NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Education

  • MIL-OSI USA: Duckworth, Durbin Help Reintroduce Bill to Help Families Get the Affordable Child Care They Need

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Tammy Duckworth
    July 17, 2025
    [WASHINGTON, D.C.] – U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) joined U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), U.S. Representative Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA-03) and their colleagues in reintroducing the Child Care for Working Families Act, comprehensive legislation to ensure families across America can find and afford the high-quality child care they need.
    “For most working parents, affordable child care isn’t a luxury—it’s a necessity,” said Duckworth. “Donald Trump ran on a promise to lower costs for working families—and yet, he and Republicans are prioritizing tax breaks to their billionaire donors, leaving families to fend for themselves. If Republicans really cared about lowering costs and supporting middle-class families, they’d help us pass this legislation to help solve our child care shortage and make quality, affordable care more accessible to every family who needs it.”
    “Working families in Illinois deserve high-quality, affordable, and reliable child care, but this necessity has become an out-of-reach luxury. While the cost of care continues to rise, President Trump has held up critical government funding and dished out tax breaks for billionaires rather than address the child care crisis,” said Durbin. “It’s time working families had better options. Under the Child Care for Working Families Act, parents would have better access to affordable child care, including pre-kindergarten programs, and caregivers would earn the living wages they deserve.”
    As President Trump and Republicans in Congress choose to spend trillions on new tax cuts for billionaires and the biggest corporations, kick Americans off their health care, cut kids off from nutrition assistance and raise costs on everyday essentials for working families, Democrats in Congress are continuing their push to help working people make ends meet—including by tackling the childcare crisis.
    The cost of child care nationwide continues to rise—and far from helping tackle it, President Trump is exacerbating the affordability crisis. The average cost of child care is now $13,128—a 29% increase since 2020 that outpaces inflation. In 49 states and the District of Columbia, the average annual costs of child care for two children exceed median rent—and in 41 states and the District of Columbia, the cost of care for one infant exceeds in-state university tuition. The crisis costs the U.S. economy over $100 billion each year. Nonetheless, President Trump has gutted oversight of and support for the federal childcare office, held up childcare funding to states, held up Head Start funding and now created massive holes in states’ budgets with the “Big Beautiful Bill’s” cuts to Medicaid and SNAP—which may well force states to pare back on their own investments in child care. While two-thirds of Americans oppose Republicans’ Big Beautiful Betrayal that President Trump signed into law earlier this month, over three-quarters of Americans support increased investment to help families afford child care.
    The Child Care for Working Families Act would tackle the childcare crisis head-on: ensuring families can afford the child care they need, expanding access to more high-quality options, stabilizing the child care sector and helping ensure child care workers taking care of our nation’s kids are paid livable wages. The legislation would also dramatically expand access to pre-K and support full-day, full-year Head Start programs and increase wages for Head Start workers. Under the legislation, typical family in America will pay no more than $15 a day for child care—with many families paying nothing at all—and no eligible family will pay more than 7% of their income on child care.
    The Child Care for Working Families Act would help:
    Make child care affordable for working families.
    The typical family earning the state median income would pay less than $15 a day for child care.
    No working family would pay more than seven percent of their income on child care.
    Families earning below 85% of state median income would pay nothing at all for child care.
    If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts or Head Start agencies.

    Improve the quality and supply of child care for all children and expand families’ child care options by:

    Addressing childcare deserts by providing grants to help open new childcare providers in underserved communities.
    Providing grants to cover start-up and licensing costs to help establish new providers.
    Increasing childcare options for children who receive care during non-traditional hours.
    Supporting child care for children who are dual-language learners, children who are experiencing homelessness and children in foster care.

    Support higher wages for child care workers.

    Childcare workers would be paid a living wage and achieve parity with elementary school teachers who have similar credentials and experience.
    Childcare subsidies would cover the cost of providing high-quality care.

    Dramatically expand access to high-quality pre-K.

    States would receive funding to establish and expand a mixed-delivery system of high-quality preschool programs for 3- and 4-year-olds.
    States must prioritize establishing and expanding universal local preschool programs within and across high-need communities.
    If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts or Head Start agencies.

    Better support Head Start programs by providing the funding necessary to offer full-day, full-year programming and increasing wages for Head Start workers.
    Along with Duckworth, Durbin and Murray, the legislation is cosponsored by 41 additional U.S. Senators—the most in the bill’s history: U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), John Fetterman (D-PA), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Ron Wyden (D-OR).
    The full text of the bill is available on Senator Duckworth’s website.
    – 30 –

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Pressley Condemns Dangerous SCOTUS Ruling Attacking Access to Healthcare for Medicaid Patients

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07)

    Medina v. Planned Parenthood Ruling Will Rob Patients of their Lives, Put Essential Healthcare Further Out of Reach for Millions

    Ruling Will Cut Off Medicaid Funding, Undermine Planned Parenthood Providing Critical Healthcare Services, Including Cancer Screenings, Birth Control, and Preventative Care

    WASHINGTON – Today, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Co-Chair of the Reproductive Freedom Caucus, issued the following statement on the harmful Medina v. Planned Parenthood ruling, the Supreme Court’s decision to allow South Carolina to bar Medicaid patients from receiving healthcare services at Planned Parenthood. The decision allows states to ban the organization from getting Medicaid reimbursements for cancer screenings, wellness checks, pre-natal care, and other basic medical services.

    “This cruel, unjust, and political ruling by this far-right majority court is nothing short of damning. On the very week that we marked the somber anniversary of the Supreme Court ripping away our right to abortion care, the Court issued another devastating blow that will push basic, essential healthcare further out of reach for millions.

    “Planned Parenthood is often folks’ only local option for essential care, including cancer screenings, wellness-checks, and pre-natal care. By cutting off Medicaid funding for this routine healthcare, the Court is going to rob patients of their lives, and will be especially harmful for Black women, people of color, low-income folks, the LGBTQIA community, and those in rural and underserved communities.

    “We are witnessing the most sweeping attempt yet to dismantle Medicaid and rip away essential healthcare as the Republicans try to ram their Big Ugly Bill through the Senate on the heels of this court ruling. Trump and Republicans are attacking our healthcare at every level of government—and today the Supreme Court majority linked arms to advance their cruel agenda. It’s absolutely shameful.”

    “We refuse to accept their harmful agenda as an inevitability. Planned Parenthood has long provided quality, compassionate care to all and we will always stand with them. We refuse to cede to such unconscionable attacks on the basic right to healthcare.”

    This week, in the wake of the third anniversary of the Dobbs decision, Congresswoman Pressley has spent the week convening leaders and impacted families, renewing her calls for comprehensive legislation to protect abortion care, and uplifting the experiences of people impacted by cruel abortion bans and denials of essential medical care.

    Congresswoman Pressley has been outspoken in demanding justice for Adriana Smith, a 30-year-old pregnant mother who was declared brain dead in February and was forced to remain on life support due to Georgia’s abortion ban. Rep. Pressley delivered an impassioned floor speech in which she underscored that Adriana’s case is far too common in the unjust history of denying Black women their dignity, humanity, and right to bodily autonomy – and that GOP abortion bans such as Georgia’s deepen this pain and bar critical healthcare freedom. Last week, Rep. Pressley issued a statement after Adriana’s infant son Chance was delivered via emergency Cesarean section and Adriana was taken off life support.

    Throughout her time in Congress, Rep. Pressley has fought persistently to protect fundamental reproductive and sexual healthcare rights. 

    • On the first anniversary of the Dobbs decision, Rep. Pressley introduced the Abortion Justice Act, sweeping, intersectional legislation to address access to abortion care and put forth a comprehensive vision of a just America where abortion care is readily available—without stigma, shame or systemic barriers—for all who seek it, regardless of zip code, immigration status, income, or background.
    • Rep. Pressley is a lead co-sponsor of the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA), bicameral federal legislation to guarantee equal access to abortion care, everywhere. 
    • Rep. Pressley is also a lead co-sponsor of the EACH Act, bold legislation to repeal the Hyde Amendment and help guarantee abortion coverage—regardless of how a patient gets their health insurance.
    • Shortly before the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, Rep. Pressley led a group of her Black women colleagues in writing to President Biden urging him to declare a public health emergency amid the unprecedented threats to abortion rights nationwide. 
    • Rep. Pressley condemned the Supreme Court’s leaked draft opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade., and implored the Senate to protect abortion rights and slammed the white supremacist roots of anti-abortion efforts.
    • In October 2024, Rep. Pressley issued a statement on Josseli Barnica, who died on Sept. 3, 2021 after being denied emergency abortion care in Texas as she suffered a miscarriage.
    • In September 2024, in a House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee Hearing, Rep. Pressley highlighted the harmful and deadly impact of abortion bans in America to date, and outlined in detail the shameful circumstances under which Amber Nicole Thurman died after being denied necessary abortion care in Georgia.
    • In June 2024, Rep. Pressley issued a statement on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Idaho v. United States; Moyle v. United States – the case about whether emergency abortion care is included under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). 
    • In May 2024, Rep. Pressley issued a statement on a Louisiana bill that would classify medication abortion drugs mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled substances. 
    • In April 2024, at a House Oversight Committee hearing, Rep. Pressley played “Fact or Fiction” with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Robert Califf to emphasize the safety and efficacy of medication abortion drug mifepristone.
    • In August 2023, Rep. Pressley issued a statement on the Fifth Circuit Court decision in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA.
    • In July 2023, Rep. Pressley, alongside Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Rep. Cori Bush (MO-01), and Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), reintroduced the Reproductive Health Care Accessibility Act, legislation to help people with disabilities—who face discrimination and extra barriers when seeking care—get better access to reproductive healthcare and the informed care they need to control their own reproductive lives.
    • In July 2023, Rep. Pressley applauded the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval of over-the-counter birth control.
    • In May 2023, Rep. Pressley applauded the FDA Advisory Committee’s unanimous, 17-0 vote to recommend the approval of the first-ever application for over-the-counter birth control. She and Senator Murray also held a press conference applauding the decision and urging the FDA to approval over-the-counter birth control without delay.
    • In May 2023, Rep. Pressley, along with Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) and Ami Bera, MD (CA-06) and Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), reintroduced their bicameral Affordability is Access Act to ensure that once the FDA determines an over-the-counter birth control option to be safe, insurers fully cover over-the-counter birth control without any fees or out-of-pocket costs.
    • In April 2023, Rep. Pressley issued a statement condemning the Texas court ruling on mifepristone, and discussed the Texas case in a recent floor speech in which she affirmed medication abortion as routine medical care and access to mifepristone as essential. She later joined Governor Maura Healey, Senator Elizabth Warren (D-MA), and local leaders in announcing action to protect Mifepristone in Massachusetts.
    • In March 2023, Rep. Pressley, along with Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Reps. Schakowsky, Lee, DeGette, Torres and Strickland, reintroduced the Abortion is Healthcare Everywhere Act harmful and discriminatory Helms Amendment and expand abortion access globally.
    • In March 2023, Rep. Pressley and Senator Hirono led their colleagues in reintroducing a bicameral congressional resolution honoring abortion providers and clinic staff. 
    • In March 2023, Rep. Pressley delivered a speech in which she discussed the pending court case in Texas, which aims to restrict access to medication abortion across the entire nation. In her remarks, Rep. Pressley affirmed medication abortion as routine medical care, and accessibility to the abortion pill mifepristone as essential.
    • In September 2021, Rep. Pressley issued a statement condemning the Supreme Court’s inaction on SB-8, Texas’ restrictive abortion law. Later that month, she participated in a House Oversight Committee hearing to examine the threat posed by abortion bans and underscored the urgency of the Senate passing the Women’s Health Protection Act. 
    • In April 2021, Rep. Pressley, along with Congresswomen Barbara Lee (CA-13), Diana DeGette (CO-01) and Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), led a group of 131 Democratic members in reintroducing the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Act or the EACH Act, which would repeal the Hyde Amendment and ensure that all people, regardless of income, insurance or zip code, can make personal reproductive healthcare decisions without interference from politicians. She re-Introduced the legislation In January 2023.
    • Rep. Pressley has led calls in Congress for the FDA to remove medically unnecessary restrictions on the medication abortion drug mifepristone, and applauded the FDA’s action in January 2023 to allow retail pharmacies to dispense abortion medication pills.
    • As Chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus’s Abortion Rights and Access Task Force, Congresswoman Pressley has led the fight to repeal the Hyde Amendments from annual Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies appropriations bills and in July 2020 published a Medium post on the importance of doing so. She applauded the removal of the Hyde Amendment in President Biden’s FY2022 budget.
    • In May 2020, she led more than 155 Members of Congress in calling on House Democratic leadership to ensure that any future COVID-19 relief packages rejected Republican efforts to use the public health crisis to diminish abortion access.
    • In August 2021, Rep. Pressley, Oversight Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney, and Pro-Choice Caucus Co-Chairs Reps. Diana DeGette and Barbara Lee led more than 70 of their House Democratic colleagues in introducing a resolution in support of equitable, science-based policies governing access to medication abortion care. 
    • In January 2023, Rep. Pressley introduced a resolution to condemn all forms of political violence in the U.S., regardless of its target or intent. That same day, she delivered a powerful speech on the House floor slamming Republicans’ harmful, misleading anti-abortion resolution.
    • In September 2022, Rep. Pressley hosted U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra at the Codman Square Health Center in Dorchester for a convening on their work to address the Black maternal health crisis and the criminalization of abortion care in states across the nation following the harmful U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. 
    • In May 2019, she led more than 100 colleagues in introducing H.Con.Res.40, a resolution reaffirming the House of Representative’s support for Roe v. Wade.
    • In June 2019, Rep. Pressley introduced H.R. 3296, the Affordability is Access Act, to make oral contraception available without a prescription. 
    • In September 2016, as a member of the Boston City Council, Pressley championed a resolution calling on Congress and President Obama to repeal the Hyde Amendment and reinstate insurance coverage for abortion services.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Separated men are nearly 5 times more likely to take their lives than married men

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Wilson, Research Fellow and PhD Candidate in Men’s Mental Health, The University of Melbourne

    Breakups hurt. Emotional and psychological distress are common when intimate relationships break down. For some people, this distress can be so overwhelming that it leads to suicidal thoughts and behaviours.

    This problem seems especially the case for men. Intimate partner problems including breakups, separation and divorce feature in the paths to suicide among one in three Australian men aged 25 to 44 who end their lives.

    Men account for three in every four suicides in many nations worldwide, including Australia. So improving our understanding of links between relationship breakdown and men’s suicide risk has life-saving potential.

    Our research, published today, is the first large-scale review of the evidence to focus on understanding men’s risk of suicide after a breakup. We found separated men were nearly five times more likely to die by suicide compared to married men.

    What did we find?

    We brought together findings from 75 studies across 30 countries worldwide, involving more than 106 million men.

    We focused on understanding why relationship breakdown can lead to suicide in men, and which men are most at risk. We might not be able to prevent breakups from happening, but we can promote healthy adjustment to the stress of relationship breakdown to try and prevent suicide.

    Overall, we found divorced men were 2.8 times more likely to take their lives than married men.

    For separated men, the risk was much higher. We found that separated men were 4.8 times more likely to die by suicide than married men.

    Most strikingly, we found separated men under 35 years of age had nearly nine times greater odds of suicide than married men of the same age.

    The short-term period after relationship breakdown therefore appears particularly risky for men’s mental health.

    What are these men feeling?

    Some men’s difficulties regulating the intense emotional stress of relationship breakdown can play a role in their suicide risk. For some men, the emotional pain tied to separation – deep sadness, shame, guilt, anxiety and loss – can be so intense it feels never-ending.

    Many men are raised in a culture of masculinity that often encourages them to suppress or withdraw from their emotions in times of intense stress.

    Some men also experience difficulties understanding or interpreting their emotions, which can create challenges in knowing how to respond to them.

    Overall, our research found relationship breakdown may lead to suicide for some men because of the complex interaction between the individual (emotional distress) and interpersonal (changes in their social network and availability of support) impacts of a breakup.

    Many of these impacts don’t seem to feature in the paths to suicide after a breakup for women in the same way.

    Breakups also impact social networks

    As intimate relationships become more serious, we tend to spend less time investing in our friendships, especially if juggling the demands of a career and family.

    Many men, especially in heterosexual relationships, rely on their intimate partner as a primary source of social and emotional support – often at the expense of connections outside their relationship.

    This can create a risky situation if relationships break down, as it seems many men are left with little support to turn to. This rang true in our research, as men’s social disconnection and loneliness seemed to increase their suicide risk following relationship breakdown.

    We also know people can struggle to know how to support men after a breakup. Research has found some men who ask for support are told to just “get back on the horse”. Such a response invalidates men’s pain and reinforces masculine stereotypes that relationship breakdown doesn’t affect them.

    So, what can we do?

    There is no simple answer to preventing suicide following relationship breakdown, but a range of opportunities exist.

    We can intervene early, by educating young people with the skills to end relationships healthily, handle rejection and regulate the difficult emotions of a breakup.

    We can embed support groups and other opportunities for connection and peer support in relationship services that are regularly in contact with those navigating separation, to help combat loneliness.

    We can ensure mental health practitioners are equipped with the skills necessary to engage and respond effectively to men who seek help following a breakup, to help keep them safe until they can get back on their feet.

    Most importantly, if men come to any of us seeking support after a breakup, we can remember that time is often a great healer. The best we can do is sit with men in their pain, rather than try and get them to stop feeling it. This connection could be life-saving.

    Support and information is available at Relationships Australia and MensLine Australia. If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

    Michael Wilson works for The University of Melbourne and consults to Movember. He receives funding from the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship, provided by the Australian Commonwealth Government and the University of Melbourne.

    Jacqui Macdonald receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council’s Medical Research Future Fund and the Australian Research Council. She convenes the Australian Fatherhood Research Consortium and she is on the Movember Global Men’s Health Advisory Committee.

    Zac Seidler has been awarded an NHMRC Investigator Grant. He is also the Global Director of Research with the Movember Institute of Men’s Health. He advises government on men’s suicide, masculinities, violence prevention and social media policy.

    – ref. Separated men are nearly 5 times more likely to take their lives than married men – https://theconversation.com/separated-men-are-nearly-5-times-more-likely-to-take-their-lives-than-married-men-258196

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: WA had the highest rates of Indigenous child removal in the country. At last, the state is finally facing up to it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jenna Woods, Dean, School of Indigenous Knowledges, Murdoch University

    Matt Jelonek/Getty Images

    First Nations people please be advised this article speaks of racially discriminating moments in history, including the distress and death of First Nations people.


    In 1997, Australia was confronted with the landmark Bringing Them Home report. It chronicled the country’s long, dark history of the forced removal of First Nations children.

    The report also made recommendations on what to do next. Compensation was key among them. Every state and territory heeded that call in the years that followed, except Western Australia.

    In the decades since, many have called for the recognition of, and compensation for, First Nations people in WA forcibly removed from their families, culture and Country. In May, Premier Roger Cook answered that call, announcing a redress scheme for living survivors of the Stolen Generations.

    But the Stolen Generations aren’t just historical; they’re ongoing. Many still feel the reverberations of decades of trauma. WA will finally seek to redress some of it.

    Generations forced apart

    WA had the highest rates of forcible removal of Aboriginal children in this country. Today, more than 50% of Aboriginal people in WA are either Stolen Generations survivors or their direct descendants.

    Historian Margaret Jacobs wrote that through the 1905 Aborigines Protection Act, “Indigeneity itself became inextricably associated with neglect”.

    Aboriginal families, due solely to their Aboriginality, were regarded as inferior and their children were removed en masse to missions where traditional cultural practices were prohibited. Stolen Generations child removals continued until the 1970s.

    In the missions where Aboriginal children were placed after removal, psychological, physical and sexual abuse was widespread. The children, often removed as infants, were institutionalised and raised by religious missionaries.

    Speaking in traditional languages or engaging in cultural practices were prohibited, with the goal being to strip them of their Aboriginality so they could be fully assimilated into Western society. To minimise barriers to this, parents and families were prohibited from communicating or visiting their children.

    The human consequences of these inhumane practices have been monumental.

    The financial impact

    Attachment theory attests to the importance of early childhood experiences of love, care and safety on an individual’s future life outcomes. The theory suggests infants develop one of four main attachment styles in response to the care they receive from their parents or other carers during infancy.

    The significance of this in the context of generations of children being forcibly removed from their caregivers cannot be understated.

    In addition, the majority of Stolen Generations children survived various forms of abuse within these institutions and live with the resulting trauma of that.

    Under the 1905 act, any property or personal items owned by Aboriginal people could be confiscated at any time and money owing to Aboriginal peoples, including wages, was to be paid to the Chief Protector of Aborigines.

    This prevented Aboriginal families from securing financial stability and establishing intergenerational wealth, despite their significant labour contributions to WA’s economic development.

    A good indicator of intergenerational wealth consolidation can be found in rates of home ownership.

    Currently, 45.8% of Aboriginal people in the greater Perth area own their home, compared with 70.4% of their non-Aboriginal counterparts.

    Of those, 10.8% of Aboriginal households own their home outright, compared with 28.5% for non-Aboriginal owners.

    This makes redress not just a symbolic move, but a deeply practical one too.

    Compounding disadvantage

    Overall, these circumstances have created a “gap within the Gap”.

    This refers to the first gap, being that Aboriginal people have poorer life outcomes than their non-Aboriginal counterparts.

    The gap within that gap is that Stolen Generations survivors and their descendants have poorer life outcomes than the general Aboriginal population.

    Stolen Generations peoples and their descendants are more likely to have mental health disorders, to experience family violence, homelessness or criminal justice involvement, and to have an addiction, including substances and gambling, while also being less likely to have a support network.

    This state scheme will make individual payments to living survivors of the Stolen Generations who were forcibly removed before July 1 1972.

    It will deliver a one-off payment of $85,000 to survivors in recognition of the trauma and pain they suffered through their removal.

    Registrations for Stolen Generations members who are eligible for this scheme will open in the latter half of 2025 and payments will commence by the end of the year.

    It won’t fix everything, but it’s a welcome sign of progress.


    13YARN is a free and confidential 24/7 national crisis support line for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are feeling overwhelmed or having difficulty coping. Call 13 92 76.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. WA had the highest rates of Indigenous child removal in the country. At last, the state is finally facing up to it – https://theconversation.com/wa-had-the-highest-rates-of-indigenous-child-removal-in-the-country-at-last-the-state-is-finally-facing-up-to-it-258695

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Olympians expected to make highlight as Universiade swimming kicks off

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Swimming at the Rhine-Ruhr World University Games will feature several student-athletes who competed at the Paris 2024 Olympic Games.

    High-profile coaches who have been behind some of biggest stars will also be part of the Games.

    Team USA will see Olympians Emma Lebron Weber and Jacob Ryan Mitchell as well as world junior mixed and women’s relay gold medalist Maxine Charlize Parker in the pool.

    Olympians Julie Brousseau, Patrick Hussey and Emma O’Croinin will be the shepherds for Canada.

    Canada’s Ashley McMillan will be on the chase for medals having made the final in the 200m individual medley at the 2024 world championships.

    Britain will have a strong presence in the 100m breaststroke with Commonwealth Games bronze medallist Archie Goodburn in the squad.

    Loughborough’s Fleur Lewis will be on the medal hunt in the 800m freestyle after breaking an 18-year-old British short-course record in the 1,500m freestyle at the BUCS Championships 2023.

    With the World Aquatics Championships beginning immediately after the opening of the FISU Games, many student-athletes will be heading straight from Berlin to Singapore.

    Among them is Paige Van Der Westhuizen from Zimbabwe, who studies at the University of Stirling in Scotland.

    “I’m feeling good,” she said. “Having the World University Games just before the World Aquatics Championships will be tough, but I’m excited.”

    Swimming Australia’s head coach Rohan Taylor, who had coached Beijing 2008 Olympic champion Leisel Jones, said that the FISU Games will also help provide an incentive to keep student-athletes in their sport.

    “Athletes often face a crossroads that can end their careers,” Taylor said on Thursday. “They think they have to choose between university and a professional career of swimming.”

    “The World University Games provide an incentive for athletes to continue developing both paths by keeping them in the sport longer.”

    MIL OSI China News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Universiade: First gold goes to Denmark as Sandersen triumphs in taekwondo

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    With a Danish flag wrapped around her shoulders, taekwondo athlete Eva Eun-Kyung Sandersen raced around the venue Thursday after claiming the first gold of the Rhine-Ruhr World University Games in the women’s individual poomsae with a score of 8.732.

    A nine-time World Poomsae medalist and 11-time European champion, Sandersen dominated the final with refined technique and precise coordination, finishing ahead of South Korea’s Jung Haeun. Kaitlyn Marie Reclusado of the United States and China’s Pan Meijing shared bronze.

    “I feel so relieved,” said Sandersen, pausing to catch her breath in a post-match interview. “I’m really happy and proud of my trainer and everything we’ve worked for. I can finally tell them that we did something great together.”

    Despite having stood on many podiums before, the gold at the University Games held special significance for the 24-year-old.

    “I’ve practiced taekwondo for about 15 years. The sport is my whole life – it’s everything I think about. This gold medal means so much to me.”

    This marked Sandersen’s first and last appearance at the Universiade. She had hoped to make her debut two years ago in China’s Chengdu, but a last-minute injury ended those plans.

    “I was supposed to go to Chengdu, but I injured my knee just one month before, due to intense training over a long period,” she said, becoming emotional. “It was a tough time, and it was hard to recover both physically and mentally.”

    Born to South Korean parents and raised in Denmark, Sandersen wasn’t introduced to taekwondo right away.

    “My sports journey actually started with ballet,” she said. “But my mom suggested I try taekwondo because of our Korean heritage.”

    After a decorated career that spans both continental and global success, Sandersen now hopes to combine her two passions: sport and science.

    “I’m a student majoring in pharmacy, and ideally I’d love to find a way to blend pharmacy with sports. I want to promote taekwondo around the world and show people how beautiful it is.”

    She also shared a personal dream: to one day see her discipline recognized at the Olympic level.

    “I know individual poomsae isn’t currently part of the Olympic program, so I may never get the chance to compete at the Olympics,” she said. “But I really hope it will be included one day, and if it is, I’ll definitely fight for that glory.”

    MIL OSI China News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: $120 million Auckland school property growth plan

    Source: New Zealand Government

    The Government’s investing more than $120 million into building more classrooms in Auckland, so thousands more students can learn in safe, warm and dry environments.

    “Auckland is booming, and we are stepping up by investing heavily in extra classrooms to support the city’s rapid growth. Through Budget 25 funding, 137 new classrooms will be rolled out, creating space for an additional 3,014 student places in the network, supporting schools with growing rolls,” Education Minister Erica Stanford says. 

    “We’re delivering these through a combination of cost-effective repeatable designs and offsite manufactured buildings, so our funding can go further and more students benefit.

    The schools getting classrooms are:

    Bucklands Beach Intermediate – 2 classrooms
    Helensville School – 1 classroom
    Kauri Flats School – 4 classrooms
    Lincoln Heights School – 6 classrooms
    Macleans College – 8 classrooms
    Massey High School – 8 classrooms
    Mission Heights Primary School – ​6 classrooms
    Mountain View School – 6 classrooms
    Northcross Intermediate – 8 classrooms
    One Tree Hill College – 6 classrooms
    Orewa College – 12 classrooms
    Panama Road School – 4 classrooms
    Papakura Normal School – 10 classrooms (in addition to the two learning support classrooms already announced)
    Papatoetoe Central School – 4 classrooms
    Papatoetoe East School – 4 classrooms
    Papatoetoe Intermediate – 6 classrooms
    Papatoetoe South School – 6 classrooms
    Puhinui School – 2 classrooms
    Pukekohe North School – 4 classrooms
    Rangitoto College – 10 classrooms
    Te Kura o Pātiki Rosebank School – 4 classrooms
    Takanini School – 4 classrooms
    Tuakau College – 6 classrooms
    Whenuapai School – 6 classrooms

    “All of these projects are expected to enter construction in the next 12 months. We are getting on with the job of future-proofing Auckland’s school network to keep pace with population growth.”

    “I am also thrilled to announce we have confirmed a site purchase in Pōkeno to build a new primary school. We will also establish a new Junior College in Chapel Downs, on the site of Chapel Downs Primary School.”

    The school is due to open in Term 1, 2027, with an initial roll of up to 270 which is expected to grow to 1000 students over time. 

    “Significant progress has also been made through Budget 24 property investment into two new schools. Te Kura Rau Iti in Flat Bush is in the final stages of construction and is set to open for Term 1, 2026. A new primary school in Massey Redhills is in construction and set to open in Term 1, 2027. 

    “These new classrooms and schools are a fantastic boost for students, teachers, and the wider community. We will continue to drive efficiencies in school property delivery so more schools, communities and children benefit sooner,” Ms Stanford says.

    “Auckland is a magnet for talent, with thousands of people moving to our largest city each year to build a better life for themselves and their families. Ensuring that our city has the services and infrastructure for growth is a priority for our Government,” Minister for Auckland Simeon Brown says.

    “The Government’s investment in new classrooms for our young learners will help Auckland accommodate growth, while also supporting construction sector jobs across the region.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: New school property agency to be established

    Source: New Zealand Government

    The Government will establish a new school property agency to help ensure Kiwi kids can learn in safe, warm and dry buildings.

    “The Government inherited a school property system bordering on a crisis. The previous government made big promises to school communities, but its unfunded, bespoke, expensive projects weren’t deliverable and left schools across the country waiting – often for years – for the classrooms and refurbishments they so badly needed,” Education Minister Erica Stanford says.

    “Our Government took immediate action to sort this out. We initiated a Ministerial Inquiry into School Property, I instructed the Ministry of Education to focus on offsite manufacturing solutions and improving communication with schools. A value for money review was also completed which helped inform a more fiscally responsible approach.

    “These immediate actions are working, we’ve already lowered the average cost of a classroom by 28%, meaning we were able to deliver 31% more classrooms last year compared to 2023, 583 classrooms in total. Currently new classrooms cost on average $620,000, compared to the $1.2 million average cost per classroom at the end of 2023.

    “The report also found the Ministry of Education’s processes for managing the school property portfolio needed overhauling, that schools struggled with a lack of transparency, unclear prioritisation of projects, and inefficient project planning and delivery.

    “The Inquiry recommended the Government create a new entity separate from the Ministry of Education to manage school property. The Government accepted this recommendation, and Cabinet has now also agreed on the form that this new entity will take.”  

    The New Zealand School Property Agency (NZSPA), a new Crown agent, will be responsible for planning, building, maintaining and administrating the school property portfolio. The Ministry of Education will remain responsible for education policy and network decisions, including where growth is required. This separation will allow the Ministry to focus on education outcomes, while the board of NZSPA will be responsible for the school property portfolio.

    “A Crown agent balances flexibility, transparency and Ministerial direction while bringing commercial discipline to the leadership and board oversight. It will have a dedicated board with the commercial acumen appropriate to support informed investment decisions for the second largest social property portfolio in New Zealand,” Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop says.

    “With the establishment of the NZSPA, schools can expect improved project delivery and communication, better value for money, and an increased level of transparency around decision making.

    “The agency will be established in this Parliamentary term. A Ministerial Advisory Group will provide specialist independent advice on the transition to the new agency. This group is chaired by Murray McCully, with Mark Binns, Rick Herd, Sarah Petersen and Craig Stobo as the other members.

    “School communities can be assured that works and improvements currently underway will continue as planned while we work through the next steps. Our focus remains on driving efficiencies across the school property portfolio through a combination of cost-effective repeatable designs and offsite manufactured buildings,” Ms Stanford says.

    “We’re backing our schools with the infrastructure they need to succeed – for teachers, for communities, and most importantly, for kids.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Mann Calls for Increased Animal Health Research Investments in Comprehensive Farm Bill

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Tracey Mann (Kansas, 1)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Tracey Mann (KS-01) spoke on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives in support of passing a five-year, comprehensive Farm Bill that makes adequate investments in animal health research and disease prevention. Following the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which invests in the farm safety net and agricultural trade promotion programs, Rep. Mann continued to urge his colleagues to pass a fiscally conservative, five-year Farm Bill that provides much-needed certainty to the nation’s agricultural community. Rep. Mann represents the Big First District of Kansas, home to the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, Kansas State’s School of Veterinary Medicine, and the Biosecurity Research Institute, crown jewels of the animal health corridor. These institutions conduct world-renowned research that strengthens the nation’s food security and, in turn, U.S. national security.

    Rep. Mann’s Remarks as Prepared:

    Mr. Speaker, in honor of the nation’s 249th birthday, House Republicans delivered the largest tax cut in our nation’s history for middle- and working-class families, strengthened the farm safety net, and voted to get our country back on track. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act gave a lifeline to the agricultural community by updating reference prices, expanding crop insurance, and saving millions of family farms from the death tax. The relief was long overdue and we’re grateful, but the work doesn’t stop there.

    It is past time for Congress to pass a fiscally conservative, five-year farm bill, including support for agricultural research and development. We’ve seen the devastating impact disease outbreaks can have with the HPAI virus and now we must continue to take steps to prevent the New World Screwworm from reaching our borders.

    The Big First District is home to crown jewels of the animal health corridor, where world-renowned research happens, positioning the United States to focus on disease prevention rather than on outbreak control after the fact. By investing in agricultural research, we strengthen our food supply chain and, in turn, our national security, all while providing the best and most effective return on taxpayer dollars. We cannot afford to put our food security at risk by not prioritizing adequate investments into animal health research when we pass the next iteration of our Farm Bill and I would urge this body to get this right.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Pressley Slams Trump DOJ for Seeking One-Day Sentence for Officer Convicted in Breonna Taylor Case

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07)

    WASHINGTON – Today, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) issued the following statement slamming the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for seeking a one-day jail sentence for the officer convicted in the 2020 killing of Breonna Taylor.

    “Breonna Taylor should be alive today. Instead, she was shot and killed while sleeping when officers fired into her home.

    “By seeking a one-day sentence, in the rare instance where a police officer is actually convicted for murdering a Black woman, Trump’s DOJ is sending a cruel and disrespectful message: that they do not value Breonna’s life, nor the pain and loss endured by her loved ones.

    “This is an affront to justice, to accountability, and to every person who calls this country home. We should all be outraged.”

    Congresswoman Pressley has introduced over a dozen pieces of precise legislation to improve police accountability and fundamentally redefine what justice looks like in America, including the People’s Justice Guarantee, Ending Qualified Immunity Act and Andrew Kearse Accountability for the Denial of Medical Care Act.

    • In June 2023, Rep. Pressley and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (MI-12)unveiled the Housing for Formerly Incarcerated Reentry and Stable Tenancy (Housing FIRST) Act, bold legislation to help people who are formerly incarcerated and those with criminal histories access safe and stable housing.
    • In May 2023, Rep. Pressley reintroduced her Justice for Incarcerated Moms Act to improve maternal health care and support for pregnant individuals who are incarcerated. It was originally introduced in March 2020 and reintroduced in February 2021 as part of the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Package—a suite of 12 bills aimed at addressing the Black maternal health crisis.
    • In May 2023, Rep. Pressley and Rep. Grace Napolitano (CA-31), Co-Chair of the Mental Health Caucus, requested the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) to research post-traumatic prison disorder and share findings related to prevention and treatment for people returning from behind the wall.
    • In April 2023, Rep. Pressley and Senator Edward J. Markey (D-MA) re-introduced their Ending Qualified Immunity Act, legislation that would eliminate the unjust and court-invented doctrine of qualified immunity and restore the ability for people to obtain relief when state and local officials, including police officers, violate their legal and constitutionally secured rights. Rep. Pressley originally introduced the bill in June 2020 with Rep. Justin Amash (L-MI) and reintroduced it with Sen. Markey in March 2021.
    • On April 6, 2023, Rep. Pressley and Rep. Hank Johnson led 25 of their colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus in calling on Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation to address racial disparities in traffic enforcement.
    • In April 2023, Rep. Pressley, in partnership with Reps. Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12) and Ilhan Omar (MN-05), re-introduced the Ending PUSHOUT Act, their legislation to end the punitive pushout of girls of color from schools. It was originally introduced in December 2019 and reintroduced in March 2021.
    • In March 2023, Rep. Pressley, Congressman Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04), Congressman Greg Casar (TX-35) and 27 Members of Congress, alongside more than 300 advocacy organizations and community leaders, reintroduced the New Way Forward Act, a landmark piece of legislation that addresses some of the most harmful provisions of immigration law that drive racist enforcement practices, expanded incarceration in immigration detention centers, and unjust deportations. It was originally introduced in December 2019 Reps. Chuy Garcia (IL-04), Pramila Jayapal (WA-07) and Karen Bass (CA-37) and was reintroduced in January 2021.
    • In March 2023, Rep. Pressley and her colleagues re-introduced the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act to stop federal entities’ use of facial recognition tools and prohibit federal support for state and local law enforcement entities that use biometric technology. They reintroduced the bill in June 2021.
    • In December 2022, the House passed Congresswoman Pressley’s amendment to strengthen maternal health care for people who are incarcerated.
    • In December 2021, Rep. Pressley unveiled the Fair and Independent Experts in Clemency (FIX Clemency) Act, historic legislation to transform our nation’s clemency system and address the mass incarceration crisis.
    • In March 2021, Rep. Pressley sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland urging him to consider H. Res. 266, the People’s Justice Guarantee, as a framework for embedding justice in our criminal legal system and building integrity in the Department of Justice (DOJ). 
    • In February 2021, October 2020, Congresswoman Pressley reintroduced the Mental Health Justice Act with Reps. Katie Porter (CA-45), Tony Cardenas (CA-29), and Mary Gay Scanlon (PA-05), to support the creation of mental health first responder units that would be deployed in lieu of law enforcement when 911 is called due to a mental health crisis. The lawmakers originally introduced the legislation in October 2020.
    • In January 2021, she reintroduced the Federal Death Penalty Prohibition Act of 2021 with Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) to prohibit the use of the death penalty at the federal level, and require re-sentencing of those currently on death row. The lawmakers originally introduced the bill in July 2019.
    • In August 2020, she introduced the COVID-19 in Corrections Data Transparency Act with Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and others, requires federal, state, and local prisons and jails to collect and publicly report COVID-19 data. The legislation was reintroduced last month.
    • In July 2020, she introduced the Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act with Reps. Ilhan Omar (MN-05) and Senators Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), to prohibit federal funds to support the increased presence of police in K-12 schools and supports school districts that invests in counselors.
    • In June 2020, she introduced the Dismantle Mass Incarceration for Public Health Act with Reps. Tlaib (MI-13) and Barbara Lee (CA-13) to require decarceration to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in prisons and jails.
    • In June 2020, she introduced the Andrew Kearse Accountability for Denial of Medical Care Act with Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Ed Markey (D-MA), to hold police officers criminally liable for denying care to those in medical distress.
    • In May 2020, she introduced a resolution with Reps. Ilhan Omar (MN-05), Karen Bass (CA-37) and Barbara Lee (CA-13) to condemn any and all acts of police brutality, racial profiling, and militarization and over-policing of Black and brown communities.  
    • In July 2019, she introduced the No Biometric Barriers Housing Act with Reps. Yvette Clarke (NY-09) and Rashida Tlaib (MI-13) that would prohibit the use of biometric recognition technology in most public and assisted housing units funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), protecting tenants from biased surveillance technology. 
    • In June 2019, in conjunction with Gun Violence Awareness Month and the 5th Annual National Gun Violence Awareness Day, she introduced a resolution to honor survivors of homicide victims by establishing National Survivors of Homicide Victims Awareness Month. 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Advocate for Passage of Child Care Affordability Bill to Expand High-Quality Child Care Options

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WASHINGTON, DC – Child care is essential to families, communities, and our economy.  But instead of making federal investments to help bring down the cost of child care, the Trump Administration is raising costs for working families in order to provide a bigger tax windfall for billionaires and special interests.  The Republican tax law also slashed Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provide critical support to children, families, child care centers and the child care workforce.  And the Trump Administration has made deep cuts within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Administration for Children and Families.

    To help working families afford the rising cost of child care, expand the range of high-quality child care options, and strengthen America’s child care infrastructure and workforce, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with Patty Murray (D-WA), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to reintroduce the Child Care for Working Families Act (S.2295).

    This comprehensive legislation seeks to alleviate the high cost of child care for working families; provide families with more flexible options for high-quality, affordable child care; and boost wages for early childhood workers.  The bill would cap child care expenses at 7 percent of working families’ incomes, making it affordable for all parents and providing historic investments in the child care workforce, including higher pay, better benefits and improved training opportunities. It would also help increase access to pre-K education while supporting full-day Head Start programs.

    “Right now, the cost of child care and other essentials is weighing millions of families down, but instead of tackling the affordability crisis, President Trump and Republicans have chosen to shower their billionaire donors with trillions of dollars in new tax breaks and kick 17 million Americans off their health care,” said Senator Murray.

    “Working parents need access to high-quality, affordable child care that meets their needs.  But too many parents simply can’t afford it.  This bill would help lower the cost of child care and allow working parents to keep more of their paychecks so they can afford to raise a family.  Making child care more accessible and affordable is critical to families, communities, businesses, and future economic growth.  Studies show that investing in quality child care and early childhood education saves money in the long run and is linked to better graduation rates and lower use of public benefits later in life,” said Senator Reed.  “This is a chance to help lift children out of poverty, save working parents real money, and strengthen our workforce.  We’ve got to prioritize investing in what’s important to us – for Democrats that is expanding access to affordable and high-quality child care.”

    “Making child care more affordable will lower one of the biggest costs in many families’ budgets, and give parents more flexibility to participate in the workforce,” said Senator Whitehouse.  “As President Trump fuels the affordability crisis with his chaotic tariffs and his Big, Beautiful-for-Billionaires Bill, our legislation will lower the cost of child care for working Rhode Island families, set kids up for success, and ensure early childhood educators are paid fairly for their hard work.”

    Last month, Ruth J. Friedman, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, testified before Congress on the state of America’s child care crisis, noting: “An approach like the Child Care for Working Families Act takes the necessary steps to adequately build child care supply and reduce parent costs. It would be transformative for American families, eliminating child care as a barrier to the workforce and child care bills as a barrier to economic security and wellbeing.  Ultimately, it would give parents much more freedom to raise their families and be productive members of society.”

    According to the Economic Policy Institute, Rhode Island is ranked as the 18th most expensive state for infant care, with the average annual cost exceeding $16,750 per year, or $1,397 per month.  And according to a WalletHub Child Care Costs by State report released this month, Rhode Island ranked 7th-highest in the nation for child care costs for married couples, with data showing 10.42 percent of married couples’ income was spent on family-based child care and 11.45 percent was spent on center-based child care.

    The cost of child care nationwide continues to rise—and far from helping tackle it, President Trump is exacerbating the affordability crisis. The average cost of child care is now $13,128—a 29% increase since 2020 that outpaces inflation. In 49 states and the District of Columbia, the average annual costs of child care for two children exceeds median rent—and in 41 states and the District of Columbia, the cost of care for one infant exceeds in-state university tuition. The crisis costs the U.S. economy over $100 billion each year. Nonetheless, President Trump has gutted oversight of and support for the federal child care office, held up child care funding to states, held up Head Start funding, and now created massive holes in states budgets with the “Big Beautiful Bill’s” cuts to Medicaid and SNAP—which may well force states to pare back on their own investments in child care. While two-thirds of Americans oppose Republicans’ Big Beautiful Betrayal that President Trump signed into law earlier this month, over three-quarters of Americans support increased investment to help families afford child care.

    The Child Care for Working Families Act would tackle the child care crisis head-on: ensuring families can afford the child care they need, expanding access to more high-quality options, stabilizing the child care sector, and helping ensure child care workers taking care of our nation’s kids are paid livable wages.

    The legislation would also dramatically expand access to pre-K, and support full-day, full-year Head Start programs and increased wages for Head Start workers.  Under the legislation, which Murray, Reed and Whitehouse have been pushing since 2017, the typical family in America will pay no more than $10 a day for child care—with many families paying nothing at all—and no eligible family would pay more than 7 percent of their income on child care.

    The Child Care for Working Families Act will:

    • Make child care affordable for working families. 
      • The typical family earning the state median income will pay less than $15 a day for child care.
      • No working family will pay more than seven percent of their income on child care.
      • Families earning below 85% of state median income will pay nothing at all for child care.
      •  If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts, or Head Start agencies.
    • Improve the quality and supply of child care for all children and expand families’ child care options by:
      • Addressing child care deserts by providing grants to help open new child care providers in underserved communities.
      • Providing grants to cover start-up and licensing costs to help establish new providers.
      • Increasing child care options for children who receive care during non-traditional hours.
      • Supporting child care for children who are dual-language learners, children who are experiencing homelessness, and children in foster care.
    • Support higher wages for child care workers.
      • Child care workers would be paid a living wage and achieve parity with elementary school teachers who have similar credentials and experience.
      • Child care subsidies would cover the cost of providing high-quality care. 
    • Dramatically expand access to high-quality pre-K.
      • States would receive funding to establish and expand a mixed-delivery system of high-quality preschool programs for 3- and 4-year-olds.
      • States must prioritize establishing and expanding universal local preschool programs within and across high-need communities.
      • If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts, or Head Start agencies.
    • Better support Head Start programs by providing the funding necessary to offer full-day, full-year programming and increasing wages for Head Start workers.         

    The Child Care for Working Families Act is endorsed by: AFL-CIO, AFSCME, AFT, All Our Kin, The Center for American Progress, The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), Child Care Aware of America, Community Change Action, Council for Professional Recognition, Family Value @ Work, MomsRising, National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC), National Education Association (NEA), National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Oxfam, Save the Children, Save the Children Action Network, SEIU, YWCA, Zero to Three.

    In addition to Murray, Reed, and Whitehouse, the Senate bill is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Chuck Schumer, (D-NY), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Christopher Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ruben Gallego (D-NM), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tammy Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT) and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

    In the House, the bill is being introduced by U.S. Representative Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA-03), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Advocate for Passage of Child Care Affordability Bill to Expand High-Quality Child Care Options

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
    WASHINGTON, DC – Child care is essential to families, communities, and our economy.  But instead of making federal investments to help bring down the cost of child care, the Trump Administration is raising costs for working families in order to provide a bigger tax windfall for billionaires and special interests.  The Republican tax law also slashed Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provide critical support to children, families, child care centers and the child care workforce.  And the Trump Administration has made deep cuts within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Administration for Children and Families.
    To help working families afford the rising cost of child care, expand the range of high-quality child care options, and strengthen America’s child care infrastructure and workforce, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with Patty Murray (D-WA), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to reintroduce the Child Care for Working Families Act (S.2295).
    This comprehensive legislation seeks to alleviate the high cost of child care for working families; provide families with more flexible options for high-quality, affordable child care; and boost wages for early childhood workers.  The bill would cap child care expenses at 7 percent of working families’ incomes, making it affordable for all parents and providing historic investments in the child care workforce, including higher pay, better benefits and improved training opportunities. It would also help increase access to pre-K education while supporting full-day Head Start programs.
    “Right now, the cost of child care and other essentials is weighing millions of families down, but instead of tackling the affordability crisis, President Trump and Republicans have chosen to shower their billionaire donors with trillions of dollars in new tax breaks and kick 17 million Americans off their health care,” said Senator Murray.
    “Working parents need access to high-quality, affordable child care that meets their needs.  But too many parents simply can’t afford it.  This bill would help lower the cost of child care and allow working parents to keep more of their paychecks so they can afford to raise a family.  Making child care more accessible and affordable is critical to families, communities, businesses, and future economic growth.  Studies show that investing in quality child care and early childhood education saves money in the long run and is linked to better graduation rates and lower use of public benefits later in life,” said Senator Reed.  “This is a chance to help lift children out of poverty, save working parents real money, and strengthen our workforce.  We’ve got to prioritize investing in what’s important to us – for Democrats that is expanding access to affordable and high-quality child care.”
    “Making child care more affordable will lower one of the biggest costs in many families’ budgets, and give parents more flexibility to participate in the workforce,” said Senator Whitehouse.  “As President Trump fuels the affordability crisis with his chaotic tariffs and his Big, Beautiful-for-Billionaires Bill, our legislation will lower the cost of child care for working Rhode Island families, set kids up for success, and ensure early childhood educators are paid fairly for their hard work.”
    Last month, Ruth J. Friedman, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, testified before Congress on the state of America’s child care crisis, noting: “An approach like the Child Care for Working Families Act takes the necessary steps to adequately build child care supply and reduce parent costs. It would be transformative for American families, eliminating child care as a barrier to the workforce and child care bills as a barrier to economic security and wellbeing.  Ultimately, it would give parents much more freedom to raise their families and be productive members of society.”
    According to the Economic Policy Institute, Rhode Island is ranked as the 18th most expensive state for infant care, with the average annual cost exceeding $16,750 per year, or $1,397 per month.  And according to a WalletHub Child Care Costs by State report released this month, Rhode Island ranked 7th-highest in the nation for child care costs for married couples, with data showing 10.42 percent of married couples’ income was spent on family-based child care and 11.45 percent was spent on center-based child care.
    The cost of child care nationwide continues to rise—and far from helping tackle it, President Trump is exacerbating the affordability crisis. The average cost of child care is now $13,128—a 29% increase since 2020 that outpaces inflation. In 49 states and the District of Columbia, the average annual costs of child care for two children exceeds median rent—and in 41 states and the District of Columbia, the cost of care for one infant exceeds in-state university tuition. The crisis costs the U.S. economy over $100 billion each year. Nonetheless, President Trump has gutted oversight of and support for the federal child care office, held up child care funding to states, held up Head Start funding, and now created massive holes in states budgets with the “Big Beautiful Bill’s” cuts to Medicaid and SNAP—which may well force states to pare back on their own investments in child care. While two-thirds of Americans oppose Republicans’ Big Beautiful Betrayal that President Trump signed into law earlier this month, over three-quarters of Americans support increased investment to help families afford child care.
    The Child Care for Working Families Act would tackle the child care crisis head-on: ensuring families can afford the child care they need, expanding access to more high-quality options, stabilizing the child care sector, and helping ensure child care workers taking care of our nation’s kids are paid livable wages.
    The legislation would also dramatically expand access to pre-K, and support full-day, full-year Head Start programs and increased wages for Head Start workers.  Under the legislation, which Murray, Reed and Whitehouse have been pushing since 2017, the typical family in America will pay no more than $10 a day for child care—with many families paying nothing at all—and no eligible family would pay more than 7 percent of their income on child care.
    The Child Care for Working Families Act will:
    Make child care affordable for working families. 
    The typical family earning the state median income will pay less than $15 a day for child care.
    No working family will pay more than seven percent of their income on child care.
    Families earning below 85% of state median income will pay nothing at all for child care.
     If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts, or Head Start agencies.

    Improve the quality and supply of child care for all children and expand families’ child care options by:
    Addressing child care deserts by providing grants to help open new child care providers in underserved communities.
    Providing grants to cover start-up and licensing costs to help establish new providers.
    Increasing child care options for children who receive care during non-traditional hours.
    Supporting child care for children who are dual-language learners, children who are experiencing homelessness, and children in foster care.

    Support higher wages for child care workers.
    Child care workers would be paid a living wage and achieve parity with elementary school teachers who have similar credentials and experience.
    Child care subsidies would cover the cost of providing high-quality care. 

    Dramatically expand access to high-quality pre-K.
    States would receive funding to establish and expand a mixed-delivery system of high-quality preschool programs for 3- and 4-year-olds.
    States must prioritize establishing and expanding universal local preschool programs within and across high-need communities.
    If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts, or Head Start agencies.

    Better support Head Start programs by providing the funding necessary to offer full-day, full-year programming and increasing wages for Head Start workers.         
    The Child Care for Working Families Act is endorsed by: AFL-CIO, AFSCME, AFT, All Our Kin, The Center for American Progress, The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), Child Care Aware of America, Community Change Action, Council for Professional Recognition, Family Value @ Work, MomsRising, National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC), National Education Association (NEA), National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Oxfam, Save the Children, Save the Children Action Network, SEIU, YWCA, Zero to Three.
    In addition to Murray, Reed, and Whitehouse, the Senate bill is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Chuck Schumer, (D-NY), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Christopher Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ruben Gallego (D-NM), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tammy Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT) and Ron Wyden (D-OR).
    In the House, the bill is being introduced by U.S. Representative Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA-03), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Advocate for Passage of Child Care Affordability Bill to Expand High-Quality Child Care Options

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WASHINGTON, DC – Child care is essential to families, communities, and our economy.  But instead of making federal investments to help bring down the cost of child care, the Trump Administration is raising costs for working families in order to provide a bigger tax windfall for billionaires and special interests.  The Republican tax law also slashed Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provide critical support to children, families, child care centers and the child care workforce.  And the Trump Administration has made deep cuts within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Administration for Children and Families.

    To help working families afford the rising cost of child care, expand the range of high-quality child care options, and strengthen America’s child care infrastructure and workforce, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with Patty Murray (D-WA), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, to reintroduce the Child Care for Working Families Act (S.2295).

    This comprehensive legislation seeks to alleviate the high cost of child care for working families; provide families with more flexible options for high-quality, affordable child care; and boost wages for early childhood workers.  The bill would cap child care expenses at 7 percent of working families’ incomes, making it affordable for all parents and providing historic investments in the child care workforce, including higher pay, better benefits and improved training opportunities. It would also help increase access to pre-K education while supporting full-day Head Start programs.

    “Right now, the cost of child care and other essentials is weighing millions of families down, but instead of tackling the affordability crisis, President Trump and Republicans have chosen to shower their billionaire donors with trillions of dollars in new tax breaks and kick 17 million Americans off their health care,” said Senator Murray.

    “Working parents need access to high-quality, affordable child care that meets their needs.  But too many parents simply can’t afford it.  This bill would help lower the cost of child care and allow working parents to keep more of their paychecks so they can afford to raise a family.  Making child care more accessible and affordable is critical to families, communities, businesses, and future economic growth.  Studies show that investing in quality child care and early childhood education saves money in the long run and is linked to better graduation rates and lower use of public benefits later in life,” said Senator Reed.  “This is a chance to help lift children out of poverty, save working parents real money, and strengthen our workforce.  We’ve got to prioritize investing in what’s important to us – for Democrats that is expanding access to affordable and high-quality child care.”

    “Making child care more affordable will lower one of the biggest costs in many families’ budgets, and give parents more flexibility to participate in the workforce,” said Senator Whitehouse.  “As President Trump fuels the affordability crisis with his chaotic tariffs and his Big, Beautiful-for-Billionaires Bill, our legislation will lower the cost of child care for working Rhode Island families, set kids up for success, and ensure early childhood educators are paid fairly for their hard work.”

    Last month, Ruth J. Friedman, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, testified before Congress on the state of America’s child care crisis, noting: “An approach like the Child Care for Working Families Act takes the necessary steps to adequately build child care supply and reduce parent costs. It would be transformative for American families, eliminating child care as a barrier to the workforce and child care bills as a barrier to economic security and wellbeing.  Ultimately, it would give parents much more freedom to raise their families and be productive members of society.”

    According to the Economic Policy Institute, Rhode Island is ranked as the 18th most expensive state for infant care, with the average annual cost exceeding $16,750 per year, or $1,397 per month.  And according to a WalletHub Child Care Costs by State report released this month, Rhode Island ranked 7th-highest in the nation for child care costs for married couples, with data showing 10.42 percent of married couples’ income was spent on family-based child care and 11.45 percent was spent on center-based child care.

    The cost of child care nationwide continues to rise—and far from helping tackle it, President Trump is exacerbating the affordability crisis. The average cost of child care is now $13,128—a 29% increase since 2020 that outpaces inflation. In 49 states and the District of Columbia, the average annual costs of child care for two children exceeds median rent—and in 41 states and the District of Columbia, the cost of care for one infant exceeds in-state university tuition. The crisis costs the U.S. economy over $100 billion each year. Nonetheless, President Trump has gutted oversight of and support for the federal child care office, held up child care funding to states, held up Head Start funding, and now created massive holes in states budgets with the “Big Beautiful Bill’s” cuts to Medicaid and SNAP—which may well force states to pare back on their own investments in child care. While two-thirds of Americans oppose Republicans’ Big Beautiful Betrayal that President Trump signed into law earlier this month, over three-quarters of Americans support increased investment to help families afford child care.

    The Child Care for Working Families Act would tackle the child care crisis head-on: ensuring families can afford the child care they need, expanding access to more high-quality options, stabilizing the child care sector, and helping ensure child care workers taking care of our nation’s kids are paid livable wages.

    The legislation would also dramatically expand access to pre-K, and support full-day, full-year Head Start programs and increased wages for Head Start workers.  Under the legislation, which Murray, Reed and Whitehouse have been pushing since 2017, the typical family in America will pay no more than $10 a day for child care—with many families paying nothing at all—and no eligible family would pay more than 7 percent of their income on child care.

    The Child Care for Working Families Act will:

    • Make child care affordable for working families. 
      • The typical family earning the state median income will pay less than $15 a day for child care.
      • No working family will pay more than seven percent of their income on child care.
      • Families earning below 85% of state median income will pay nothing at all for child care.
      •  If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts, or Head Start agencies.
    • Improve the quality and supply of child care for all children and expand families’ child care options by:
      • Addressing child care deserts by providing grants to help open new child care providers in underserved communities.
      • Providing grants to cover start-up and licensing costs to help establish new providers.
      • Increasing child care options for children who receive care during non-traditional hours.
      • Supporting child care for children who are dual-language learners, children who are experiencing homelessness, and children in foster care.
    • Support higher wages for child care workers.
      • Child care workers would be paid a living wage and achieve parity with elementary school teachers who have similar credentials and experience.
      • Child care subsidies would cover the cost of providing high-quality care. 
    • Dramatically expand access to high-quality pre-K.
      • States would receive funding to establish and expand a mixed-delivery system of high-quality preschool programs for 3- and 4-year-olds.
      • States must prioritize establishing and expanding universal local preschool programs within and across high-need communities.
      • If a state does not choose to receive funding under this program, the Secretary can provide funds to localities, such as cities, counties, local governments, districts, or Head Start agencies.
    • Better support Head Start programs by providing the funding necessary to offer full-day, full-year programming and increasing wages for Head Start workers.         

    The Child Care for Working Families Act is endorsed by: AFL-CIO, AFSCME, AFT, All Our Kin, The Center for American Progress, The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), Child Care Aware of America, Community Change Action, Council for Professional Recognition, Family Value @ Work, MomsRising, National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC), National Education Association (NEA), National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), Oxfam, Save the Children, Save the Children Action Network, SEIU, YWCA, Zero to Three.

    In addition to Murray, Reed, and Whitehouse, the Senate bill is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Chuck Schumer, (D-NY), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Christopher Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ruben Gallego (D-NM), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tammy Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT) and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

    In the House, the bill is being introduced by U.S. Representative Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA-03), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Marshall: Association Health Plans are a Great Resource for Kansans

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall
    Senator Marshall Questions Experts About Benefits Access for Independent Workers
    Washington – On Thursday, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas),questioned Patrice Onwuka, Director at the Center for Economic Opportunity at the Independent Women’s Forum, Kev Coleman, Research Fellow at the Paragon Health Institute, and Karen Friedman, Executive Director at the Pension Rights Center, during a recent Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) committee focused on benefits for independent workers.
    Click HERE or on the image above to watch Senator Marshall’s full interview.
    Highlights from the hearing include: 
    On what protections would exist if a portable benefits provider went under:
    Senator Marshall: “Let’s start with Mrs. Onwuka. Welcome everybody. We appreciate you being here. Under a portable benefit model, what protections do workers have if a benefit provider were to go under or misuse funds?”
    Mrs. Onwuka: “Under a portable benefits plan, I think that there are protections in place to ensure that, you know, whatever investments have been made, whatever has been paid into it, that that would still be there and protected. There’s some great companies that have those accounts and set those up to ensure that, and they’re regulated to ensure that that happens.”Senator Marshall: “Have many of them failed? Or has that happened very often?”
    Mrs. Onwuka: “I have not seen anything any of them fail, sir.”
    On what’s preventing wider adoption of association health care plans:
    Senator Marshall: “Mr. Coleman, let’s go to you next. I’m a big fan of association health care plans. It’s something I fought for to help become a possibility. I’ve seen some acceptance of it, I’m surprised it’s not more, so to be honest. What’s keeping that from exploding in a good way, and what do we need to do to put wind beneath those sails?”
    Mr. Coleman: “Senator, thank you very much for that question. A primary obstacle to association health plans, underneath legacy regulation, deals with the obstacles to be able to form a coalition of our association of businesses whose aggregate employee body can be seen as a single health plan. There’s something known as ‘lookthrough doctrine,’ which says, if you don’t have the right affiliations among businesses, we’re going to treat each individual business within an association as its own entity with respect to health insurance. And hence, if they have three people, they’re in the small group health insurance.”
    Senator Marshall: “Got it – so, is this that we need to change the law, or is it a regulatory issue?”
    Mr. Coleman: “Ultimately, changing the law is best, because not only do you have the benefit of, you know, a very clear statutory precedent, but you also have a situation where technologists like myself, or my former self, are going to make investments in that market to build platforms facilitating technology, et cetera. If it’s a regulatory solution, there’s more hesitation, because there’s the fear that the next administration may change regulation.”
    Senator Marshall: “Okay, thanks. And I would just ask the committee staff, I’m sure you’re looking at that, but would love to kind of understand what we can do to improve that situation as well. We’ve seen some great success in Kansas with some of these plans, and again, I’m surprised there’s not more people utilizing it.”
    On how portable benefits could be on par with benefits offered to W2 employees:
    Senator Marshall: “I’ll go to Ms. Friedman next. And if you just briefly explain…how under portable benefits can we be sure that employers are still providing benefits on par with many of the W2 employees?”
    Ms. Friedman “…I mean, look, portability has been an intractable problem in the retirement space. There are lots of proposals that will address this. Senator Sanders, pensions for all would be portable. The state-facilitated auto-Iris has some portability. I think we have to ensure that we’re looking at solutions. I mean, what we’re trying to do is address a concern, which is portability. People changing jobs a lot, and benefits going with them. We need to be exploring those options and make sure that they’re options that both protect employees and also are being workable.”
    Senator Marshall: “So I understand the problem, now I’m looking for the solution. Mrs. Onwuka, can you take a shot at that? How, under portable benefits, can we be sure that employers are still providing benefits on par with W2 employees?”
    Mrs. Onwuka: “Well, that can be negotiated between the independent contractor and their client, really, who’s able to pay in you know, just as they in their contracts, they can define how much the employer is willing to pay this independent contractor on top of their negotiated rate, how much they’re going to pay into that benefits plan. And they can match with whatever they’re paying their W2 employees in terms of the benefits that they’re providing there. But let’s not forget, these plans can be paid into by multiple different clients and different entities, so an independent contractor can really do well in terms of being negotiating the kind of, you know, benefits package that works for them.”
    Senator Marshall: “Typically, if you were new to that negotiation and you have seven or ten clients or people you’re working for, are you asking them to match like 10% or 20%? Is there a kind of a range that you’re looking for?”
    Mrs. Onwuka: “It would be up to that independent contractor to decide, sir.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: Our performance evolution

    Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

    Download Our performance evolution

    You can download a version of Our performance evolution (PDF, 674KB)This link will download a file.

    Commissioner’s foreword

    Since commencing as Commissioner of Taxation on 1 March 2024, I continue to be impressed by the expertise, professionalism and dedication of ATO staff.

    Our performance is strong, but as with any organisation, we need to take opportunities to improve. Accordingly, I am grateful that the ATO has had the opportunity to be reviewed as part of the Australian Public Service Commission’s (APSC) capability review program, particularly so early in my tenure. Independent reviews such as this provide us with honest and frank perspectives on what to improve to set us up for the future.

    I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the review team for their professionalism, rigour, and the depth of insight they brought to this process. Their extensive experience and thoughtful engagement have been invaluable.

    The review found that we are a high-performing organisation, which is a testament to the dedication and capability of our people. At the same time, it has identified areas where we can do better – opportunities to strengthen our systems, sharpen our focus, and deliver even greater value to the Australian community.

    We deliver well on our core purpose of collecting tax so government can deliver services for the Australian community. However, what delivers us success now will not be enough alone to achieve our vision for an Australia where every taxpayer meets their obligations because:

    • complying is easy
    • help is tailored
    • deliberate non-compliance has consequences.

    We need to examine what we do and how we do it, identify opportunities for improvement and make decisive shifts to unlock our full potential.

    Our performance evolution will help us get there. Drawing on key insights from our APSC capability review, it outlines how we – as one ATO – will align our efforts to not only deliver today’s priorities, but also prepare for and tackle tomorrow’s challenges.

    We are fortunate to be building on a strong foundation. The capability review identified many strengths we can be proud of. We’ll use these strengths to propel us forward on our performance evolution, taking practical actions to set a course for the future, where we will:

    • think bigger
    • act bolder
    • deliver together.

    While this plan does not outline every detail of the actions we will take, it establishes the key shifts that will empower us to strengthen what we do best, allowing us to adapt our actions as our environment changes.

    The Executive team and I will play a key role here. We must role model the behaviours needed for the ATO to achieve its vision, drive accountability and ensure we don’t lose momentum. We must also openly and genuinely support employees to act as one to deliver our performance evolution.

    Whilst the staff who support the Tax Practitioner Board (TPB) and the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) are ATO staff, our performance evolution relates to those in the Tax Office itself.

    I will leave it to the Chair of the TPB and the ACNC Commissioner to draw on the Capability Review insights that best serve the delivery of their statutory functions.

    I’m grateful to have the opportunity to capitalise on our high performance and look forward to continuing to improve as we implement our performance evolution.

    Rob Heferen

    Commissioner of Taxation

    Registrar of the Australian Business Register

    Australian Business Registry Services

    Register of Foreign Ownership of Australian Assets

    Unlocking the full potential of our high performance

    ‘The ATO is a high performing organisation with a strong reputation for managing Australia’s tax and superannuation systems in a modern and reliable way.

    Its capabilities are good and ATO staff are right to be proud of them.

    The findings [of the capability review] are not judgments on current capability, but rather ways the ATO might evolve to be a ‘great’ organisation.’ Capability Review, Australian Taxation Office, 2025 (PDF, 817KB)This link will download a file

    The Australian Public Service Commission’s capability review affirmed the ATO’s position as a high performing and globally respected tax administration.

    We have a proven track record and have excelled when circumstances have called for us to be at our best. Our role in the government’s response to the pandemic demonstrated what we’re capable of and underscored our potential to be truly exceptional. Learning from this and our many other successes, as well as our mistakes, we should not stand still. We need to continually improve.

    The capability review’s insights inform where to focus our ongoing improvement efforts. This future view highlights the capabilities we need to adapt and respond to the changing demands of government, the community and our own operations.

    Key insights from the review indicate that to continue to serve the Australian community with excellence and integrity, achieve our vision, and proactively address future challenges, we need to:

    • work as one ATO to deliver for the Australian community, including through improved internal collaboration
    • have a leadership group that works as a team and models the right behaviours
    • establish enterprise-wide priorities and shared plans for achieving them
    • make trade-offs for the sake of the organisation, work through impasses and take collective responsibility for decisions
    • accept and reward measured risk taking in the interests of innovation, collaboration and achieving better, faster outcomes.

    Our performance evolution sets us on a path to meet these needs and unlock the full potential of our high performance. It does so by bringing together current initiatives and building on the successes of the past to do some things differently and truly excel.

    This plan is just the beginning. It lays a foundation for the ongoing implementation of a range of connected actions which will unlock our full potential. A future where:

    • We will agree on our priorities, how much we are prepared to invest in achieving them, relevant trade‑offs and what risks those carry. We will align our resourcing and performance measures to them.
    • We will clearly communicate our strategic direction and priorities under it, ensuring they are understood throughout the organisation.
    • We will ensure accountabilities are clear, and advancing our strategic direction is a collective responsibility.
    • We will make decisions far enough in advance to ensure that at both the group and individual level, we can effectively plan our contribution to the delivery of our enterprise priorities and our functional accountabilities.
    • We will work as one ATO, so that improved internal collaboration becomes ‘business as usual’.
    • We will engage sensibly with risk. To do this, we will think carefully about risk appetite, tolerances and sensible mitigations in the context of our strategic direction.
    • At the individual level we will be supported in innovating and taking measured risks, aligning our efforts with our strategic direction and by having irritants taken out of how we work.

    We will do this by thinking beyond function, beyond our teams and comfort zones.

    From

    To

    Team first

    Purpose first

    Cautious action

    Bold action

    Siloed delivery

    Shared delivery

    Avoiding the hard calls trade‑offs

    Courageous trade‑offs

    Key shifts

    Together, we will unlock the full potential of our high performance by moving together as one ATO, and adapting our mindsets and behaviours to:

    Think bigger

    Thinking bigger means seeing the broader picture and understanding where we are headed.

    This requires each of us to:

    • expand our view of what we can do to drive the ATO to succeed
    • consider what is truly possible within our remit
    • challenge assumptions of what is needed for us to achieve our vision.

    If we are to challenge assumptions of what’s needed and expand our view of how we can help the ATO succeed, we first need a common understanding of what success looks like.

    This will come from having a clear understanding of our longer-term direction, and the strategies we will prioritise to deliver on it. Clearly communicating our strategic direction (including our priorities, risk tolerances and areas where we are choosing to reduce our focus) will help:

    • guide our actions
    • sharpen our focus
    • expand our perspective on the role we can each play in realising our vision.

    We also need the means to think bigger. We will commit the right leadership, accountabilities, resources and funding to the work needed to deliver our purpose and achieve our vision.

    Initial actions

    Develop and communicate our strategic direction – We will agree on strategies that will move us forward in delivering our purpose and achieving our vision over the next 5 years and communicate the roadmap for delivery.

    Align investment – We will invest our resources in line with our strategic direction.

    Make clear decisions – We will be clear about our decisions on our priorities, their scope and implications (including for accountabilities, resourcing, performance measures and risks).

    Act bolder

    Being bold takes both individual courage and confident leadership to support our action.

    This requires each of us to:

    • proactively address issues
    • work through impasses and make the call, including trade-offs needed to deliver on priorities
    • use good judgment to make decisions and support those who do the same – regardless of the outcome.

    With our strategic direction, priorities, functional accountabilities and shared responsibilities clear, we are trusted to use good judgment, sensibly engage with risk, and take decisive action within the parameters of our authority.

    Doing this boldly will come from knowing that informed and decisive action is supported at the highest levels of the ATO and encouraged at all levels across the ATO. Acting within our remit, this will help us to:

    • make decisive calls
    • adopt innovative approaches
    • act proactively to resolve impasses and agree trade-offs
    • slow, change or stop work when we need to make room for higher priorities
    • use good judgment to make sound, timely and innovative recommendations that inform decisions beyond our level of delegation.

    Being bolder is also stretching our comfort zone, supporting mobility to expand our perspective and empowering people to take appropriate measured risks.

    Initial actions

    Support and reward decision-making – We will encourage and recognise:

    • measured risk-taking
    • staff who innovate.

    We will support decision-makers with appropriate guidance and tools.

    Reinforce support for mobility – We will increase mobility, including amongst our SES.

    Clarify delegations – We will refresh and reinforce delegations and decision-making authorities.

    Deliver together

    We excel when we are aligned – around purpose, priorities and outcomes. Collaboration is just the starting point.

    This requires each of us to:

    • recognise that our impact goes beyond our function
    • take shared ownership of our strategic direction, respecting any trade-offs
    • move together to deliver our core purpose and advance our vision.

    To deliver our core purpose and achieve our vision, we need to unlock the full potential of our high performance together – as one ATO.

    Delivering as one ATO will come from:

    • understanding both the big picture and the detail of how work flows, how different areas interact, and how it all fits together
    • working collaboratively with those impacted by our work
    • understanding what our part to play is.

    Enhancing our forward planning and ensuring that effective internal collaboration is part of our ‘business as usual’ will help us:

    • understand how our plans deliver our strategic direction
    • take shared ownership of our plans
    • know what we must do
    • move together, to deliver what is needed.

    This does not mean everyone doing everything. Accountabilities and decision-making will still lie with individuals, but understanding who else is responsible for contributing to those outcomes, and interconnecting our many moving parts will help us deliver together, as one ATO.

    Delivering together also requires that we be proactive in reducing frictions that might otherwise divert our focus away from the work that contributes most to our purpose and vision. We’ll take action to reduce irritants in how we work, deliver incremental changes that improve our efficiency and lay a clear pathway to prioritise larger improvements.

    Initial actions

    Plan as one ATO – We will:

    • bring planning discussions forward
    • design and integrate our group and line plans to deliver on our strategic direction.

    Agree on our part – We will ensure everyone understands their contribution, not just to their direct responsibilities and functional accountabilities, but to broader outcomes. We will agree on collective responsibilities for the priorities and outcomes that deliver on our strategic direction and reinforce collaboration expectations.

    Address irritants – We will address some of the more pervasive technology irritants and smaller opportunities as informed by users through Pulse surveys and our Census action plan.

    User insights will also inform and drive longer-term planning for the IT tools and data we need to work efficiently.

    Be the key

    We’re building on the strong foundations of a high-performing organisation that:

    • is trusted by government and the community to get things done
    • has a proven track record.

    From this position of strength, we are making a call to action: Our performance evolution will only happen through positive steps and everyday actions taken by all of us.

    We all need to contribute to unlocking the potential of our high performance. To do this we can ask ourselves some questions to help us get there.

    • Think bigger:
      • Do I know where we are headed?
      • Am I putting myself in the Commissioner’s shoes?
      • What positive change am I creating beyond my team?
    • Act bolder:
      • Have I raised necessary issues and worked through impasses?
      • What’s standing in the way of me making decisions I’m empowered to make?
      • How can I support my team to make the decisions they are empowered to make?
      • Should I be getting outside my comfort zone?
    • Deliver together:
      • How am I contributing to organisational outcomes?
      • Who should I work with to get it done?
      • Do I have solutions for blockers or irritants impeding smooth delivery?

    MIL OSI News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Thinking of trekking to Everest Base Camp? Don’t leave home without this expert advice

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Heike Schanzel, Professor of Social Sustainability in Tourism, Auckland University of Technology

    Purnima Shrestha /AFP via Getty Images

    Tourists in Kathmandu are tempted everywhere by advertisements for trekking expeditions to Everest Base Camp. If you didn’t know better, you might think it’s just a nice hike in the Nepalese countryside.

    Typically the lower staging post for attempts on the summit, the camp is still 5,364 metres above sea level and a destination in its own right. Travel agencies say no prior experience is required, and all equipment will be provided. Social media, too, is filled with posts enticing potential trekkers to make the iconic journey.

    But there is a real risk of creating a false sense of security. An exciting adventure can quickly turn into a struggle for survival, especially for novice mountaineers.

    Nevertheless, Sagarmatha National Park is deservedly popular for its natural beauty and the allure of the world’s highest peak, Chomolungma (Mount Everest). It is also home to the ethnically distinctive Sherpa community.

    Consequently, the routes to Everest Base Camp are among the busiest in the Himalayas, with nearly 60,000 tourists visiting the area each year. There are two distinct trekking seasons: spring (March to May) and autumn (September to October).

    High mountains require everyone to be properly prepared. Events which under normal conditions might be a minor inconvenience can be magnified in such an environment and pose a serious risk.

    Even at the start of the trek in Lukla (2,860m), one is exposed to factors that can directly or indirectly affect one’s health, especially altitude mountain sickness or unfamiliar bacteria.

    We interviewed 24 trekkers in May this year, as well as 60 residents and business owners in May 2023, to explore some of the safety issues anyone considering heading to base camp should be aware of.

    Life at high altitude

    First, it’s vital to choose goals within one’s technical and physical capabilities. While the human body can adapt to altitudes of up to 5,300m, the potential risk of altitude mountain sickness can occur at only 2,500m – lower than Lukla.

    Proper acclimatisation above 3,000m means ascending no more than 500m a day and resting every two to three days at the same altitude. The optimal (though rarely followed) approach is the “saw tooth system” of climbing during the day but descending to sleep at a lower level.

    Residents of the Khumbu region (on the Nepalese side of Everest) are familiar with the problem of tourists not acclimatising, or not paying attention to their surroundings. As one hotel owner said, pointing to a trekker setting out:

    He’s going uphill and it’s already late. It’s going to get dark and cold soon. He won’t make it to the next settlement. We have to report this to the authorities or go after him ourselves.

    Inexperienced trekkers should hire a local guide. Several we interviewed had needed medical evacuation, including a woman in her mid-20s who had to leave base camp after one night. She found her guides – not locals – online. But they never checked her vital signs during the trek:

    [The doctors] said that I had high-altitude pulmonary edema […] it was just really important to come down the elevation. And if I had tried to go higher, it probably would have been really bad.

    Health checks throughout the trek are imperative. This includes assessing the four main symptoms of altitude mountain sickness: headache, nausea, dizziness and fatigue. If they appear, the trekker shouldn’t go higher and might even need to descend.

    A Sherpa woman at the market in Namche Bazar, Nepal: respect the culture, eat local food.
    Paula Bronstein/Getty Images

    Take time to adapt

    Using a reputable local trekking agency might be more expensive, but it will help ensure safety and also familiarise the visitor with the local culture, helping avoid negative impacts on the host community.

    Too often, the primary goal of trekkers is a photo on the famous rock at base camp. Once obtained, many simply take a helicopter back to Kathmandu. As a helicopter tour agency owner said:

    They don’t want to get back on their feet. The goal, after all, has been achieved. In general, tourists used to be much better prepared. Now they know they can return by helicopter.

    Helicopter travel can be dangerous on its own, of course. But this tendency to view the trek as a one-way trip also affects host-guest relations and can irritate local communities.

    It’s also important to monitor your food and drink intake and watch for signs of food poisoning. Diarrhoea at high altitudes is particularly dangerous because it leads to rapid dehydration – hard to combat in mountain conditions.

    Low air pressure and reduced oxygen exacerbate the condition, weakening the body’s ability to recover. Also, the symptoms of dehydration can resemble altitude mountain sickness.

    When travelling in other climate zones or countries with different sanitary standards, there is inevitable contact with strains of bacteria not present in one’s natural microbiome.

    A good solution is to spend a few days naturally adapting to bacterial flora at a lower altitude in Nepal before heading to the mountains. Also, try to eat the local food, such as daal bhat, Nepal’s national dish. According to one hotel owner in Pangboche:

    Tourists demand strange food from us – pizza, spaghetti, Caesar salad – and then are angry that it doesn’t taste the way they want. This is not our food. You should probably eat local food.

    Most of the trekkers we interviewed during this spring season reported experiencing gastrointestinal issues, often for several days.

    Overall, diarrhoea-related infections are the leading cause of illness among travellers, including base camp trekkers. Studies conducted in the Himalayas show as many as 14% of mountain tourists contract gastroenteritis, accounting for about 10% of all helicopter evacuations.

    In the end, the commonest cause of failure or accident in the mountains is overestimating one’s abilities – what has been called “bad judgement syndrome” – when the route is too hard, the pace too fast, or there’s been too little time spent acclimatising.

    A simple solution: walk slowly and enjoy the views.

    Michal Apollo receives funding from the National Science Centre NCN Poland, the small-scale project awarded by the Institute of Earth Sciences, and the Research Excellence Initiative of the University of Silesia in Katowice. He is affiliated with the Global Justice Program, Yale University, and Academics Stand Against Poverty.

    Heike Schanzel 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. Thinking of trekking to Everest Base Camp? Don’t leave home without this expert advice – https://theconversation.com/thinking-of-trekking-to-everest-base-camp-dont-leave-home-without-this-expert-advice-260497

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to Perspective article on genome editing for conservation

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    July 18, 2025

    A Perspective article published in Nature Reviews Diversity looks at genome engineering for biodiversity conservation and restoration. 

    Prof Bruce Whitelaw, Professor of Animal Biotechnology and Director of The Roslin Institute, said:

    “Biodiversity across our planet is both facing unprecedented challenges and increasing recognised as critical for planetary health. Genome editing technology offers approaches that overcome aspects that current approaches addressing biodiversity cannot address – it can restore lost genetic diversity and increase the resilience of endangered species. Genome editing technology is advancing fast and for species where we know much about their genetic make-up could be used now to reduce genetic load and enable adaption to environmental change. This could include restoration of lost variation but we are still some way-off from restoring a species – although this is foreseeable for the future. No single technology can solve all biodiversity concerns. Genome editing should be adopted alongside traditional conservation methods and habitat restoration. The driver should be for social benefit, have societal involvement, and be guided by science-based regulation – and should be viewed as another useful method in the race to safeguard the world’s needed biodiversity.”

    Prof Dusko Ilic, Professor of Stem Cell Science at King’s College London, said:

    “The article is a thoughtful and forward-looking synthesis, offering a powerful vision for integrating genome engineering into conservation biology. However, its weaknesses lie in over-optimism, lack of robust comparative cost-effectiveness analysis, and occasional underplaying of ecological, regulatory, and ethical risks—especially in complex field scenarios.

    “The paper persuasively argues that genome engineering can address genomic erosion—an underappreciated long-term threat in conservation biology—by restoring adaptive genetic variation and reducing genetic load. The technology has potential, but the evidence base is currently stronger in theory and in model organisms than in demonstrated success with real-world.

    “The authors assume that the relationship between genome-wide variation and fitness is sufficiently understood to justify editing decisions. In reality, the genotype–phenotype–fitness map remains poorly resolved in most non-model organisms, which weakens confidence in editing targets. What improves fitness in captivity or small restored habitats may not translate under fluctuating wild conditions.

    “The paper clearly articulates how genome engineering can target fixed deleterious alleles, reintroduce lost immunogenetic diversity, and enhance climate adaptation capacity—things traditional conservation (e.g. protected areas, captive breeding) cannot accomplish once variation is lost.

    “The concept is compelling but lacks quantitative modelling or comparative data to support the claim that genome editing is more effective or feasible than scaled-up traditional approaches in most cases.

    “The argument presumes that ancestral or heterospecific alleles can be confidently identified and reintroduced without negative pleiotropic effects, but this is rarely tested rigorously outside lab settings.

    “The paper is also light on cost-benefit comparisons. For example, how does gene editing for climate resilience compare (in cost, efficacy, and ecological risk) to investing in habitat corridors that allow natural gene flow?

    “International approvals for edited wildlife release is a probable limiter of near-term feasibility. Regulatory inertia and public scepticism that have historically limited the rollout of genetically modified (GM) organisms—particularly in agriculture, where decades of commercial GM crop use remain contentious in many countries despite robust safety data. Scientific bodies (e.g., WHO, NAS, EFSA) consistently find no substantiated health risks from approved GM crops, yet public acceptance varies widely. The first GM crop was approved in the US in 1994. Thirty years later, only about 30 countries cultivate GM crops, and about 70 allows imports but not domestic cultivation.

    “The distinction between technical readiness (editing) and ecological readiness (release, integration, adaptation) is important. Timescales needed for breeding, backcrossing, release, and population establishment, are equally complex. In species with long generation times, edited lineages may not reach ecological relevance for decades.

    “While critical of de-extinction, the authors do not fully confront the blurring of boundaries in practice—e.g. Colossal Biosciences’ projects (which some authors are affiliated with) walk a fine line between de-extinction branding and conservation justification.

    “The critique of de-extinction would be more credible if potential conflicts of interest were explicitly addressed, and if more scrutiny were applied to projects that market proxy-species restorations as conservation.

    “The call for responsibility is ethically sound, but implementation guidance is vague. How, for example, will conservation scientists ensure openness when working with private-sector collaborators like biotech firms or proprietary genome platforms? How engineered lineages may tie future conservation efforts to specific technologies or patents, raising issues of access, control, and continuity?”

    Prof Tony Perry, Head of the Laboratory of Mammalian Molecular Embryology at the University of Bath, said:

    “This timely Perspective collates potential contributions from the revolution in ‘genome engineering’ (including genome editing) to biodiversity conservation.  The piece points out that to be effective, these advances need to include advanced assisted reproduction methodologies, such as embryonic and stem cell chimeras and nuclear transfer cloning.  In addition, the behaviour of individual or small numbers of gene variants moved into a foreign genome may be difficult or impossible to predict, making it desirable to replicate entire genomes from the oldest sources available.  

    “The challenges of achieving this are considerable even for well-studied species, but by raising the profiles of these challenges, the Perspective promises to accelerate our efforts to solving them for species conservation and its retroactive cousin, de-extinction.”

    ‘Genome engineering in biodiversity conservation and restoration’ by Cock van Oosterhout et al. was published in Nature Reviews Biodiversity at 00.01 UK time Friday 18 July.

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44358-025-00065-6

    Declared interests

    Dusko Ilic: “I declare no conflict of interest.”

    Tony Perry: “None”

    Bruce Whitelaw: “I receive funding from BBSRC, Roslin Foundation, and Gates Foundation.  I am a member of FSA’s Advisory Committee for Novel Foods & Processes, and the Engineering Biology Responsible Innovation Advisory Panel.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to study looking at scarring and heart arrhythmia in veteran male athlete’s hearts

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    July 18, 2025

    A study published in Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging looks at cardiac scarring and arrhythmia in veteran males. 

    Prof Steffen Petersen, Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine, Queen Mary University of London; Consultant Cardiologist at Barts Health NHS Trust; BHF Data Science Centre Interim Director; and Immediate Past President, European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging, said:

    “This study is an important contribution to improving our current understanding of the long-term heart health impact of endurance exercise in older asymptomatic male athletes.  First, scar formation in the heart is common in about half of those athletes enrolled.  Second, a type of scar which is not due to poor blood supply of the heart muscle predicts the occurrence of ventricular arrhythmias, but a very common type (insertion point between the left and right heart) is not concerning, which is reassuring to know.

    “A strength of the study is the confidence we can have in the accuracy of the outcome regarding ventricular arrhythmias, as determined by implantable loop recorders.  A weakness is the limited generalisability of the findings due to the small sample size, exclusive inclusion of male endurance athletes over 50 years of age from a single centre.”

    Prof James Ware, Professor of Cardiovascular and Genomic Medicine, Imperial College London and the MRC Laboratory of Medical Sciences, and NHS consultant cardiologist, said:

    “This is in my opinion a well designed and well executed study.  The authors themselves acknowledge the principal limitations of the study, and the conclusions are balanced and fair.  The press release is a fair reflection of the science described in the article.

    “I would note:

    “This is a highly selected group of competitive athletes who have trained intensively for many years.  I would not expect these findings to have direct relevance to most recreational athletes, and I would not want anyone to be scared of exercise as a result of this study.  Regular physical activity is hugely beneficial for the vast majority of people, and I would encourage participation and enjoyment.  Dr Swoboda emphasises this in his own comments.

    “Nonetheless, fibrosis (scarring) is evidently more common in these high intensity athletes, and associated with heart rhythm abnormalities.  This is something we need to understand better.

    “Most of the arrhythmias observed were non-sustained ventricular arrhythmia (NSVT) – that is short runs of abnormal rhythm lasting

    ‘VENTricular arrhythmia and cardiac fibrOsis in endUrance eXperienced athletes (VENTOUX)’ by Wasim Javed first author et al. was published in Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging at 00:01 UK time on Friday 18 July 2025. 

    Declared interests

    Prof Steffen Petersen: “Disclosures:

    1. Consultancy, Circle Cardiovascular Imaging, Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada (in my view no conflict related to this work).
    2. Named reviewer of two relevant European guidelines:
    1. Pelliccia A, Sharma S, Gati S, Bäck M, Börjesson M, Caselli S, Collet JP, Corrado D, Drezner JA, Halle M, Hansen D, Heidbuchel H, Myers J, Niebauer J, Papadakis M, Piepoli MF, Prescott E, Roos-Hesselink JW, Graham Stuart A, Taylor RS, Thompson PD, Tiberi M, Vanhees L, Wilhelm M; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2020 ESC Guidelines on sports cardiology and exercise in patients with cardiovascular disease. Eur Heart J. 2021 Jan 1;42(1):17-96. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa605. Erratum in: Eur Heart J. 2021 Feb 1;42(5):548-549. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa835. PMID: 32860412.
    2. Visseren FLJ, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Bäck M, Benetos A, Biffi A, Boavida JM, Capodanno D, Cosyns B, Crawford C, Davos CH, Desormais I, Di Angelantonio E, Franco OH, Halvorsen S, Hobbs FDR, Hollander M, Jankowska EA, Michal M, Sacco S, Sattar N, Tokgozoglu L, Tonstad S, Tsioufis KP, van Dis I, van Gelder IC, Wanner C, Williams B; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2022 Feb 19;29(1):5-115. doi: 10.1093/eurjpc/zwab154. PMID: 34558602.
    1. Author of relevant European consensus paper:

    Galderisi M, Cardim N, D’Andrea A, Bruder O, Cosyns B, Davin L, Donal E, Edvardsen T, Freitas A, Habib G, Kitsiou A, Plein S, Petersen SE, Popescu BA, Schroeder S, Burgstahler C, Lancellotti P. The multi-modality cardiac imaging approach to the Athlete’s heart: an expert consensus of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015 Apr;16(4):353. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jeu323. PMID: 25681828.”

    Prof James Ware: “I was not involved in this study, though have collaborated with Dr Swoboda on other research projects.

    Industry relationsships (in the last 2 years):  I have received research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, and have acted as a paid advisor to Health Lumen, Tenaya Therapeutics, and Solid Biosciences.  I am a founder with equity in Saturnus Bio.

    I do not consider that these relationships are directly related to the subject of this paper.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI China: Europe urged to diversify trade markets over US tariff coercion, supply chains disruption

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    As Washington presses ahead with additional tariffs on products from the European Union (EU) and beyond, European officials and experts are urging the diversification of trade markets to mitigate the damage that such coercive financial statecraft is inflicting on global supply chains.

    TARIFF GAME SETTING OFF CHAIN REACTION

    U.S. President Donald Trump announced Saturday that his administration would impose 30 percent tariffs on EU and Mexican exports, arguing that bilateral trade had long been unbalanced and lacked reciprocity.

    Trucks wait to enter the Container Terminal Tollerort in Hamburg, Germany, May 28, 2025. (Xinhua/Zhang Fan)

    The Irish Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald described the tariff threat as “volatile” and “not helpful at all.” “That poses a challenge for Ireland, for Europe, for the world,” she told Xinhua at a press conference in London.

    Countries across Europe have been warning about the impact of the seemingly unrelenting tariff assaults on their economies.

    The Bank of Slovenia estimated that U.S. tariffs could indirectly disrupt the broader European value chain and impact about 15,000 jobs in Slovenia, a significant number in a country of just 2.1 million people.

    The Bank of England also said in its latest Financial Stability Report that the global economy faces rising downside risks, citing U.S. tariffs, and despite a new trade agreement between Britain and the United States in May, a further escalation in trade disputes globally could amplify financial stress and drag on economic growth in Britain.

    Companies of all sizes, from those exporting to the U.S. to manufacturers heavily reliant on global supply chains, are feeling the strain that the tariffs are placing on their operations.

    Neb Chupin, founder of Croatia’s Hermes International, a successful fig jam producer in the U.S. market, said, “With 10 percent tariffs, we are losing about 20,000 U.S. dollars a week. What would happen with 30 or even 50 percent tariffs? I cannot even sleep at night as the situation is very unstable.”

    With 40 percent of exports going to the U.S., Finland’s pharmaceutical industry could also be severely affected by potential U.S. tariffs. Johanna Sipola, deputy CEO of Keskuskauppakamari, or the Finnish Chamber of Commerce, called the tariffs “unrealistic” and warned that the greater risk is the uncertainty they create.

    “If the tariffs were implemented, the repercussions for international pharmaceutical production would be significant. The industry’s delivery chains are unusually global, and even minor disruptions can trigger substantial changes in medicine prices and demand,” Sipola said.

    Beyond the immediate effects, the high-stakes tariff game is setting off a chain reaction across global supply chains and geopolitical dynamics.

    Gavran Igor, an economic analyst from Bosnia and Herzegovina, said that the longer-term impact of the tariffs could prove even more damaging for Balkan manufacturers that are integrated into EU-based industries, particularly automotive supply chains.

    Czech Republic’s Finance Minister Zbynek Stanjura said that exports to the United States account for less than 3 percent of the country’s total exports. However, the country would also be indirectly affected through its European partners who purchase Czech goods and components.

    STRENGTHENING COOPERATION WITH MULTI-PARTNERS URGED

    Inevitably, even countries with modest trade ties to the world’s largest economy can still feel the ripple effects of Washington’s unpredictability. In response, experts recommend that European nations broaden their trade partnerships, especially with China, Southeast Asia and other regions.

    “Europe must, in the long term, become more independent from the American market. A joint free trade zone with the ASEAN countries and the rapid ratification of the agreement with Mercosur are urgently needed,” Dirk Jandura, president of the Federation of German Wholesale, Foreign Trade and Services, said in a statement after Trump’s new tariff announcement.

    Mario Boselli, chairman of the Italy China Council Foundation, said that the shifting dynamics might prompt Europe to reconsider its external economic strategy. In his view, strengthening cooperation with China is a “highly strategic choice.”

    “If economies, like the EU, China, the United Kingdom, Brazil and India, keep global trade open, the U.S. tariffs’ impact on global supply chains will be lower. That’s the opportunity,” said Carlo Altomonte, associate professor of the Department of Social and Political Sciences of Bocconi University in Milan.

    Martin Geissler, Partner at the management consultancy Advyce & Company, echoed the suggestions by sharing Germany’s auto industry as an example. “German automakers have often not yet recognized the growth prospects that exist in Africa and many emerging countries,” Geissler said, contrasting this with China’s strategic engagement with multi-partners.

    Bernardo Mendia, Secretary General of the Portugal-China Chamber of Commerce and Industry, is leading a Portuguese delegation to the ongoing China International Supply Chain Expo in Beijing.

    A key factor driving Portugal’s participation this year, in his words, is the rise of protectionism, logistical disruptions and geopolitical shifts. In the face of these challenges, China offers a distinctive platform to develop innovative solutions, business models, and collaborative partnerships, he said.

    Looking ahead, experts believe that Washington’s trade policies could ultimately backfire on the U.S. economy itself.

    “The U.S. needs many of our industrial products, which cannot be easily replaced in the short term. This allows German manufacturers of these goods to largely pass on the tariffs in their prices to the detriment of the U.S. economy,” said Juergen Matthes, head of International Economic Policy, Financial and Real Estate Markets Research Unit at the German Economic Institute. 

    MIL OSI China News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Tuberville OP-ED: The Fed Has Gone Rogue—Fire Jerome Powell

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) penned a scathing op-ed in the Daily Caller calling for Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to be fired. In the piece, Sen. Tuberville addresses his concern with Powell’s refusal to lower interest rates during a time of economic growth in the Golden Age of America. Chair Powell’s decision to play politics is hurting hardworking American families.

    Read excerpts from Sen. Tuberville’s op-ed below or the full piece here.

    “President Donald J. Trump and his America First policies are back, and the American people can feel the momentum. After four years of disastrous open-border policies, skyrocketing inflation, and woke bureaucrats running wild, the tide is finally turning. Thanks to the President’s tariffs and tax cuts, the Trump economic engine is revving back up. Prices are low. The stock market is up. Employment numbers are on the rise. America is returning to energy dominance. Families are finally starting to feel like they’re keeping more of their paycheck. But there’s still one major obstacle standing in the way of unleashing America’s full economic potential — and that’s Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell.

    Let’s cut the bull, Jerome Powell has gone rogue. He’s acting like a coach whose team is down by 2 at the end of the 4th quarter – but instead of kicking a field goal to win the game, they punt the ball. Inflation is at the lowest point in four years under President Trump – but Jerome Powell is still using the old Biden Democrat Socialist playbook. As a result, interest rates are through the roof, borrowing costs are squeezing families, and small businesses are getting crushed. Americans are ready to build, buy, hire, and grow — but the Fed is playing games instead of cutting rates and letting the economy breathe. That’s not just bad policy. That’s sabotage.

    This isn’t his first offense either. Powell’s track record is a mess. Back in 2021, as Biden and the Radical Left were pumping the economy with trillions of dollars in reckless spending, Powell stood in front of the American people and told them inflation was “transitory.” He basically told American consumers to not believe their own lying eyes. But the American people aren’t stupid. They saw prices rising at the pump, at the grocery store, and on every utility bill. What Powell called “transitory” turned out to be full-blown, historic inflation that was here to stay as long as Biden and Powell were the ones calling the shots.

    […]

    Let’s not pretend this wasn’t political. Powell has aligned himself with the D.C. Swamp, the same corrupt system that’s tried everything to stop Donald Trump from putting America First. The Fed is supposed to be independent, but under Powell, it’s acting like the economic arm of the Democrat Socialist Communist Party. Powell isn’t just a bad economist. He’s a symbol of the woke elites that look down on farmers, truckers, teachers, and welders — the backbone of this nation — and thinks they should just sit down and be quiet while the “experts” in D.C. run things.

    In the United States of America, we believe in freedom, faith, hard work, and putting the American taxpayer first. We don’t take orders from the World Economic Forum. We don’t answer to Davos. And we sure don’t let Ivy League elites in glass towers decide whether families in Alabama can afford to buy a house or start a business.

    If your quarterback is fumbling the ball, missing reads, and throwing picks, you bench him. You don’t give him another season; you send him packing. President Trump knows how to win. We need a Federal Reserve that supports that mission, not one that tries to undermine it. This isn’t just about monetary policy, it’s about our future. 

    It’s time to fire Jerome Powell and bring in a Fed Chair who understands the America First vision — someone who will fight inflation by empowering American workers, not punishing them. Someone who understands that prosperity starts with cutting taxes, slashing regulation, and letting a free people create, build, and thrive. Jerome Powell had his shot. He blew it. It’s time for a new leader at the Fed.”

    Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP and Aging Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Leading lights of UK research spearhead search for world’s best talent

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Press release

    Leading lights of UK research spearhead search for world’s best talent

    12 leading universities and research institutions selected to deliver government’s £54 million fund to recruit world’s top researchers.

    • 12 leading universities and research institutions selected to deliver government’s £54 million fund to recruit world’s top researchers
    • From AI to medicine, cutting-edge research is delivering the new breakthroughs and products that are key to economic growth, the core mission of the Plan for Change   
    • Global Talent Fund is just one part of over £115 million in funding dedicated to attracting top talent to the UK

    12 of the UK’s leading universities and research institutions, across all 4 nations, will deliver the Global Talent Fund: a £54 million investment in Britain’s future prosperity and economic growth.

    The new £54 million Global Talent Fund is designed to attract a total of 60-80 top researchers (both lead researchers and their teams) to the UK, working in the 8 high priority sectors critical to our modern Industrial Strategy like life sciences and digital technologies.  By bringing the very best minds in fields that will be critical to the future of life and work to the UK, we can pave the way for the products, jobs and even industries that define tomorrow’s economy, to be made and grow in Britain.

    From Argentine César Milstein’s work on antibodies, to Hong Kong-born Sir Charles Kao who led the development of fibre optics, through to German Ernst Chain’s efforts to make penicillin usable in medicine, there is a long pedigree of overseas researchers making great breakthroughs whilst working in the UK. We want the UK to continue to be the natural home of the very best science and research, the world over. 

    Driving new tech innovations and scientific breakthroughs will fire up the UK economy and put rocket boosters on the government’s Plan for Change. The IMF estimates that breakthroughs in AI alone could boost productivity by as much as 1.5 percentage points a year, which could be worth up to an average £47 billion to the UK each year over a decade. Other technologies could be gamechangers too: quantum computing could add over £11 billion to the UK’s GDP by 2045, while engineering biology could drive anywhere between £1.6-£3.1 trillion in global impact by 2040. 

    Science Minister Lord Vallance said:

    Genius is not bound by geography. But the UK is one of the few places blessed with the infrastructure, skills base, world-class institutions and international ties needed to incubate brilliant ideas, and turn them into new medicines that save lives, new products that make our lives easier, and even entirely new jobs and industries. Bringing these innovations to life, here in Britain, will be critical to delivering this government’s Plan for Change.

    My message to the bold and the brave who are advancing new ideas, wherever they are, is: our doors are open to you. We want to work with you, support you, and give you a home where you can make your ideas a reality we all benefit from.

    Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves said:

    The UK is home to some of the world’s best universities which are vital for attracting international top talent. Supported by our new Global Talent Taskforce, the Global Talent Fund will cement our position as a leading choice for the world’s top researchers to make their home here, supercharging growth and delivering on our Plan for Change.

    The institutions selected to deliver the Global Talent Fund are:

    • University of Bath 
    • Queen’s University Belfast 
    • University of Birmingham 
    • University of Cambridge 
    • Cardiff University 
    • Imperial College London 
    • John Innes Centre 
    • MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology 
    • University of Oxford 
    • University of Southampton 
    • University of Strathclyde
    • University of Warwick 

    These organisations will each get an equal share of the £54 million Fund, to use bringing some of the world’s foremost researchers and their teams to the UK. Each of them has a track record of recruiting and supporting top international R&D talent, as well as securing international competitive research funding to the UK. They are empowered to develop their own approaches and plans to spend their share of the Global Talent Fund to attract research talent from the around the globe in their choice of Industrial Strategy areas, including covering visa and relocation costs for researchers and their family members.

    The Global Talent Fund, administered by UKRI, is just one part of over £115 million funding that is being dedicated to attracting the very best scientific and research talent to the UK. In addition to this fund, 2 fellowships have been launched, aimed at bringing groundbreaking AI research teams to UK organisations and labs: the £25 million Turing AI ‘Global’ Fellowships, as well as a UK-based expansion of the Encode: AI for Science Fellowship.

    Alongside this, 2 new fast-track research grant routes have been announced by the National Academies – including £30 million from the Royal Society for a Faraday Discovery Fellowship accelerated international route, part-funded by their £250 million DSIT endowment. The Royal Academy of Engineering has announced a similar fast track international route, as part of its £150 million Green Future Fellowships endowment from DSIT – this funding will ensure the UK competes for the best global talent in science and research. While researchers looking to relocate to the UK can also benefit from the Choose Europe scheme, thanks to the UK’s association to Horizon Europe.

    All of these efforts will be supported by the Global Talent Taskforce. Launched as part of the Industrial Strategy, the taskforce will report directly to the Prime Minister and Chancellor, and support researchers, scientists and engineers as well as top-tier investors, entrepreneurs and managerial talent to bring their skills to Britain.

    Work to cultivate top AI research talent in the UK is further bolstered through the Spärck AI scholarships, which will provide full funding for master’s degrees at 9 leading UK universities specialising in artificial intelligence and STEM subjects. These scholarships will open for applications in Spring 2026. We also support postgraduate research broadly, with £500 million UKRI funding supporting over 4.700 students at 45 higher education institutions to study projects in biological, engineering and physical, and natural and environmental sciences.

    Professor Phil Taylor, Vice-Chancellor and President of the University of Bath, said: 

    Our university was founded with a mission to work closely with industry, and partnership working has been in our DNA ever since. We are truly delighted to play our part in attracting outstanding global academics to help power research in the UK’s industrial strategy priority areas. 

    This major investment recognises the vital role universities play in driving innovation and growth across the UK. We look forward to working with DSIT and UKRI to attract more bright minds to play their part in our innovation-fuelled and impact-focussed research.

    Professor Sir Ian Greer, President and Vice-Chancellor at Queen’s University Belfast said:

    We are proud that Queen’s has been selected as one of the 12 institutions to deliver the Global Talent Fund. This funding will allow us to bring world-leading researchers to Northern Ireland in priority areas such as advanced manufacturing and cybersecurity, fields that are vital to our economy and to the UK’s global competitiveness.

    By attracting exceptional talent from outside the UK, we are strengthening our research base, and helping to drive innovation within the local economy. This is a clear endorsement of the excellence and impact of research at Queen’s, and of our role in helping to deliver the UK government’s Industrial Strategy.

    Professor Adam Tickell, Vice-Chancellor and Principal at the University of Birmingham said:

    I am delighted that the University of Birmingham has been selected to support the government’s vision to attract exceptional international researchers to the UK. In celebration of our 125 anniversary this year, our University is committed to investing in the recruitment of 125 leading researchers. The Global Talent Fund investment means that we will now go even further – drawing a diverse community of world-leading researchers to Birmingham. They will join a thriving and ambitious research environment, where the potential for discovery, collaboration, and impact has never been greater. We look forward to welcoming a new generation of global research leaders to our University and city and to seeing the positive impact their work will have on the UK economy and on the health and wellbeing of society.

    Professor Deborah Prentice, Vice-Chancellor, University of Cambridge, said:

    The University is grateful for this award of funding. The Fund will bolster emerging and accelerating research areas, in line with the goals of the government’s Industrial Strategy. This investment will be pivotal in securing and supporting international academic expertise and strengthening the strategic opportunities the University is seeking to catalyse for both the University and the UK more widely.  We look forward to the opportunities this will unlock.

    Cardiff University’s Vice-Chancellor, Professor Wendy Larner said:

    We are delighted to have secured this funding to help us attract the world’s best minds to Cardiff and Wales.

    It is a clear endorsement of our standing and place in the UK research community and sends a clear message that we are well-positioned to attract global talent. It will enable us to support more of the world’s leading academics in Wales – helping to further boost our research capacity and global reputation in key research areas.

    Professor Hugh Brady, President of Imperial College London said:

    Imperial College London is a global university and international researchers are central to our success. They bring fresh perspectives, new ideas, and a spirit of discovery that enriches our community and drives breakthroughs that benefit all of society – from tackling malaria to breakthroughs in quantum computing.

    The Global Talent Fund will support our efforts to attract the brightest minds from around the world. We look forward to welcoming them and continuing to push the boundaries of knowledge together.

    Professor Cristobal Uauy, Director designate, John Innes Centre said:

    This funding is a major boost to our efforts at the John Innes Centre to attract ambitious world-leading researchers to join our Healthy Plants, Healthy People, Healthy Planet vision.

    By bringing outstanding talent to the Norwich Research Park, we are strengthening the UK’s global leadership in bio-based innovation, data-driven biology, and sustainable, high-value agri-tech, key pillars of the UK’s Modern Industrial Strategy.

    As a Chilean researcher who relocated to the UK, I’ve experienced first-hand the friendly, open and collaborative academic environment here. The world-class facilities, technology platforms and institutional support provided at the John Innes Centre are unrivalled. It’s the kind of environment where scientists can take bold ideas forward, build meaningful collaborations, and create lasting global impact.

    Jan Löwe, Laboratory of Molecular Biology Director, said:

    We welcome the government’s drive to attract global talent which addresses key barriers faced by researchers wishing to relocate to the UK.

    The LMB’s scientific breakthroughs and technological advances have been driven by talented scientists of all nationalities since our origins in the 1940s. Science is a creative pursuit, and creativity thrives on diverse input from people of different backgrounds.

    Research has no borders, and this funding will enable the LMB and fellow UK institutions to be competitive in the global scientific talent market and attract gifted scientists from around the world to drive UK innovations for the benefit of all.

    Professor Irene Tracey CBE, FRS, FMedSci, Vice-Chancellor of Oxford University, said:

    Oxford University has a long history of attracting exceptional global talent, enabling world-leading research, teaching, and innovation with wide-reaching social and economic impact. In 2021–2022, our science parks, knowledge exchange, and the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine contributed to a £6.6 billion boost to the UK economy, with our spinouts supporting over 31,600 UK jobs. Globally, the AZ vaccine is estimated to have saved over 6 million lives in its first year, resulting in a worldwide health economic impact of £2 trillion. The Global Talent Fund will draw internationally recognised experts to Oxford, building capability for future innovation and growth in the Industrial Strategy areas we have prioritised.

    Professor Mark E. Smith, President and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Southampton, said:

    We are proud that the University of Southampton has been chosen as one of the small number of organisations for this exciting and important initiative.

    Attracting world-leading researchers to work in the United Kingdom will help to lead innovation in the technologies of the future, supporting industry and driving economic growth.

    Southampton is a global University with a wealth of research talent and this funding will help us to build further on our existing strengths and partnerships.

    Professor Sir Jim McDonald, Principal and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Strathclyde, said:

    We welcome this important investment in global talent that UKRI has committed to and the alignment it creates between the new Industrial Strategy and the research and innovation leadership that is critical to its success. 

    Strathclyde is proud of its position as a leading international technological university. We deliver impact collaboratively by bringing together the excellent talented people we have at Strathclyde and through working closely with partners in other universities, industrial partners, innovation centres and National Laboratories through research that addresses market opportunities and national priorities – from climate resilience and sustainable energy to health innovation, and security and resilience.

    This new funding from UKRI and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology reflects confidence in our ability to translate cutting-edge discovery into real-world applications and solutions, working collaboratively with industry, government and global partners. It will enhance our research environment, widen our talent pipeline and further enable our mission as a place of useful learning.

    Professor Stuart Croft, Vice Chancellor and President of the University of Warwick said:

    The University of Warwick is known for our world-leading expertise in Advanced Manufacturing and the Arts and this £4.35 million investment will accelerate the development of innovative insights, solutions, products, and services in an inter-disciplinary way. It will also help drive inclusive regional and national growth in the Creative Industries.

    Through our strong partnerships with SMEs, industry, and local councils, this initiative will play a key role in advancing UK innovation and delivering meaningful benefits to communities across the West Midlands and the wider UK. 

    In our 60th anniversary year we are reaffirming our commitment to making a better world together and this funding will further strengthen our determination to deliver our vision.

    Professor Christopher Smith, International Champion at UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), said:

    Global challenges from climate change to energy security, food systems to antimicrobial resistance do not respect borders, and neither should the research and innovation required to address them. Time and again, international collaboration has driven transformative breakthroughs: from the discovery of the Higgs boson at CERN, to the global effort to decode the complex wheat genome, enabling the development of high-yield, climate-resilient crops that support food security worldwide. The impact of global partnerships is clear.

    The Global Talent Fund is a vital part of UKRI’s mission to support an open, dynamic, and diverse research and innovation system. By supporting our brilliant research institutes to attract outstanding individuals from across the world and foster collaboration between nations, we are strengthening the UK’s position at the heart of the global knowledge economy. This fund aligns with our enduring commitment to international engagement, and to working together to shape a better future for all.

    Notes to editors

    The £54 million Global Talent Fund comes over 5 years, starting in 2025/2026. The fund, administered by UKRI and delivered by universities and research organisations, will cover 100% of eligible costs, including both relocation and research expenses, with no requirement for match funding from research organisations. The initiative also includes full visa costs for researchers and their dependants, removing significant financial and administrative barriers to relocation.

    Funding will be distributed evenly amongst the 12 research organisations.

    The small number of world-class researchers, and their teams, who go on to be supported by these funds, will come to live and work in the UK via existing routes such as the Skilled Worker, Global Talent, and the Innovator Founder visas.

    There are no plans to change existing visa routes – and the Immigration White Paper sets out the government’s broad approach to restoring order to the immigration system through the Plan for Change.  

    DSIT media enquiries

    Email press@dsit.gov.uk

    Monday to Friday, 8:30am to 6pm 020 7215 3000

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 18 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Warnock, Capito Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Boost Child Care Workforce, Increase Access to Early Head Start Programs

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Reverend Raphael Warnock – Georgia

    Warnock, Capito Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Boost Child Care Workforce, Increase Access to Early Head Start Programs

    The bipartisan HEADWAY Act would address staffing shortages in the child care workforce by allowing Early Head Start classroom teachers to teach and earn their Child Development Associate (CDA) credential simultaneously

    Senator Reverend Warnock is one of two Head Start alum currently serving in the Senate

    Senator Warnock is also a founding member of the Head Start to Congress Caucus

    As of February 2023, nearly 20% of Early Head Start and Early Head Start staff positions remained vacant nationwide

    Senator Warnock: “I’m where I am today because of programs like Head Start”

    Senator Capito: “Workforce shortages in childcare centers, including in Head Start and Early Head Start, can be particularly challenging for families and communities because so many parents rely on consistent childcare to be able to work”

    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) introduced the bipartisan HEADWAY Act (Head Start Education and Development Workforce Advancement and Yield Act). The legislation would address early child care workforce shortages by allowing Early Head Start classroom teachers to teach and earn their Child Development Associate (CDA) credential simultaneously. As of February 2023, nearly 20% of Early Head Start and Early Head Start staff positions remained vacant nationwide.

    The HEADWAY Act would also help pave the way for greater hiring flexibility, attract more qualified candidates to the profession of early childhood education, and ensure that Early Head Start classrooms are fully staffed.

    “I’m where I am today because of programs like Head Start,” said Senator Warnock, who is one of two Head Start alums currently serving in the Senate.“Ensuring our nation’s children have access to quality childcare and excellent teachers is crucial, which is why I am so pleased to work across the aisle with Senator Capito on this effort. As the father of two young kids, I know how crucial education is during those formative years to their continued growth.”

    “Workforce shortages in childcare centers, including in Head Start and Early Head Start, can be particularly challenging for families and communities because so many parents rely on consistent childcare to be able to work. I am proud to help introduce the HEADWAY Act, which will add staff to Early Head Start classrooms, and give early-career childcare workers the skills, mentorship, and experience they need to thrive,” Senator Capito said.

    “The HEADWAY Act addresses two serious workforce challenges: it provides added flexibility for Early Head Start to hire and train those new to the early childhood workforce, and it enables the beginning of a career path in early childhood education for those who are interested in the field but still need training. The HEADWAY Act provides a career stepping stone, improves Early Head Start’s capacity to serve, and ensures we remain competitive and adaptable in an ever-changing workforce market,” said NHSA’s Executive Director Yasmina Vinci. “We applaud Senators Raphael Warnock – a proud Head Start alumnus – and Shelley Capito for their belief in the potential of our people to bring Head Start to new heights, and helping children and families in Early Head Start to flourish.”

    “We recognize Senators Warnock and Capito for their deep support of Early Head Start and the role the CDA plays in its success. The important thing to remember is that, ultimately, the bill will lead to more teachers with CDAs. We’re at a point where we recognize the need for flexibility to ensure classrooms are fully staffed, as the senators have advanced with their bill. We also believe those who earn a CDA should have that achievement recognized with salary increases.” – The Council for Professional Recognition.

    The HEADWAY Act will allow Head Start to fulfill its commitment to providing high-quality, early childhood education for children from vulnerable families, laying the foundation for their future success. The HEADWAY Act will support Early Head Start learning professionals and give program directors the flexibility they need to respond to employment trends, while still maintaining the high standards and professionalization of the field.

    As a Head Start alum, Senator Warnock has been a strong advocate for the program. Previously, in 2023, Senator Warnock returned to his hometown of Savannah, Georgia, to tour Early Head Start classrooms at the Economic Opportunity Authority (EOA) for Savannah-Chatham County and hear from local early learning leaders about the workforce shortages impacting this critical early education program serving low-income families and their children.

    The bill text for the HEADWAY Act is HERE.

    A one-pager for the HEADWAY Act is HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Education – Campaign launched to boost school board participation

    Source: Te Whakarōputanga Kaitiaki Kura o Aotearoa (NZSTA)

    Te Whakarōpūtanga Kaitiaki Kura o Aotearoa – the New Zealand School Boards Association (NZSBA) has officially launched its national campaign, Get on Board 2025, to mobilise participation in the upcoming triennial school board elections.
    The campaign aims to increase nominations and voter turnout for school boards (formerly boards of trustees) across Aotearoa, encouraging Kiwis to step forward and help shape the future of their local schools.

    Created in-house,  Get on Board 2025 builds on previous campaigns and brings a fresh new look, modernised resources and a digital-first approach designed to reach more prospective board members than ever before.
    “School boards play a critical role in our education system. They make decisions that affect students, teachers and whānau across the country,” says NZSBA President Meredith Kennett.
    “This campaign is about making sure all New Zealanders understand the value of community participation in their children’s education – and feel empowered to take part.”
    With updated messaging, vibrant visuals and a strong focus on video storytelling and social media, the 2025 campaign is designed to highlight the value of school board service and the impact local governance has on student success.
    Key features of the Get on Board 2025 campaign include:

    • A new campaign identity and refreshed resources for schools and boards, including digital and print-ready assets.
    • In collaboration with Foxton-based animator Fraser Munro, a promotional video (also translated into te reo Māori).
    • A redeveloped website – schoolboardelections.org.nz – built by our digital partner Somar featuring improved accessibility, clearer content and easier navigation for prospective candidates and voters.
    • Advertising across print, radio and digital (as well as TV via Whakaata Māori).
    • It sits alongside Mātauranga Iwi Leaders Group’s Whakapapa Decisions campaign to increase Māori participation in the elections.
    The triennial elections are scheduled for September 2025. Nominations for most schools are now open, and NZSBA encourages everyone who is passionate about their school community to consider standing or nominating someone they know.
    Visit www.schoolboardelections.org.nz for more information and join one of our community webinars or in-person sessions to see what it’s all about.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Ogles Urges Investigation Into Belmont University DEI Deception

    Source:

    Washington, DC—Congressman Andy Ogles (TN-05) sent a formal letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon demanding an immediate compliance review of Belmont University for its alleged rebranding of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in defiance of federal law and Executive Order 14173, “Combating Radical Ideologies in Higher Education.”

    Despite public claims of compliance with President Trump’s directive to eliminate DEI programs, Belmont appears to have rebranded its DEI bureaucracy under a new label: “HUB”—Hope, Unity, and Belonging. Leaked video footage and whistleblower reports suggest this rebranding is an intentional effort to deceive federal authorities and continue promoting discriminatory programming under a new name.

    “Belmont University claims to be a Christian institution grounded in Biblical principles—but its administration is injecting anti-gospel DEI ideology into its curriculum,” said Congressman Ogles. “President Trump has rightly demanded that colleges and universities dismantle the DEI cartel or lose federal funding. Belmont officials, however, have been caught on camera bragging about their ‘clever’ scheme to rebrand DEI and continue pushing the same radical agenda under a new name.

    “I am demanding a full investigation into Belmont—and, if necessary, a cut to their federal funding. The preservation of faithful Christian education in Middle Tennessee is non-negotiable.”

    Read The Letter Here

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Law and Research – Study slams Family Court’s reliance on ‘junk’ research – UoA

    Source: University of Auckland (UoA)

    The Family Court is basing decisions on ‘junk’ evidence and putting children’s futures at risk, according to a new journal article.

    You might imagine the expert evidence heard in the Family Court, such as what’s provided by court psychologists, would stand up to scrutiny… not so, according to a scathing new journal article.

    The study suggests judges, lawyers and psychologists in New Zealand’s Family Court are routinely accepting ‘junk’ evidence to support critical decisions about children’s lives.

    University of Auckland law scholar Associate Professor Carrie Leonetti reviewed 29 Family Court judgements under the New Zealand Care of Children Act in which court professionals claimed to be citing academic research to support their decisions. Her investigation finds they frequently cited material that was not academic research, instead relying on online content, unpublished handouts, and presentations from conferences or legal training sessions.

    “Clinical psychologists, often working without specialised forensic training, are presenting evidence that would not withstand academic scrutiny,” she says.

    “I’m shocked at how judges never go … ‘but but but’… and ask some questions. We need to define what’s real, what isn’t, what’s reliable, and what’s not.”

    New Zealand’s Evidence Act 2006 and the High Court Rules require expert witnesses to base their recommendations on evidence that’s within their area of expertise and generally accepted within a scientific field and specify the literature they rely on. Yet Leonetti’s paper details breaches of these requirements – including experts opining outside their area of expertise, misrepresenting research, and failing to qualify sweeping claims.

    Examples include statements like “almost all disclosures of sexual abuse by children whose parents have separated are false” or “studies show that all children are better off in shared care” – broad claims Leonetti says are based on misrepresented or misunderstood literature.

    “The Court’s reliance on a small, fringe collection of writings from conferences, trainings, and legal journals rather than peer-reviewed science publications is dangerous and unjust.”

    Associate Professor Carrie LeonettiAuckland Law School

    Leonetti’s paper, published in the Indiana Health Law Review, says some professionals referenced controversial or discredited theories while omitting landmark studies like research into Adverse Childhood Experiences, which shows the long-term traumatic impact of exposure to family violence in childhood.

    She says Family Court judges, lawyers, and psychologists frequently misrepresent or misuse academic literature, dismissing evidence they disagree with and cherry-picking non-peer-reviewed material to support pre-existing views.

    The paper also identifies what Leonetti dubs “Family Court favourites” – a small number of obscure authors and articles cited disproportionately by court professionals, regardless of their academic significance.

    “The Court’s reliance on a small, fringe collection of writings from conferences, trainings, and legal journals rather than peer-reviewed science publications is dangerous and unjust.”

    She also highlights the high cost of accessing peer-reviewed scientific publications and the rise of “predatory” academic journals.

    “Since the 2000s, thousands of online journals with little to no peer review have emerged, making it difficult for non-experts to identify scientifically valid research.”

    This erosion of the meaning of academic publication, says Leonetti, has made it harder for non-experts, such as judges, lawyers, and court psychologists, to “separate the wheat from the chaff when deciding which literature warrants consideration and which is the functional equivalent of self-publication.

    “These courts are essentially making life-changing decisions about children’s futures based on what amounts to professional folklore rather than scientific evidence.”

    The study recomm

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Pragmatic engagement – what Albanese’s visit reveals about China relations in a turbulent world

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Edward Sing Yue Chan, Postdoctoral Fellow in China Studies, Australian National University

    The Albanese government has faced an increasingly uncertain world since its re-election in May.

    US President Donald Trump has cast a long shadow over the Australia–US alliance, raising fresh questions about Canberra’s long-term regional strategy.

    Against this backdrop, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s approach to foreign policy is reflecting a careful recalibration – one that seeks to balance security partnerships with the pursuit of economic opportunities, especially with Australia’s largest trading partner, China.

    Albanese has wrapped up a six-day visit to China which was characterised by a highly pragmatic approach to dealing with the problems and irritants in the bilateral relationship.

    Economic engagement

    Albanese’s visit to Beijing, Shanghai and Chengdu – cities emblematic of Australia’s political, economic and cultural connections with China – was more than symbolic.

    It was a high-profile diplomatic venture, with Albanese meeting both the Chinese President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Qiang.

    But it was more than a leaders’ summit. A large team of key business leaders in banking, manufacturing, mining and education were on the trip to meet their Chinese counterparts and seek more cooperation.

    Economic engagement dominated the visit. As Albanese highlighted before his trip, “my priority is jobs”.

    Broader partnerships spanning multiple sectors, including healthcare, education and green energy, were canvassed. The two nations also explored closer cooperation on energy transition and climate change.

    Chinese Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian has even floated a collaboration on artificial intelligence.

    However, the suggestion has been met with caution in Canberra due to ongoing concerns around national security and data governance.

    Cooperate where we can

    Beyond trade and investment, the visit also marked an effort to rebuild people-to-people exchanges.

    Since last year, Australian citizens have been able to visit China for up to 30 days without a visa. In turn, Australia will welcome more Chinese visitors under a new Memorandum of Understanding promoting Australia as a premier tourist destination for Chinese travellers.

    Albanese’s meetings with Xi Jinping and Li Qiang also yielded concrete results.

    The official joint statement emphasised economic cooperation, particularly in climate-related areas such as steel decarbonisation, dryland farming and the green economy.

    These outcomes align with the Albanese government’s guiding principle: cooperate where we can.

    The deeper economic cooperation has been noted in China, where there is an expectation collaboration will continue to accelerate on the back of improved relations.

    As James Laurenceson of the Australia–China Relations Institute recently noted, a stronger economic partnership will help foster more resilient ties across the board.

    More independent foreign policy

    Other analysts also see increased mutual benefits in the bilateral relationship.

    China-watcher James Curran suggests the visit may signal a maturing, more independent Australian foreign policy.

    The primary role of Australian statecraft is to do everything we possibly can to avoid a conflict. To avoid ever getting close to a decision about following the Americans into a war of that kind.

    This was best illustrated by Albanese’s refusal to provide Washington with a wide-ranging and largely open-ended commitment to support the US in any conflict with China over Taiwan.

    Indeed, as Curran observes, Albanese has tried to steer the relationship away from disagreement and towards pragmatic engagement.

    Following his meeting with Xi, Albanese was repeatedly asked by Australian journalists if he raised sensitive issues such as Taiwan, China’s military build-up and the South China Sea.

    While he confirmed these topics were addressed, he emphasised a preference for peaceful engagement:

    […] we want peace and security in the region. That is in the interest of both Australia and in the interest of China.

    Unsurprisingly, the joint statement made no reference to these issues, reflecting a mutual decision to sidestep confrontation in favour of stabilising the relationship.

    Quietly managing differences

    This diplomatic posture toward China would appear to be a defining feature of the Albanese government’s second term: strengthening cooperation while quietly managing differences.

    Rather than highlighting points of contention, the government is opting to avoid open disagreement where possible.

    Overt disputes risk destabilising bilateral ties. If issues are raised publicly, it is unlikely to shift entrenched positions on either side. This explains why the ownership of the Port of Darwin, for example, was not mentioned during Albanese’s meeting with Xi.

    Critics, however, argue this risks projecting weakness towards China.

    Justin Bassi, executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, warns the government is staying silent in the face of ongoing Chinese coercion:

    Australia is only complying with China’s desires when the government says nothing and leaves the public to trust that the threats posed by China are all being dealt with in the classified realm. This is not viable policy. Australia’s sovereignty must not be contingent on Beijing’s preferences.

    Even within China, analysts are cautious about Albanese’s approach. As one Chinese scholar told us, “a stable relationship does not necessarily mean a friendly one”.

    In fact, while the Chinese media has stressed Australia and China’s shared commitment to regional stability, this was barely mentioned in the official joint statement.

    Mutual interests

    Still, there is recognition on both sides that pragmatism rather than ideological grandstanding is the more sustainable path forward.

    In sum, Albanese’s visit does not mark a dramatic reset or bold new direction in Australia–China relations. Rather, it signals a shift toward greater realism.

    In an increasingly complex and multipolar world, diplomacy grounded in mutual interests, rather than ideology, is not just practical, but may be a growing trend across the globe.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Pragmatic engagement – what Albanese’s visit reveals about China relations in a turbulent world – https://theconversation.com/pragmatic-engagement-what-albaneses-visit-reveals-about-china-relations-in-a-turbulent-world-260578

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Merkley, Bonamici, Oregon Delegation Slam Trump Education Funding Cuts Harming Schools Across the State

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)

    July 17, 2025

    Washington, D.C. – Oregon’s U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley and U.S. Representative Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01) led the Oregon Democratic delegation—Senator Ron Wyden and U.S. Representatives Val Hoyle (OR-04), Andrea Salinas (OR-06), Maxine Dexter (OR-03), and Janelle Bynum (OR-05)—to demand the Trump Administration reverse its abrupt cutoff of more than $73 million in federal education funds for Oregon, harming afterschool programs, specialized literacy programs, educator training, and support for English language learners at schools.

    “Any withholding of these critical funds will negatively affect the State of Oregon’s efforts to increase academic outcomes for all our students, particularly our multilingual and migrant education students. It will undermine successful initiatives to recruit talented teachers and retain them in our schools, and it will undermine the ability for students to be taught in safe and secure environments. Additionally, withholding funds that support student learning through summer and after-school programs will undermine Oregon’s efforts to help all students thrive in their education,” wrote the lawmakers to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought and U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon.

    The Oregon delegation letter follows Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield announcing the state joined a coalition of states to file a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s freezing of these federal education funds. The Administration this week also moved to fire 1,400 Education Department employees, impacting the agency’s ability to perform essential functions such as distributing financial aid and essential federal dollars.

    “Oregon’s school districts are dedicated and efficient stewards of federal dollars, leveraging funds from [these grant programs] to improve student outcomes and serve Oregon’s student population,” they continued. “For example, Neah-Kah-Nie School District in rural Tillamook County uses ESEA Title II, Part A dollars to fund literacy interventionists in their rural elementary schools so students struggling with reading, writing, and comprehension get targeted support. Without Title II dollars, Portland Public Schools, Oregon’s largest school district serving more than 44,000 students, will lose the ability to provide critical professional development and support for teachers working in low-income schools with challenging student needs.”

    The lawmakers stressed, “In addition, Hood River Valley School District uses a 21st Century Community Learning Center grant under ESEA Title IV to administer academic support in after-school programs at four Title I schools across this rural region. Similarly, Umatilla School District uses the funds for an after-school program that supports extended learning for roughly half of its K-12 students and provides an opportunity for the students to participate in robotics and a variety of STEAM-focused classes.”

    Merkley and Wyden also previously joined 30 Senate colleagues to demand OMB Director Vought and Secretary McMahon immediately release nearly $7 billion in frozen funding for K-12 schools and adult literacy programs nationwide.

    “We respectfully demand that you abide by the law and immediately release this previously appropriated funding. Oregon’s students are counting on you and so are we,” the lawmakers directed.

    Full text of the Oregon delegation’s letter can be found HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA Opens Business Recovery Center in San Angelo to Help Businesses Impacted by July Storms and Flooding

    Source: United States Small Business Administration

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) announced today the opening of an SBA Business Recovery Center (BRC) in Tom Green Countyto assist small businesses, private nonprofit (PNP) organizations and residents affected by severe storms, straight-line winds and flooding beginning July 2.

    Beginning Friday, July 18, SBA customer service representatives will be on hand at the Business Recovery Center in San Angelo to answer questions and assist with the disaster loan application process. No appointment is necessary, walk-ins are welcome. Those who prefer to schedule an in-person appointment in advance can do so at appointment.sba.gov.

    The center’s hours of operation are as follows:

    TOM GREEN COUNTY
    Business Recovery Center
    Angelo State University
    69 N. Chadbourne St.
    San Angelo, TX  76903

    Opens at 10 a.m., Friday, July 18
    Mondays – Fridays, 8 a.m. – 5 p.m.

    The following location is also open and continues to serve survivors:

    KERR COUNTY
    Business Recovery Center
    The YES Center at First Presbyterian Church
    823 North St.
    Kerrville, TX   78028

    Mondays – Fridays, 9 a.m. – 6 p.m.
    Saturdays, 9 a.m. – 1 p.m.

    “SBA’s Business Recovery Centers have consistently proven their value to business owners following a disaster,” said Chris Stallings, associate administrator of the Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience at the SBA. “Business owners can visit these centers to meet face‑to‑face with specialists who will guide them through the disaster loan application process and connect them with resources to support their recovery.”

    Businesses and nonprofits are eligible to apply for business physical disaster loans and may borrow up to $2 million to repair or replace disaster-damaged or destroyed real estate, machinery and equipment, inventory, and other business assets.

    The SBA’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program is available to small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, nurseries, and private nonprofit organizations impacted by financial losses directly related to these disasters. The SBA is unable to provide disaster loans to agricultural producers, farmers, or ranchers, except for small aquaculture enterprises.

    EIDLs are available for working capital needs caused by the disaster and are available even if the business or PNP did not suffer any physical damage. The loans may be used to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts payable, and other bills not paid due to the disaster.

    Homeowners and renters are eligible to apply for home and personal property loans and may borrow up to $100,000 to replace or repair personal property, such as clothing, furniture, cars, and appliances. Homeowners may apply for up to $500,000 to replace or repair their primary residence.

    SBA representatives will also provide help to business owners and residents at disaster recovery centers when they are opened in the impacted area.

    Interest rates are as low as 4% for small businesses, 3.625% for nonprofits, and 2.813% for homeowners and renters with terms up to 30 years. Interest does not begin to accrue, and payments are not due until 12 months from the date of the first loan disbursement. The SBA determines eligibility and sets loan amounts and terms based on each applicant’s financial condition.

    To apply online, visit sba.gov/disaster. Applicants may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955 or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov for more information on SBA disaster assistance. For people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

    The filing deadline to return applications for physical property damage is Sept. 4, 2025. The deadline to return economic injury applications is April 6, 2026.

    ###

    About the U.S. Small Business Administration

    The U.S. Small Business Administration helps power the American dream of business ownership. As the only go-to resource and voice for small businesses backed by the strength of the federal government, the SBA empowers entrepreneurs and small business owners with the resources and support they need to start, grow, expand their businesses, or recover from a declared disaster. It delivers services through an extensive network of SBA field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations. To learn more, visit www.sba.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Clawback of $1.1B for PBS and NPR puts rural stations at risk – and threatens a vital source of journalism

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Allison Perlman, Associate Professor of Film & Media Studies, University of California, Irvine

    Nathan Heffel and Grace Hood rehearse their Colorado Public Radio public affairs program in Centennial, Colo., in 2017. Andy Cross/The Denver Post via Getty Images

    The U.S. Senate narrowly approved on July 16, 2025, a bill that would claw back federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which distributes money to NPR, PBS and their affiliate stations. The US$9 billion rescission package will withdraw $1.1 billion Congress had previously approved for the CPB to receive in the 2026 and 2027 fiscal years. In addition, it makes deep foreign aid cuts. All Democrats present voted against the measure, joined by two Republicans: Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. As long as the House, which approved a previous version, votes in favor of the Senate’s version of the bill by midnight July 18, Trump will be able to meet a budgetary deadline by signing the measure into law in time for it to take effect.

    What will happen to NPR, PBS and local stations?

    NPR and PBS provide programming to local public television and radio stations across the country. The impact on them will be direct and indirect.

    Both NPR and PBS receive money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, an independent nonprofit corporation Congress created in 1967 to receive and distribute federal money to public broadcasters. More than 70% of the money it distributes flows directly to local stations. Some stations get up to half of their budgets from the CPB.

    But NPR and PBS get much of their funding from foundation grants, viewers’ and listeners’ donations, and corporate underwriting. And local public radio and TV stations also get support from an array of sources besides CPB.

    “There’s nothing more American than PBS,” said the network’s CEO, Paula Kerger, at a congressional hearing on March 26, 2025.

    Only about 1% of NPR funding, and 15% of PBS funding, comes directly from the government via the CPB. However, once local radio and television stations lose federal funding, they’ll be less able to pay NPR and PBS for the programs they produce.

    The nearly 1,500 public media stations in the U.S. rely on a mix of NPR, PBS and third-party producer programming, such as American Public Media and PRX, for the programs they offer. Local stations also produce and air regional news and provide emergency broadcasts for the government.

    In rural areas with few broadcast stations and spotty cellphone coverage, public broadcast stations are vital sources of information about important community news and updates during emergencies. Federal support is essential for the programming and day-to-day operations of many local stations and allows for the maintenance of equipment and personnel to operate these vital community resources.

    We believe that stations in communities that most need them, especially in rural locations, would be hit especially hard because they rely heavily on CPB funding.

    Why are Republicans taking this step?

    Public broadcasting has long been a target of conservative Republicans. They say that with a highly diversified media landscape, the public no longer needs media that is subsidized by federal dollars. They also claim that public broadcasting has a liberal bias and taxpayers should not be required to fund media that slants to the left politically.

    Why is public media necessary when there’s news on the internet?

    As journalism revenue has plummeted, public broadcasting has remained a vital source for news in communities across the nation. This is especially true in rural communities, where economic and political pressures have threatened the survival of local journalism.

    In addition, with much online news coverage placed behind paywalls, public radio and television plays an important role in making quality journalism available to the American public.

    Want crucial information about water systems in your drought-prone community? Public radio station KVMR in Nevada City, Calif., has a program for you.
    KVMR screenshot

    Why did Congress approve these funds 2 years ahead?

    Public broadcasting has gotten roughly $550 million per year from the federal government in recent years. The CPB has always approved and designated those funds two years in advance, due to a provision in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, after Congress has voted to provide that money. The CPB then has distributed that funding primarily through grants to PBS and NPR affiliate stations to support their technical infrastructure, program development and audience research.

    What are the consequences for Native communities?

    Dozens of Native American stations are at risk of closing once the CPB is defunded. Native Public Media, a network of 57 radio stations and four TV stations, is a key source of news and information for tribal communities across the nation and relies on CPB support.

    U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, publicly stated that he secured an agreement with the White House to move $9.4 million in Interior Department funding to two dozen Native American stations. But there is no provision related to this promise within the legislation.

    Allison Perlman is the co-chair of the Scholars Advisory Committee of the American Archive of Public Broadcasting.

    Josh Shepperd and Allison Perlman are under contract to co-author an update of the history of public broadcasting for Current, public media’s trade journal, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Josh and Allison are not paid employees or vendors of either institution.

    – ref. Clawback of $1.1B for PBS and NPR puts rural stations at risk – and threatens a vital source of journalism – https://theconversation.com/clawback-of-1-1b-for-pbs-and-npr-puts-rural-stations-at-risk-and-threatens-a-vital-source-of-journalism-255826

    MIL OSI Analysis –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Boozman Joins Capito, Colleagues to Advocate for Critical Education Funding

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman
    WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators John Boozman (R-AR) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), joined by eight of their Republican colleagues, sent a letter to White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought, advocating for the release of anticipated education formula funding.
    Specifically, Boozman and colleagues requested the release of education funding secured in the FY 2025 Full-Year Continuing Resolution Act, which President Trump signed into law earlier this year.
    This legislation contains critical funding that states, including Arkansas, rely on to help students, families and local economies. Releasing federal funding as allocated is necessary for Natural State school districts and organizations as they depend on funding secured through grants such as the 21st Century Community Learning Centers, Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants, among others.
    Boozman and Capito were joined by Senators Katie Britt (R-AL), Susan Collins (R-ME), Deb Fischer (R-NE), John Hoeven (R-ND), Jim Justice (R-WV), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Mike Rounds (R-SD). 
    Text of the letter can be found below and here. 
    Dear Director Vought,
    We write to ask you to faithfully implement the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Full-Year Continuing Resolution Act, which President Trump signed into law earlier this year, including the education formula funds that states anticipated receiving on July 1, 2025.
    The Continuing Resolution contained funding for Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants; 21st Century Community Learning Centers; Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants; English Language Acquisition; Migrant Education; Adult Basic and Literacy Education State Grants (including Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education State Grants). Withholding these funds will harm students, families, and local economies.
    The decision to withhold this funding is contrary to President Trump’s goal of returning K-12 education to the states. This funding goes directly to states and local school districts, where local leaders decide how this funding is spent, because as we know, local communities know how to best serve students and families. Withholding this funding denies states and communities the opportunity to pursue localized initiatives to support students and their families.
    We share your concern about taxpayer money going to fund radical left-wing programs. However, we do not believe that is happening with these funds. These funds go to support programs that enjoy longstanding, bipartisan support like after-school and summer programs that provide learning and enrichment opportunities for school aged children which also enables their parents to work and contribute to local economies.
    These funds also go to support adult learners. These students are often adults seeking second chances for a myriad of reasons, for example, caregiving responsibilities or financial challenges. These are adult learners working to gain employment skills, earn workforce certifications, or transition into postsecondary education. We should be making educational opportunities easier for these students, not harder.
    We welcome the opportunity to work with you and Secretary McMahon to ensure that all federal education funding goes towards programs that help states and school districts provide students an excellent education. We want to see students in our states and across the country thrive, whether they are adult learners, students who speak English as a second language, or students who need after-school care so that their parents can work. We believe you share the same goal.
    We encourage you to reverse your decision and release this Congressionally-approved funding to states.
    Thank you for your attention to this request, and we look forward to your prompt reply.
    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 18, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 50 51 52 53 54 … 1,010
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress