for Rich

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    June 13, 2025
    Video of Exchange (YouTube)
    Washington, D.C. — At a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) questioned Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent on Republicans’ hypocrisy on raising the deficit with Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”
    Senator Warren highlighted the hypocrisy of Secretary Bessent’s support for cutting crucial social programs to decrease the national debt, while also supporting adding trillions to the deficit to give billionaires and giant corporations tax cuts. 
    Secretary Bessent, with no evidence, said he believed the tax bill would decrease the deficit. 
    Senator Warren pointed out that “[e]very credible, independent expert agrees that Trump and the Republicans’ ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ will add trillions to the national debt and would not even come close to paying for itself…Even Elon Musk and the Wall Street Journal are criticizing the bill for ballooning the national debt.”  
    The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has revealed the Republican tax bill would increase the deficit by $3 trillion. Secretary Bessent said only that he “[doesn’t] agree with the CBO.” 
    “[W]hy is the national debt so very important that you’re trying to kick 16 million people off their health insurance, but increasing the national debt doesn’t seem to matter if you’re cutting taxes for billionaires and billionaire corporations?” Senator Warren asked. 
    Bessent attempted to downplay the health care cuts by saying the “figure is overstated by 5.1 million,” and falsely claimed Medicaid is granted to undocumented people. 
    “[T]he part that troubles me the most is that the Secretary is deeply worried about the deficit and is willing to knock 16 million, or as he says, ‘merely 11 million,’ people off their health care [because it] matters so much, but it doesn’t matter so much if you’re cutting taxes for billionaires…I think that’s wrong,” concluded Senator Warren.
    Transcript: Hearing on the President’s Fiscal Year 2026 Budget for the Department of Treasury and Tax ReformSenate Finance CommitteeJune 12, 2025 
    Senator Elizabeth Warren: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I want to ask about the Republican “Big, Beautiful Bill,” which will knock about 16 million off their healthcare coverage and cut programs that keep groceries cheaper for millions of families, in order to try to pay for about $4 trillion in tax giveaways, that are mostly going to be sucked up by millionaires, billionaires, and wealthy corporations. 
    So, Secretary Bessent, I’d like to start with a very simple question: will this bill increase or decrease the deficit?
    Mr. Scott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury: There are varying scoring on that, Senator Warren.
    Senator Warren: You’re the Secretary of the Treasury, so I’m asking you: what is your view? Will this bill increase or decrease the deficit? 
    Secretary Bessent: It is my view that over the ten-year window, it will decrease. 
    Senator Warren: You know, do you have anybody who agrees with you on this? 
    Secretary Bessent: Yes, ma’am.
    Senator Warren: Let me ask my question. 
    Secretary Bessent: Okay. 
    Senator Warren: Every credible, independent expert agrees that Trump and the Republicans’ “Big Beautiful Bill” will add trillions to the national debt and would not even come close to paying for itself. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the Penn Wharton Budget Model, and the Yale Budget Lab all agree on this, and they are looking at ten-year windows, thank you. So do the conservative Tax Foundation and Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget—conservative groups. 
    Even Elon Musk and the Wall Street Journal are criticizing the bill for ballooning the national debt. The only people who are saying publicly that it is not going to add to the national debt are you, Donald Trump, the Republicans in Congress. Do you have an independent group that has put forward numbers that disagrees with all of these conservative groups and disagrees with the Wall Street Journal on this? 
    Secretary Bessent: Well, Senator, it’s interesting to see you aligned with Elon Musk, but if I might—
    Senator Warren: You’re no more shocked than I am. 
    Secretary Bessent: If we want to take the full Congressional Budget scoring, they predict, and I don’t agree with their methodology, they predict a $2.4 trillion deficit, but— 
    Secretary Warren: Okay, so the answer to the question is yes.
    Secretary Bessent: No, no, no. But may I finish? They include that, but they’ve also scored $2.8 trillion in tariff income. So even, even in Washington, D.C. math, that is a $400 billion surplus.
    Senator Warren: Okay, so let me make sure I understand. This bill, you admit, will increase the deficit by $2.4 trillion, but you think there will be another bill and another set of agreements that somehow materialize. Haven’t materialized so far, don’t have any statutory authority, but that will make up the difference. 
    So the answer to the original question, will this bill increase or decrease the deficit? I think you just said it will increase. This bill increases the deficit, is that right? 
    Secretary Bessent: I will use all the CBO scoring, and you can’t take one without the other. I don’t agree with the CBO.
    Senator Warren: One is the law that we are scoring, the bill that is in front of us. We don’t have a tariff bill in front of us to score. Mr. Secretary, let me go on to the second question. You have said that government spending is, quote, “out of control.” You have also called government spending, quote, “unsustainable.” In fact, in the name of fiscal responsibility, you’re working with the Republicans on this “big, beautiful bill” to pass the biggest cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act in American history. 
    So, Mr. Secretary, help me understand here: why is the national debt so very important that you’re trying to kick 16 million people off their health insurance, but increasing the national debt doesn’t seem to matter if you’re cutting taxes for billionaires and billionaire corporations?
    Secretary Bessent: Well, first of all, a huge portion of this goes to family-owned businesses that are passed through entities that are below that level, Senator, and I am sure you share my goals of Main Street prosperity.
    Senator Warren: You know, I’m glad to do tax cuts for people of modest means. The question I’m asking is, why does the deficit not matter to you when we’re talking about knocking 16 million people off their health care? But it matters not—It does matter to you if we’re knocking people off their health care, but not if—
    Secretary Bessent: Well, first of all, that figure is overstated by 5.1 million. That is an amount not attributable to provisions in this bill. 
    Senator Warren: So you think it’s okay to knock ten million people off. 
    Secretary Bessent: Well, first of all, let’s set that straight. Work requirements account for 8 million of CBO’s claim number. Again, we’re creating an economy that promotes and rewards—
    Senator Warren: So it’s clear, Secretary Bessent, you don’t want to answer the question.
    Secretary Bessent: Senator, I am answering. 
    Senator Warren: No, you’re not. 
    Secretary Bessent: And what I want is for Medicaid to be used for mothers and children as it was meant, not for 1.4 million illegal aliens, not for able-bodied people—
    Senator Warren: Medicaid is not used for people who are not documented. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say here the part that troubles me the most is that the Secretary is deeply worried about the deficit and is willing to knock 16 million, or as he says, “merely 11 million,” people off their health care—matters so much, but it doesn’t matter so much if you’re cutting taxes for billionaires, then it’s okay to run up a big deficit. I think that’s wrong.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: The Government of Canada to launch the Canada Strong Pass this summer

    Source: Government of Canada News

    OTTAWA – The Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture and Minister responsible for Official Languages, will make an announcement on Monday about expanding access to Canada’s cultural and natural treasures this summer.

    Please note that all details are subject to change. All times are local.

    The details are as follows:

    DATE:

    Monday, June 16, 2025

    TIME:

    9:30 a.m.

    Journalists wishing to attend this announcement must confirm their attendance by sending their full name and the name of the media outlet they represent to media@pch.gc.ca by 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, June 15. Details on how to attend will be provided afterward.

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI USA: In a letter to the Senate, over 900 state and local elected leaders oppose extreme cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, SNAP and public services

    Source: American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Union

    The letter reads in part, “As government leaders, we understand the importance of rooting out fraud, waste and abuse to keep public services strong, but this plan fails to do that. Instead, it would rip the very fabric of our nation’s social safety net wide open to give the wealthiest people tax breaks they don’t need. Meanwhile, veterans, seniors, children, people with disabilities, and all working people will suffer.”

    We, the undersigned state and local officials, are writing to express our opposition to the reconciliation bill (H.R. 1) and ask you to protect the public services our communities depend on. By cutting Medicaid, SNAP and other critical public services, this bill threatens to destabilize state and local budgets and force deep cuts across the board that will diminish public services and hurt working families nationwide – all to give billionaires tax breaks.

    Medicaid accounts for the largest portion of federal funding to state budgets and is the largest funder of long-term care services in the U.S. Without this critical funding and due to other provisions in the bill, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates roughly 15 million people will lose their health coverage and become uninsured by 2034. The cuts outlined in H.R. 1 will also mean nursing homes, hospitals, home care and other critical health care services will disappear, leading to job losses in the health care sector. As people lose Medicaid coverage, hospitals and providers will face an estimated $48 billion in uncompensated care costs. Altogether, this will place an incredible strain on states, cities and towns and other local governments and will cost lives.

    Moreover, the bill’s proposed work requirements for Medicaid beneficiaries will impose huge costs on states, including adding compliance systems and a need for greater staffing at agencies that are already understaffed. Experience in Arkansas and Georgia shows that work requirements do not result in more people working. They actually lead to huge losses in coverage for workers due to red tape. The reality is these provisions will result in cuts and needlessly harm our country’s most vulnerable populations who need Medicaid to live.

    The bill also shifts $300 billion in costs to states and local governments for both the benefits and administrative costs of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This provision threatens the food security of more than 40 million Americans, including one in five children. There will be no way for state governments to cover all these new expenses without making cuts to other critical services like our schools or roads.

    The bill also automatically triggers historic cuts to Medicare, which will spell disaster for seniors. As critical health care services are ripped away from seniors, their families will struggle to care for them. That will place huge costs on our workforce, our economies and our communities.

    Taken together, the cuts that are included in H.R. 1 will place an impossible burden on states. Forced to make up for the massive shortfalls in federal funding, every sector of our state and local economies will suffer, from health care to higher education, public safety to public schools. Services that our communities rely on will be slashed; and the people who provide them may be furloughed or laid off.

    As government leaders, we understand the importance of rooting out fraud, waste and abuse to keep public services strong, but this plan fails to do that. Instead, it would rip the very fabric of our nation’s social safety net wide open to give the wealthiest people tax breaks they don’t need. Meanwhile, veterans, seniors, children, people with disabilities and all working people will suffer.

    America’s state and local elected leaders urge you to vote against this damaging and reckless plan. The health, safety, and well-being of our communities are too important.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ciscomani Leads Bipartisan Push to Increase Benefits for Online Student Veterans

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Juan Ciscomani (Arizona)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Congressman Juan Ciscomani reintroduced a bipartisan bill to increase housing stipends for student veterans attending classes online.

    Specifically, the Expanding Access for Online Veteran Students Act (H.R. 3753) would increase the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) monthly housing allowance for student-veterans who attend classes online during the summer semester. Under current law, student-veterans enrolled in online classes only receive half the monthly housing allowance compared to their in-person counterparts.  

    “As our service members transition to civilian life and pursue educational opportunities, they deserve to have access to all the benefits their service earned, regardless of whether the classes are in-person or virtual,” said Ciscomani. “As education and pathways to career success continue to evolve and online classes become more prevalent, I am proud lead this bipartisan effort to eliminate the disparity between online and in-person classes to ensure our veterans have flexibility as they pursue further education.”

    Ciscomani is joined by Reps. Derrick Van Orden (R-WI), Chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Mike Lawler (R-NY), and Greg Stanton (D-AZ).

    “As veterans transition back to civilian life, they deserve to fully access the benefits they have earned,” said Van Orden. “This bill ensures that student veterans can pursue their education on their own timeline without the added stress of wondering how they will afford rent.”

    “Arizona’s student veterans have earned the right to pursue their education without having to worry about how they’re going pay for their home,” said Stanton. “Our bipartisan bill delivers the fairness and financial security these veterans deserve by ensuring those taking online classes receive the same housing support as their in-person peers. We’re honoring our promise to those who served and making sure every veteran can use their hard-earned VA education benefits.” 

    This legislation is supported by Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc, AM Vets, Students Veterans of America (SVA), the American Legion, and Veterans of Foreign Wars.

    Commander J.B. Well, Executive Director of Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc.: “Since the Second World War, Congress has provided our veterans with educational benefits including a housing stipend to allow them to attend school free from worry about where they will live.   Technology has allowed the development of online education. These students deserve the same benefits as though who attend classes in-person.   Making it easier for veterans to attend class not only rewards them for their service but acts as an investment in our national future.”

    Tammy Barlet, Vice President of Government Affairs at SVA: “SVA strongly supports the introduction of H.R. 3753, the Expanding Access for Online Veteran Students Act. This legislation would ensure that student veterans attending classes solely online receive the national average monthly housing allowance during the semester of their enrollment. Online MHA parity supports student veterans as they pursue higher education where they are at. Many student veterans choose online education out of necessity rather than preference, as they are often balancing other responsibilities such as childcare, caregiving, or familial obligations. SVA thanks Representative Ciscomani, Representative Stanton, and Representative Van Orden for their dedication and efforts to support student veterans nationwide. By establishing parity for online MHA, we continue to encourage student veterans to pursue their education and have access to the same educational opportunity as their counterparts.”

    Find the full text of the bill here.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Presidential Message on National Men’s Health Week, 2025

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    For far too long, the health, happiness, and well-being of our Nation’s men have been neglected, contributing to a troubling reality: men in the United States have a life expectancy five years shorter than women. They visit healthcare providers less frequently and often delay critical care. Men tend to have their first heart attack an average of 10 years earlier than women.
    This neglect has been compounded by a vicious campaign against masculinity. This war on manhood has left many American men in a state of loneliness, confusion, and emptiness, with devastating consequences: men in the United States are four times more likely to commit suicide and more than twice as likely to overdose than women.
    This National Men’s Health Week, I make a solemn pledge to honor the men in America: we will always have your back—and we will never waver in our promise to embolden you to lead long, healthy, and safe lives.
    Just last month, I proudly signed an Executive Order to deliver most-favored-nation pricing to American patients, improve access to quality medical care, and lower the price of medications.  Together, with my Make America Healthy Again Commission, we are empowering men to prioritize their health and prolong their lives. 
    Under my leadership, we will relentlessly pursue a healthier future for the men of our nation. We will always lift you up rather than tear you down, and we will champion the voices, values, and wellness of hardworking American men across our country.  

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Meet Daniela Espinal Fondeur and Gabrijela Papec, Recipients of the Competitive Schwarzman Scholars Programme

    Source: Universities – Science Po in English

    Daniela Espinal Fondeur and Gabrijela Papec have been selected to be part of the 150 students from 38 countries of the 10th cohort of Schwarzman Scholars, one of the most competitive scholarship programmes in the world – with an acceptance rate of below 3%. With its first anniversary coming up in 2026, this programme has reached this year the biggest number of applications and has admitted its 100th country represented, thanks to Sciences Po student Gabrijela Papec, from Croatia.

    This scholarship offers the equivalent of €150,000 to each recipient, with automatic acceptance to the best university in Asia (Times Higher Education World University Rankings), Tsinghua University in Beijing, China, for a one-year master’s degree on a campus reserved exclusive to the 150 graduates, the Schwarzman College. The core purpose of this programme can be summed up in this quote from its founding trustee, Stephen A. Schwarzman, “Those who will lead the future must understand China today”.

    Meet this year’s two Sciences Po recipients, Daniela Espinal Fondeur, a graduate from the Paris School of International Affairs (PSIA) and Gabrijela Papec, a master’s student from the Law School.

    Who are you?

    Daniela E. F.: I was born and raised in the Dominican Republic, where I studied economics as an undergraduate student. In 2022, I joined the Master in International Governance and Diplomacy at Sciences Po, and graduated in June 2024. My interest lies in international cooperation. I undertook internships in embassies, UNESCO, and the Dominican Republic Consulate in Paris. I wish to become a diplomat in the near future.

    Gabrijela P.: I am from Croatia. I began my journey at Sciences Po as an undergraduate student on the Reims campus, and its North America minor – just like Felipe Chertouh (2024 Schwarzman Scholar, article in French). I have a strong interest in the way advocacy work can be intertwined with human rights and international law, which grew even stronger after a summer internship at Genocide Watch. After a year as a master’s student in Economic Law, I decided to take a gap year and applied to the Schwarzman Scholar programme.

    What are you expecting from this programme?

    Daniela: I am really excited to benefit from this unique opportunity. China is so remote from the Dominican Republic, it is priceless to learn about a country while living there. I aim to build a bridge between China and my country through an internship at the Dominican Embassy in Beijing. Considering all the turmoil that’s happening in our world, it is incredible to go through that experience.

    Gabrijela: Getting a deep cultural understanding of the way international law is applied in China – a gigantic country which holds much power over other countries – is very important. I feel that China needs to be included in the very making of international law and policies, or they will never work out. I already experienced working in Asia, for a South Korean company, and I can’t wait to further enrich my skill set.

    How was your experience at Sciences Po ?

    Daniela: It was my first time away from home! I met remarkable colleagues, professors, and had a unique experience as a Paris Peace Forum volunteer, assigned to the Montenegro delegation. You can access many academic opportunities, such as the European Forum Alpbach in Austria. One of my favourite courses was about great strategies in diplomacy, past and present, taught by Bruno Stagno Ugarte, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica. I made the most out of my Sciences Po experience by joining different clubs as well, in the fields of diplomacy and debate. 

    Gabrijela: Reims being quite a small city, I found it easy to meet people, who came from everywhere. The course that made a lasting impression on me was about conflict-related sexual violence, taught by David Eichert. This excellent course focused on the way international criminal law evolved to include sexual violence. I do believe that I, too, can change the course of history. I used to complain about the way Sciences Po gave me so much work, but I can see now that it prepared me to think for myself, to be responsible. It enabled me to apply to this programme, filling in a comprehensive file.

    What advice would you give to sciences po students applying to the Schwarzman Scholars programme? 

    Daniela: Be open to getting out of your comfort zone, to consider living in other places that can challenge you, mentally and culturally. It can turn into the greatest opportunity for growth at all level.

    A Schwarzman recipient must meet three main criteria :

    • demonstrated leadership,
    • intellect,
    • exemplary character and integrity.

    Gabrijela: Be open to yourself and who you want to be, but also, try to be the best student you can be. 

    Both: Reach out to previous scholars, ask for help. Sciences Po has an alumni base for this programme now, rely on it, on its sense of community. We can’t wait to meet the 1,300+ programme graduates in 2026 for its 10th anniversary.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Smith On Israels Strikes Against Iran

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Adam Smith (9th District of Washington)

    WASHINGTON, DC – Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) released the following statement.

    “As we work to understand the situation that is developing in the Middle East tonight, I urge both sides to do what they can to prevent further escalation of violence,” said Rep. Smith. “Too many innocent civilians are at risk of getting caught in the crossfire and leaders of both countries should proceed with caution.”

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: U.S. natural gas storage capacity increased in 2024

    Source: US Energy Information Administration

    In-brief analysis

    June 13, 2025


    Underground working natural gas storage capacity in the Lower 48 states increased in 2024 according to our latest data. We calculate natural gas storage capacity in two ways: demonstrated peak capacity and working gas design capacity. Both increased in 2024. Underground natural gas storage provides a source of energy when demand increases, balancing U.S. energy needs. In 2024, demonstrated peak capacity rose 1.7%, or 70 billion cubic feet (Bcf), to 4,277 Bcf, while working gas design capacity increased slightly by 0.1%, or 3 Bcf.

    Demonstrated peak capacity is the sum of the largest volume of working gas stored in each storage field during the previous five-year period, regardless of when the peaks occurred. Demonstrated peak capacity is typically less than working gas design capacity because it relates to actual usage rather than potential capacity based on the design of the facility.

    In 2024, demonstrated peak capacity increased in four of the five storage regions of the Lower 48 states. The increased demonstrated peak capacity reflected both greater utilization of existing facilities and expansions of existing infrastructure. The largest increase in demonstrated peak capacity was in the Mountain region, where colder-than-normal temperatures during the 2023–24 winter required more working gas in storage to meet winter demand, resulting in increased injection activity during the subsequent months. In California, the California Public Utilities Commission increased the authorized working gas capacity at the Aliso Canyon facility by 67% to 69 Bcf in late August 2024. This regulatory change contributed to increased demonstrated peak capacity in the Pacific region.

    The working gas design capacity of a natural gas storage field measures the theoretical capacity of a facility based on physical characteristics of the reservoir, installed equipment, and operating procedures, which are often certificated by federal or state regulators.

    Total U.S. working gas design capacity increased slightly in 2024. Working gas design capacity increased 7 Bcf in the Mountain region, offsetting declines elsewhere in the Lower 48 states. In the South Central region, working gas design capacity declined slightly in 2024 primarily due to base gas adjustments in the region. The East region also saw a decline primarily due to base gas adjustments (of 5 Bcf), which reduced the amount of capacity available for working gas storage. The increases in base gas—coupled with no changes in total design capacity—had the effect of reducing working gas capacity at these facilities.


    For the most up-to-date weekly data and regional breakdowns on U.S. underground natural gas storage, readers can visit EIA’s Natural Gas Storage Dashboard.

    Principal contributors: Jose Villar, Eulalia Munoz-Cortijo

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: SEC Names Jamie Selway as Director of Trading and Markets

    Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

    The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced the appointment of Jamie Selway, an accomplished financial markets leader, as Director of the Division of Trading and Markets, effective June 17, 2025.

    “I’d like to welcome Jamie to the SEC,” said SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins. “He brings decades of industry experience in market structure and across multiple asset classes to this critical role. I look forward to working with him to protect our markets and ensure the agency’s regulations balance costs and benefits.”

    Mr. Selway was most recently a partner at Sophron Advisors, where he advised clients on capital markets issues. He was also a board member at Protego Holdings, board chair at AllofUs Financial and Skew, and served as an advisor to multiple financial technology companies. He previously was a managing director and head of electronic brokerage at Investment Technology Group, a global institutional broker. He co-founded institutional brokerage White Cap Trading, where he was a managing director and chairman. Earlier in his career, he was chief economist at Archipelago, worked in Equity Derivatives Research at Goldman Sachs, and was associate director of research at the National Association of Securities Dealers, which became the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

    “Chairman Atkins is bringing about a ‘new day’ at the SEC,” said Mr. Selway. “I thank him for selecting me to lead Trading and Markets at this exciting and pivotal time. Together, we will promote the SEC’s mission and enable innovation, to the benefit of our nation’s investors.”

    Mr. Selway has served on a number of industry committees and previously testified at Congressional and SEC roundtables. He is a member of the National Organization of Investment Professionals (NOIP) and the Investment Traders Association of Philadelphia, and has served as chair of NOIP and the NOIP Foundation. He previously was associate editor of the Journal of Trading.

    Mr. Selway received an M.S. in financial mathematics from the University of Chicago and a B.A. in mathematics and European history from Washington & Lee University.  

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Public Notice of Proposed State Fiscal Year 2026 Intended Use Plan, including the proposed Project Priority List, for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

    Source: US State of Rhode Island

    The Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank (RIIB) and the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) are seeking public comment on the proposed State Fiscal Year (SFY) 2026 Intended Use Plan (IUP) for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), which includes the proposed SFY 2026 Project Priority List (PPL).

    The proposed document can be found at the link below, on RIDOH’s DWSRF webpage (https://health.ri.gov/drinking-water-quality/drinking-water-state-revolving-loan-fund), on RIIB’s website (https://www.riib.org/), by calling 401-453-4430 weekdays from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., or by writing to: Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank 275 Promenade Street, Suite 301Providence, RI 02908.

    The proposed SFY 2026 IUP, including the proposed PPL, was published on June 13, 2025. Written comments on the proposed document should be sent to RIIB at the above address or by email to Suh Walker at swalker@riib.org within thirty (30) days of June 13, 2024.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Nuclear energy is a risky investment, but that’s no reason for the UK government to avoid it

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Renaud Foucart, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster University

    Sizewell B on the UK’s Suffolk coast. Nick Beer/Shutterstock

    The UK government’s investment of around £14 billion in a new nuclear power plant marks a big economic shift for the country’s approach to energy.

    The Sizewell C plant in Suffolk will be the second of a new generation of reactors to be built in the country, after Hinkley Point C in Somerset, which is expected to open in 2031.

    French energy firm EDF is building Hinkley and will probably end up building Sizewell too. But it seems that the British government is finally prepared to take on the considerable financial risk which these projects bring.

    Previously it has preferred to look elsewhere. China, notably, has a longstanding appetite for investment in British infrastructure. (Although in 2022, the UK government bought back China’s stakes in Sizewell C amid geopolitical concerns.)

    But the money has to come from somewhere. And after EDF announced it wanted to limit its participation in Sizewell C – and in particular, exposure to the risk of cost overruns – the UK government has stepped in.

    EDF has has already lost a lot of money building Hinkley Point C. When construction began in 2017, costs were estimated at £18 billion.

    At the time, the UK government agreed to pay a set rate for the electricity produced so the French company could recoup its cost and make a reasonable profit. That price was perceived by some as as extremely high and remains higher than current wholesale prices.

    But as construction costs have more than doubled, the project has generated an estimated loss of around £13 billion for EDF. The company hopes to keep construction costs down this time, after similar costs overruns in projects it completed in France and in Finland.

    But now Sizewell C will only progress because the British government has said it will take on almost all of the financial risk.

    In doing so, the UK is not an outlier. In France, China and South Korea, nuclear power plants are built by state-owned companies. In the US, private companies are waiting for public funding to finance Donald Trump’s dream of a nuclear renaissance.

    And perhaps it’s an expense the state should be willing to take on.

    After all, although nuclear reactors (like solar farms and wind turbines) are expensive to set up, once they are built, the cost of producing electricity is very small.

    And if the long-term goal is to eliminate the need for fossil fuels, it means all electricity will need to come from a mixture of renewables, batteries and nuclear. Electricity could then become much cheaper than it is now.

    But building the means of creating this power comes with varying degrees of risk.

    Solar, for example, is not that risky. Panels are usually imported, there are no major safety concerns, and investors can roughly predict how much sun there will be in a typical year.

    For nuclear energy, production is also predictable. But the time it will take to complete construction of a plant and the associated costs are not.

    Part of this is down to choice. UK regulations around nuclear energy are complex and strict, and other countries build faster and cheaper. This may be why globally, solar power is attracting much more investment than other sources of energy.

    Political energy

    But this does not mean governments should ignore the nuclear option. One of the main reasons governments are useful to society is that they can afford to take risks that private investors cannot, and finance long term innovation.

    This in turn can lead to much greater strategic and geopolitical autonomy. While solar panels and batteries are getting ever cheaper, the vast majority of production is in China.

    Domestic production of nuclear allows for greater diversity in energy sourcing, and arguably from some more predictable partners. The key component, uranium, can be found in large quantities in places like Canada or Australia, or directly reused.

    Research suggests that nuclear energy may be particularly suited to feed the needs of digital datacentres and artificial intelligence.

    Meanwhile, the government also hopes to get small nuclear reactors from domestic producer Rolls Royce which could be built in factories at a much more predictable cost. Russia and China have each already built this kind of reactor.

    Plus there’s £2.5 billion for UK research on nuclear fusion, with the potential to deliver electricity on an unprecedented scale.

    No one knows if fusion will ever be possible. It is the kind of uncertain, incredibly expensive projects (with potentially massive returns) that pretty much no private investor would risk looking at.

    But again, it is the kind of bet only governments can take. For nuclear power, for reasons of scale, risk and uncertainty, is mostly a government business – and ultimately a political choice.

    It will take a long time to know if the decision to spend taxpayers’ money on Sizewell C was the right way to respond to the country’s energy needs. But ending reliance on private or foreign financing for nuclear projects could one day be seen as a positive reaction.


    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.


    Renaud Foucart 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.

    ref. Nuclear energy is a risky investment, but that’s no reason for the UK government to avoid it – https://theconversation.com/nuclear-energy-is-a-risky-investment-but-thats-no-reason-for-the-uk-government-to-avoid-it-258645

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Canterbury is Best, Bar None!

    Source: City of Canterbury

    Hosted by Canterbury BID, the third annual Best Bar None awards took place on Wednesday 11 June, recognising the efforts of 33 venues in Canterbury.

    Best Bar None is a national accreditation scheme that recognises excellence in the hospitality industry, promoting safer and more welcoming nights out. Canterbury remains the leading location for accredited venues in Kent.

    The scheme was introduced by Kent Police, Canterbury City Council and Canterbury BID in 2022 and provides businesses with an official, independent, accreditation that shows customers how hard they work to provide a safe and welcoming place to visit while they are out socialising.

    This year’s ceremony took place at The Lounge Bar & Kitchen, with 33 businesses receiving their awards, along with 14 Special Achievements awards for those venues and individuals that have gone above and beyond in keeping our community safe.

    The event was opened by the Lord Mayor of Canterbury, Cllr Keji Moses, District Commander CI Paul Stoner and BID CEO Lisa Carlson.

    Awards for top scoring assessments were given to The Venue, Woody’s, Tokyo Tearoom and The Cricketers, while staff from Club Chemistry, McDonald’s, Boom Battle Bar, The Shakespeare and The Foundry BrewPub also received individual and special awards.

    Awards based on the highest scores achieved in the Best Bar None accreditation process:

    • Best Venue Management: The Venue
    • Best Staff Training & Care: Woody’s
    • Best Customer Safety & Welfare: Tokyo Tearooms
    • Best Customer Safety & Community: The Lounge
    • Best Newcomer: The Cricketers
    • Best Overall Venue: The Venue

    Individual and special awards based on the stories submitted by management about their staff and project work:

    • Special Recognition Award: Thomas Garncarek, Club Chemistry
    • Community Ambassador Award: McDonald’s Team
    • Best Commitment to Safety and Prevention: Chloe Petter, The Shakespeare
    • Best Dedicated Member of Staff: Ricky Richards, Boom Battle Bar
    • Best Diversity and Inclusion Awareness Award: Sarah and Alice from Club Chemistry
    • Best Customer Experience: Kristina Hopkins, The Shakespeare
    • Sustainability Award: The Foundry BrewPub
    • Outstanding Service: PC Danielle Rolfe, Kent Police

    Lisa Carlson, CEO Canterbury BID said: “Canterbury has been the proud receiver of the Purple Flag for 13 years, thanks to the existing partnership working between agencies, police and businesses and we are delighted to see that Best Bar None continues to grow in popularity.

    “When we started three years ago, 19 venues were accredited and we’re now up to 33. The scheme was so successful in its first year that we were part of the Kent-wide team that won the national Best Newcomer award because of the number of venues accredited in the first year (actually, within four months!).

    “Our licensed venues drive economic growth, support jobs and improve the quality of life for residents and visitors. They provide the vibrant cultural atmosphere that well and truly make Canterbury the best night out in Kent – and beyond!”

    PC Danielle Rolfe, Canterbury Licensing Officer, said: “Through the Best Bar None scheme, Kent Police is able to build stronger relationships with local venues. By working closely with businesses, officers are creating a safer local environment, helping to prevent crime and will gain the ability to identify suspects faster.

    “It is a pleasure to work alongside the venues and individuals that are being recognised at the event, and I congratulate them for their contribution to the community.”

    Cabinet member for community safety, Cllr Connie Nolan, said: “Our licensed premises play a vital role in the economic and social fabric of the city and residents and visitors need to know that when they are heading for a night out, they are doing so in well run, responsible and safe businesses.

    “It’s great to see such a range of pubs, clubs and restaurants being recognised in this year’s awards and I congratulate them all.

    “Managing the night-time economy is one big collaborative effort between the businesses and all the authorities and it’s by taking such an approach that Canterbury retains its reputation as a great and safe city to socialise in and spend time in.”

    The 33 venues to receive Best Bar None accreditation were:

    The Ballroom, The Bishops Finger, The Black Griffin, Boom Battle Bar, Canterbury Cathedral, Club Chemistry, The Cherry Tree, Citi Terrace, The Cosy Club, The Cricketers, The Cuban, Curzon Riverside, The Dolphin, The Lady Luck, Las Iguanas, Matches Sports Bar, McDonalds, The Miller’s Arms, Old City Bar, The Foundry BrewPub, The Lounge (Canterbury Christ Church University), The Parrot, The Penny Theatre, The Pound, The Seven Stars, The Shakespeare, Thomas Ingoldsby, Tokyo Tea Rooms, The Unicorn, The Venue (University of Kent), The Westgate Inn, Woody’s (University of Kent), Ye Olde Beverlie.

    Published: 13 June 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Global: Supreme Court ignores precedent instead of overruling it in allowing president to fire officials whom Congress tried to make independent

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Claire B. Wofford, Associate Professor of Political Science, College of Charleston

    Can President Donald Trump — or any president — fire the heads of independent agencies created by Congress? Douglas Rissing/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    What may be one of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most important and far-reaching rulings in decades dropped in late May 2025 in an order that probably didn’t get a second – or even first – glance from most Americans.

    But this not-quite-two-page ruling, as technical and procedural as they come, potentially rewrites a major principle of constitutional law and may restructure the operation of the federal government.

    The case is dry in a way only lawyers could love, but its implications are enormous.

    Public mission, not presidential whims

    The dispute began when President Donald Trump fired two Biden-era officials: Gwynne Wilcox, a member of the National Labor Relations Board, and Cathy Harris, a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board.

    The National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board, like the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Reserve, are among more than 50 independent agencies established by Congress to help the president carry out the law. Though technically located within the executive branch, independent agencies are designed to serve the public at large rather than the president.

    The dispute began when President Donald Trump fired board members of two independent agencies.
    Win McNamee/Getty Images

    To ensure these agencies are devoted to their public mission, not the will or whims of a president, congressional statutes generally permit the president to remove leaders of these agencies only for “good cause.” Malfeasance in office, neglect of duty, or inefficiency generally constitute “good cause.”

    Other executive branch agencies, such as the FBI, Food and Drug Administration and Department of Homeland Security are entirely under presidential command – if he wants their leaders out, out they go. But independent agencies, in existence since the late 19th century, are to carry out congressional policy free from the president’s purview and his political pressure.

    Because independent agencies are creatures of Congress housed within the executive branch, there is long-standing disagreement among scholars about just how much power the president should have over them.

    Limiting Congress, empowering the president

    In the two firings, there was agreement that Trump had violated the relevant statute by firing Wilcox and Harris without “good cause.”

    He justified Wilcox’s removal, in part, because she did not share his policy preferences. For Harris, he gave no reason at all.

    But the bigger issue was whether the law itself was constitutional: Could Congress limit why or how a president can remove employees of the executive branch?

    The root of the problem lies within the Constitution. Although Article 2 specifically gives the president the power to “appoint” certain federal officials, it says nothing about the power to fire -– or “remove” – them.

    Conservative legal scholars propose, under what’s called the “unitary executive theory,” that because the president “is” the executive branch, he has complete authority, including removal, over all who serve within it. Only with the unfettered ability to fire anyone who serves under him can the president fulfill his constitutionally mandated duty to ensure that “the Laws be faithfully executed.”

    Opponents have countered that this ignores fundamental aspects of our constitutional framework: the framers’ devotion to checks and balances, their aversion toward monarchical, kinglike rule, and their determination to put policymaking in the hands of Congress.

    These questions are not new.

    The Supreme Court first took up the issue in 1926 in Myers v. United States, when Chief Justice – and former president – William Howard Taft held that Congress could not limit the president’s ability to fire an Oregon postmaster, writing that “the power to remove inferior executive officers … is an incident of the power to appoint them.”

    Less than a decade later, however, the court ruled in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States that the Constitution did not grant the president an “illimitable power of removal,” at least over certain types of officials. This included the head of the Federal Trade Commission, whose firing by President Franklin Roosevelt had sparked the case.

    Humphrey’s Executor stood basically untouched for decades, until Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito – both of whom had previously served in the executive branch – were appointed.

    With a now-solid conservative majority, the Supreme Court invalidated restrictions on the president’s ability to remove members of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in 2009.

    Two years after the arrival of fellow executive branch alumnus Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, the court struck down the “good cause” removal restriction for the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

    Rather than explicitly overrule Humphrey’s Executor, however, the justices declared that these agencies were factually distinct from the Federal Trade Commission – leaders of one were protected by a “two-layer” removal system and the other because it was run by a single individual, not a multimember board.

    ‘Massive change in the law’

    Because Humphrey’s Executor was still good law, and the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board were structured like the Federal Trade Commission, district courts in 2025 initially held that the firings of Wilcox and Harris were unlawful.

    On April 9, 2025, Trump filed an emergency appeal with the Supreme Court, asking it to put the district court decisions on hold. On May 22, the Supreme Court granted that request, at least while the cases proceed through the lower courts.

    The court did not decide on the constitutionality of the removal statute, but the ruling is nonetheless a major victory for Trump. He can now fire not only Wilcox and Harris but also potentially the heads of any independent agency. Low-level civil servants may also be at risk.

    In the unsigned order, the high court echoed unitary executive theory, stating, “Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the Presidents … he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions.” It simply ignored Humphrey’s Executor altogether, leaving its value as precedent unclear.

    The Supreme Court also said that the holding did not apply to the Federal Reserve Board. That “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity” would remain free from executive control via removal.

    Such an explicit carve-out in legal doctrine is striking but responds directly to claims made by litigants and political commentators of the dire economic consequences that could result were the president to have free rein over the Federal Reserve’s chairman.

    In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan blasted the majority for allowing the president to overrule Humphrey’s Executor “by fiat,” a result made even worse because the court had done so via the so-called shadow docket, in the absence of full briefing or oral argument. Such “short-circuiting” of the “usual deliberative process” is, she wrote, a wholly inappropriate way to make a “massive change in the law.”

    After the appointments of conservatives John Roberts, left, and Samuel Alito, the Supreme Court in 2009 invalidated restrictions on the president’s ability to remove members of an independent agency.
    Alex Wong/Getty Images

    The shadow of Humphrey’s Executor

    What happens now?

    The National Labor Relations Board is paralyzed, and the Merit Systems Protection Board is somewhat hamstrung, with both lacking the quorum necessary to act. Cases about the firing of Harris, Wilcox and multiple other officials will bedevil lower courts as they try to figure out whether Humphrey’s Executor still stands, even as a shadow of its former self.

    Trump aims to continue axing federal employees, even as the administration struggles to rehire others.

    And, already asked again to make major legal change on its emergency docket, the Supreme Court will need to determine whether such change warrants more than the few paragraphs of explanation it gave in the ruling on the Wilcox and Harris firings.

    If, as seems likely, the court ultimately overturns Humphrey’s Executor, Kagan’s dissent serves as a warning voiced by others as well: A decision that allows the president to have total control over the heads of more than 50 independent agencies – agencies that pursue the public interest in areas from financial regulation to the environment, to nuclear safety – could shift their focus from serving the public to pleasing the president, profoundly affecting the lives of many Americans.

    In 2022, I donated $20 to ActBlue.

    ref. Supreme Court ignores precedent instead of overruling it in allowing president to fire officials whom Congress tried to make independent – https://theconversation.com/supreme-court-ignores-precedent-instead-of-overruling-it-in-allowing-president-to-fire-officials-whom-congress-tried-to-make-independent-257784

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Sly Stone turned isolation into inspiration, forging a path for a generation of music-makers

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jose Valentino Ruiz, Associate Professsor of Music Business and Entrepreneurship, University of Florida

    The charismatic front man of Sly and the Family Stone died on June 9, 2025, at the age of 82. Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

    In the fall of 1971, Sly and the Family Stone’s “There’s a Riot Goin’ On” landed like a quiet revolution. After two years of silence following the band’s mainstream success, fans expected more feel-good funk from the ensemble.

    What they got instead was something murkier and more fractured, yet deeply intimate and experimental. This was not just an album; it was the sound of a restless mind rebuilding music from the inside out.

    At the center of it all was front man Sly Stone.

    Long before the home studio became an industry norm, Stone, who died on June 9, 2025, turned the studio into both a sanctuary and an instrument. And long before sampling defined the sound of hip-hop, he was using tape and machine rhythms to deconstruct existing songs to cobble together new ones.

    As someone who spends much of their time working on remote recording and audio production – from building full arrangements solo to collaborating digitally across continents – I’m deeply indebted to Sly Stone’s approach to making music.

    He was among the first major artists to fully embrace the recording environment as a space to compose rather than perform. Every reverb bounce, every drum machine tick, every overdubbed breath became part of the writing process.

    From studio rat to bedroom producer

    Sly and the Family Stone’s early albums – including “Dance to the Music” and “Stand!” – were recorded at top-tier facilities like CBS Studios in Los Angeles under the technical guidance of engineers such as Don Puluse and with oversight from producer David Rubinson.

    These sessions yielded bright, radio-friendly tracks that emphasized tight horn sections, group vocals and a polished sound. Producers also prized the energy of live performance, so the full band would record together in real time.

    But by the early 1970s, Stone was burnt out. The dual pressures of fame and industry demands were becoming too much. Struggling with cocaine and PCP addiction, he’d grown increasingly distrustful of bandmates, label executives and even his friends.

    So he decided to retreat to his hillside mansion in Bel Air, California, transforming his home into a musical bunker. Inside, he could work on his own terms: isolated and erratic, but free.

    Stone relied heavily on overdubbing when recording music from his home.
    Richard McCaffrey/Michael Ochs Archives via Getty Images

    Without a full band present, Stone became a one-man ensemble. He leaned heavily into overdubbing – recording one instrument at a time and building his songs from fragments. Using multiple tape machines, he’d layer each part onto previous takes.

    The resulting album, “There’s a Riot Goin’ On,” was like nothing he’d previously recorded. It sounds murky, jagged and disjointed. But it’s also deeply intentional, as if every imperfection was part of the design.

    In “The Poetics of Rock,” musicologist Albin Zak describes this “composerly” approach to production, where recording itself becomes a form of writing, not just documentation. Stone’s process for “There’s a Riot Goin’ On” reflects this mindset: Each overdub, rhythm loop and sonic imperfection functions more like a brushstroke than a performance.

    Automating the groove

    A key part of Stone’s tool kit was the Maestro Rhythm King, a preset drum machine he used extensively.

    It wasn’t the first rhythm box on the market. But Stone’s use of it was arguably the first time such a machine shaped the entire aesthetic of a mainstream album. The drum parts on his track “Family Affair,” for example, don’t swing – they tick. What might have been viewed as soulless became its own kind of soul.

    This early embrace of mechanical rhythm prefigured what would later become a foundation of hip-hop and electronic music. In his book “Dawn of the DAW,” music technology scholar Adam Patrick Bell calls this shift “a redefinition of groove,” noting how drum machines like the Rhythm King encouraged musicians to rethink their songwriting process, building tracks in shorter, repeatable sections while emphasizing steady, looped rhythms rather than free-flowing performances.

    Though samplers wouldn’t emerge until years later, Stone’s work already contained that repetition, layering and loop-based construction that would become characteristic of the practice.

    He recorded his own parts the way future DJs would splice records – isolated, reshuffled, rhythmically obsessed. His overdubbed bass lines, keyboard vamps and vocal murmurs often sounded like puzzle pieces from other songs.

    Music scholar Will Fulton, in his study of Black studio innovation, notes how producers like Stone helped pioneer a fragment-based approach to music-making that would become central to hip-hop’s DNA. Stone’s process anticipated the mentality that a song isn’t necessarily something written top to bottom, but something assembled, brick by brick, from what’s available.

    Perhaps not surprisingly, Stone’s tracks have been sampled relentlessly. In “Bring That Beat Back,” music critic Nate Patrin identifies Stone as one of the most sample-friendly artists of the 1970s – not because of his commercial hits, but because of how much sonic space he left in his tracks: the open-ended grooves, unusual textures and slippery emotional tone.

    You can hear his sounds in famous tracks such as 2Pac’s “If My Homie Calls,” which samples “Sing a Simple Song”; A Tribe Called Quest’s “The Jam,” which draws from “Family Affair”; and De La Soul’s “Plug Tunin’,” which flips “You Can Make It If You Try.”

    The studio as instrument

    While Sly’s approach was groundbreaking, he wasn’t entirely alone. Around the same time, artists such as Brian Wilson and The Rolling Stones were experimenting with home and nontraditional recording environments – Wilson famously retreating to his home studio during “Pet Sounds,” and the Stones tracking “Exile on Main St.” in a French villa.

    Yet in the world of Black music, production remained largely centralized in institutionally controlled studio systems such as Motown in Detroit and Stax in Memphis, where sound was tightly managed by in-house producers and engineers. In that context, Stone’s decision to isolate, self-produce and dismantle the standard workflow was more than a technical choice: It was a radical act of autonomy.

    The rise of home recording didn’t just change who could make music. It changed what music felt like. It made music more internal, iterative and intimate.

    Sly Stone helped invent that feeling.

    It’s easy to hear “There’s a Riot Goin’ On” as murky or uneven. The mix is dense with tape hiss, drum machines drift in and out of sync, and vocals often feel buried or half-whispered.

    But it’s also, in a way, prophetic.

    It anticipated the aesthetics of bedroom pop, the cut-and-paste style of modern music software, the shuffle of playlists and the recycling of sounds that defines sample culture. It showed that a groove didn’t need to be spontaneous to be soulful, and that solitude could be a powerful creative tool, not a limitation.

    In my own practice, I often record alone, passing files back and forth, building from templates and mapping rhythm to grid – as do millions of musical artists who compose tracks from their bedrooms, closets and garages.

    Half a century ago, a funk pioneer led the way. I think it’s safe to say that Sly Stone quietly changed the process of making music forever – and in the funkiest way possible.

    Jose Valentino Ruiz 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.

    ref. Sly Stone turned isolation into inspiration, forging a path for a generation of music-makers – https://theconversation.com/sly-stone-turned-isolation-into-inspiration-forging-a-path-for-a-generation-of-music-makers-258659

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: UNOC3: “Fine words must now translate into action”, Greenpeace comment

    Source: Greenpeace Statement –

    Nice, France, The UN Ocean Conference (UNOC) concludes today with significant progress made towards the ratification of the High Seas Treaty and a strong statement on a new plastics treaty signed by 95 governments. Once ratified, it will be the only legal tool that can create protected areas in international waters, making it fundamental to protecting 30% of the world’s oceans by 2030. 50 countries, plus the European Union, have now ratified the Treaty.

    Deep sea mining rose up the agenda in the conference debates, demonstrating the urgency of opposing this industry. The expectation from civil society and a large group of states, including both co-hosts of UNOC, was that governments would make progress towards stopping deep sea mining in Nice. UN Secretary General Guterres said the deep sea should not become the wild west. French President Macron said a deep sea mining moratorium is an international necessity. Four new countries pledged their support for a moratorium at UNOC bringing the total to 37. Attention now turns to what actions governments will take in July to stop this industry from starting.

    Megan Randles, Greenpeace Head of Delegation regarding the High Seas Treaty and progress towards stopping deep sea mining said: “High Seas Treaty ratification is within touching distance, but the progress made here in Nice feels hollow as this UN Ocean Conference ends without more tangible commitments to stopping deep sea mining. 

    “We’ve heard lots of fine words here in Nice, but these need to turn into tangible action. Countries must be brave, stand up for global cooperation and make history by stopping deep sea mining this year. They can do this by committing to a moratorium on deep sea mining at next month’s International Seabed Authority meeting. We applaud those who have already taken a stand, and urge all others to be on the right side of history by stopping deep sea mining.”

    Following this UNOC, attention now turns to the International Seabed Authority (ISA) meetings in July. In the face of The Metals Company teaming up with Trump to mine the global oceans, the upcoming ISA provides a space where governments can come together to defend the deep ocean by adopting a moratorium to stop this destructive industry.

    Negotiations on a Global Plastics Treaty resume in August. 

    John Hocevar, Oceans Campaign Director, Greenpeace USA said: “The majority of countries have spoken when they signed on to the Nice Call for an Ambitious Plastics Treaty that they want an agreement that will reduce plastic production. Now, as we end the UN Ocean Conference and head on to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations in Geneva this August, they must act. The world cannot afford a weak treaty dictated by oil-soaked obstructionists. 

    “The ambitious majority must rise to this moment, firmly hold the line and ensure that we will have a Global Plastic Treaty that cuts plastic production, protects human health, and delivers justice for Indigenous Peoples and communities on the frontlines. Governments need to show that multilateralism still works for people and the planet, not the profits of a greedy few.”

    Nichanan Thantanwit, Project Leader, Ocean Justice Project said: “Coastal and Indigenous communities, including small-scale fishers, have protected the ocean for generations. Now they are being pushed aside by industries driving ecological collapse and human rights violations. 

    “As the UN Ocean Conference ends, governments must recognise small-scale fishers and Indigenous Peoples as rights-holders, secure their access and role in marine governance, and stop destructive practices such as bottom trawling and harmful aquaculture. There is no ocean protection without the people who have protected it all along.”

    The anticipated Nice Ocean Action Plan, which consists of a political declaration and a series of voluntary commitments, will be announced later today at the end of the conference. None will be legally binding, so governments need to act strongly during the next ISA meeting in July and at plastic treaty negotiations in August. 

    ENDS

    Photos and Video available in the Greenpeace Media Library.

    Contacts:

    James Hanson, Head of Communications, Greenpeace Protect the Oceans campaign, +44 7801 212 994, [email protected] 

    Magali Rubino, Global Media Lead, Greenpeace Protect the Oceans campaign, +33 7 78 41 78 78, [email protected] 

    Greenpeace International Press Desk: +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), [email protected]

    MIL OSI NGO

  • MIL-OSI Global: House tax-and-spending bill and other Trump administration changes could make millions of people lose their health insurance coverage

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Simon F. Haeder, Associate Professor of Public Health, Texas A&M University

    People who don’t have health insurance coverage often delay or simply don’t get the medical care they need. Jacob Wackerhausen/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    President Donald Trump has promised not to cut Medicaid many times over the past decade, including in the tax-and-spending legislative package he has made a top priority in his second administration.

    But several provisions in the bill, which the House of Representatives passed in a largely party-line 215-214 vote in May 2025, could cause millions of Americans enrolled in Medicaid to lose their health insurance coverage, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Medicaid is funded jointly by the federal government and the states. The program provides nearly 80 million Americans, most of whom are low-income or have disabilities, with health insurance.

    The legislation, which advances Trump’s agenda, faces a tough battle in the Senate despite the Republican Party majority in that chamber. Several GOP senators have either said they oppose it or have expressed strong reservations for a variety of reasons, including the trillions of dollars the package would add to the U.S. government’s debt.

    As a scholar who researches access to health care, I am concerned about the possibility that millions of people will lose their health insurance coverage should this bill become law. In many cases, that could occur due to new bureaucratic obstacles the bill would introduce.

    Proposed policy changes and the uninsured

    About 25.3 million Americans lacked insurance in 2023, down sharply from 46.5 million in 2010. Most of this 46% decline occurred because of the Affordable Care Act of 2010.

    The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan agency that provides evidence-supported information to Congress, estimates that 10.9 million Americans would lose their health insurance by 2034 if the House of Representatives’ version of that package were to become law.

    Of these, as many as 7.8 million would lose access to Medicaid.

    Another 2.1 million people who the CBO estimates would end up uninsured are Americans who today have coverage they bought in the marketplaces that the Affordable Care Act created.

    In addition to the measures in the tax-and-spending bill, other changes are looming. These include the expiration of some ACA-related measures adopted in 2021 that Trump does not intend to renew, and new regulations. All told, the number of Americans losing their health insurance by 2034 could total 16 million, according to the CBO.

    Other estimates suggest that the number of Americans losing their coverage could run even higher.

    Obstructing Medicaid expansion

    The House bill would reduce incentives the federal government provides states to expand their Medicaid programs as part of the ACA.

    Eliminating these incentives would make it even less likely that Texas and the other nine states that still have not expanded Medicaid eligibility would do so in the future.

    The bill would also make it harder for states to come up with their share of Medicaid funding by limiting “provider taxes.” These taxes are charged to hospitals, doctors and other medical providers. The revenue they raise help pay for the state’s share of Medicaid costs.

    And the legislative package would also reduce federal funding to cover Medicaid costs in states that provide coverage to unauthorized immigrants using only their own funds. Threatened with billions in losses, the states that do this are unlikely to maintain these programs. In California alone, this would jeopardize the coverage of 1.6 million of its residents.

    Losing Medicaid coverage may leave millions of low-income Americans without insurance coverage, with no affordable alternatives for health care.

    A supporter of the Affordable Care Act stands in front of the Supreme Court building on Nov. 10, 2020.
    Samuel Corum/Getty Images

    Making Medicaid enrollment more complicated

    Other proposed changes in the House bill would indirectly cut Medicaid coverage by forcing people to deal with more red tape to get or keep it.

    This would happen primarily through the introduction of “work requirements” for Medicaid coverage. When enrolled in the program, applicants who are between 19 and 64 years old would need to certify they are working at least 80 hours a month or spending that much time engaged in comparable activities, such as community service.

    Work requirements specifically target people eligible for Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of the program. They tend to have slightly higher incomes than the other people eligible for this benefit.

    Arkansas gave Medicaid work requirements a try during the first Trump administration. Researchers who studied what happened found that 1 in 4 of the Arkansans enrolled in Medicaid affected by the policy lost their health insurance coverage. They also found that in most cases, this occurred because of bureaucratic obstacles, and that the policy didn’t lead to more people getting jobs.

    By some estimates, the work requirements provision alone would lead to close to 5 million people of the 7.8 million being denied Medicaid coverage.

    At the same time, the bill would increase how often Medicaid beneficiaries have to reapply to the program to keep their coverage from once every 12 months to twice a year.

    It also would delay or reverse several policies that made it easier for Americans to enroll in Medicaid and maintain their coverage. Many of those who aren’t kicked out would also face either new or higher co-payments for appointments and procedures – restricting their access to health care, even if they don’t wind up without insurance.

    There is ample evidence that obstacles like these make it hard to remain enrolled in safety net programs. Historically, the people who are most likely to lose their benefits are low-income, people of color or immigrants who do not speak English well.

    President Barack Obama signs the Affordable Care Act during a ceremony with congressional Democrats on March 23, 2010.
    Win McNamee/Getty Images

    Costlier Marketplace policies and more barriers

    The bill would also affect the more than 24 million Americans who get health insurance through Affordable Care Act Marketplace plans.

    Changes in the House version of the bill would make it harder to get this coverage. This includes reducing the time Americans have to enroll in plans and eliminating certain subsidies. It also makes the enrollment process more complicated.

    Combined with other changes the Trump administration has made, experts expect Marketplace premiums to skyrocket.

    The Congressional Budget Office expects more than 2 million beneficiaries to lose coverage due to these new policies.

    More coverage losses possible

    Americans buying their own insurance on the ACA marketplaces may also face higher premiums.

    Increased subsidies in place since 2021 are set to expire at the end of the year. Combined with Trump regulatory decisions, this may lead to more than 5 million Americans losing coverage – whether or not the GOP’s tax-and-spending package is enacted.

    The effects of the bill would also be compounded by further changes by individual states. This could include the introduction of monthly premiums that people with Medicaid coverage would have to pay, in Indiana and other states.

    Some states may also reduce eligibility for certain groups or cover fewer services, as states seek to reduce their Medicaid costs.

    And some states, including Iowa and Utah, are already pursuing work requirements on their own whether or not they become mandatory across the nation.

    If fewer Americans have health insurance due to changes the Trump administration is making and the policies embedded in the pending tax-and-spending legislative package, the health of millions of people could get worse due to forgone care. And at the same time, their medical debts could grow larger.

    Dr. Simon F. Haeder has previously received funding from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Pennsylvania Insurance Department, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation for unrelated projects.

    ref. House tax-and-spending bill and other Trump administration changes could make millions of people lose their health insurance coverage – https://theconversation.com/house-tax-and-spending-bill-and-other-trump-administration-changes-could-make-millions-of-people-lose-their-health-insurance-coverage-257529

    MIL OSI – Global Reports