Source: Asia Development Bank
ADB, AIIB, and the energy ministries of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan today signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to support the Feasibility Study for the Caspian Green Energy Corridor Project. The initiative is part of ADB’s regional technical assistance for the project.
Source: China State Council Information Office 2
On a recent spring night, nearly a thousand drones took flight simultaneously at a college in southwest China’s Sichuan Province, lighting up the sky with messages like “set aside studies and work” and “savor our nation’s beauty” in announcing an upcoming seven-day break.
“It was definitely a surprise when I first learned about the additional break. Most of us choose to travel with friends,” said a student at Sichuan Southwest Vocational College of Civil Aviation.
Such spring breaks are now popular among Chinese schools and universities, as it provides more opportunities for students to connect with nature and engage in hands-on learning, while also unleashing great consumption vitality for the country.
Traditionally, besides public holidays, students in China have only had breaks in summer and winter. Now, however, many higher education institutions, such as Renmin University of China in Beijing, allow students to enjoy extra breaks.
Notably, additional breaks are becoming increasingly common for younger Chinese students as well. In March, Chinese authorities issued an action plan, encouraging regions with suitable conditions to implement spring and autumn breaks for primary and secondary schools based on local realities, with such breaks forming part of efforts to stimulate tourism-related consumption.
To date, the plan has received positive responses from over a thousand schools in at least 12 provincial regions.
In Guangzhou, south China’s Guangdong Province, a total of 310 students from Yuyan Middle School recently enjoyed an additional five-day holiday, going on a journey to explore history and science at sites like the Museum of Dr. Sun Yat-sen, the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge and Zhuhai Aerospace Land. “While others are stuck in classrooms, we’re out enjoying ourselves,” a student said excitedly.
According to the school, the break was a pilot program for seventh-grade students only, but it may be expanded to include other non-graduating grades next semester.
The implementation of this plan has enjoyed broad public support. A 2024 online survey showed that 71.3 percent of respondents backed the idea of spring breaks for primary, secondary and college students. Many parents are particularly supportive of the new policy.
The mother of an elementary school student in Hangzhou, east China’s Zhejiang Province, said she plans her work schedule ahead of time each year, arranging leave during her child’s spring break for family trips. During last year’s spring break, they traveled to Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region in northwest China, while this year they will visit the Three Gorges of the Yangtze River, experiencing its beauty by boat.
Such arrangements are common among primary and secondary school parents in Hangzhou. As a result, the city’s major transport hubs experience a surge in travelers around the spring and autumn breaks.
On April 28, 2024, the first day of Hangzhou’s spring break last year, the city’s international airport reported 904 scheduled flights, with an estimated 140,000 passengers — an over 10 percent increase from the previous week. Among the outbound travelers, families with children were a major group.
In China’s tourism market, family travel is rapidly emerging as a strong consumption force. According to Trip.com, China’s leading online travel platform, family travel accounted for 28 percent of all travelers in 2023, with total travel bookings by this group surging 186 percent year on year.
As the first Chinese city to introduce spring and autumn holidays for students, Hangzhou has been refining the system over the past two decades. “Overall, public feedback has been positive, with parents responding favorably,” said Tu Xiaodan, an official in charge of basic education at Hangzhou’s education bureau.
These additional holidays help reduce academic pressure on students while enabling families to travel during off-peak periods. “This improves holiday quality and strengthens parent-child bonds,” Tu said, adding that in recent years, many officials from other regions have come to learn about the implementation of spring and autumn breaks in Hangzhou.
Cities and schools exploring such seasonal breaks should plan them carefully — taking economy, climate and other factors into consideration, emphasized Luo Caijun, principal of Hangzhou Maiyuqiao Elementary School. “Adopting different vacation periods is essential in fulfilling the purpose of establishing the additional breaks,” he said.
This off-peak travel approach effectively addresses the “tidal effect” in holiday economies, unlocks family spending power, and ensures more sustainable tourism market growth throughout the year.
Additionally, this institutional reform transcends mere adjustments to vacation schedules, as it represents an evolution in educational philosophy and an optimization of public policy frameworks in China.
“Education is not just about classrooms and books. It can happen in museums, libraries and in nature, too. Seasonal breaks are a vital upgrade to China’s education model,” said Dai Bin, president of the China Tourism Academy.
The inclusion of these breaks in the action plan chapter on protecting rest and vacation rights, alongside measures like strictly enforcing paid annual leave and prohibiting illegal extension of working hours, sends a strong signal of emphasizing the protection of leisure rights, he added.
Source: China State Council Information Office 2
Amid gentle sea breezes and blooming memorial flowers, and through 3D-printed facial restoration of the deceased and AI-powered farewells, China is breathing new life into traditional tomb-sweeping rituals on Qingming Festival, which falls on Friday.
With its dual identity as both a solar term and a festival, Qingming, which has a history of over 2,500 years, sees tens of millions honor ancestors through tomb-sweeping rituals, both on-site and online, embodying the Confucian ethos of “revering the departed to nurture virtue.”
In a modern twist on Qingming customs, technological and ecological approaches now vie with the more familiar incense and paper offerings.
Guided by green policies and shifting public attitudes, a quiet dialogue has unfolded between tradition and modernity, as green burials and minimalist tributes gain traction, blending the cultural heritage of this age-old Chinese day of remembrance with modern values.
ETERNAL REST IN THE BLUE
At dawn, 112 families boarded a charter boat off Tiger Beach in Dalian, a coastal city in northeast China’s Liaoning Province, and lowered biodegradable urns containing their loved ones’ ashes into the Bohai Sea.
Chrysanthemum petals and handwritten memorial cards floated on the waves as seagulls circled above — a tranquil alternative to smoke-heavy traditional open-air ritual burning.
“My father loved the ocean. Now, he’ll forever be a part of it,” said Yang Lijiao, who came from the provincial capital Shenyang, along with the other families on board. The ritual was organized by Shenyang’s only government-contracted sea burial service provider.
Her eyes fixed on her father’s urn as it drifted away before slowly descending into the depths. “Wherever the ocean flows, Dad’s memory will live on.”
Liaoning has pioneered sea burials for over a decade, offering services in cities like Dalian, Yingkou and Dandong. Official statistics show that a total of 71,386 sea burials were performed between 2012 and 2023, saving approximately 290,000 square meters of land — equivalent to 40 soccer fields.
“Policy upgrades and public outreach have driven sea burial adoption,” explained Yao Ning from Shenyang’s civil affairs bureau. The province now provides subsidies of up to 2,000 yuan (about 278 U.S. dollars) per sea burial.
In 2016, China’s Ministry of Civil Affairs and eight other departments jointly issued guidelines promoting land-saving eco-burials, encouraging sustainable ashes disposition via sea or tree burials, or urn storage.
To date, 28 provincial-level regions nationwide have adopted eco-burial policies with financial incentives and infrastructure investments, according to an official with the ministry. Multiple regions now offer higher sea burial subsidies, streamlined procedures and humane services, driving growing public adoption.
Beijing has conducted nearly 40,000 sea burials since 1994, now representing 4 percent of the city’s annual cremations. In the neighboring Hebei Province, 30 pilot eco-burial sites were green-lighted last year, aiming to set the stage for gradual province-wide adoption.
“Traditional burial practices have become unsustainable in their land consumption,” said Wang Yi, associate professor at Tianjin University, adding that the shift in Qingming rituals reflects the public’s growing ecological awareness. “Sea and tree burials, with their land-free designs, offer sustainable alternatives that reduce pressure on limited land resources.”
TECH WARMS GOODBYES
During a recent open day at the Guangzhou Funeral & Interment Service Center in south China, local residents observed technology merging with tradition: 3D-printed facial restoration of the departed, AI-curated memorial videos reviving personal histories, and robotic urn bearers operating with ceremonial precision.
In the center’s mortuary restoration lab, Li Fajun, a mortician, led a team using 3D scanning and printing to recreate lifelike facial contours for the deceased. Their “3D wound mapping” technique digitally reconstructs facial features with unprecedented accuracy, allowing highly authentic reconstruction for those whose appearances were affected by trauma or illness.
Through a meticulous process combining 3D-printed molds and specialized cosmetic techniques, the departed can be restored to their natural appearance for their final goodbyes. The lab has also secured national patents for its self-developed high-efficiency composite embalming agent and 3D-printed surface restoration device.
“These patented technologies allow families to see their loved ones at peace,” Li said. “We’re not just repairing appearances. We’re healing families’ grief.”
Among the team’s younger members is Zhao Zhihui, a mortuary science graduate, who regards the work as “building the last bridge between the departed and their loved ones.”
As technology reshapes modern life, it’s also redefining how China faces death, with growing numbers embracing innovative approaches such as AI memorials or virtual ceremonies to honor their departed loved ones.
Beyond Guangzhou, tech-infused memorials are reshaping China’s funeral culture. In Beijing, over 100,000 families have opted for “life gemstones” — cremated ashes transformed into crystalline keepsakes via high-pressure synthesis. Meanwhile, Dalian’s sea burial memorials feature LED walls displaying names, embodying the growing acceptance of “returning to nature.”
“Tech-driven memorials reflect modern trends,” commented Wang, noting that faster lifestyles and greater mobility reduce opportunities for physical grave visits, she linked this shift to digital memorials’ growth, whose efficiency and visual appeal further boost adoption. Yet AI shouldn’t replace all traditions, she warned, as rites like tomb-sweeping demand physical presence, a practice central to filial piety that virtual interactions cannot replicate.
Hong Chang, professor at Tianjin Foreign Studies University, viewed AI-assisted memorials and sea burials as adaptations of tradition to modernization, with AI streamlining remembrance and eco-burials addressing environmental concerns. “Yet we should balance innovation with cultural heritage as we retain the essence of Qingming rituals.”
These innovations signal a societal shift: as environmental awareness grows, Chinese families increasingly honor the departed through more diverse practices from AI-preserved memories to green burials. This fusion of technology and sustainability creates new forms of reverence without severing ties to tradition.
Source: China State Council Information Office 3
California Governor Gavin Newsom announced a bold initiative on Friday to shield the state’s economy from the impacts of the U.S. tariff policies by pursuing independent trade relationships with international partners.
“Donald Trump’s tariffs do not represent all Americans,” Newsom said in a video message. “California remains a stable trading partner,” he said, directing his administration to pursue new trade opportunities globally.
The move came just two days after U.S. President Donald Trump announced sweeping tariffs, including a 10-percent “minimum baseline tariff” on all imports, with higher rates for certain trading partners, effective on April 5.
The new tariffs have drawn backlash from economies around the world, with countermeasures already pledged by some. Newsom urged the state’s “long-standing trade partners” to exempt California-made products from any retaliatory measures.
“California leads the nation as the #1 state for agriculture and manufacturing — and it’s our workers, families, and farmers who stand to lose the most from this Trump tax hike and trade war,” said the governor in a statement.
“To our international partners: As the fifth largest economy in the world, the Golden State will remain a steady, reliable partner for generations to come, no matter the turbulence coming out of Washington. California is not Washington, D.C.”
With a gross domestic product of 3.9 trillion U.S. dollars, California is the largest importer among all U.S. states, with more than 675 billion dollars in two-way trade supporting millions of jobs across the state. Its economy is 50 percent bigger than the GDP of the nation’s next largest state, Texas, according to the governor’s office.
The initiative directed the state administration to identify collaborative opportunities with trading partners that protect California’s economic interests, including workers, manufacturers and businesses, as well as broader supply chains linked to the state’s economy.
The tariffs announced by the Trump administration could result in a 2.3 percent increase in overall inflation in the United States this year, including a 2.8 percent increase in food prices and an 8.4 percent increase in automotive prices. The tariffs’ impact could cost the average household 3,800 dollars a year, according to analysis by the Budget Lab at Yale University.
Newsom is particularly concerned about the state’s agricultural sector. California produces about 80 percent of the world’s almonds, generating an industry worth approximately 5.6 billion dollars and supporting more than 100,000 jobs.
The almond industry alone contributes about 11 billion dollars in added value to California’s economy, according to industry data. About 70 percent of the state’s almond crop is exported to more than 100 economies worldwide.
Beyond agriculture, Newsom’s administration was concerned about disruptions to the state’s manufacturing sector. Manufactured goods dominate both California’s exports (87 percent) and imports (89 percent), making the state particularly vulnerable to tariff impacts.
The Port of Los Angeles, a major trade hub, anticipates a possible 10 percent decrease in cargo volume due to the tariffs, which could result in job losses in the port and related industries.
The governor’s initiative also aimed to safeguard access to critical construction materials needed for recovery efforts following the recent Los Angeles wildfires. Officials noted that current tariffs on Canadian lumber of 14 percent could rise to nearly 27 percent, hampering rebuilding efforts.
State officials also expressed concern about supply chains between California and Baja, Mexico. They argued that taxing component goods each time they cross the border will raise final product prices for Californians.
Moreover, the Sacramento Bee reported Friday that Newsom faced another serious question: “How much of a problem will tariffs be for the state’s economy, which is heavily reliant upon high-income earners, many of whom draw their wealth from stocks.”
The UCLA Anderson Forecast issued a recession watch last month, citing tariffs as one factor in a possible downturn. But there are others, notably Trump’s crackdown on undocumented immigrants, which the Forecast saw as having the potential for reducing the labor pool in the state.
Though legal experts noted that individual states do not have the constitutional authority to independently negotiate global trading deals regarding tariffs, as this power is reserved for the federal government, California has been cultivating relationships with foreign governments and officials independent of the current federal administration.
California has a history of active engagement in international trade through various agreements and initiatives. It has entered into 38 international agreements with 28 different foreign partners, according to the governor’s office.
The state government has established the International Affairs and Trade Development Interagency Committee, which advises Newsom on international trade matters and coordinates related state activities, and California maintains trade and investment desks in key markets to further its international economic objectives.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern and Central Asian Studies, Australian National University; and Vice Chancellor’s Strategic Fellow, Victoria University
The United States and Iran are once again on a collision course over the Iranian nuclear program.
In a letter dated early March, US President Donald Trump urged Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to negotiate a new deal. The new deal would replace the defunct nuclear agreement negotiated in 2015 between the United States, Iran and five other global powers.
Trump withdrew from that agreement, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), during his first term.
Trump gave the Iranians a two-month deadline to reach a new nuclear deal. If they don’t, the US will bomb the country. In recent days, American B-2 bombers and warships have been deployed to the region in a show of force.
In response, Tehran has agreed only to indirect negotiations. It has ruled out any direct talks while under a US policy of “maximum pressure”.
The danger of US or combined American-Israeli military actions against Iran has never been greater.
Trump says the US is down to the “final moments” should Tehran persist with moving towards a military nuclear capability.
His national security advisor, Mike Waltz, has gone further, demanding Iran shut down its entire nuclear program.
Khamenei and his generals have promised a “harsh response” to any military venture. Iran has vowed to target all American bases in the region.
France, one of key negotiators in the 2015 deal, said this week a failure to secure a new deal would make a military confrontation “almost inevitable”.
In a positive sign, however, Washington is reportedly “seriously considering” Iran’s offer for indirect negotiations. And Trump is now suggesting Iran may actually be open to direct talks.
It would be a folly to expect a quick result that could satisfy an impatient Trump. This is especially true given Trump is under intense pressure from his close friend, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Netanyahu has long advocated for military action as the best way to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and eliminate its other military capabilities, as well as its regional influence.
The Iranian Islamic regime has repeatedly said its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. However, the US and its allies – in particular Israel – have remained highly sceptical of Tehran’s intentions.
Following Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, Tehran has substantially expanded its nuclear program, to the chagrin of the other signatories to the deal (Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China).
It has installed more advanced centrifuges and accelerated uranium enrichment to 60%, just below weapons-grade level. The country is now at a nuclear weapon threshold. It is believed to be capable of assembling an atomic bomb within months, if not weeks.
Israel’s devastating military operations against Iran’s allies in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria, as well as direct exchanges with Iran, have prompted some in the Iranian leadership to advocate for crossing that threshold.
As I document in my book, Khamenei also remains highly distrustful of Trump and the US political class in general.
Khamenei initially dismissed Trump’s letter last month as a “deception” from the leader of a country he has long considered an “arrogant power” that wants to dictate to Iran, rather than negotiate with it.
One of his senior advisers, former Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi, berated Washington for engaging in “psychological warfare”.
And the current foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said direct negotiations would be futile unless Washington changed its policy of maximum pressure against Iran. This would involve removing sanctions against his country.
Despite this historic distrust of the US, Tehran has found it expedient to offer indirect talks for a possible deal. However, the two sides remain far apart in their respective demands.
Washington, at the very least, would want Tehran to indefinitely limit its uranium enrichment to 3.7% – the level it had agreed to in the 2015 deal. Washington would also demand close oversight by the US and the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Tehran’s minimum demands would include the US unfreezing Iranian assets, lifting all sanctions against Iran and guaranteeing a nuclear deal will not be rescinded by future American administrations.
Neither side could meet these demands, however, without first engaging in substantive confidence-building measures. Since Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, the onus is on him to jump-start the process. He could do this by:
Given the depth of the long-standing enmity and distrust between the parties, the chances of reaching a new nuclear deal seem further away than the drums of war.
However, given Trump’s unpredictability and the serious domestic and foreign policy challenges facing the Iranian regime, a deal also cannot not be completely ruled out.
Amin Saikal 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. With US bombers at the ready, can Trump cut a deal with Iran and avoid a war? – https://theconversation.com/with-us-bombers-at-the-ready-can-trump-cut-a-deal-with-iran-and-avoid-a-war-253828
Source: China State Council Information Office
The world is approaching painful times as the U.S. administration’s so-called “reciprocal tariffs” arrive. It is an undeniable reality that the United States is unabashedly wielding hegemony in an attempt to secure its interests, but these measures may well end up backfiring.
For its major trading partners, U.S. enthusiasm for tariffs is nothing new. The latest evidence suggests that the U.S. administration will impose a 10 percent “minimum baseline tariff,” and even higher rates on certain trading partners.
To some extent, Washington’s flagrant bullying practice indicates the U.S. administration’s growing jitters and anxiety concerning the retention of its position of superiority in an increasingly globalized world. However, it’s ridiculous that the United States opts for protectionism instead of embracing the trend of the times. Playing the “tariff card” is a lose-lose game that also hurts the United States itself.
If the U.S. administration does follow through with its tariff plans, it would further elevate what are already the nation’s highest tariff levels over the past decades. Leading U.S. economists have warned of high implementation costs and collectively voiced concerns about grave consequences — such as higher consumer prices, increased inflation, a rise in unemployment, and even an economic recession.
According to a Yale University study, reciprocal tariffs will incur the United States a price level rise of 2.1 percent, should other countries choose to retaliate. This is equivalent to a loss of 2,700 to 3,400 U.S. dollars per household on average. Meanwhile, overall U.S. economic growth will drop by 1 percentage point in 2025.
Notably, classical Western economics underlines the benefits of free trade and the division of labor. America should know it can never return to the primary ends of the global supply chain in all sectors. What the U.S. administration is doing goes against basic economic laws.
It is not possible for the United States to deny that it has benefited a lot from free trade and a multilateral trading system. After all, this system substantially lowered living costs and raised living standards for people in the United States over the past decades.
Tariffs will cause damage across the board. Retaliation is almost certain and likely to be considerable. By announcing the so-called “reciprocal tariffs” scheme, the U.S. administration is dealing a heavy blow to the world trading system and the global economy at large.
For example, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), in its latest Economic Outlook, forecast that global GDP growth is projected to moderate to 3.1 percent in 2025 and 3 percent in 2026. The OECD is also warning that higher and broader trade barriers will negatively impact growth around the world and add to inflation.
Any attempt to curb trade flows in the global village will backfire. Unchecked protectionism has the very real potential to trigger trade wars, with catastrophic consequences for all parties concerned, while also destabilizing the global economy. A stable and predictable trading environment should not be a luxury. It is a necessity for healthy global economic growth. Equal dialogue is the only viable approach to resolving trade disputes while bullying tariffs make things worse.
Building a better world requires shelving the obsession with tariffs and pursuing shared development based on openness and cooperation.
Source: China State Council Information Office
The United States’ reciprocal global tariffs are a lose-lose game that can escalate trade tensions and provoke retaliatory measures from other countries, ultimately damaging international trade relations, Cambodian experts said on Friday.
U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday announced reciprocal tariffs on goods imported from dozens of its trade partners, including Cambodia. The U.S. tariffs on goods imported from Cambodia will be increased by 49 percent, which will take effect on April 9, 2025.
“This move explicitly highlights the U.S. selfishness, protectionism, unilateralism and isolationism,” Kin Phea, director-general of the International Relations Institute of Cambodia, an arm of the Royal Academy of Cambodia, told Xinhua.
“These tariffs raise the cost of imported goods for consumers and businesses, leading to higher prices and reduced purchasing power,” he said. “Additionally, domestic industries that rely on imported materials may experience increased production costs, potentially resulting in job losses and diminished global competitiveness.”
Phea added that over time, such protectionist policies can stifle economic growth and innovation by discouraging companies from optimizing supply chains or investing in new technologies.
“These policies will not only hurt the global economy but also that of the U.S. itself,” he said. “It’s vital that all nations work together harder to uphold an inclusive and pluralistic global trade system and establish alternatives.”
Joseph Matthews, a senior professor at the BELTEI International University in Phnom Penh, said Trump’s policies are undermining Washington’s credibility and standing within the international community.
“His ‘America First’ strategy is marginalizing and isolating the U.S. globally,” he told Xinhua. “He is putting the U.S. economy at risk, potentially leading it into a recession.”
Matthews said America’s allies, such as Japan and South Korea, are not spared from these new tariff rates.
“Overall, the global relations between the U.S. and the rest of the world are deteriorating, reaching an all-time low,” he said.
Thong Mengdavid, a lecturer at the Institute for International Studies and Public Policy of the Royal University of Phnom Penh, said Trump’s tariff policy is causing higher consumer prices, increased production costs, supply chain disruption and global retaliation.
“One of the most immediate effects is the increase in the cost of imported goods, which, in turn, leads to higher prices for consumers,” he told Xinhua. “As tariffs increase the cost of raw materials, components, and finished products, American businesses face higher production costs, which are often passed down to consumers.”
Furthermore, tariffs can disrupt established supply chains, as companies that rely on importing goods and materials from abroad face greater uncertainty and higher costs, potentially leading to delays in production and reduced profitability.
“For many U.S. companies, tariffs also lead to a loss of market access and diminished competitiveness in global markets, affecting their ability to expand and maintain profitability,” Mengdavid said.
Seun Sam, a policy analyst at the Royal Academy of Cambodia, said Trump’s tariff hike policies are a “disaster for the American people” because consumers will bear the brunt of his tariffs.
“When the tariff is high, businesspeople will increase the price to sell in the U.S., and American buyers will pay the price of the products they need,” he told Xinhua.
“I think the hikes in U.S. import tariffs are unfair as they go against the principle of free trade and fair competition,” he added.
Penn Sovicheat, secretary of state of the Cambodian Ministry of Commerce, said the ministry is assessing the impact of the new tariff rate and trying to find a solution to the issue.
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) joined their colleagues in introducing the IDEA Full Funding Act to ensure all children with disabilities can access a free, high-quality public education. In 1975, Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to ensure that every child with a disability has equal access to education opportunities. While this was a historic step forward, Congress has failed to provide the promised funding. The IDEA Full Funding Act will bridge this gap.
Under IDEA, the federal government committed to pay 40 percent of the average cost per student to provide special education services; however, that pledge has never been met. Current funding is at less than 12 percent, according to the Congressional Research Service. The IDEA Full Funding Act requires regular, mandatory increases in IDEA spending to finally meet Congress’ obligation to ensure students have the tools they need to succeed.
“New Mexico kids deserve every opportunity to succeed, and that requires access to quality public education that meets their unique needs. While Donald Trump and Elon Musk are trying to dismantle America’s education system, I am focused on fighting for our kids’ future,” said Heinrich. “It’s past time that we make good on the promise Congress made in 1975: We need to deliver our fair share of funding for special education, delivering for our kids and our communities.”
“It’s critical that students with disabilities can access a free appropriate public education,” said Luján. “When Congress passed IDEA, we promised to cover 40% of the extra cost of special education. For over 40 years, the federal government has failed to fund its fair share of the IDEA Act, leaving room for gaps in education. That’s why I’m proud to join my colleagues in reintroducing this bipartisan legislation to fully fund IDEA for students with disabilities.”
The legislation is led by U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen and U.S. Representative Jared Huffman. Alongside Heinrich and Lujan, the legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Penn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). The legislation is co-led in the House by U.S. Representatives G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.-15), Joe Neguse (D-Colo.-02), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.-01), Angie Craig (D-Minn.-02), Pete Stauber (R-Minn.-08), Janelle Bynum (D-Ore.-05), Don Bacon (R-Neb.-02), Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.-14), and Mike Bost (R-Ill.-12) and cosponsored by over 60 additional members of the House.
The bill is supported by 60 organizations, including: The School Superintendents Association (AASA), AFT, AFL-CIO, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), American Occupational Therapy Association, American Psychological Association, Assistive Technology Industry Association, Association of Educational Service Agencies, Association of Latino Administrators and Superintendents, Association of Latino Superintendents and Administrators, Association of People Supporting Employment First (APSE), Association of School Business Officials International (ASBO), Autism Society of America, Autism Speaks, Autistic Self Advocacy Network, CAST, Center for Learner Equity, Coalition for Adequate Funding for Special Education, Coalition for Community Schools, Consortium of State School Boards Associations (COSSBA), Council for Exceptional Children, Council for Learning Disabilities, Council of Administrators of Special Education, Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, EDGE Consulting Partners, EdTrust, Education Reform Now, First Focus Campaign for Children, Higher Education Consortium for Special Education, Institute for Educational Leadership, Learning Disabilities Association of America, National Association of ESEA State Program Administrators (NAESPA), National Association for Music Education, National Association for Pupil Transportation, National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities, National Association of Federally Impacted Schools (NAFIS), National Association of Private Special Education Centers, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP), National Center for Learning Disabilities, National Consortium for Physical Education for Individuals with Disabilities (NCPEID), National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), National Down Syndrome Congress, National Down Syndrome Society, National Education Association, National PTA, National Rural Education Association (NREA), NBJC, Teach For America, The Advocacy Institute, The Arc of the United States, TNTP.
The full bill text can be found here.
Source: China State Council Information Office 2
As silicon chips approach the limits of their physical scale, scientists are pioneering ultra-thin designs to boost computational performance.
A Chinese research team has developed a semiconductor microprocessor just a few atomic layers thick. The chip, WUJI, is a 32-bit RISC-V processor based on two-dimensional semiconductors.
RISC-V is an architecture known for being free and open-source, and for its design flexibility and low power consumption.
The microprocessor has 5,900 transistors and a complete standard cell library containing 25 types of logic units, and can perform addition and subtraction operations on up to 4.2 billion data points, allowing for the programming of up to 1 billion instructions, according to Zhou Peng at Fudan University.
The 2D logic circuits have been designed in alignment with advances in silicon integrated circuits, as has an optimized process flow, according to the study, the details of which were published in Nature this week.
The research team leveraged innovative AI algorithms to enable precise control from material-growth to integration processes, said Zhou, the paper’s corresponding author.
The team’s approach to manufacturing and design has successfully tackled the major challenges of wafer-scale integration for 2D circuits, resulting in a groundbreaking microprocessor prototype that demonstrates the vast potential of 2D integrated-circuit technology beyond the standard silicon, according to the researchers.
Source: China State Council Information Office
South Korea’s constitutional court on Friday upheld a motion by the National Assembly to impeach the country’s president Yoon Suk-yeol over his short-lived martial law imposition.
The conservative leader officially lost all presidential power, becoming the country’s second sitting president to be forcibly removed from power following former conservative President Park Geun-hye’s ouster through impeachment in 2017.
WHAT ABOUT YOON
Moon Hyung-bae, acting chief of the court, read a ruling on Yoon’s impeachment, saying it was a unanimous decision of eight justices.
The acting chief said Yoon broke his duty of protecting the constitution as he damaged the constitutional institutions, such as the parliament, and violated the basic rights of people by mobilizing the military and the police.
Following his removal from office, Yoon must vacate the presidential residence in central Seoul. Local media predicted that he may return to his private house, but it remains unclear whether he will leave the official residence immediately.
According to South Korea’s law on the treatment of former presidents, a president who is removed from office due to impeachment loses most of the post-retirement privileges granted under normal circumstances.
This includes the loss of pension, office space, vehicle, and secretarial support. Only basic security protection will be provided.
Yoon will face criminal trial as a normal citizen over his alleged involvement in an attempted insurrection. South Korea’s prosecution indicted Yoon on an insurrection charge on Jan. 26 after he was arrested in the presidential residence on Jan. 15.
POLITICAL AND SOCIAL CONFLICTS
Yoon had been facing challenges from opposition parties since he took office. Last April, the ruling party suffered a crushing defeat in parliamentary elections, further weakening the government.
After over two years in office, Yoon used veto power 25 times against bills passed by the opposition-led National Assembly. As a result, issues such as healthcare and pension reform, led by the Yoon administration, have faced significant legislative resistance.
The political conflicts have deepened social conflict. A report by the Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs released in March found that public perception of “social conflict” reached its highest level since 2018, with the most severe divide between progressives and conservatives.
Local newspaper Chosun Ilbo observed that ideological conflicts, more than regional or wealth disparities, have become a major obstacle to South Korea’s social unity.
After a motion to impeach Yoon was passed in the National Assembly on Dec. 14 over his botched martial law imposition, polarization and conflicts became even more pronounced, leading to growing hatred and extreme emotions.
The delay in the constitutional court has also intensified conflicts between conservative and progressive factions, making street protests a daily occurrence and further fracturing society, said Lee Jaemook, a professor at the Department of Political Science and Diplomacy of Hankuk University of Foreign Studies.
EARLY ELECTION
After Yoon is removed from office, South Korea must hold an early presidential election within 60 days. Currently, the leading candidate is Lee Jae-myung from the Democratic Party of Korea, though uncertainty remains.
According to an NBS poll on Thursday, Lee has a 33-percent approval rating, leading by about 24 percentage points over the second-highest contender, the minister of employment and labor, Kim Moon Soo.
Given the deepening political polarization and Yoon’s impeachment, the key to determining the election outcome will be the support of centrist voters and the non-partisan electorate, according to local media reports.
Although the impeachment has created a more favorable environment for progressives, the conservative camp remains unified, which could lead to a balanced contest, said Professor Choi Yong-tae of Chonnam National University.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman John Moolenaar (4th District of Michigan)
Headline: Moolenaar, Michigan GOP Representatives Call on SoS Benson to Explain Failures to Stop Illegal Voting
Today, Congressman John Moolenaar, along with his Republican colleagues in the Michigan Congressional delegation, called on Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to answer questions after her office reported at least an additional 15 noncitizens were found to illegally cast a ballot in the 2024 election.
Benson’s announcement comes after a Chinese national attending the University of Michigan, voted illegally as well. In a Congressional hearing last September, Benson claimed, “there is no evidence that non-citizens are voting.” The Secretary is publicly opposed to bipartisan legislation, the SAVE Act, which would require individuals to provide documentation proving they are a citizen, such as a REAL ID, to register to vote.
The lawmakers wrote:
“Your failure to secure Michigan’s elections continues to erode the public’s trust. Your department not only failed to prevent these noncitizens from voting, but your report casts further doubt about how many noncitizens actually voted on Election Day. House Republicans have repeatedly raised these concerns. Last year, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 8281 – SAVE Act with a bipartisan 221-198 vote and is poised to pass it again this Congress. The SAVE Act would require individuals to provide proof of citizenship, including REAL ID, when registering to vote in federal elections.
We have already raised these concerns directly with you. In November, we wrote to you about Haoxiang Gao’s vote, and you dismissed our concerns. Ironically, last year at a Committee on House Administration hearing, you stated “[t]here is no evidence that noncitizens are voting.” Further, you have continually promoted falsehoods about the SAVE Act. It is disheartening that our State’s chief election officer does not support basic election integrity measures.”
The letter concludes with the the members of Congress asking Benson questions about the illegal votes, how they were discovered, and Benson’s misrepresentation of the SAVE Act. The lawmakers’ letter to Benson can be found in full here.
Moolenaar was joined in his letter to Benson by Republican members of the Michigan Congressional delegation including, Jack Bergman (MI-1), Bill Huizenga (MI-4), Tim Walberg (MI-5), Tom Barrett (MI-7), Lisa McClain (MI-9), and John James (MI-10).
Source: China State Council Information Office
California Governor Gavin Newsom announced a bold initiative on Friday to shield the state’s economy from the impacts of the U.S. tariff policies by pursuing independent trade relationships with international partners.
“Donald Trump’s tariffs do not represent all Americans,” Newsom said in a video message. “California remains a stable trading partner,” he said, directing his administration to pursue new trade opportunities globally.
The move came just two days after U.S. President Donald Trump announced sweeping tariffs, including a 10-percent “minimum baseline tariff” on all imports, with higher rates for certain trading partners, effective on April 5.
The new tariffs have drawn backlash from economies around the world, with countermeasures already pledged by some. Newsom urged the state’s “long-standing trade partners” to exempt California-made products from any retaliatory measures.
“California leads the nation as the #1 state for agriculture and manufacturing — and it’s our workers, families, and farmers who stand to lose the most from this Trump tax hike and trade war,” said the governor in a statement.
“To our international partners: As the fifth largest economy in the world, the Golden State will remain a steady, reliable partner for generations to come, no matter the turbulence coming out of Washington. California is not Washington, D.C.”
With a gross domestic product of 3.9 trillion U.S. dollars, California is the largest importer among all U.S. states, with more than 675 billion dollars in two-way trade supporting millions of jobs across the state. Its economy is 50 percent bigger than the GDP of the nation’s next largest state, Texas, according to the governor’s office.
The initiative directed the state administration to identify collaborative opportunities with trading partners that protect California’s economic interests, including workers, manufacturers and businesses, as well as broader supply chains linked to the state’s economy.
The tariffs announced by the Trump administration could result in a 2.3 percent increase in overall inflation in the United States this year, including a 2.8 percent increase in food prices and an 8.4 percent increase in automotive prices. The tariffs’ impact could cost the average household 3,800 dollars a year, according to analysis by the Budget Lab at Yale University.
Newsom is particularly concerned about the state’s agricultural sector. California produces about 80 percent of the world’s almonds, generating an industry worth approximately 5.6 billion dollars and supporting more than 100,000 jobs.
The almond industry alone contributes about 11 billion dollars in added value to California’s economy, according to industry data. About 70 percent of the state’s almond crop is exported to more than 100 economies worldwide.
Beyond agriculture, Newsom’s administration was concerned about disruptions to the state’s manufacturing sector. Manufactured goods dominate both California’s exports (87 percent) and imports (89 percent), making the state particularly vulnerable to tariff impacts.
The Port of Los Angeles, a major trade hub, anticipates a possible 10 percent decrease in cargo volume due to the tariffs, which could result in job losses in the port and related industries.
The governor’s initiative also aimed to safeguard access to critical construction materials needed for recovery efforts following the recent Los Angeles wildfires. Officials noted that current tariffs on Canadian lumber of 14 percent could rise to nearly 27 percent, hampering rebuilding efforts.
State officials also expressed concern about supply chains between California and Baja, Mexico. They argued that taxing component goods each time they cross the border will raise final product prices for Californians.
Moreover, the Sacramento Bee reported Friday that Newsom faced another serious question: “How much of a problem will tariffs be for the state’s economy, which is heavily reliant upon high-income earners, many of whom draw their wealth from stocks.”
The UCLA Anderson Forecast issued a recession watch last month, citing tariffs as one factor in a possible downturn. But there are others, notably Trump’s crackdown on undocumented immigrants, which the Forecast saw as having the potential for reducing the labor pool in the state.
Though legal experts noted that individual states do not have the constitutional authority to independently negotiate global trading deals regarding tariffs, as this power is reserved for the federal government, California has been cultivating relationships with foreign governments and officials independent of the current federal administration.
California has a history of active engagement in international trade through various agreements and initiatives. It has entered into 38 international agreements with 28 different foreign partners, according to the governor’s office.
The state government has established the International Affairs and Trade Development Interagency Committee, which advises Newsom on international trade matters and coordinates related state activities, and California maintains trade and investment desks in key markets to further its international economic objectives.
Source: US Congressman Gabe Amo (Rhode Island 1st District)
RIVERSIDE, RI – Last night, Congressman Gabe Amo (RI-01) held a district town hall to answer questions from Rhode Islanders in the First Congressional District and outline his plans to combat the chaos and confusion of the Trump administration. Over the course of more than 2 hours, Congressman Amo was joined by Attorney General Peter Neronha to discuss how he is defending Rhode Island values through legislation, litigation, communication, and agitation.
Topics raised by Rhode Islanders included President Donald Trump’s illegal federal funding freeze, efforts to eliminate federal agencies, and steps Congressman Amo is taking to hold the Trump administration accountable and protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid from Republican cuts to pay for tax breaks for billionaires.
“Whether it’s Trump’s illegal federal funding freeze, his disastrous tariff proposals, or DOGE and Elon Musk shutting down federal agencies, residents in Rhode Island’s First Congressional District are understandably worried,” said Congressman Amo. “I organized this district town hall with Attorney General Neronha to hear concerns, answer questions, and talk about our concrete plans to respond. We need to think globally and act locally — and last night we did just that.”
“Since day one, this President and his Administration have used fear tactics, intimidation, and chaos to try and subvert the rule of law and consolidate power through a number of unconstitutional executive actions,” said Attorney General Neronha. “Just yesterday, my Office secured another victory against one of these actions, because we are on the right side of the law. In order to protect our democracy and the rights of Americans everywhere, we need to boldly counter this behavior by asking questions, demanding answers, and acting accordingly. Last night, Rhode Islanders did just that, and I thank Congressman Amo for organizing this opportunity.”
“I would like to thank Congressman Gabe Amo for choosing East Providence to host this important nonpartisan town hall meeting,” Mayor Bob DaSilva said. “Any opportunity to hear directly from our neighbors is important to helping push the needle forward to creating a brighter future for both our state and community.”
Photos of the event can be downloaded here.
BACKGROUND
Since the start of President Trump’s administration, Congressman Amo has been laser focused on opposing dangerous executive orders, illegal federal funding freezes, harmful efforts to shut down federal agencies, and the elimination of basic protections for immigrants and our LGBTQ neighbors.
In the last 73 days, Congressman Amo:
In addition to these actions, Congressman Amo has sent letters to:
Congressman Amo has also set up a link on his website for Rhode Islanders who’d like to share their story about how the Trump administration is affecting them:
https://amo.house.gov/shareyourstory
Source: US State of California Department of Justice
Friday, April 4, 2025
Contact: (916) 210-6000, agpressoffice@doj.ca.gov
OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement after the U.S. Supreme Court stayed a temporary restraining order (TRO) granted by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, in a lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful termination of multi-year grants for K-12 teacher preparation programs. California and a coalition of seven other states obtained the TRO on March 10, 2025, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s order today allows the Trump Administration to go forward with terminating the multi-year grant programs that address the ongoing teacher shortage faced by states across the nation through teacher preparation programs while litigation is ongoing. The Supreme Court’s Order does not conclusively resolve any of the issues in this case, and the preliminary injunction motion is still pending. The evidence presented in the district court is concrete and establishes that without immediate relief many of the programs will shutter – harming the States’ students and aspiring teachers.
“The Trump Administration is pursuing an anti-education agenda that would yank teachers out of schools and prevent new teachers-in-training who are close to being ready to serve our students from filling empty classrooms,” said Attorney General Bonta. “While we would have preferred to maintain the TRO, we respect the court process, and we look forward to continuing to make our case in the lower court. California and our multistate coalition remain committed to fighting, so that our kids — especially those in high-poverty or high need schools — have access to qualified, talented teachers and a quality education.”
More information on the K-12 teacher grant lawsuit is available here.
# # #
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Bradshaw, Professor of Marketing, Royal Holloway University of London
As politicians around the world scramble to respond to US “liberation day” tariffs, consumers have also begun flexing their muscles. “Boycott USA” messages and searches have been trending on social media and search engines, with users sharing advice on brands and products to avoid.
Even before Donald Trump announced across-the-board tariffs, there had been protests and attacks on the president’s golf courses in Doonbeg in Ireland and Turnberry in Scotland in response to other policies. And in Canada, shoppers avoided US goods after Trump announced he could take over his northern neighbour.
His close ally Elon Musk has seen protests at Tesla showrooms across Europe, Australia and New Zealand. New cars have been set on fire as part of the “Tesla take-down”, while Tesla sales have been on a deep downward trend. This has been especially noticeable in European countries where electric vehicles sales have been high, and in Australia.
This targeting of Trump and Musk’s brands are part of wider boycotts of US goods as consumers look for ways to express their anger at the US administration.
Denmark’s biggest retailer, Salling Group, has given the price label of all European products a black star, making it easy for customers to avoid US goods.
Canadian shoppers are turning US products upside down in retail outlets so it’s easier for fellow shoppers to spot and avoid them. Canadian consumers can also download the Maple Scan app that checks barcodes to see if their grocery purchases are actually Canadian or have parent companies from the USA.
The issue of ostensibly Canadian brands being owned by US capital illustrates the complexity of consumer boycotts – it can be difficult to identify which brands are American and which are not.
In the UK, for example, many consumers would be surprised to learn how many famous British brands are actually American-owned – for example, Cadbury, Waterstones and Boots. So entwined are global economies that attempts by consumers to boycott US brands may also damage their local economies.
This complexity is also present in Danish and Canadian Facebook groups that are dedicated to boycotting US goods. Consumers exchange tips on how to swap alternatives for American products.
The fact that Facebook is a US-based company only demonstrates how deeply embedded consumer culture is in US technologies. European businesses often depend on American operating systems and cloud storage while consumers rely on US-owned social media platforms for communication.
Even when consumers succeed in weeding out American products, if they pay using Visa, Mastercard or Apple Pay, a percentage of the price will nonetheless be rerouted to the US. If a touch payment is made with Worldpay, the percentage could be even greater.
These American financial services show just how embedded US businesses are in retail in ways that consumers may not appreciate. In practice, an absolute boycott of US business is almost unimaginable.
But American branding is not always subtle. In addition to brands directly connected to the US administration – such as the Trump golf courses and Tesla – many other companies have always been flamboyantly American. Coca-Cola, Starbucks and Budweiser are just some examples where their American identities and proudly on show.
As such, it’s possible that consumers will increasingly avoid blatantly American brands. They may be less concerned about the complexities and contradictions of a more comprehensive boycott.
Consumer actions where the goal is political change are known as “proxy boycotts” because no particular company is the ultimate target. Rather, the brands and firms are targeted by consumers as a means to an end.
A classic example of a proxy boycott took aim at French goods, particularly wine, in the mid-1990s. This was in response to president Jacques Chirac’s decision to conduct nuclear tests in the Pacific. The large-scale consumer boycotts contributed to France’s decision to abandon its nuclear tests in 1996.
In Britain, for example, French wines in all categories lost market share as demand fell during the boycott. At the time, it cost the French wine sector £23 million (about £46 million today).
These boycotts are a reminder that the interplay between corporations, brands and consumer culture are inevitably embedded in politics. The current political impasse demonstrates that consumers can participate in politics, not just with their votes, but also with their buying power.
Trump clearly wants to demonstrate American strength. The “liberation day” tariffs, which were higher than most observers expected, bear this out. But many US corporations will now be worrying about how consumers in the US and around the world might respond. Trump could see a mass mobilisation of consumer power in ways that will give the president something to think about.
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. Consumers are boycotting US goods around the world. Should Trump be worried? – https://theconversation.com/consumers-are-boycotting-us-goods-around-the-world-should-trump-be-worried-253389
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
Full interview with Katy Tur here
Washington (April 4, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Subcommittee on Primary Health and Retirement Security, responded to Trump’s reckless tariff actions yesterday, which significantly raised the risk for recession and will drive up costs for ordinary families.
On MSNBC’s Katy Tur Reports, Senator Markey warned that Republicans would be hearing from their constituents on how the tariffs are causing them economic pain. His remarks come as the Senate considers the Republicans’ budget resolution, with lawmakers offering amendments through the night ahead of a final vote.
Below is an excerpt from the MSNBC interview with host Katy Tur:
“[Republicans] are going to be hearing it from home. We’re going to be up all day long, every single day, overnight, and we’ll be talking about the dire, catastrophic economic consequences for ordinary families. We haven’t been able to get their support to block the cuts in NIH research for Alzheimer’s and cancer, or the Department of Education that helps poor kids get an education, or at the EPA in order to make sure that we have clean air and clean water. So I don’t know that these tariffs are going to be the exception, but I don’t think Republican House and Senate members are going to want to pay the political price.”
Source: American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Union
Filing Seeks to Restore Control Over SSA’s Data Systems and Suspend DOGE’s Unlawful Activity Until the Lawsuit is Resolved
Baltimore, MD — Today, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and the Alliance for Retired Americans (ARA) filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in federal court to stop the ongoing, unlawful access to sensitive personal data by Elon Musk’s so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) at the Social Security Administration (SSA). DOGE’s intrusion has already put millions at risk of identity theft, financial fraud, and doxxing.
The filing follows a lawsuit brought by Democracy Forward on behalf of the organizations and an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) filed last month. On March 20, a federal court ordered, for the first time since Trump took office, that DOGE return or destroy all private Social Security data it accessed, recognizing that stopping DOGE’s future access to the data was not enough to protect Americans.
Since then, new facts have further exposed the breadth and urgency of the harm to retirees, teachers, and everyday Americans who rely on the SSA and have entrusted it with highly sensitive personal and financial information.
The plaintiffs seek relief while the case develops to block DOGE personnel’s access to SSA systems, which include bank account numbers, health records, immigration status, and wage histories of tens of millions of Americans. The preliminary injunction application argues that the access violates the Privacy Act, Social Security Act, and Internal Revenue Code, and Administrative Procedure Act and that DOGE is acting far beyond the legal authority of any executive agency.
“Today, we take another step forward in our case to block Elon Musk’s DOGE from accessing Social Security Administration data,” said AFSCME President Lee Saunders. “Working people and retirees deserve assurance that their sensitive information remains safe and not in the hands of Musk’s unvetted lackeys – some of whom were working with this data before their background checks were even final. Despite being continually asked by the court, this administration has still failed to answer why they need this information. This unelected billionaire and his cronies have no rightful claim to our critical data, and we are committed to proving that in court.”
“With every passing day, Americans’ personal and financial data is further jeopardized by Elon Musk’s actions,” said AFT President Randi Weingarten. “Absent immediate relief, working families are at risk of having their private information stolen and exploited, all because an unelected billionaire has decided to raid this sensitive data for his own ends. The promise of Social Security is that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can retire with dignity and grace. Elon Musk is breaking that basic bond of trust and must be stopped immediately before he lays waste to the savings working people have spent their lives building up.”
“Older Americans are rightly alarmed about what is happening at the Social Security Administration and worried about whether their most sensitive information is safe,” said Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans. “We will continue to fight in court to make sure that our personal and financial data remains secure.”
“Millions of people have shared their most sensitive information with the Social Security Administration because they trusted that it would be protected and used appropriately,” said Anne Swift, Senior Counsel at Democracy Forward. “That trust is now being broken. DOGE’s unlawful access to Social Security’s data systems put the American people at risk–not only of privacy violations but also of losing access to the benefits they depend on to support themselves and their families. The harm is already happening, and we are asking the court to step in to prevent it from escalating further.”
Read the complaint here, the motion for temporary restraining order here, and the motion for preliminary injunction here.
Source: Government of Canada regional news
From CMHA-Cowichan Valley Branch: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/cowichancmha/pages/102/attachments/original/1743800294/NR_CMHA_Media_Release_FINAL_updated.pdf?1743800294
In June 2024, the Ministry of Children and Family Development and Canadian Mental Health Association – Cowichan Valley Branch (CMHA-CVB) announced plans to establish a Youth Emergency Shelter or YES pilot project. Less than one year later, the Cowichan YES is now officially open and ready to support the youth in Duncan who need it most.
Youth aged 15 to 18 years who are in crisis, or at risk of harm or homelessness, will have access to critical supports delivered by the Cowichan YES open day and night for youth in need.
Several youth who have visited the YES have echoed the essence of the program’s purpose. “Wow, this is a house, and it feels like a home” – youth aged 16. Another youth noted the comfort of the bedrooms. “I can come and stay in a real bedroom with a real bed, some of the beds are huge.” – youth aged 17. Another excited youth commented on the program’s amenities by joyfully exclaiming, “You have a gym in here? When can I use it?”
“I am pleased to announce that a safe space for the most vulnerable youth in the Cowichan Valley is not only a reality today but will become a legacy for years to come,” said Laurie Harding, CMHA-CVB board chair. “This dream was made possible by CMHA-CVB, along with the incredible support of hundreds of local community members volunteering their time, resources, and donations through our annual Coldest Night of the Year campaign.”
Approximately $204,000 was raised between 2022 and 2024 through the CMHA-CVB campaigns and those funds were used as a down payment to purchase a home, which has been transformed into this vital shelter space for youth.
“With the opening of this shelter, the most vulnerable youth in the Cowichan Valley will have a safe place to turn, day or night, when they find themselves with nowhere else to go,” said Jodie Wickens, Minister of Children and Family Development. “This home is another important resource to keep Cowichan youth safer by connecting them to the supports they need when they need them.”
In addition to the funds from the Coldest Night of the Year campaigns and up to $4 million funding from the Province, the Mischa Weisz Foundation donated $450,000. That donation will allow CMHA-CVB to pay off the mortgage and to purchase a van to provide outreach to youth in Duncan and outlying communities within the Cowichan Valley Regional District (CVRD). The significant legacy donation will help transform the lives of some of the most vulnerable young people in the Cowichan Valley.
Recognizing with respect that YES Cowichan is located on Quw’utsun lands, and for the generous donation by the Mischa Weisz Foundation, the name Mischa Lelum has been chosen to recognize both the legacy of Mischa Weisz and because “Lelum” is a fitting Hulqiminum word meaning home.
“We know that many young people in our community have been facing significant challenges since the pandemic,” said Debra Toporowski, MLA, Cowichan Valley. “It’s so gratifying to see the dedication and hard work of Cowichan Tribes, CMHA, community partners, the B.C. government and even an individual donor, come to fruition to make a difference for vulnerable youth.”
“The creation of this home is reflective of our collective strength as a community, wisdom as an organization, and the unwavering care and concern for those we serve,” says Laurie Harding, CMHA-CVB board president. “Through a commitment to supporting a healthier community, it is our hope that our actions clearly demonstrate that ‘Everyone Matters.’ We cannot do this work alone, and we are extremely grateful to community partners who have supported our work by walking with us, volunteering, and through their generous donations. Thank you as well to MCFD, Guido Weisz, and all of you here today for working collaboratively with us. Through our partnerships, we demonstrate that ‘We are Better Standing Together’ and that our youth matter.”
The Cowichan Valley YES is one more youth-centred service that CMHA-CVB offers.
Background:
YES Cowichan
The Youth Emergency Shelter is a 24/7 therapeutic community-based crisis service in Duncan that provides a temporary safe placement (one to 14 days) for youth who are experiencing homelessness, or unstable/precarious living situations, and are in need of a temporary placement and support services. Currently there are three bedrooms available. YES consists of three essential elements: overnight shelter, drop-in day programming, and outreach services. Community partners will provide wraparound supports to youth accessing the YES and will work together to ensure youth receive the resources and assistance they require. Youth will be involved in the design and implementation of the programs to ensure those fit their needs. The first YES opened in Maple Ridge in December 2023.
Cowichan Youth at Home Team
The YES program is a result of efforts led by the Cowichan Youth at Home Team: a partnership organization made up of members from CMHA-CVB, Cowichan Tribes, Cowichan Valley School District, Cowichan Valley Youth Services, Island Health Population and Public Health, Our Communities Health Network, and the Ministry of Children and Family Development. “We are grateful to our community partners for their collective commitment and hard work in making a safe space a reality. Together we are making a difference because we believe that ‘Every Child Matters’.”
Mischa Weisz Foundation
The Mischa Weisz Foundation has been supporting unhoused youth by providing a grant that has been delivering food and making critical connections over the past three years. Mischa was an entrepreneur whose life was, sadly, cut short. Deeply grounded in his life values, Mischa believed that youth are the future and that we should invest in them if we want to make the world a better place. He also believed that “while people may be trapped in unfortunate circumstances, or disadvantaged by complex factors, all of us have potential within us,” says his brother Guido Weisz. Mischa created the Mischa Weisz Foundation which has been co-managed by his brother.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Doug LaMalfa 1st District of California
Washington, D.C.—Congressman Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale) was selected to receive the 2025 Congressional Leadership Award from the American Loggers Council (ALC) and the American Biomass Energy Association (ABEA) for his work to support the timber and biomass industries, improve forest management, and reduce wildfire risks. Each year, ALC and ABEA recognize one Republican and one Democrat in Congress for their leadership on forestry policy.
“Our forests are in trouble, and the policies coming out of Washington have too often made things worse. Decades of hands-off management have left our forests overgrown and our logging infrastructure on the verge of collapse, all while catastrophic wildfires get worse,” said Rep. LaMalfa. “We need active management, and we need it now. I appreciate this recognition from the American Loggers Council and the American Biomass Energy Association, and I’ll continue working towards solutions that keep our forests healthy and our rural economies strong.”
Rep. LaMalfa has led efforts in Congress to cut red tape and restore active management, pushing for legislation that prioritizes wildfire prevention, hazardous fuels reduction, and timber industry stability, including:
Congressman Doug LaMalfa is Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus and a lifelong farmer representing California’s First Congressional District, including Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Shasta, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama and Yuba Counties.
###
Source: US State of North Dakota
Following tonight’s ruling in Department of Education v. California, Attorney General Pamela Bondi released the following statement:
“Today marks a significant victory for President Trump and the rule of law. This Supreme Court ruling vindicates what the Department of Justice has been arguing for months: local district judges do not have the jurisdiction to seize control of taxpayer dollars, force the government to pay out billions, or unilaterally halt President Trump’s policy agenda. Department of Justice attorneys will continue fighting to protect the executive branch from gross judicial overreach.”
Read the full filing here.
Source: United States Attorneys General
Following tonight’s ruling in Department of Education v. California, Attorney General Pamela Bondi released the following statement:
“Today marks a significant victory for President Trump and the rule of law. This Supreme Court ruling vindicates what the Department of Justice has been arguing for months: local district judges do not have the jurisdiction to seize control of taxpayer dollars, force the government to pay out billions, or unilaterally halt President Trump’s policy agenda. Department of Justice attorneys will continue fighting to protect the executive branch from gross judicial overreach.”
Read the full filing here.
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Padilla Cosponsors Legislation to Improve Access to Quality, Affordable Child Care for American Families
Republican-proposed funding cuts to pay for tax breaks for billionaires would eliminate child care for 40,000 children, according to recent CLASP analysis
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) joined his colleagues in introducing bicameral legislation to help American families get access to the quality, affordable child care they need. The bill comes as Republicans are acting on their plan to eliminate child care for 40,000 children to pay for massive tax breaks for billionaires.
The need to rebuild a stronger, more robust, and more equitable child care system is greater than ever as working families across America struggle to access affordable, quality child care. But in addition to cuts to child care, the Trump Administration is conducting mass layoffs at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including the offices at the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) that administer child care and Head Start programs. These layoffs will make child care even less accessible, less affordable, and less safe.
Earlier this week, Padilla and Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) led 25 Senators in condemning the Trump Administration’s mass firings of federal employees at the Office of Head Start (OHS) and the Office of Child Care (OCC) and demanding HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. immediately reinstate these employees to full work status.
“As a father to three boys, I understand that having access to child care isn’t a luxury, it’s a critical necessity,” said Senator Padilla. “No parent should have to miss work because they don’t have access to child care, yet too many Californians either do not live near a caregiver or cannot afford it. As President Trump and his Administration wage a war on American families and intensify our child care crisis, we must fight to ensure every family, regardless of zip code, has access to reliable, high-quality child care.”
“At a time when families are struggling to find affordable child care so they can work and pay their bills, Republicans in Congress are making their priorities clear with 40,000 kids about to lose their child care to pay for another handout to billionaires. Taken together with the absolute gutting of HHS and the offices responsible for Head Start and child care, America’s child care crisis is on track to only grow worse,” said Senator Wyden. “It doesn’t have to be this way. Our bill invests in working families by making sure more families can get child care and new child care centers can be built to increase slots, while also guaranteeing a living wage for the essential workers who staff them. That is where priorities should lie.”
“Parents shouldn’t have to choose between breaking the budget, cutting back their work hours, or settling for lower-quality care to make sure their kids have child care,” said Senator Warren. “I am grateful for Senator Wyden’s partnership and commitment to investing in child care so working parents have a fighting chance in our economy.”
The price of child care continues to place a major financial burden on American families, with costs ranging from $5,357 to $17,171 per year depending on location and type of care. Additionally, the cost of center-based care for two children is more than the average mortgage in 45 states and more than the average annual rent in all 50 states plus D.C. The Building Child Care for a Better Future Act would address the child care crisis by providing new, permanent funding so states, tribes, and territories have the critical resources they need to develop a child care infrastructure that better serves all families.
The legislation would expand guaranteed child care funding by increasing annual funding for the Child Care Entitlement to States (CCES) to $20 billion per year (a $16.45 billion increase per year). It also would appropriate $5 billion to the CCES annually to provide new grants to improve child care workforce, supply, quality, and access in areas of particular need, including rural communities. Specifically, the funding can be used for Child Care and Development Block Grant purposes, including:
Increasing child care slots in child care facilities and family child care homes;
Establishing or expanding the operation of community or neighborhood-based family child care networks;
Providing funding for construction and renovation of child care facilities and family child care homes;
Providing start-up funding, technical assistance, support for improving business practices, and support navigating real estate financing and development processes;
Providing guidance to child care providers on negotiating with landlords or applying for land or home ownership;
Recruiting child care providers and staff;
Supporting professional development and training for the child care workforce, including through apprenticeships, partnerships with labor unions or labor-management partnerships, and partnerships with public and nonprofit institutions of higher education;
Contracting with an intermediary with experience securing private sources of capital financing for child care facilities or other low-income community development projects to provide technical support; and
Maintaining an effective and diverse early care workforce by increasing total compensation, providing wage supplements or bonuses, or offering wage and retention rewards and ensuring adequate wages for staff of child care providers, including sole proprietors and independent contractors, that, at a minimum:
Provide a living wage for all staff of such child care providers and
Are adjusted on an annual basis or cost of living increases.
U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) lead the legislation. In addition to Senator Padilla, the Building Child Care for a Better Future Act is cosponsored by Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.). U.S. Representative Danny Davis (D-Ill.-07) introduced companion legislation in the House.
A one-page summary of the legislation is here.
Ful text of the bill is available here.
The Building Child Care for a Better Future Act is endorsed by: AFL-CIO, AFSCME, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Federation of Teachers, Caring Across Generations, Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), Child Care Aware of America, Child Care for Every Family Network, Community Change Action, Early Care & Education Consortium (ECEC), Family Values at Work, First Five Years Fund, First Focus Campaign for Children, KinderCare, MomsRising, National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC), National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), National Education Association, National Indian Child Care Association (NICCA), National Women’s Law Center, Save the Children, SEIU, Small Business Majority, ZERO TO THREE, Campaign for a Family Friendly Economy, Communications Workers of America (CWA), Family Forward Oregon, First Children’s Finance, Iowa Association for the Education of Young Children, Little Miracles Early Development Center, Massachusetts Association for the Education of Young Children (MAAEYC), Maine Association for the Education of Young Children, Maine People’s Alliance, Maryland Association for the Education of Young Children (MDAEYC), Montana Family Childcare Network, New Jersey Association for the Education of Young Children, NJ Communities United, Ohio Association for the Education of Young Children, Oregon Association for the Education of Young Children (ORAEYC), Our Children Oregon, Pennsylvania Association for the Education of Young Children, Pennsylvania Child Care Association, Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children, Prevent Child Abuse America, Rhode Island Association for the Education of Young Children, South Carolina Association for the Education of Young Children (SCAEYC), Southwest Ohio Association for the Education of Young Children, Trying Together, Virginia Association for the Education of Young Children, Virginia Organizing, and Wisconsin Early Childhood Association.
“Right now, this country is facing a serious child care crisis–parents are struggling to find or afford child care, child care workers are making poverty wages, and child care providers are struggling to keep their doors open and make ends meet. Republicans’ only proposal is to make this crisis even worse by cutting child care funding and putting more wealth in the hands of billionaires over supporting our families,” said Andrea Paluso and Erica Gallegos, Executive Directors of the Child Care for Every Family Network. “But there is another way. Senator Wyden and Warren’s Building Child Care for a Better Future Act will boost child care funding, instead of taking a hatchet to it. We are proud to endorse this critical bill that will invest in our child care supply, support the child care workforce, and help make child care easier to find and afford. The contrast couldn’t be clearer: support for care or support for cuts. Instead of non-stop Republican threats to cut child care, Congress must pass the Building Child Care for a Better Future Act.”
“Families across the country are sending us a clear message that child care prices are too high and they need help,” said Julie Kashen, Senior Fellow and Director of Women’s Economic Justice at the Century Foundation. “Instead of tax cuts for billionaires and big corporations, we should work towards child care solutions that give parents room to breathe, providers wages they deserve, and children the opportunity to grow and flourish. The Building Child Care for a Better Future Act would be a big step in the right direction walking the walk for families and workers, not just talking the talk.”
“America’s moms support the Building Child Care for a Better Future Act, and applaud its sponsors, cosponsors and champions,” said Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, Executive Director and CEO of MomsRising Together. “Millions of young families simply can’t access quality, affordable child care in our country today. Without it, children miss opportunities to learn, moms are pushed out of the workforce, businesses go without the workers they need, families can’t contribute and make ends meet, and our economy suffers terribly. Moms want Congress to support this bill to stabilize the child care infrastructure and improve wages for educators – not give even more tax breaks to billionaires and wealthy corporations.”
“At a time when President Trump and congressional Republicans are proposing dramatic cuts to child care, the Building Child Care for A Better Future Act provides meaningful investments that would make a real dent in addressing the child care crisis,” said Fatima Goss Graves, President and CEO of the National Women’s Law Center. “With families at a breaking point with the soaring costs of child care, we need real, sustained investment to make care more affordable and to invest in the early learning workforce. If Congress is serious about lowering child care costs, they’ll pass this bill instead of pretending that small tax credits—which provide only a fraction of relief that families need—are a real solution.”
“The Building Child Care for a Better Future Act will make child care more affordable for families and invest in the workforce that makes it all possible. By ensuring sustainable and reliable funding and bolstering the supply of child care, we can build a stronger, more equitable child care sector,” said Stephanie Schmit, Director of Child Care and Early Education at Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP). “This legislation is an essential step toward a much-needed child care system that meets the diverse needs of all children and families.”
“Child care is essential for parents who are continuing to struggle with long waitlists and skyrocketing costs. Providers are barely scraping by due to the ever-rising costs of providing safe and quality care,” said Samantha Cadet, Legislative Director for ZERO TO THREE. “ZERO TO THREE is proud to support the Building Child Care for a Better Future Act, which addresses the root issue of chronic underinvestment by increasing mandatory funding for child care so that states, tribes, and territories have the resources they need to build a child care infrastructure that works for everyone.”
“The Building Child Care for a Better Future Act is a powerful step forward in ensuring that Tribal Nations have meaningful access to the resources needed to strengthen child care in our communities. By increasing dedicated funding and continuing the flexibility in how those funds are used, this bill honors the sovereignty of Tribal Nations to lead the development of early care and education systems that reflect our unique cultures, needs, and priorities,” said Jennifer Rackliff, Executive Director of National Indian Child Care Association (Cherokee Nation — Anisahoni Clan). “We commend this legislation for recognizing that lasting solutions come from within the community—and for giving Tribes the tools to build the systems our children and families deserve.”
“As a national coalition of child care providers, education service providers, and state child care associations, ECEC is pleased to endorse the Building Child Care for a Better Future Act. This legislation recognizes that the child care workforce is the workforce behind the workforce—without well-qualified and compensated child care educators and staff, many parents cannot go to work with the comfort that their children are being educated and cared for in safe and healthy environments. Furthermore, the legislation takes needed steps to help provide support to providers that serve communities that are most in need of high-quality early education,” said Radha Mohan, Executive Director of ECEC. “The long-term investments proposed in the Building Child Care for a Better Future Act will better equip our nation’s child care system to serve all who rely on it every day, and support the continued growth of the American economy.”
“Virtually every segment of our population is struggling with access to childcare, and small businesses are no exception. In fact, Small Business Majority’s research found that most small business owners said a lack of access to quality, affordable childcare for their own children made it difficult to start and grow their business. These business owners also said childcare challenges are an ongoing problem that have forced many to take time away from work, miss out on opportunities or hire additional help,” said John Arensmeyer, Founder and CEO of Small Business Majority. “We support the Building Child Care for a Better Future Act because it will improve our nation’s childcare infrastructure to more effectively address the needs of America’s small businesses.”
Source: US State of North Carolina
Headline: Governor Stein Announces Boards and Commissions Appointments and Nominations
Governor Stein Announces Boards and Commissions Appointments and Nominations
lsaito
Today, Governor Josh Stein announced Boards and Commissions appointments and nominations.
Governor Stein has nominated the following to the Governor’s Crime Commission:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the Historic Hillsborough Commission:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Board of Chiropractic Examiners:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Board of Transportation:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina College Foundation Incorporated Board of Trustees:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Emergency Response Commission:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Local Governmental Employees’ Retirement System Board:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Military Affairs Commission:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Respiratory Care Board:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners:
Governor Stein has nominated the following to the North State Board of Education:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Respiratory State Board of Examiners for Plumbing, Heating and Fire:
Governor Stein has nominated the following to the North Carolina Utilities Commission:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Veterans Affairs Commission:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the Underground Damage Prevention Review Board:
Governor Stein has appointed the following to the North Carolina Agricultural Hall of Fame Board of Directors:
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for North Carolina Thom Tillis
WASHINGTON, D.C. – This week, Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) led the introduction of the Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions (DETERRENT) Act, legislation that brings much-needed transparency, accountability, and clarity to foreign gift reporting requirements for American colleges and universities. Joining Senators Tillis and Cassidy were Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), John Cornyn (R-TX), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Rick Scott (R-FL), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Jim Risch (R-ID), and Eric Schmitt (R-MO).
“America’s foreign adversaries, including the Chinese Communist Party, are targeting our nation’s students by stealing research, spewing anti-American propaganda, and censoring free speech by providing American academic institutions with lucrative funding opportunities,” said Senator Tillis. “Too often, schools fail to report these foreign gifts and funding, leaving our adversaries with an unchecked influence over U.S. academic institutions. The DETERRENT Act is essential to countering this threat and safeguarding our educational integrity. I applaud the House of Representatives for passing this important legislation and I urge the Senate to take swift action to take up and pass this legislation.”
“The DETERRENT Act brings important transparency and ensures our universities are not susceptible to foreign influence,” said Dr. Cassidy. “If America’s adversaries are using these gifts to infiltrate college campuses, we need to know about it.”
Background:
The DETERRENT Act:
Currently, colleges and universities are legally required to report foreign funding under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act. However, a series of recent oversight efforts make alarmingly clear the law is vague, poorly enforced, and full of loopholes. Recent reports show billions in foreign money, often from adversarial regimes like the Chinese Communist Party, coming into U.S. campuses with little to no oversight or transparency. The single biggest enforcement tool to protect against the threats posed by foreign adversaries is in desperate need of reform.
A Senate report from 2019 found that up to 70 percent of all institutions failed to comply with Section 117 of the Higher Education Act. Section 117’s loose legislative language, a lack of enforcement efforts, and institutions’ refusal to adhere to the law have resulted in billions of dollars in foreign funds infiltrating our country undetected.
A one-pager of the legislation is available HERE. Full text of the legislation is available HERE.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jim McGovern (D-MA)
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, Congressman Jim McGovern (D-MA), Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee and a Senior Member of the House Agriculture Committee, led 38 House Democrats in a letter to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins demanding answers after the Patrick Leahy Farm to School Grant Program was abruptly terminated without Congressional consultation or notice, harming farms and schools in communities across America, and making it harder to get healthy food into cafeterias across the country.
The letter was co-led by Representatives Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR), Stacey Plaskett (D-VI), and Chellie Pingree (D-ME), with strong support from Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-MN) and Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT).
“Every child in America deserves access to nutritious food as part of the school day to fuel their learning,” the lawmakers wrote. “The highly successful Patrick Leahy Farm to School Program provides just that. As you know, it helps schools across the country purchase produce from local farmers to incorporate into tasty and nutritious meals for kis, as well as provide hands-on education activities related to agriculture and nutrition. The program is good for kids, good for families, and good for farmers.”
The Members expressed alarm that USDA inappropriately terminated the program’s grants on March 24, 2025, despite being authorized and funded by Congress. “To the best of our knowledge, there was no communication or consultation with Congress prior to the termination of this Congressionally authorized and funded program, and we are deeply concerned about the impact this program cancellation will have on students, schools, and farmers in our districts,” the letter states.
They also noted the broader trend of USDA eliminating nutrition and agricultural programs, writing that: “[i]n just the past few weeks, USDA has terminated at least four programs that achieve the goals of improving health and supporting our farmers.”
The Patrick Leahy Farm to School Program has awarded over $100 million in funding to 1,275 projects nationwide since 2013, with a particular focus on rural communities. The program helps schools incorporate locally grown foods into their meal programs, supports school gardens, and promotes nutrition education. In their letter, lawmakers cited USDA’s own findings that 61% of school food authorities using the program reported increased fruit and vegetable consumption among students, and 57% said it improved access to higher quality foods. They also noted that Farm to School grantees have already reached out to their offices expressing confusion and distress about how to continue their programs without support.
The letter demands a response by April 11, 2025, and asks USDA to clarify the scope of the termination, its legal authority to cancel funding, and what steps will be taken to fulfill the agency’s Congressionally mandated responsibilities.
The signed letter is available here.
The letter was signed by Representatives Becca Balint (D-VT); Nanette Barragán (D-CA); Sanford Bishop (D-GA); Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR); Julia Brownley (D-CA); Shontel Brown (D-OH); Nikki Budzinski (D-IL); André Carson (D-IN); Troy Carter (D-LA); Kathy Castor (D-FL); Angie Craig (D-MN); Sharice Davids (D-KS); Diana DeGette (D-CO); Rosa DeLauro (D-CT); Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ); Jahana Hayes (D-CT); Jared Huffman (D-CA); Seth Magaziner (D-RI); John Mannion (D-NY); April McClain Delaney (D-MD); Betty McCollum (D-MN); Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-MI); James McGovern (D-MA); Seth Moulton (D-MA); Brittany Pettersen (D-CO); Chellie Pingree (D-ME); Stacey Plaskett (D-VI); Mark Pocan (D-WI); Andrea Salinas (D-OR); Adam Smith (D-WA); Mark Takano (D-CA); Shri Thanedar (D-MI); Jill Tokuda (D-HI); Paul Tonko (D-NY); Lori Trahan (D-MA); Eugene Vindman (D-VA); Maxine Waters (D-CA); and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ).
###
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Frank Pallone (6th District of New Jersey)
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06) today blasted a sweeping education funding rollback by Donald Trump and Elon Musk that would gut federal support for public schools and result in the firing of nearly 300,000 teachers nationwide—including 6,914 in New Jersey and 399 in the Sixth Congressional District alone.
Pallone denounced the plan as part of a broader billionaire-driven effort to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and eliminate Title I grants, which provide critical resources to schools serving low-income students.
“Donald Trump and Elon Musk are teaming up to destroy public education in this country,” said Pallone. “Their plan to eliminate Title I funding is a direct attack on working families. In New Jersey alone, millions of students would be left behind. This is cruelty masquerading as reform. At the same time, Trump and Republicans are working to give trillions of dollars in tax breaks to big corporations and billionaires.”
The proposed cuts stem from Trump’s recent executive order to dismantle the Department of Education and slash Title I grants, as well as Title II teacher support and IDEA special education programs. The result: fewer teachers, larger class sizes, and an increased burden on local taxpayers to keep schools afloat.
Pallone and members of the New Jersey congressional delegation sent a letter on March 24 to Education Secretary Linda McMahon warning that the Trump-Musk proposal would have devastating consequences for New Jersey’s students, educators, and school districts. The letter outlines how the plan would decimate education budgets, trigger mass layoffs, and force local governments to raise property taxes to cover the shortfall.
Pallone, who serves as the Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, has long fought to preserve robust federal investments in public education and is now leading efforts to block what he calls “a billionaire power grab that leaves our kids in the dust.”
“Every student deserves a teacher who believes in them—not a billionaire who wants to balance the budget on their backs,” Pallone added. “We won’t let them get away with it.”
Pallone’s full March 24 letter can be found here.
Source: The White House
Here is a non-comprehensive list of wins in week 11:
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Nebraska Deb Fischer
U.S. Senators Deb Fischer (R-NE), John Cornyn (R-TX), Gary Peters (D-MI), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced the Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant Program Reauthorization Act to reauthorize this nationwide law enforcement program that uses evidence-based and data-driven approaches to reduce violent crime.
“Since its inception, the Project Safe Neighborhoods program has a proven track record of reducing violent crime and protecting communities,” said Fischer. “I’m proud to support this commonsense legislation, which continues to provide Nebraska’s law enforcement with the resources they need to keep our communities safe.”
“For more than two decades, the Project Safe Neighborhoods program has successfully implemented data-backed solutions to lower the rate of violent crime and help keep dangerous criminals off our streets,” said Cornyn. “This legislation would build on this impressive track record and foster greater collaboration between law enforcement and the communities they serve to make America safe again.”
“Building trust and partnerships between local law enforcement and the people they serve is absolutely essential to strengthening our communities,” said Peters. “Project Safe Neighborhoods is proven to be an effective tool for reducing violent crime, including drug and gun violence, so I’m proud to again lead this bipartisan legislation to ensure this important program can continue making a difference in the years to come.”
“For over two decades, Project Safe Neighborhoods has worked to combat violent crime by fostering collaboration between local, state and federal law enforcement agencies,” said Grassley. “I’m proud to back the blue and support Project Safe Neighborhoods’ comprehensive approach to crime fighting, which includes a provision in honor of fallen Iowa State Patrol Sergeant Jim Smith.”
“For over 20 years, Project Safe Neighborhoods has helped law enforcement agencies across the country implement proven strategies to reduce violent crime and protect our communities,” said Tillis. “This legislation provides much-needed support to local law enforcement to combat crime and map overdose patterns in our communities. I am proud to support this commonsense legislation to create safer neighborhoods for future generations.”
Background:
Project Safe Neighborhoods is a nationwide partnership between federal, state, and local law enforcement and prosecutors that uses evidence-based and data-driven approaches to reduce violent crime. Under this program, law enforcement agencies focus their enforcement efforts on organized criminal networks and repeat offenders that drive crime rates in a particular region. Project Safe Neighborhoods also works to build trust and partnerships between law enforcement and the communities they serve through coordinated outreach, public awareness, innovative tactics, and collaborative interventions.
Since its inception in 2001, Project Safe Neighborhoods has been successfully deployed by both Democratic and Republican administrations to reduce violent crime in large cities and smaller communities across the country. According to a Michigan State University study funded by the Department of Justice in 2013, Project Safe Neighborhoods was associated with a 13.1% decrease in violent crime in cities with a high rate of program participation. This included double-digit reductions in total firearm crimes and homicides in every city examined by the study.
Specifically, the Project Safe Neighborhoods Grant Program Reauthorization Act of 2025:
This legislation is endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, Sergeants Benevolent Association, National Association of Police Organizations, Major County Sheriffs of America, National District Attorneys Association, Major Cities Chiefs Association, Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies, and National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition.
Source: ACT Party
ACT can reveal that Waikato University’s law faculty is giving students an automatic 10-day extension for assessments submitted past deadline.
A law lecturer has confirmed the policy in an email to ACT, saying a normal deadline policy “creates a burden for students.” A concerned Waikato University student has told ACT that their lecturer explained the policy was part of a wider effort to “decolonise” the assessment process.
ACT Tertiary Education spokesperson Dr Parmjeet Parmar is condemning the policy, saying:
“Instead of aspiring for excellence, Waikato University is making excuses for mediocrity. This is the kind of degradation of values that, if left unchecked, would send our universities tumbling down international rankings.
“Deadlines are a fundamental part of any professional environment, and law graduates in particular must be prepared for strict timeframes. The faculty is developing a culture that risks innocent New Zealanders being put in jail when their mollycoddled lawyers fail to submit documentation on time.
“Universities already have processes to grant extensions in cases of genuine hardship. Automatically granting extra time to everyone destroys the entire meaning of the deadline, and it disrespects the efforts of excellent students who work extremely hard to submit on time.
“Justifying lateness as a kind of decolonisation is ridiculous. It sends a message that Māori students cannot handle deadlines, which is untrue, and frankly offensive.”
Source: Securities and Exchange Commission
The Division of Corporation Finance issued another installment today[1] in its ongoing statement series dedicated to jurisdictional carve-outs for crypto. This one opines that certain so-called “stablecoins” are not securities. What’s remarkable about this statement is not so much its ultimate conclusion, but the analysis staff relies on to get there. The statement’s legal and factual errors paint a distorted picture of the USD-stablecoin market that drastically understates its risks.
Much of the staff’s analysis is premised on issuer actions that supposedly stabilize price, ensure redeemability, and otherwise reduce risk. Staff also acknowledges, albeit briefly, that some USD-stablecoins are available to retail purchasers only through an intermediary and not directly from the issuer. But it is the general rule, not the exception, that these coins are available to the retail public only through intermediaries who sell them on the secondary market, such as crypto trading platforms. Over 90% of USD-stablecoins in circulation are distributed in this way.[2] Holders of these coins can redeem them only through the intermediary. If the intermediary is unable or unwilling to redeem the stablecoin, a holder has no contractual recourse against the issuer. The role of intermediaries, particularly unregistered trading platforms, as primary distributors of USD-stablecoins poses a panoply of significant, additional risks that staff does not consider.[3]
Staff fails to unpack the consequences of this market structure and how it affects risk. The fact that intermediaries conduct most retail USD-stablecoin distribution and redemption significantly diminishes the value of the issuer actions staff relies on as “risk-reducing features.” Key among these features is an issuer asset reserve that staff describes as designed to “satisfy fully their redemption obligations,” i.e., with enough assets to pay out a $1 redemption for each outstanding coin. But generally speaking, as described above, issuers have no “redemption obligations” to retail coin holders. These holders have no interest in or right to access the issuer’s reserve. If they redeem coins through an intermediary, they are paid by the intermediary, not from the issuer’s reserve. The intermediary is not obligated to redeem a coin for $1 and will instead pay the holder the market price. Retail coin holders therefore do not, as staff claims, have a “right[]” to “redemption for USD on a one-for-one basis.”
It is also grossly inaccurate for staff to suggest that just because an issuer’s reserve is, at some point, somehow valued at or above the par value of its outstanding coins, the issuer has sufficient reserves to satisfy unlimited redemption requests (from intermediaries or coin holders) at any future time. First, the issuer’s overall financial health and solvency cannot be judged by the value of its reserve, which tell us nothing about its liabilities, risk from proprietary financial activities, and so forth. Second, there is always a risk, particularly in times of market stress or if the price of a stablecoin drops, of a “run” scenario where intermediaries and/or issuers cannot honor all redemption requests in real time.[4] This leads to a “self-reinforcing cycle of redemptions and fire sales of reserve assets.”[5] Major run events have already occurred with USD-pegged stablecoins, with significant consequences for the broader stablecoin market and the traditional banking system.[6]
Staff further overstates the assurance value of issuer reserves by claiming that some issuers publish reports, called “proof of reserves,” that “demonstrate that a stablecoin is backed by sufficient reserves.” As the SEC and the PCAOB have warned, proof of reserve reports demonstrate no such thing. Their content is unregulated, not subject to PCAOB standards, and determined entirely at the issuer’s discretion. They are “typically [ ] not designed to” and “often provide no assurance as to the reliability of the information provided.”[7] Other regulators have similarly warned of the general lack of transparency and reliability in how stablecoin reserves are invested, managed, and valued.[8] Whatever claims issuers make about their reserves, stablecoin holders have unfortunately learned the hard way that these claims often turn out to be false.[9]
Understanding these facts, it becomes clear that as a legal matter, staff is simply wrong that the issuer’s reserve is a “risk-reducing” feature under the Reves test. Risk-reducing features under Reves include collateralization, insurance, or federal regulatory oversight.[10] Because retail coin holders generally have no right to access the issuer’s reserve to guarantee redemption at any price, let alone $1, the reserve does not “collateralize” stablecoins held by the retail public.[11] Without a redemption right against the issuer, a retail stablecoin holder has no claim in a bankruptcy proceeding, as an unsecured creditor or otherwise, if the issuer becomes insolvent.[12] Just like the product at issue in Reves, USD-stablecoins are “uncollateralized and uninsured.”[13] Even intermediaries responsible for retail redemptions may not be secured creditors of the issuer, meaning they too would have limited or no ability to recover directly from the reserve if the issuer declares bankruptcy. The contractual arrangements between issuers and intermediaries are bespoke and generally non-public, leaving retail coin holders (and regulators) in the dark.
The statement also presents a practical problem: what if any existing stablecoins actually meet the stated criteria and fall within the staff’s definition of “Covered Stablecoin”? It is hard to even understand what staff’s criteria are because the statement is written as though issuers have redemption obligations directly to retail coin holders when in general, they do not. For example, staff claims that issuers stabilize the price because they “mint[ ] and redeem[ ] Covered Stablecoins on a one-for-one basis with USD at any time and in unlimited quantities.” But staff fails to explain if or how that occurs in the typical case of a USD-stablecoin that is purchased and redeemed by retail holders only through intermediaries. To the extent distribution and redemption affect the retail market price, it is the intermediaries, not the issuers, whose actions matter. What are the practices and obligations of those intermediaries? Is that information disclosed to the retail public? Staff gives us no idea.
These legal and factual flaws in the staff’s statement do a real disservice to USD-stablecoin holders, and, given the central role of stablecoins in the crypto markets, to crypto investors more generally. They feed a dangerous industry narrative about the supposed stability and safety of these products. This is perhaps best highlighted by the staff’s choice to parrot a highly misleading marketing term, “digital dollar,” to describe USD-stablecoins. Make no mistake: there is nothing equivalent about the U.S. dollar and unregulated, privately-issued crypto assets that are opaque (clearly even to the staff), uncollateralized, uninsured, and laden with risk at every step of their multi-layer distribution chain. They are risky business.
[1] The timing of today’s statement – issued as the country is reeling from market turmoil not seen since the early days of COVID-19 – calls into question how the Commission is choosing to deploy its increasingly limited staff resources.
[3] See IOSCO Policy Recommendations for Crypto and Digital Asset Markets Final Report, pp. 9, 71-72 (Nov. 16, 2023) (“The majority of stablecoin distribution[ ] [ ] occurs on secondary markets through [crypto asset service providers] and clients may not be aware of what rights they have and do not have against a stablecoin issuer … [i]n many stablecoin structures, the stablecoin issuer will allow only larger institutions and crypto-asset trading platforms to interact directly with the stablecoin issuer to create and to redeem stablecoins … [this] creates conflicts [of interest between the issuer and intermediary] and gives rise to potential misuse of inside information, market manipulation and other misconduct”); SEC Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Exercise Caution with Crypto Asset Securities: Investor Alert (Mar. 23, 2023) (“crypto asset securities trading platforms or other intermediaries (such as so-called ‘crypto exchanges’) may offer a combination of services that are typically performed by separate firms that may each be required to be separately registered with the SEC, a state regulator, or a SRO. The commingling of these functions, exchange, broker-dealer and custodial functions, for example, creates conflicts of interest and risks for investors ….”).
[10] See Reves v. Ernst & Young, 494 U.S. 56, 69 (1990).
[11] See Black’s Law Dictionary, “Collateral” (12th ed. 2024) (defined as “[p]roperty that is pledged as security against a debt; the property subject to a security interest or agricultural lien.” (citing UCC Article 9-102(a)(12)); SEC v. Wallenbrock, 313 F.3d 532, 539 (9th Cir. 2002) (“here the so-called collateralization appears to be a fiction … investors had no way of reaching the assets.”).
[13] See Reves, 494 U.S. at 69.