As M23 rebels continue to gain ground in South Kivu in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (RDC), the country’s top UN humanitarian official has told UN News that increasing “complexity and needs” are fuelling a crisis which had already left more than a million people displaced before the latest surge in fighting.
“The frontline is getting closer to Kavumu Airport,” warned Bruno Lemarquis on Wednesday.
Following the fall of regional capital Goma, in North Kivu, at the end of January, the Rwanda-backed M23 armed group is now making headway against Congelese Government forces towards Bukavu, the capital of South Kivu.
Kalehe, a major city in the province, fell around midday on Wednesday local time, the Humanitarian Coordinator reported. The city is only 20 miles away from Kavumu, which is home to the province’s main airport.
The commercial airfield – a 20 mile drive from Bukavu – is mainly being used for military operations by Kinshasa’s beleaguered regular forces.
“Until recently, it was our main lifeline for bringing personnel to South Kivu,” said Mr. Lemarquis.
But as with the Goma airport, which remains non-operational, that window has now closed.
A historically dire situation
Before the M23’s latest offensive at the beginning of the year, Mr. Lemarquis recalled that the humanitarian situation in South Kivu was already dire.
Roughly 1.65 million people, or just over 20 per cent of the province’s population, had been displaced for a wide range of reasons.
“There are other conflicts in the province, community tensions, tensions related to land,” he explained.
South Kivu is also prone to natural disasters, including landslides on the shores of Lake Kivu, which are responsible for many displacements.
“So, we had a major humanitarian operation running in South Kivu,” said Mr. Lemarquis.
The recent advances of the M23 rebels, whose incursion in South Kivu is the first since the withdrawal of the UN Stabilization Mission in the DRC (MONUSCO) from the province in June 2024, are compounding historic problems.
“This will only add complexity and needs,” the Human Coordinator said.
United Nations
Children gather in Goma, in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo.
At least 170,000 new displacements
Mr. Lemarquis estimated that the recent clashes in the province had displaced at least 170,000, a figure that does not include estimates for the past two weeks.
The Humanitarian Coordinator also noted an influx of people moving towards Bukavu, where nearly 1.3 million people already reside.
“Depending on how the situation evolves, in the coming days, we can imagine that there will be an even larger influx of population towards the city of Bukavu, then out of the city, towards the South,” he explained.
Such an outcome, he added, would hinder vulnerable people’ access to health and social services.
Risks of epidemics
Mr. Lemarquis also voiced concern over the spread of infectious diseases as fighting continues in South Kivu, a province rife with cholera.
“When essential services are impaired, this can lead to epidemic outbreaks,” he warned.
This is especially worrisome, he added, because the province is currently the global epicentre of a new mpox strain, known as clade 1b, which is particularly prevalent around Kalehe, the city now controlled by M23.
UNICEF/Jospin Benekire
A mother holds her young child after having visited a UN-supported medical clinic at an IDP camp in North Kivu.
No humanitarian access to the South
On a positive note, the Humanitarian Coordinator said that the road from Goma to Minova, the first South Kivu town conquered by the M23 in mid-January, is no longer closed.
“There were a few rather difficult days for our humanitarian colleagues because of the fighting,” he acknowledged. “But now access has been restored.”
Further South in the province, however, humanitarian access has been cut off.
“For quite some time, the road between Goma and Bukavu has not been accessible,” he said.
Alternative pathways, including via Lake Kivu, which borders the province and connects Goma in the north to Bukavu in the south, have also been cut off.
“There aren’t many alternative routes, the airport being the main access route,” he acknowledged.
[. However, many of these technologies don’t yet exist, are still early in development or are not yet commercially available. Given our energy leadership, Alberta will continue to lead the way.
Alberta’s government is investing $55 million from the industry-funded TIER program to help industries, big and small, test and implement the technologies they need to keep leading the world. Delivered through Emissions Reduction Alberta, this funding will help 15 projects develop cutting-edge technologies that could one day be used across Canada and around the world.
“When it comes to innovation, Alberta’s track record is second to none. This funding will help empower our industry and businesses to develop the new technologies that are in demand around the world. This funding is a win-win: creating jobs, reducing emissions, and strengthening our economy for the benefit of all Albertans.”
This funding will support projects across the economy, including the energy, newsprint, cement, water treatment, dairy and forestry sectors. In total, $46 million will go to 12 projects through Emissions Reduction Alberta’s Industrial Transformation Challenge, with an additional $8.7 million invested in three projects approved through the Partnership Intake Program.
“By investing in these technologies today, we are helping to maintain Alberta as a global leader in industrial innovation and paving the way for a more sustainable and competitive future across our industries.”
Funding ranges from $500,000 to $10 million for each project, including:
$10 million to help Alberta Newsprint Company make best-in-class energy efficiency upgrades that will reduce costs and improve the mill’s competitiveness.
$8.4 million to help Dairy Innovation West advance a new approach for developing concentrated milk products that can be transported with less energy and further processed into other dairy products, increasing the province’s milk-processing capacity.
$7.45 million to help the City of Calgary install a first-in-Alberta and second-in-Canada technology to use thermal energy at the Fish Creek wastewater treatment plant.
$4 million to help Lafarge Canada explore using calcined clay in cement products, lowering the overall emission intensity of cement while maintaining strength.
$3.7 million to help Flash Forest Inc. advance a proof-of-concept that uses drones, AI-based site selection software and ecological science to speed up and improve tree planting and reforestation.
$2 million to help Merlin Plastics develop a commercial-scale operation that will divert hard-to-recycle plastics from landfills or incineration.
$700,000 to help TS-Nano Canada test a new product that will more effectively seal oil and gas wells, reducing potential methane leaks and reducing operational costs.
“With support from the Government of Alberta and Emissions Reduction Alberta, Alberta Newsprint Company will adopt state-of-the-art technologies that significantly reduce its carbon footprint, demonstrating Alberta’s leadership in sustainable manufacturing.”
“This funding support enables the City of Calgary to employ innovative low-carbon technology to heat the new infrastructure for the Fish Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade project. By using heat pumps to recover thermal energy from wastewater effluent as a heat source, the project significantly reduces the plant’s greenhouse gas emissions.”
“The support from the Government of Alberta and Emissions Reduction Alberta has been instrumental in driving the development and deployment of innovative technologies for the Dairy Innovation West facility. This funding not only accelerates our progress but also underscores Alberta’s commitment to advancing clean technology and sustainable solutions that have a lasting impact both locally and globally.”
A full list of funding and project details can be found at https://www.eralberta.ca.
Quick facts
These projects are estimated to reduce 119,000 tonnes of emissions each year, 394,000 tonnes of emissions by 2030, and more than 2.2 million tonnes of emissions by 2050.
These projects are estimated to create almost 1,600 jobs and inject $237 million into Alberta’s GDP by 2027.
Emissions Reduction Alberta’s Partnership Intake Program acts as a catalyst to de-risk and deploy novel technology solutions by giving applicants the opportunity to leverage funding from both Emissions Reduction Alberta and trusted partner organizations.
Industrial Transformation Challenge applicants and their technologies can originate from anywhere in the world, but projects must be piloted, demonstrated or deployed in Alberta and show significant emissions reduction and economic benefits within the province.
Successful applicants are eligible for up to $10 million per project, with a minimum request of $500,000. Funding received through the Industrial Transformation Challenge will match private contributions on a one-to-one basis.
Following a report of a residential break and enter in progress in Stephenville, 49-year-old Terrance Benoit, who had fled from the home on foot, was tracked and located by RCMP Police Service Dog Thor.
Shortly after 6:00 a.m. on Wednesday, February 12, 2025, Bay St. George RCMP received the report of a residential break and enter in progress at a home located on Townview Road. Surveillance footage captured a man inside the residence. Police immediately attended the scene and searched the home for the suspect. Officers found fresh footprints in the snow at the back of the residence. RCMP Police Service Dog Thor and his handler, Cpl. Ralph, attended the area and conducted a track which led to a home on Woodland Drive in Stephenville.
Shortly before 7:00 a.m., Benoit, who matched the individual captured on the surveillance footage, was arrested and was taken into police custody. A number of stolen items, that had been discarded in the snow near Townview Road, were recovered and returned to the owner.
Later in the day yesterday, a search warrant obtained under the Criminal Code was executed at the residence where Benoit was arrested. Police recovered additional stolen property and other evidence in relation to the break and enter.
Benoit attended court yesterday charged with break and enter, failure to comply with a condition of a release order and breach of probation. He was held in custody and will appear in court again today.
On February 12, shortly before the report of this break and enter, police received a number of reports of a suspicious person breaking into vehicles in Stephenville on York Avenue, Fairview Avenue, Gallant Street and Viking Terrace. Those matters remain under investigation.
Anyone having surveillance footage of a suspicious person in the areas mentioned above or in the area of Townview Road in Stephenville between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and 6:45 a.m. is asked to contact Bay St. George RCMP at 709-643-2118.
Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) issued the following statement:
“There’s no question that America’s food system is painfully broken. It drives historic levels of suffering and illness. It’s broken for farmers and rural communities; it’s broken for workers; it poisons our environment; it subsidizes unhealthy foods and hurts consumers. It’s a system that seems to hurt everyone except the multinational food companies that control it.
“It’s also true that our country faces a huge nutrition crisis. In recent decades, we’ve seen an explosion of diet-related diseases, fueled by the world’s biggest food companies that rigged the rules in their favor to maximize profits at the expense of public health. These companies have blocked my efforts to regulate things like toxic pesticides, food chemicals, and ultra-processed foods.
“I’m always hopeful that we can make progress on these challenges and I will work with whomever wants to join with me and the millions of Americans who are demanding change.
“However, I will not be voting to confirm Mr. Kennedy. He has championed views on a number of issues that are deeply concerning to me. Furthermore, the Trump administration is flagrantly ignoring the law in its efforts to dismantle vital government programs, from health care to education to national security, while ignoring the burden of rising costs on American families.”
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) today voted against advancing the nomination of Kash Patel in the Senate Judiciary Committee, President Trump’s nominee to be the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and expressed his opposition:
“In my view, the beginning of the Trump Administration is showing a contempt for the Constitution and a lawlessness that is dangerous for the republic [add]…” said Senator Peter Welch. “We, each of us, must be custodians of that constitutional order and our role as the legislature, in it. Tough judgments have to be made. My judgment is that the President is showing absolute contempt for the United States Congress. And the next stop is contempt for the United States Judiciary. I cannot vote for a person who signed onto that agenda.”
Watch the Senator’s full remarks below:
Read Senator Welch’s remarks as delivered here.
During Patel’s confirmation hearing, Senator Welch grilled the nominee about his refusal to acknowledge that President Biden won the 2020 Presidential Election and stressed the importance of combatting any attempt to weaponize the Justice Department and the FBI under the Trump Administration. Earlier this week, Senator Welch reacted to reports that Patel has been personally involved in the Trump Administration’s ongoing efforts to target and fire career FBI agents and officials. Under oath, Mr. Patel told Senator Welch he had no recollection of the purge at the FBI. Senator Welch reacted:
“If these reports are true, this is perjury. Under oath, Kash Patel said he had no recollection of any discussions or details about plans to purge career FBI agents—but whistleblowers have revealed that he was not only aware but orchestrating it. Kash Patel’s goal is to wreck the FBI, and my colleagues across the aisle must vote no.”
Governor Kathy Hochul today announced that the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) has initiated a comprehensive review of utility management compensation following her direction on Tuesday for the Department of Public Service (DPS) to move forward with the audit. This audit follows years of work by DPS to examine utility management structures and seeks to align utility priorities with State objectives, including affordability, reliability, safety, and a cleaner environment. This is part of a comprehensive effort by the Governor to combat rising utility costs and protect consumers, and it builds upon her direction for DPS to reject Con Edison’s rate proposal and her demand that the New York Power Authority suspend its proposed rate increase.
“New Yorkers deserve fair and transparent utility rates,” Governor Hochul said. “This audit will ensure that utility compensation structures are working for New Yorkers, not rewarding expected behavior. We will hold utilities accountable and ensure their focus is where it should be: delivering reliable, affordable, and high-quality service. At a time when families are facing rising costs, we are taking decisive action to ensure every dollar that customers pay is justified and that utility companies are prioritizing the needs of the people they serve.”
The audit will focus on compensation for non-union utility management employees statewide and the results will inform future rate cases to protect New Yorkers from unfair rate hikes. Numerous recent management and operations audits of large, investor-owned electric and gas utilities have highlighted meaningful concerns with how utilities administer their programs.
In a recent audit of Central Hudson, the auditor concluded their bonus structure rewarded financial performance, but only set reliability and service quality metrics at the bare minimum. In the case of NYSEG and RG&E, auditors had to recommend that the companies set performance standards that encourage service improvements. And in other recent audits, including of Con Edison, O&R, and National Grid, auditors found that companies should update their compensation structures to focus on ratepayer-centric goals.
Commission Chair Rory M. Christian said, “This audit is about accountability. Management compensation is a reflection of a company’s values, and we expect utility values to mirror our own and be focused on providing quality, affordable service to ratepayers.”
The audit will examine compensation practices at 13 major utilities, including Con Edison, National Grid, Central Hudson, NYSEG, RG&E, and Veolia Water New York. Investor-owned electric and gas utilities have a total of 12.4 million customers in New York State. Findings from the audit will influence future rate cases, providing the PSC with insights into best practices and potential cost-saving measures.
Over the last four years, Governor Hochul has prioritized energy affordability by:
Affordability policy enhancements to expand eligibility in the Energy Affordability Program and creating the Energy Affordability Guarantee, the first-in-the nation pilot program that ensures low-income New Yorkers participating in the EmPower Plus program never pay more than 6 percent of their incomes on electricity and incentivizes them to fully electrify their homes.
Budget appropriations to reduce ratepayer costs of EAP that provides critical utility bill relief to low-income New Yorkers.
Providing arrears forgiveness of more than $1 billion.
State procurements of renewable generation to offset ratepayer costs of developing new clean generation resources
$300 million to create power-ready sites for attracting new businesses through the Promote Opportunity with Electric Readiness for Underdeveloped Properties (POWER UP) Fund.
Assemblymember Didi Barrett said, “As utility rates continue to soar it is imperative that we take a close look at utility company salaries to ensure our constituents across the state are not shouldering the burden of inflated salaries. I thank Governor Hochul for her focus on energy affordability and the Public Service Commission for their support of this audit.”
Governor Kathy Hochul today announced an exciting addition to the transformative Interstate 81 Viaduct Project’s community engagement toolbox: The launch of the I-81 Connect mobile app. The app builds on the unprecedented community outreach efforts implemented during the project’s planning and environmental phases — which are currently still effective — during construction. The I-81 Connect mobile app incorporates the convenience of 21st century technology into the largest infrastructure project in the New York State Department of Transportation’s history. The app will deliver real-time project updates and travel alerts and allow the Central New York Community to connect with the I-81 Project team directly. A daily tap of the app will enhance everyday life and reduce stress caused by congested commutes, improve traffic flow and increase overall safety.
“Community engagement does not stop once construction begins,” Governor Hochul said. “The New York State Department of Transportation is building on the robust public outreach that has accompanied every stage of this project, as we step into the future of community engagement with the new I-81 Connect mobile app. Our commitment to ensuring the residents of this community are involved in every aspect of this undertaking will remain strong until the viaduct comes down and the neighborhoods surrounding it are reconnected for good.”
The I-81 Connect mobile app is a one-stop shop resource that provides users 24/7 access to all aspects of the I-81 Viaduct Project and streamlines communication between the user and NYSDOT. When users navigate to the section titled “Connect with Us” on the app’s home screen, they will be redirected to clickable links that call the I-81 Viaduct Project toll-free hotline or draft an email to the project team. The notification feature on the app provides NYSDOT the ability to send messages about important project information directly to the user’s mobile device. This modernized approach to community engagement cuts out the middleman and allows the public to receive information directly from the source.
New York State Department of Transportation Commissioner Marie Therese Dominguez said, “The I-81 Connect mobile app is a game changer and reinforces Governor Hochul’s commitment to providing a safe and reliable transportation network, accessible to all. I-81 Connect brings the community and NYSDOT together through the app, on the phone, or online, decreasing anxiety and sharing information. Today, we raised the bar on community engagement!”
As the first-ever mobile app to be paired with a NYSDOT infrastructure project, I-81 Connect is linked to the project’s website and provides full access to project renderings, contract updates, information and data associated with the first of its kind Local Hire Initiative, an inquiry form for jobseekers, materials and resources for prospective Disadvantage Business Owners and contractors, archived documents, technical details and more. Downloading the app automatically enables users to receive important project updates and traffic alerts on their mobile devices. Additionally, users can opt-in to receive email notifications.
The I-81 Connect home screen includes a list of categories to help users find what information they are looking for, quickly and efficiently.
I-81 Connect is an inclusive communications tool that gives the most vulnerable Central New York communities a seat at the table. Members of the community — whether they live in downtown Syracuse or in surrounding suburban and rural areas — will be able to get real time updates and not rely on word-of-mouth or wait to attend a community event, and instead, will be able to engage with a member of the I-81 Viaduct Project team right from the palm of their hand. The I-81 Viaduct Project’s outreach Centers will continue to be open and available to all New Yorkers interested in the project.
The I-81 Viaduct Project is part of Governor Hochul’s unprecedented commitment to modernize New York State’s infrastructure and invest in projects that promote connectivity and multi-modal transportation opportunities for communities across the State. The project will take down a 1.4-mile stretch of elevated highway that has divided the City of Syracuse for generations and implement a Community Grid that will reconnect neighborhoods, modernize infrastructure, give motorists multiple options to safely access downtown Syracuse and improve mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Work on the I-81 Viaduct Project has been in progress for two years, with four of the project’s eight contracts in construction and a fifth contract anticipated to start later this spring. Additionally, final design on phase two of the project has begun. The project’s first two contracts focusing on reconstructing the existing I-81/I-481 northern and southern interchanges into Business Loop 81 and I-81, are anticipated to be substantially complete by the end of this year.
The I-81 Connect mobile app, powered by GoGov, is available on iPhone and Android devices for free and can be downloaded in the App Store and Google Play.
State Senator Rachel May said, “The I-81 Viaduct project is moving along quickly. That means drivers, cyclists and pedestrians need a way to stay up to date with reliable information. This new app will be helpful for road users in Central New York, providing updates on road construction and traffic alerts that will make navigating the project much more manageable. Thank you to Commissioner Dominguez for introducing this innovative app and for your dedication to making the I-81 project a success.”
Assemblymember Bill Magnarelli said, “The I-81 Viaduct Project significantly impacts the entire Central New York region. The investment reinforces New York State’s commitment to protecting and enhancing our statewide infrastructure, strengthening economic development and our quality of life. The I-81 Connect mobile app will allow the community to stay informed during the construction phases and have real-time information throughout the process.”
About the Department of Transportation
It is the mission of the New York State Department of Transportation to provide a safe, reliable, equitable and resilient transportation system that connects communities, enhances quality of life, protects the environment and supports the economic well-being of New York State. Lives are on the line; slow down and move over for highway workers!
For more information, find us on Facebook, follow us on X or Instagram, or visit our website. For up-to-date travel information, call 511, visit www.511NY.org or download the free 511NY mobile app.
A man was sentenced on January 31, 2025, to 24 months imprisonment for contempt of court.
Joel Perea-Duenas, age 24, from Sioux City, Iowa, received the prison term after a July 30, 2024, guilty plea to contempt of court.
In the evening hours of June 23, 2020, Perea-Duenas was asked to serve as the getaway driver for a drive-by shooting. He agreed, put on dark clothing, and joined three armed men in a waiting car. The attackers drove to the home of their intended victim, but seeing law enforcement in the area, aborted their attack. Perea-Duenas suggested a secondary target, drove to that new target and identified it to his conspirators. It was a home, occupied by seven people including children. One of the gunmen repeatedly fired upon the home hitting the house at least eight times. Perea-Duenas was later caught by police and admitted he knew about the intended shooting before agreeing to drive, admitted knowing there were people, including children, in the targeted home, and he wanted the shooting to occur to in retaliation against a resident of the home and his family. On November 19, 2021, Perea-Duenas pled guilty to two counts of being a drug user in possession of a firearm and was sentenced to 4 years in federal prison.
On October 27, 2022, defendant was called as a witness at the federal sentencing of an accomplice. He was sworn by the district court judge. When he was questioned under oath, however, he refused to testify because he did not want to testify. The district court advised him that he did not have a lawful right to refuse to answer the questions. Nonetheless, Perera-Duenas persisted in his refusal to testify. The district court continued the sentencing, in part, to give Perea-Duenas time to reconsider his refusal of the district court’s lawful order. The sentencing resumed on December 8, 2022. Perera-Duenas again, communicated his refusal to testify. He was sent back to federal prison to complete his federal sentence for the firearms charge.
On October 19, 2023, while he was still in federal prison, he was charged with contempt of court. On November 20, 2023, he was released from federal prison on the gun charges, he was re-arrested and haled back into federal court to answer for his criminal contempt. On July 30, 2024, he plead guilty. He was sentenced on January 31, 2025, in Sioux City by United States District Court Judge Leonard T. Strand to 24 months’ imprisonment. He must also serve a 3-year term of supervised release after the prison term. There is no parole in the federal system.
Judge Strand indicated in sentencing Perea-Duenas that this was the only time in his career as a jurist that he had encountered a refusal to testify of this nature and that the crime had to be sanctioned stiffly to ensure others do not follow suit.
United States Attorney Timothy T. Duax said: “refusals to testify, like refusals of court orders generally, strike at the very heart of the American justice system and the rule of law. As a result, those who disobey lawfully issued court orders risk prosecution and incarceration.”
Perea-Duenas is being held in the United States Marshal’s custody until he can be transported to a federal prison.
The case was investigated by the Sioux City Police Department and prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Forde Fairchild.
Defendant Targeted Egyptian-American Coptic Christians and Spent Victims’ Funds on Luxury Goods and Expensive Meals
Earlier today, Mina Tadrus pled guilty at the federal courthouse in Brooklyn, New York to committing investment adviser fraud in connection with a scheme to defraud investors in Tadrus Capital LLC, a hedge fund Tadrus founded and operated, of more than $5 million. Today’s proceeding took place before United States District Judge Hector Gonzalez. When sentenced, Tadrus faces up to five years in prison. Tadrus was charged in September 2023.
John J. Durham, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, James E. Dennehy, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI) and Harry T. Chavis, Jr., Special Agent-in-Charge, Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation, New York Field Office (IRS-CI), announced the guilty plea.
“The defendant preyed on the Egyptian-American Coptic Christian community by falsely promising that his purported artificial intelligence-driven hedge fund would earn guaranteed annual returns of 30% or more, and taking advantage of their trust for his own personal gain,” stated United States Attorney Durham. “This Office has prioritized protecting and seeking justice for individual investors in our District and beyond.”
Mr. Durham expressed his appreciation to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s New York Regional Office for its assistance in this matter.
“The only thing more artificial than Tadrus’ AI-driven hedge fund was his sincerity. He sold a dream to trusting investors and instead of turning their money into profit, he swindled it for his own luxuries. Today’s plea and forfeiture agreements are just a small step forward for his victims to receive genuine justice,” said Harry T. Chavis, Jr., Special Agent in Charge of IRS-CI New York.
According to court filings and facts presented during the plea proceeding, Tadrus marketed interests in Tadrus Capital LLC to investors based on false promises that he would employ artificial intelligence-driven trading strategies that would earn them guaranteed annual returns of 30% or more.
In reality, however, Tadrus did not use investor funds to engage in artificial intelligence-based trading as promised, nor did he engage in any trading activity. Instead, he used investor funds to pay employees, to purchase luxury gifts and expensive meals for himself, and to make Ponzi scheme-like payments to new victim investors.
If you were a Tadrus Capital LLC client and would like to file a complaint, please visit www.iC3.gov. Please reference “Tadrus Capital” or “Mina Tadrus” in your complaint.
The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Business and Securities Fraud Section. Assistant United States Attorney John O. Enright and Special Agent Martin Sullivan are in charge of the prosecution with assistance from Paralegal Specialist Sarah Burn.
Source: United States Senator for Colorado John Hickenlooper
Legislation will cut reliance on China for critical materials essential to our national security, energy, and emerging tech
WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper, Lindsey Graham, Chris Coons, and Todd Young reintroduced the bipartisan Critical Materials Future Act to establish a pilot program for the Department of Energy to financially support domestic critical material processing projects.
“American energy independence is a bipartisan goal,” said Hickenlooper. “The U.S. could be a global leader in critical materials, but we need to shore up our domestic supply chains to strengthen our national security. Let’s get to work.”
“China maintains dominant control over critical mineral processing, which poses significant risks to our national security. It’s important for us to build better and more resilient processing capabilities here at home,” said Graham.
“Critical minerals are essential to manufacturing the most advanced energy and defense technologies, but the production, processing, and recycling of these materials is dominated by China,” said Coons. “This bipartisan bill will spur the investment we need to regain American control of our critical mineral supply chains.”
“Our reliance on global supply chains for critical materials poses a significant national security threat, especially as the Chinese Communist Party continues to manipulate this market,” said Young. “Our bill will take innovative steps to identify opportunities for American leadership and investment in critical material projects, strengthen domestic supply chains, and boost our economic and global competitiveness.”
The U.S. critical minerals list contains 50 minerals – including graphite, nickel, and cobalt – that are essential to our economy, infrastructure, and military capability. Critical minerals are used in smartphones, electric vehicle batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, and more.
This December, China announced that they would immediately block the export of three critical minerals: gallium, germanium, and antimony to the U.S. China currently controls 90% of the global processing capacity for rare earth elements and over 80% of the processing for other critical minerals like cobalt, gallium, and graphite. Experts have become increasingly concerned with U.S. dependence on China for critical materials, arguing it poses a significant risk to national security.
The Critical Materials Future Act supports critical material processing projects in the United States by granting the Secretary of Energy the authority and funding to deploy innovative financial mechanisms, such as contracts for differences and advanced market commitments, within this sector.
The bill also requires the Secretary of Energy to conduct a comprehensive study on the impact of these financial tools on market dynamics and processing projects within the critical materials sector, and to provide recommendations for expanding their use to strengthen America’s processing capabilities.
In the 119th Congress, Hickenlooper has reintroduced his bipartisan STRATEGIC Minerals Act to foster critical minerals trade with our international allies, and the bipartisan Unearth Innovation Act to establish a DOE program for critical minerals innovation.
The Critical Materials Future Act is supported by the Colorado School of Mines, the Bipartisan Policy Center, the National Wildlife Federation, the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, the Key Minerals Forum, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, Employ America, MineTech Ventures, Alta Resource Technologies, the Chamber of Progress, U.S. Critical Minerals, Nyrstar, the Alabama Mobility and Power Center (University of Alabama), South32 Hermosa, Alliance for Mineral Security, South Star Battery Metals Corp, the American Critical Minerals Association, and the Federation of American Scientists. For their statements of support, click HERE.
Full text of the Critical Materials Future Act is available HERE. A one-pager explanation on this bill is available HERE.
Montpelier, Vt. – Governor Phil Scott and the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) today announced $4,764,010 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding to benefit 15 projects in 14 communities. Projects include supporting the creation of the regional Orange County Parent Child Center in Randolph, renovating the Abenaki Nation of Missisquoi headquarters in Swanton which includes a food pantry that serves the entire region, and increasing home ownership services provided by the Windham and Windsor Housing Trust.
“These investments are transformational for rural Vermont and will help revitalize communities,” said Governor Phil Scott. “Without this support, many of these projects would not get across the finish line. I want to thank our Congressional delegation for their support of this important program.”
There is a total of nine of the projects that will receive a CDBG grant:
Town of Braintree– Subgrant to Green Mountain Economic Development Corporation to develop property in Randolph to become Orange County Parent Child Center which will accommodate 88 childcare slots, workforce training, education, and other services.
Town of Hardwick– Subgrant to Heartbeet Lifesharing, Inc. to hire at least three full-time staff to support three Vermonters living with developmental and/or physical impairment.
Town of Randolph– Subgrant to Randolph Area Community Development Corporation for design and rehabilitation of 25 existing affordable housing units and construction of seven at three different properties.
Town of Swanton– Subgrant to Maquam Bay of Missisquoi to renovate the Abenaki Nation of Missisquoi’s headquarters in Swanton. The building serves all members of the public with cultural and community services, programs and events including the Abenaki Food Pantry, health and wellness workshops, and preservation and enrichment of indigenous cultural knowledge.
Town of Bennington– Subgrant to Shires Housing for integration, technical expertise, and coordination necessary for the merger of Shires Housing, Housing Trust of Rutland County, and NeighborWorks of Western Vermont.
Town of Fair Haven– Planning feasibility study to determine if a vacant industrial building can be redeveloped so it can again produce HUD approved Manufactured Homes.
Town of Hancock– Conduct feasibility study, develop architectural and engineering plans for construction of housing, and conduct an environmental review at 50 Taylor Meadow.
Town of Stowe– Subgrant to Downstreet Housing & Community Development to plan for the merger of the Lamoille Housing Partnership and Downstreet Housing and Community Development.
Town of West Rutland– Subgrant to NeighborWorks of Western Vermont to fund merger of Housing Trust of Rutland County, NeighborWorks of Western Vermont, and Shires Housing in Bennington.
Click here for a full list of awards.
Six other projects which received CDBG funding in the past are awarded CDBG Enhancement grants in this round. For more details about these latest awards and previous CDBG grants,please visit the DHCD website.
CDBG is funded by U.S. Housing and Urban Development and administered by the Vermont Community Development Program at DHCD. Seventy percent of CDBG funds must primarily benefit low- and moderate-income households.
Now, 85 years later, many people know “Cap” best from his depiction in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). The first film to bring the character to the big screen was Captain America: The First Avenger, in 2011. The film establishes what is probably the best known iteration of Captain America, a mantle taken up by the second world war “super-soldier” Steve Rogers (Chris Evans).
Each iteration of Captain America correlates to the real US of their time. For Trump’s America, that iteration is played by Anthony Mackie. His MCU character, Sam Wilson, formerly known as Falcon, takes up the mantle in Avengers: Endgame (2019). Mackie now appears in his first standalone film in the role, Captain America: Brave New World.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Joe Simon and Jack Kirby, the creators of Captain America, conceived him explicitly as the antithesis to Hitler. By draping Steve Roger in stars and stripes and giving him the name Captain America, their superhero became the symbol of a nation.
With his origins in the second world war, the Steve Rogers iteration of Captain America is a fairly uncomplicated piece of propaganda, representing the righteousness of the US and its fight against Nazism. Captain America is the archetype of the nationalist superhero. He’s embodiment of the nation state and therefore represents and defends the ideal version of it.
However, as cultural geographer Jason Dittmer points out in his book Captain America and the Nationalist Superhero (2013), the state and the nation are not necessarily the same thing. The state is the governmental apparatus while the nation is the identity of its people.
Erskine explains why Rogers was chosen as a super-solder.
This difference is articulated, to an extent, in Captain America: The First Avenger (2011). The creator of the super-soldier serum, Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci) explains that the weak, sickly Rogers was chosen to become the first super-soldier because he understands the value of power. Having never had it, Erskine argues, he would not be corrupted by it. Rogers is not a perfect soldier, but he is a good man and that is more important.
If we map this onto the US, the implication is that America as a nation is fundamentally good and just, and therefore separate from any potentially problematic policies set by America the state.
As Rogers’ arc progresses across successive movies, the character becomes increasingly disillusioned with state power and control. His relationship with his own identity as Captain America fluctuates, with his ambivalence often symbolised by his either giving up or reclaiming the shield.
Enter Sam Wilson
In one of the closing scenes of Avengers: Endgame (2019), an aged Steve Rogers passes his shield to Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie), the African-American superhero known as the Falcon.
In the world of the MCU, Captain America’s shield has never just been a shield – it is a symbol of heroism, of moral values and of “American-ness”. It can be read as a symbol of what America is, and what it could be.
Captain America: Brave New World is Anthony Mackie’s first standalone film in the role.
The legacy of Steve Rogers’ Captain America was explored in the TV show The Falcon and the Winter Soldier (2021). The series interrogated topics such as race, patriotism and American identity through the story arcs of two versions of Captain America: the Rogers-approved Wilson and the state-sponsored John Walker (Wyatt Russell). The series explores the concept of heroism and links it to questions of race.
In American Masculinities: A Historical Encyclopedia (2003), associate professor of American studies Holly Allen argues that: “The basis of American notions of both heroism and manliness has been a tension between virtuous devotion to a higher cause and the quest for personal achievement.”
This tension is palpably played out in the narrative arc of Rogers and in some ways resolved across the course of his films. His personal achievement (thanks to the super-soldier serum) is put in service of a higher cause, first during the second world war, later with the Avengers and finally in passing the shield to Wilson.
The state-sponsored shield
Despite his disillusionment, Rogers is positioned as being the living embodiment of the American dream, rather than a tool of the state. The same cannot be said of Walker, the white, blond, blue-eyed, highly decorated soldier selected to be the next Captain America by the US government.
Rogers’ Captain America was conceived of to fight against and be ideologically opposed to fascism. But Walker’s short-lived tenure sees him – with the backing of the “Global Repatriation Council” – carrying out raids on safe houses and refuges. He angrily demands that the people he is brutalising show him respect purely because he is Captain America.
Walker becomes, effectively, the public face of the Global Repatriation Council. Armed with the shield and dubbed the new “Star Spangled Man”, he embodies a particularly American brand of aggressive insertion into global politics. This can be interpreted as a critique of the positioning of America as “the world’s policeman”.
Wilson’s speech in The Falcon and The Winter Soldier.
During the show, Walker’s murder of an unarmed dissident brings his stint as Captain America to an end. The shield, mantle and title of Captain America therefore return to Wilson, whose climatic speech in the series’ finale articulates the hostility and judgment he faces as a black man wearing the stars and stripes.
During the recent promotional tour for Brave New World, Mackie stated that Captain America was a man with “honour, dignity and integrity”, noting that these are virtues not currently embodied by America the state.
He added that while Cap represents many things, “America” as it currently is should not be one of them. It looks likely then that Wilson’s Captain will return the character to the ideal of the nation as it should be, rather than a tool of state propaganda and repression.
Unsurprisingly, Mackie has faced enormous backlash to his comments – despite them being almost identical to sentiments expressed by Evans in 2011. Whatever the future of the character in the MCU, ideas around heroism, patriotism and race will be central to the continuing evolution of Captain America.
Laura Crossley 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.
We may never know if St Valentine, a martyr beheaded for officiating the forbidden weddings of persecuted Christians, was keen on chocolate and flowers. But we do know that millions of people around the world will be using those very items to celebrate his name on February 14.
In the UK, it is estimated that 60% of the population will celebrate Valentine’s Day this year, each spending around £52 on gifts and other romantic gestures. The total spend in the US will be about US$27 billion (£22 bilion), including roughly $US500 million on roses.
So the tradition of spending money on your romantic partner on February 14 seems fairly well established. But it is hard to know exactly when the link began.
Up until the late 14th century, Valentine’s Day was solely a commemoration of his martyrdom. The shift toward an association with romantic love emerged in the Middle Ages, and is often attributed to the poet Geoffrey Chaucer, who linked Valentine’s Day to romance in his poem Parliament of Fowls.
But it was the 19th century industrial revolution which brought about the mass production of romantic gifts. Cadbury was the first chocolate maker to commercialise the association between romance and confectionery by producing heart-shaped boxes of chocolates for Valentine’s Day in 1868. These boxes were decorated with images of Cupid, roses and hearts, and would sometimes be kept to store romantic letters and mementos.
And while Hallmark did not invent the occasion, it played a big part in bolstering its popularity by selling Valentine’s Day postcards in 1910, and then printing its own greetings cards from 1916.
Now in the US, around 145 million Valentine’s Day cards are exchanged each year, making it the second largest annual occasion for card giving (after Christmas).
But it’s not just car sellers, florists and chocolate-makers who seek to benefit from the commercial opportunities Valentine’s Day provides. This year for example, IKEA has partnered with a dating app to give nine British couples a “once-in-a-lifetime” first date in an Ikea store, where they will share a meatball dinner for two in bed.
Lego has launched a travelling campaign in major cities around the world to show off its floral designs, and Coca-Cola has teamed up with a fast-food brand to create a Valentine-themed drive-thru experience.
Chocolate and marshmallows
These kinds of one-off marketing campaigns are only possible thanks to a long history of Valentine’s traditions, which vary around the world.
In Japan for example, it is a two-part celebration. On February 14, women often give “Giri-choco” (“obligation chocolate”) to friends and colleagues, while “home-choco” (“true-feeling chocolate”) is reserved for romantic partners. On March 14, known as White Day, men reciprocate by giving jewellery and less-expensive gifts that are white (marshmallows are a popular choice).
Celebrations in South Korea are similar to those in Japan, but with the addition of Black Day on April 14 when single people gather at restaurants to eat black noodles (jajangmyeon). In the Philippines, Valentine’s Day is marked by mass weddings organised by the government.
In Finland and Estonia, Valentine’s Day is known as “Friend’s Day” with the focus on celebrating non-romantic love and friendship. A similar idea, “Galentine’s Day”, which featured in a 2010 episode of the US sitcom Parks and Recreation, has become a popular way of celebrating female friendship.
Love for sale
Of course, not all consumers enjoy Valentine’s Day rituals. For many, there is pressure attached to romantic shopping, while for others it is just an unwelcome reminder of their single status.
But there is a market for that too. Anti-Valentine’s day sentiment has inspired other ways to (not) celebrate, including a box of chocolates aimed at single people.
And it can be a very valuable day for businesses, large and small. With high levels of participation and spending, Valentine’s Day brings a major surge in revenue for sectors including retail, hospitality and entertainment.
So although it might not sound very romantic, it’s worth remembering that while money can’t buy you love, love can provide a significant boost to the economy.
Sameer Hosany does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By DaLissa Alzner, Registered Psychotherapist, Adjunct faculty in the Department of Applied Psychology, Adler University
A healthy relationship is one where you feel comfortable being your authentic self.(Shutterstock)
Many people spend much of their lives searching for what is arguably one of the most subjective of human experiences — true love. From popular movies, TV shows and dating apps to a cultural focus on finding “the one,” the phenomenon of love is inescapable. Our preoccupation with social connectedness is biologically connected to our desire for human connection.
But how do we establish connections across all our relationships that positively contribute to our well-being? Identifying the characteristics of a healthy relationship and being mindful of red flags is a reasonable place to start.
Love is often one of those things that you just know when you feel it. While it is difficult to define love as an explicit experience or construct, there are certain guides we can use to understand what makes a loving relationship.
What makes a healthy relationship?
If you believe that friends are the family we choose, then you have been fortunate to experience a meaningful friendship that positively contributes to a reality where you feel appreciated, valued and have a sense of belonging.
This experience of connection can be defined as compassionate love — originally coined as a component of the Two-Factor Theory of Love, which suggests love is comprised of two main categories. The first is passionate love, which is the intense longing for someone that may end in sexual connection or rejection. The second is compassionate love, which is associated with friendship, companionship and affection.
Being your authentic self means aligning your actions and behaviours with your core values and beliefs. This allows you to engage in self-discovery and thrive in every environment or relationship you find yourself in.
This alignment fosters a sense of congruence between your internal self and external expressions, allowing you to interact with others genuinely. Engaging with others authentically allows you to navigate social interactions with integrity and fosters deeper, more meaningful relationships.
What does love look like?
While love can be a difficult thing to define, there are some ways that we can sense when it is present, and when it isn’t.
Celebrating differences: Embracing the authenticity and differences of friends, siblings and partners fosters appreciation. This can reduce criticism, unrealistic expectations and dissatisfaction in relationships. Forcing change may work briefly, but it often leads to resentment and unhappiness.
Putting in the work: The grass is greener where you water it. Whether it’s a 25-year or five-month partnership, relationships require effort and co-operation. Working through individual differences to achieve a common goal is crucial in relationships. Siblings may need to overlook disagreements, while friends should meet regularly.
Leaning into language: When extending a gesture or token of appreciation, consider how it will be received by your partner — not by you. For instance, if you enjoy going out for dessert, but the other person prefers staying at home, you might initially think to take them out for dessert. However, to ensure the gesture is meaningful, present it in a way that aligns with their preferences and how they receive affection.
Diffusion:Acceptance and commitment therapy encourages people to create psychological and emotional space when conflict arises. This makes space for them to process conflict objectively, while also de-personalizing the interaction, contributing to emotional regulation and an ability to respond intentionally. The ability to develop and facilitate this skill is a vital tool for emotional regulation across relationships and circumstances.
To curate healthy and meaningful relationships, be intentional about nurturing connection, authenticity and mutual respect. (Shutterstock)
Signs love may not be present
Our need to belong and form meaningful connections drives our desire for companionship. When these efforts fail or relationships break, it is painful. Yet, there are some potential signs that can indicate when love is no longer present in a relationship.
Lack of communication and avoiding conflict: Poor communication and avoiding conflict can harm relationships. Research shows that not communicating leads to misunderstandings, emotional withdrawal and unresolved issues. Avoiding conflict can result in internalizing emotions, passive-aggressive behaviour and tension. In friendships, poor communication can cause feelings of being unheard or undervalued. Studies indicate that healthy friendships rely on open communication and respectful conflict resolution.
In family relationships, dysfunctional communication often contributes to division and resentment. Family therapy research has found that a lack of open communication can contribute to generational misunderstandings, leading to dysfunctional family dynamics.
Within families, particularly between parents and children, the absence of empathy may lead to significant emotional strain. Research has found that if family members fail to offer emotional support or to recognize each other’s needs, it negatively impacts family cohesion and individual well-being.
Controlling or manipulative behavior: Controlling behaviours, like restricting autonomy or manipulating someone into believing they are the problem in every situation, poses a serious threat to the well-being of a relationship. Research has shown that controlling behaviours often reflect insecurity and can contribute to abusive dynamics in relationships.
In friendships, manipulation may present as guilt-tripping, isolating from others or using emotional leverage to get one’s way. Research in this area suggests that healthy friendships involve mutual respect and boundaries, and when manipulation is present, satisfaction and trust is significantly reduced.
In families, controlling behaviours from parents, siblings or other relatives may contribute to a decrease in personal growth. The creation of toxic family dynamics manipulation and control at the hands of family has been found to significantly contribute to damaging effects over time, particularly in the parent-child relationship.
To curate healthy and meaningful relationships, be intentional about nurturing connection, authenticity and mutual respect. By celebrating differences, putting in effort, communicating openly and practising emotional regulation, it is possible to create meaningful relationships that will positively contribute to our well-being.
At the same time, we need to be diligent in recognizing and addressing red flags like poor communication and manipulative behaviours. Doing so allows us to safeguard our emotional health. Start today — reflect on your relationships, embrace authenticity and take the steps necessary to build deeper, more supportive connections that enrich your life.
DaLissa Alzner 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.
SPOKANE VALLEY, Wash., Feb. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Key Tronic Corporation, a provider of electronic manufacturing services (EMS), is expanding its clean-tech manufacturing operations in Arkansas, establishing its flagship manufacturing and research and development location in Springdale. The company anticipates investing more than $28 million in the new facility and expects to create over 400 new jobs in the next five years.
“We are pleased to announce the expansion of our U.S. manufacturing operations in Northwest Arkansas. Our new center of excellence in Springdale will provide both our employees and customers with cutting-edge technology and the increased capacity necessary to accommodate expected growth,” said Brett Larsen, CEO of Key Tronic. “We are committed to continuously investing in our capabilities and attracting innovative talent. Our people are our most valuable asset, and we are delighted to enhance our operations in a region where we have maintained a longstanding presence and a strong team and can benefit from a business-friendly environment.”
“When we invest in education and our workforce, we can attract companies like Key Tronic and ensure they have the skilled workforce they need. Arkansas LEARNS and ACCESS are laser-focused on that issue and help attract announcements like this one, which mean $28 million and nearly 400 jobs for Springdale,” said Governor Sanders.
Key Tronic will be shifting its existing Arkansas operations to a new larger facility in Springdale, located at 601 W Apple Blossom Avenue later in 2025, increasing its total U.S. production capacity by approximately 40 percent.
“Crossland purchased the land in 2021 with a vision to build a modern, best-in-class facility, and we are grateful that Key Tronic has chosen this location to call home. This building is part of a larger business park, representing an investment of over $100 million in the Springdale community,” said Director of Real Estate Mattie Crossland. “Our goal is to provide spaces that allow our tenants to run their businesses efficiently while also contributing to the growth and future of the community.”
Crossland Realty Group developed the 300,000-square-foot building shell in late 2023, with Crossland Construction completing Key Tronic’s tenant improvements, slated for completion in Q3 2025.
“Key Tronic has a long history of manufacturing electronics in Arkansas, and we are proud that the company has decided to expand their presence and increase production capacity in our state,” said Clint O’Neal, Executive Director of the Arkansas Economic Development Commission. “Congratulations to the Key Tronic team and to the City of Springdale on this major economic development win.”
“Key Tronic’s decision to relocate to Springdale is a strong endorsement of our city’s talented workforce, thriving economy, and commitment to fostering business success,” said Springdale Mayor Doug Sprouse. “This investment brings significant job opportunities to our community, further strengthening Springdale’s reputation as a prime destination for industry and innovation. We proudly welcome Key Tronic and look forward to their future growth here.”
“This exciting announcement would not have been possible without the leadership of Governor Sanders and the unwavering support of the Arkansas Economic Development Commission,” said Bill Rogers, president and CEO of the Springdale Chamber of Commerce. “Thanks to our regional partners and the proactive efforts of Mayor Sprouse’s administration, we were able to roll out the red carpet for Key Tronic. We are thrilled to welcome them to Springdale and look forward to supporting their success in our community.”
“Key Tronic’s reinvestment in Northwest Arkansas highlights our region’s strong workforce and pro-growth environment,” said Nelson Peacock, president and CEO of the Northwest Arkansas Council. “As a leader in electronics manufacturing, their expansion strengthens our economy, retains quality jobs and creates new opportunities—reinforcing our position as a top destination for business and innovation.”
About Key Tronic Founded in 1969, Key Tronic is a leading contract manufacturer offering value-added design and manufacturing services from its facilities in the United States, Mexico, China and Vietnam. The Company provides its customers with full engineering services, materials management, worldwide manufacturing facilities, assembly services, in-house testing, and worldwide distribution. Its customers include some of the world’s leading original equipment manufacturers. Key Tronic has operated in Arkansas since 1985.
About Crossland Construction Company Crossland is a top-ranked construction firm offering a wide range of services through its family of companies. Crossland Construction provides general contracting, construction management, and much more. Crossland Realty, a division of Crossland Construction, offers complete real estate services, guiding clients through location scouting, planning, development, construction, and leasing. Crossland is dedicated to Building So Much More for its clients and the communities they serve. Learn more: www.crossland.com
About the Arkansas Economic Development Commission At AEDC, we know economic advancement doesn’t happen by accident. We work strategically with businesses and communities to create strong economic opportunities, making Arkansas the natural choice for success. AEDC is a division of the Arkansas Department of Commerce. To learn more, visit ArkansasEDC.com.
Forward-Looking Statements Some of the statements in this press release are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including Key Tronic’s opportunities and its partnership, the potential success of Key Tronic and the customer, and related revenues. Forward-looking statements include all passages containing verbs such as aims, anticipates, believes, estimates, expects, hopes, intends, plans, predicts, projects or targets or nouns corresponding to such verbs. Forward-looking statements also include other passages that are primarily relevant to expected future events or revenue or that can only be fully evaluated by events that will occur in the future. There are many factors, risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted or projected in forward-looking statements, including but not limited to: the success and timing of our expansion plans; the success and timing of ramping; availability and timing and receipt of critical parts or components; demand from customers and sales channels; the future of the global economic environment and its impact on our customers and suppliers; the availability of a healthy workforce; the accuracy of suppliers’ and customers’ forecasts; development and success of customers’ programs and products; success of new-product introductions; the risk of legal proceedings or governmental investigations relating to the previously reported financial statement restatements and related material weaknesses, the May 2024 cybersecurity incident and the subject of the internal investigation by the Company’s Audit Committee and related or other unrelated matters; acquisitions or divestitures of operations or facilities; technology advances; changes in pricing policies by the Company, its competitors, customers or suppliers; impact of new governmental legislation and regulation, including tax reform, tariffs and related activities, such trade negotiations and other risks; and other factors, risks, and uncertainties detailed from time to time in the Company’s SEC filings.
ANN ARBOR, Mich., Feb. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — iink, a leading provider of technology to streamline the property damage insurance claims process and support faster payments to contractors, property owners, and claim professionals, is pleased to announce the appointment of Scott Fleszar as its new Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Fleszar brings extensive experience and a proven track record of scaling businesses, driving operational excellence, and cultivating customer-centric innovation in high growth technology companies.
Mr. Fleszar succeeds Tom McGrath who will transition to the role of Chief Product Officer and lead iink’s product innovation efforts. “Tom has been a tremendous steward of the iink business, and this planned transition will ensure that Tom’s deep industry expertise and experience leading product teams will continue to support our ambitious platform innovation agenda and customer-focused product roadmap,” said Mr. Fleszar. Mr. McGrath will also lead iink’s partnerships strategy aimed at building more automation and connectivity across the insurance payments ecosystem.
“I am excited to work closely with Tom as we continue to enhance iink platform’s capabilities and extend our reach through partnerships to offer customers more convenience, transparency, and speed in claims processing and payments.” Mr. Fleszar added.
iink recently launched powerful new platform capabilities, including a proprietary digital wallet that enables instant, wallet-to-wallet payments, even on weekends. “We are just getting started with our vision for revolutionizing claims processing and payments,” said Mr. McGrath. “This is an exciting time for iink. Scott’s experience leading high-growth technology businesses will help propel us into our next phase of expansion and strengthen our market leadership.”
Mr. Fleszar most recently served as CEO of SafeSend, a market leader in automation and client collaboration technology for accounting firms. During his tenure, the company experienced transformational growth, with revenues increasing eightfold, annual margin improvements, and customer NPS scores rising into the 60s—a testament to strong customer satisfaction. Under his leadership, SafeSend cultivated an award-winning, high-performance culture, marked by exceptional employee engagement, low turnover, and a commitment to innovation, positioning the company as a standout employer in the fintech and automation space.
“I am thrilled to join iink at such a pivotal time in its journey,” said Mr. Fleszar. “Leading a passionate and talented team, backed by an engaged investor group, is truly an honor. iink has established itself as a pioneer in insurance payments, and I look forward to accelerating our growth, expanding our product offerings, and delivering even greater value to customers and partners.” Under Mr. Fleszar’s leadership, iink will focus on advancing its technology platform, securing key strategic partnerships, and expanding its Sales and Marketing efforts. His vision reinforces iink’s mission to simplify claims payments, empower policyholders, and drive efficiency across the insurance ecosystem.
“Scott’s extensive experience and leadership make him the ideal person to guide iink into its next chapter,” said King Goh of Headline Venture Capital, Chairman of the Board at iink. “We are confident that his strategic vision and passion for innovation will propel iink to new heights and further strengthen our position as an industry leader.”
Mr. Fleszar’s appointment follows the recent addition of Tina Hsiao to iink’s Board of Directors. Hsiao brings deep expertise in payments, having led WePay through a Series B funding round to a successful acquisition by JP Morgan Chase.
The appointments of Mr. Fleszar and Ms. Hsiao come at a pivotal moment for iink as the company pursues rapid expansion of its platform capabilities, target customer segments, and vendor partners.
About iink
iink, Corp develops and operates a homeowner’s claims and endorsements management platform. The company provides document review, insurance claims, mortgages, insurance payments, endorsement package submission, and insurance services. Its platform also allows its users to access property insurance payments for restoration professionals and enables payees to endorse and disburse funds electronically.
Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)
February 13, 2025
Washington, D.C. – Oregon’s U.S. Senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden joined an effort led by California’s U.S. Senator Alex Padilla to demand President Trump rescind his unprecedented and illegal firing of Federal Election Commission (FEC) Chair Ellen Weintraub. The Senators also advised Trump to pursue the lawful process of consulting with the Senate on nominating a replacement for both Weintraub and future vacancies.
The FEC is an independent, bipartisan agency tasked with enforcing U.S. campaign finance laws. In the 50 years since it was created — in the wake of the Watergate scandal — a commissioner has never been fired by the President. Typical procedure, as outlined in the Federal Election Campaign Act, is to have a Commissioner depart upon confirmation of their replacement. The illegal, unprecedented firing of Chair Weintraub took effect immediately on February 6.
“Chair Weintraub must be able continue to serve in her role unless and until you use the lawful process of nominating a commissioner for the Senate’s consideration and that nominee is confirmed,” wrote the Senators. “Your letter seeking to remove a commissioner ignores the legal requirements that commissioners may not be removed without cause. This effort violates the procedure set in statute for replacing commissioners in the Federal Election Campaign Act and appears to be a bad faith effort to dismantle the only federal agency that protects the American people’s right to transparency in campaigns and elections.”
“Record spending in our elections, including from ultra-wealthy individuals who now serve at the highest levels of power, has placed the FEC’s responsibilities at the heart of maintaining a healthy democracy,” continued the Senators. “While years of deadlock at the Commission have hindered its ability to serve as an effective regulator, removing commissioners without cause moves beyond dysfunction to outright destruction.”
In addition to Merkley, Wyden, and Padilla, the letter was signed by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
Full text of the letter is available here and below:
Dear President Trump:
We write to strongly urge you to rescind your illegal attempt to remove Chair Ellen Weintraub from the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the independent and bipartisan agency charged with enforcing our campaign finance laws. Chair Weintraub must be able continue to serve in her role unless and until you use the lawful process of nominating a commissioner for the Senate’s consideration and that nominee is confirmed.
Your letter seeking to remove a commissioner ignores the legal requirements that commissioners may not be removed without cause. This effort violates the procedure set in statute for replacing commissioners in the Federal Election Campaign Act and appears to be a bad faith effort to dismantle the only federal agency that protects the American people’s right to transparency in campaigns and elections.
Removing an FEC commissioner without nominating a replacement is without precedent. With Republican Commissioner Sean Cooksey’s recent resignation to join your administration, regular order would be to consult with the Senate on a bipartisan basis and nominate a pair of Republican and Democratic commissioners for the Senate’s consideration. Unlawfully removing a commissioner with an existing vacancy, without consultation with the Senate on nominations to replace them, demonstrates an intent to ignore the Senate’s constitutional role and diminish the Commission’s ability to hold accountable potential violations of campaign finance law.
Chair Weintraub, a Democratic commissioner, has a strong record of seeking to enforce the law that regulates money in politics on a nonpartisan basis, including holding presidential campaigns accountable. Congress created the FEC over 50 years ago, in the wake of the Watergate scandal that eroded trust in our government. The FEC was designed to be free from the interference of those it might be regulating and to ensure the American people had insight into how money was being spent to influence its elected officials. The role of money in our elections has changed since the FEC was first created, particularly as the Supreme Court has issued decisions permitting dark money to infiltrate our elections. However, the need for balanced and dedicated commissioners who work on behalf of the country has remained unchanged.
Further, record spending in our elections, including from ultra-wealthy individuals who now serve at the highest levels of power, has placed the FEC’s responsibilities at the heart of maintaining a healthy democracy. While years of deadlock at the Commission have hindered its ability to serve as an effective regulator, removing commissioners without cause moves beyond dysfunction to outright destruction.
We call on you to rescind your unlawful letter and pursue the legal process for replacing commissioners in bipartisan consultation with the Senate.
Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
WASHINGTON, DC – There are many ways to show one’s love on Valentine’s Day, but unfortunately, due to President Donald Trump’s tariff threats and refusal to help lower food prices, Americans will likely shell out record amounts this year for things like flowers, chocolate, or a dinner date at their favorite local restaurant.
U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) says it’s time President Trump follow through on his campaign promise to actually do something to help lower prices instead of making moves to increase costs on consumers and American businesses.
“Donald Trump pledged to fix the economy, but so far he’s made things worse. He’s fixated on tax cuts for the wealthy and tariffs that economic experts say will only drive up prices for American consumers. Since Trump took office, inflation is accelerating and groceries, gas, and rents rose over the last month. His chaotic, destabilizing approach is sending prices in the wrong direction for families,” said Senator Reed.
During Trump’s second term in office, the consumer price index rose 3 percent in January from a year ago, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. It has increased from a 3-and-a-half year low of 2.4 percent in September.
Those planning to wine and dine their sweetheart this Valentine’s Day will likely face higher costs than last year for everything from flowers to food to fuel. In fact, Trump’s focus on everything but the economy might leave Americans a little lighter in their wallet for things like:
Flowers: A majority of florists import their bouquet flowers from countries like Colombia and Mexico. Recent tariff threats by President Trump are already creating supply chain pressures and impacting prices on products coming into the U.S. In order to stay afloat, some mom and pop flower shops are estimating they could have to raise prices as much as 10 percent on bouquets compared to last year’s Valentine’s Day.
Chocolate: It will be harder to find a sweet deal on chocolate this Valentine’s Day because chocolate prices are up about twenty percent as cocoa prices hit new heights. Several factors contribute to the price hike, and not all are within Trump’s direct control. For instance, key cocoa-producing regions of West Africa have been impacted by severe weather, exacerbated by climate change. But Trump’s inaction and climate denial only exacerbates environmental and health hazards that don’t respect borders. The chocolate industry in the U.S. is also impacted by consolidation. Trump has allowed anti-competitive industry consolidation in the past which leads to higher prices in the long run and allows huge companies to stomp out upstarts.
Restaurant Dining: Not only are menu prices rising under the Trump Administration, but due to Trump ignoring his pledge to take action on day one to address food prices, staples like eggs and entrée items like steak have shot up in the last month.
“Americans want the federal government to work effectively and they want action to lower prices and strengthen the economy. Donald Trump needs to stop with the culture war sideshows and focus on the things he pledged to do — like lowering food, housing, and health costs. Giving away massive tax windfalls for the wealthy and slashing Medicaid doesn’t lower prices. So far, Trump’s policies have made things worse for many Americans. He needs to change course,” concluded Reed.
PROVIDENCE, RI– Governor Dan McKee, Providence Mayor Brett Smiley, RIDE Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green, Providence Public School District (PPSD) Superintendent Dr. Javier Montañez, Principal Cassandra Henderson, and 2023 Presidential Awards for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching (PAEMST) recipient Kerry Johnson joined state, municipal, school and community leaders today at Asa Messer Elementary School to launch the statewide Math Matters RI campaign, which aims to promote the importance of mathematics.
As part of the launch, Governor McKee and Commissioner Infante-Green awarded the latest round of Learn365RI grants, which will provide 38 communities with $2,125,000 in grant funding aimed at improving math skills. Additionally, $725,000 has been allocated as a State set-aside for statewide intervention and support. Asa Messer Elementary was chosen to host the event because the school saw one of the highest increases in math proficiency, with a more than 12 percentage point improvement in students meeting or exceeding expectations in the 2024 RICAS results.
“In every home, every day, learning matters and we are launching our statewide Math Matters RI campaign to place an extra emphasis on math instruction and learning,” said Governor Dan McKee. “We’re underscoring that math is important for the future success of students and state with an investment of $2.85 million in Learn365RI funding that will support out-of-school math-focused programming statewide. Our intention is to build on the success of our nationally recognized Attendance Matters RI campaign and continue our work to improve academic achievement across the Ocean State.”
“Providing our students with the tools and support they need to excel in math is an investment in both their future and the future of Providence,” saidMayor Brett P. Smiley.“Strong math skills create pathways to higher education and careers in high-demand industries, strengthening our local workforce and economy. We are pleased to partner with the State to expand access to high-quality learning opportunities. By working together, we can ensure that every student has the foundation to reach their full potential and succeed for years to come.”
“While some of our students are seeing positive momentum in math and have rebounded past pre-pandemic levels of achievement, we have to double down on our efforts to promote math to help all students get back on track,” said Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green. “RIDE is working diligently to expand access to high-quality math instruction for students and math-focused professional learning for teachers, and we know that the funds made available to communities through the Governor’s Learn365RI initiative will complement and strengthen our efforts to improve math understanding and skills. RIDE is excited to kick off the Math Matters RI campaign alongside math teachers, coaches, champions, and representatives from cities and towns throughout Rhode Island.”
Funding for the third round of Learn365RI Municipal Learning Project grants has been aligned to the Math Matters RI campaign and will support out-of-school time learning programs with an explicit focus on math programs for students currently enrolled in kindergarten through grade 8. The program’s grant recipients may offer April break math camps, intensive afterschool and/or weekend math programming, and/or a four (or more)-week summer program.
State leaders emphasized the need to focus on improving math instruction and learning, citing positive trends in math RICAS results that have rebounded past pre-pandemic levels of achievement with 30.1% of students meeting or exceeding expectations in 2023-2024 results compared to 29.8% in 2018-2019. However, math SAT results remain below pre-pandemic levels, with 21.7% of secondary students meeting and exceeding expectations compared to 31.2% in 2018-2019. At the national level, NAEP, known as the “Nation’s Report Card,” underscored a need to focus on math with 2024 national math scores declining by 5 percentage points in grade 4 and 8 percentage points in grade 8 compared to 2019.
“When our future leaders succeed, Rhode Island succeeds, and I am proud that representatives from across our state are joining to support students reach their highest potential,” said Chair of the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education Patti DiCenso. “A comprehensive, high-quality education opens doors for all students, but we’ve seen that math can serve as a gatekeeper for many. By focusing joint efforts to promote math, we can help expand college and career options for students of all backgrounds.”
As part of the $725,000 State set-aside, $500,000 will help provide math-focused and enrichment courses through EnrollRI.org. The All Course Network (ACN), accessible through EnrollRI, helps students get a head start on postsecondary success, master the skills required of a lifelong learner, and be prepared for jobs in sectors critical to Rhode Island’s future prosperity. ACN courses offer students the opportunity to earn both high school and college credit, offsetting the cost of college tuition, and preparing students for a life without limits. With the goal of supporting college and career readiness, last December state leaders announced a new partnership with Khan Academy, offering a no-cost opportunity to all local education agencies (LEAs) to enhance SAT preparation and student success through the integration of Khan Academy Districts and Khanmigo tools.
Providence Public Schools will receive $225,000 of the State set-aside to set up spring recess math programming. PPSD’s math RICAS results show positive trends with 14.7% of students meeting or exceeding expectations in 2023-2024 compared to 11.9% in 2018-2019, prior to the pandemic. PPSD has seen steady increases in math RICAS annually since levels reached their lowest point during the pandemic.
“PPSD is committed to promoting the message that math matters, and we are working hard to expand access to learning opportunities that will boost math outcomes in the capital city,” said Superintendent Montañez. “Since the height of the pandemic, PPSD has made gains in math RICAS every year, and are now above where we were prior to the disruption of COVID-19. We know work remains and we are thankful for the State’s support in helping ensure our students continue to learn and develop their math skills beyond the classroom.”
The new campaign is in alignment with Governor McKee’s goal to meet or beat Massachusetts’ achievement levels by 2030 improving school attendance, boosting FAFSA completion rates, and improving RICAS English Language Arts (ELA) and math scores. To promote greater outcomes, state leaders have made a series of investments to support students and teachers. Notably, last year, the State announced the investment of $5 million in funding for instructional coaching in mathematics and ELA for more than 20 schools and districts across the state, with $4 million going towards staffing and the remaining $1 million going towards accompanying professional development.
“We are all math people, and as a math educator it brings me great joy to see statewide support towards elevating and strengthening math skills across the Ocean State,” said 2023 PAEMST recipient Kerry Johnson. “We can all learn and thrive in math if given the right support and I join the chorus of Rhode Island officials, teachers, parents, and business and community partners proudly saying that math matters!”
WASHINGTON – London Teeter, 21, of Washington D.C., pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court to her role in a series of seven inside-job robberies of the Chinatown drug store where she was employed as a store manager.
The plea was announced United States Attorney Edward R. Martin, Jr., FBI Special Agent in Charge Sean Ryan of the Washington Field Office Criminal and Cyber Division, and Chief Pamela Smith of the Metropolitan Police Department
Teeter pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to interfere with interstate commerce by robbery (Hobbs Act robbery). The Honorable Jia M. Cobb scheduled sentencing for June 12, 2025. When she is sentenced, Teeter is eligible for up to 20 years in prison and up to a $250,000 fine.
According to court documents, Teeter, and three co-conspirators devised a scheme to carry out armed robberies of the Walgreens store in Chinatown nearly once a month, beginning in July 2023, when either she or her co-conspirator were working. As a store manager, Teeter knew the timing of cash transfers within the business. In each robbery, a masked gunman entered the store, forced an employee into the manager’s office or accessed the manager’s office using a code provided by Teeter or her co-conspirator. The gunman then robbed the employees and fled through a rear exit. Teeter and her co-conspirator took turns pretending to be the “victim” manager on duty, knowing that the robberies would be captured on internal surveillance.
The robberies occurred on July 18, 2023, August 2, 2023, September 2, 2023, November 10, 2023, December 4, 2023, January 9, 2024, and February 11, 2024. Teeter was present in the manager’s office and pretended to be the victim of a robbery during the July 18, 2023, and January 9, 2024, robberies.
In response to the robberies, the Chinatown Walgreens hired armed Special Police Officers to protect the business. Teeter was aware that armed Special Police Officers would be present during the robberies and that a co-conspirator robbed the officers of their firearms during the robberies that occurred on December 4, 2023, and February 11, 2024.
In the plea agreement, Teeter admitted that the co-conspirators stole and split at least $28,983. She also acknowledged that she reviewed surveillance footage from the August 2, 2023, robbery during which a co-conspirator briefly placed his firearm on a chair Teeter acknowledged that she sent a co-conspirator a text message stating: “the vid looks so bad,” “idk why he put the gun down,” and “he can’t do it next time [not gonna lie].”
Law enforcement arrested Teeter on February 22, 2024. During the search of her home that preceded her arrest, law enforcement recovered a loaded Glock 45 pistol loaded with 16 rounds of 9mm ammunition.
Trial dates are pending for co-conspirators Michael Robinson, 34, Kamanye Williams, 25, and Gianni Robinson, 27.
This case is being investigated by the FBI’s Violent Crimes Task Force with assistance from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). It is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Justin F. Song, Sarah Martin, and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Monica Svetoslavov of the Federal Major Crimes Section.
A spontaneous memorial of flowers in St Petersburg, Russia, on the day of Alexei Navalny’s death, February 16 2024.Aleksey Dushutin/Shutterstock
This is the best day of the past five months for me … This is my home … I am not afraid of anything and I urge you not to be afraid of anything either.
These were Alexei Navalny’s words after landing at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport on January 17 2021. Russia’s leading opposition figure had spent the past months recovering in Germany from an attempt on his life by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Minutes after making his comments, Navalny was detained at border control. And he would remain behind bars until his death on February 16 2024, in the remote “Polar Wolf” penal colony within the Arctic Circle.
“Why did he return to Russia?” That’s the question I’m asked about Navalny most frequently. Wasn’t it a mistake to return to certain imprisonment, when he could have maintained his opposition to Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, from abroad?
But Navalny’s decision to return didn’t surprise me. I’ve researched and written about him extensively, including co-authoring Navalny: Putin’s Nemesis, Russia’s Future?, the first English-language, book-length account of his life and political activities. Defying the Kremlin by returning was a signature move, reflecting both his obstinacy and bravery. He wanted to make sure his supporters and activists in Russia did not feel abandoned, risking their lives while he lived a cushy life in exile.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Besides, Navalny wasn’t returning to certain imprisonment. A close ally of his, Vladimir Ashurkov, told me in May 2022 that his “incarceration in Russia was not a certainty. It was a probability, a scenario – but it wasn’t like he was walking into a certain long-term prison term.”
Also, Navalny hadn’t chosen to leave Russia in the first place. He was unconscious when taken by plane from Omsk to Berlin for treatment following his poisoning with the nerve agent Novichok in August 2020. Navalny had been consistent in saying he was a Russian politician who needed to remain in Russia to be effective.
In a subsequent interview, conducted in a forest on the outskirts of the German capital as he slowly recovered, Navalny said: “In people’s minds, if you leave the country, that means you’ve surrendered.”
Video: ACF.
Outrage, detention and death
Two days after Navalny’s final return to Russia, the Anti-Corruption Foundation (ACF) – the organisation he established in 2011 – published its biggest ever investigation. The YouTube video exploring “Putin’s palace” on the Black Sea coast achieved an extraordinary 100 million views within ten days. By the start of February 2021, polling suggested it had been watched by more than a quarter of all adults in Russia.
Outrage at Navalny’s detention, combined with this Putin investigation, got people on to the streets. On January 23 2021, 160,000 people turned out across Russia in events that did not have prior approval from the authorities. More than 40% of the participants said they were taking part in a protest for the first time.
But the Russian authorities were determined to also make it their last time. Law enforcement mounted an awesome display of strength, detaining protesters and sometimes beating them. The number of participants at protests on January 31 and February 2 declined sharply as a result.
Between Navalny’s return to Russia in January 2021 and his death in February 2024, aged 47, he faced criminal case after criminal case, adding years and years to his time in prison and increasing the severity of his detention. By the time of his death, he was in the harshest type of prison in the Russian penitentiary system – a “special regime” colony – and was frequently sent to a punishment cell.
The obvious intent was to demoralise Navalny, his team and supporters – making an example of him to spread fear among anyone else who might consider mounting a challenge to the Kremlin. But Navalny fought back, as described in his posthumously published memoir, Patriot. He made legal challenges against his jailers. He went on hunger strike. And he formed a union for his fellow prisoners.
He also used his court appearances to make clear his political views, including following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, declaring: “I am against this war. I consider it immoral, fratricidal, and criminal.”
Navalny’s final public appearance was via video link. He was in good spirits, with his trademark optimism and humour still on display. Tongue firmly in cheek, he asked the judge for financial help:
Your Honour, I will send you my personal account number so that you can use your huge salary as a federal judge to ‘warm up’ my personal account, because I am running out of money.
Navalny died the following day. According to the prison authorities, he collapsed after a short walk and lost consciousness. Although the Russian authorities claimed he had died of natural causes, documents published in September 2024 by The Insider – a Russia-focused, Latvia-based independent investigative website – suggest Navalny may have been poisoned.
A mourner adds her tribute to Alexei Navalny’s grave in Moscow after his burial on March 1 2024. Aleksey Dushutin/Shutterstock
Whether or not Putin directly ordered his death, Russia’s president bears responsibility – for leading a system that tried to assassinate Navalny in August 2020, and for allowing his imprisonment following Navalny’s return to Russia in conditions designed to crush him.
Commenting in March 2024, Putin stated that, just days before Navalny’s death, he had agreed for his most vocal opponent to be included in a prisoner swap – on condition the opposition figure never returned to Russia. “But, unfortunately,” Putin added, “what happened, happened.”
‘No one will forget’
Putin is afraid of Alexei, even after he killed him.
Yulia Navalnaya, Navalny’s wife, wrote these words on January 10 2025 after reading a curious letter. His mother, Lyudmila Navalnaya, had written to Rosfinmonitoring – a Russian state body – with a request for her son’s name to be removed from their list of “extremists and terrorists” now he was no longer alive.
The official response was straight from Kafka. Navalny’s name could not be removed as it had been added following the initiation of a criminal case against him. Even though he was dead, Rosfinmonitoring had not been informed about a termination of the case “in accordance with the procedure established by law”, so his name would have to remain.
This appears to be yet another instance of the Russian state exercising cruelty behind the veil of bureaucratic legality – such as when the prison authorities initially refused to release Navalny’s body to his mother after his death.
“Putin is doing this to scare you,” Yulia continued. “He wants you to be afraid to even mention Alexei, and gradually to forget his name. But no one will forget.”
Alexei Navalny and his wife, Yulia Navalnaya, at a protest rally in Moscow, May 2012. Dmitry Laudin/Shutterstock
Today, Navalny’s family and team continue his work outside of Russia – and are fighting to keep his name alive back home. But the odds are against them. Polling suggests the share of Russians who say they know nothing about Navalny or his activities roughly doubled to 30% between his return in January 2021 and his death three years later.
Navalny fought against an autocratic system – and paid the price with his life. Given the very real fears Russians may have of voicing support for a man still labelled an extremist by the Putin regime, it’s not easy to assess what people there really think of him and his legacy. But we will also never know how popular Navalny would have been in the “normal” political system he fought for.
What made Navalny the force he was?
Navalny didn’t mean for the humble yellow rubber duck to become such a potent symbol of resistance.
In March 2017, the ACF published its latest investigation into elite corruption, this time focusing on then-prime minister (and former president), Dmitry Medvedev. Navalny’s team members had become masters of producing slick videos that enabled their message to reach a broad audience. A week after posting, the film had racked up over 7 million views on YouTube – an extraordinary number at that time.
The film included shocking details of Medvedev’s alleged avarice, including yachts and luxury properties. In the centre of a large pond in one of these properties was a duck house, footage of which was captured by the ACF using a drone.
Video: ACF.
Such luxuries jarred with many people’s view of Medvedev as being a bit different to Putin and his cronies. As Navalny wrote in his memoir, Medvedev had previously seemed “harmless and incongruous”. (At the time, Medvedev’s spokeswoman said it was “pointless” to comment on the ACF investigation, suggesting the report was a “propaganda attack from an opposition figure and a convict”.)
But people were angry, and the report triggered mass street protests across Russia. They carried yellow ducks and trainers, a second unintended symbol from the film given Medvedev’s penchant for them.
Another reason why so many people came out to protest on March 26 2017 was the organising work carried out by Navalny’s movement.
The previous December, Navalny had announced his intention to run in the 2018 presidential election. As part of the campaign, he and his team created a network of regional headquarters to bring together supporters and train activists across Russia. Although the authorities had rejected Navalny’s efforts to register an official political party, this regional network functioned in much the same way, gathering like-minded people in support of an electoral candidate. And this infrastructure helped get people out on the streets.
The Kremlin saw this as a clear threat. According to a December 2020 investigation by Bellingcat, CNN, Der Spiegel and The Insider, the FSB assassination squad implicated in the Novichok poisoning of Navalny had started trailing him in January 2017 – one month after he announced his run for the presidency.
At the protests against Medvedev, the authorities’ growing intolerance of Navalny was also on display – he was detained, fined and sentenced to 15 days’ imprisonment.
The Medvedev investigation was far from the beginning of Navalny’s story as a thorn in the Kremlin’s side. But this episode brings together all of the elements that made Navalny the force he was: anti-corruption activism, protest mobilisation, attempts to run as a “normal” politician in a system rigged against him, and savvy use of social media to raise his profile in all of these domains.
Courting controversy
In Patriot, Navalny writes that he always “felt sure a broad coalition was needed to fight Putin”. Yet over the years, his attempts to form that coalition led to some of the most controversial points of his political career.
In a 2007 video, Navalny referred to himself as a “certified nationalist”, advocating for the deportation of illegal immigrants, albeit without using violence and distancing himself from neo-Nazism. In the video, he says: “We have the right to be Russians in Russia, and we’ll defend that right.”
Although alienating some, Navalny was attempting to present a more acceptable face of nationalism, and he hoped to build a bridge between nationalists and liberals in taking on the Kremlin’s burgeoning authoritarianism.
But the prominence of nationalism in Navalny’s political identity varied markedly over time, probably reflecting his shifting estimations of which platform could attract the largest support within Russia. By the time of his thwarted run in the 2018 presidential election, nationalist talking points were all but absent from his rhetoric.
However, some of these former comments and positions continue to influence how people view him. For example, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, Navalny tried to take a pragmatic stance. While acknowledging Russia’s flouting of international law, he said that Crimea was “now part of the Russian Federation” and would “never become part of Ukraine in the foreseeable future”.
Many Ukrainians take this as clear evidence that Navalny was a Russian imperialist. Though he later revised his position, saying Crimea should be returned to Ukraine, some saw this as too little, too late. But others were willing to look past the more controversial parts of his biography, recognising that Navalny represented the most effective domestic challenge to Putin.
Another key attempt to build a broad political coalition was Navalny’s Smart Voting initiative. This was a tactical voting project in which Navalny’s team encouraged voters to back the individual thought best-placed to defeat the ruling United Russia candidate, regardless of the challenger’s ideological position.
The project wasn’t met with universal approval. Some opposition figures and voters baulked at, or flatly refused to consider, the idea of voting for people whose ideological positions they found repugnant – or whom they viewed as being “fake” opposition figures, entirely in bed with the authorities. (This makes clear that Navalny was never the leader of the political opposition in Russia; he was, rather, the leading figure of a fractious constellation of individuals and groups.)
But others relished the opportunity to make rigged elections work in their favour. And there is evidence that Smart Voting did sometimes work, including in the September 2020 regional and local elections, for which Navalny had been campaigning when he was poisoned with Novichok.
In an astonishing moment captured on film during his recovery in Germany, Navalny speaks to an alleged member of the FSB squad sent to kill him. Pretending to be the aide to a senior FSB official, Navalny finds out that the nerve agent had been placed in his underpants.
How do Russians feel about Navalny now?
It’s like a member of the family has died.
This is what one Russian friend told me after hearing of Navalny’s death a year ago. Soon afterwards, the Levada Center – an independent Russian polling organisation – conducted a nationally representative survey to gauge the public’s reaction to the news.
The poll found that Navalny’s death was the second-most mentioned event by Russian people that month, after the capture of the Ukrainian city of Avdiivka by Russian troops. But when asked how they felt about his death, 69% of respondents said they had “no particular feelings” either way – while only 17% said they felt “sympathy” or “pity”.
And that broadly fits with Navalny’s approval ratings in Russia. After his poisoning in 2020, 20% of Russians said they approved of his activities – but this was down to 11% by February 2024.
Video: BBC.
Of course, these numbers must be taken for what they are: polling in an authoritarian state regarding a figure vilified and imprisoned by the regime, during a time of war and amid draconian restrictions on free speech. To what extent the drop in support for Navalny was real, rather than reflecting the increased fear people had in voicing their approval for an anti-regime figure, is hard to say with certainty.
When asked why they liked Navalny, 31% of those who approved of his activities said he spoke “the truth”, “honestly” or “directly”. For those who did not approve of his activities, 22% said he was “paid by the west”, “represented” the west’s interests, that he was a “foreign agent”, a “traitor” or a “puppet”.
The Kremlin had long tried to discredit Navalny as a western-backed traitor. After Navalny’s 2020 poisoning, Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said that “experts from the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency are working with him”. The Russian state claimed that, rather than a patriot exposing official malfeasance with a view to strengthening his country, Navalny was a CIA stooge intent on destroying Russia.
Peskov provided no evidence to back up this claim – and the official propaganda wasn’t believed by all. Thousands of Russians defied the authorities by coming out to pay their respects at Navalny’s funeral on March 1 2024. Many, if not all, knew this was a significant risk. Police employed video footage to track down members of the funeral crowd, including by using facial recognition technology.
The first person to be detained was a Muscovite the police claimed they heard shouting “Glory to the heroes!” – a traditional Ukrainian response to the declaration “Glory to Ukraine!”, but this time referencing Navalny. She spent a night in a police station before being fined for “displaying a banned symbol”.
Putin always avoided mentioning Navalny’s name in public while he was alive – instead referring to him as “this gentleman”, “the character you mentioned”, or the “Berlin patient”. (The only recorded instance of Putin using Navalny’s name in public when he was alive was in 2013.)
However, having been re-elected president in 2024 and with Navalny dead, Putin finally broke his long-held practice, saying: “As for Navalny, yes he passed away – this is always a sad event.” It was as if the death of his nemesis diminished the potency of his name – and the challenge that Navalny had long presented to Putin.
Nobody can become another Navalny
Someone else will rise up and take my place. I haven’t done anything unique or difficult. Anyone could do what I’ve done.
So wrote Navalny in the memoir published after his death. But that hasn’t happened: no Navalny 2.0 has yet emerged. And it’s no real surprise. The Kremlin has taken clear steps to ensure nobody can become another Navalny within Russia.
In 2021, the authorities made a clear decision to destroy Navalny’s organisations within Russia, including the ACF and his regional network. Without the organisational infrastructure and legal ability to function in Russia, no figure has been able to take his place directly.
More broadly, the fate of Navalny and his movement has had a chilling effect on the opposition landscape. So too have other steps taken by the authorities.
Russia has become markedly more repressive since the start of its war on Ukraine. The human rights NGO First Department looked into the number of cases relating to “treason”, “espionage” and “confidential cooperation with a foreign state” since Russia introduced the current version of its criminal code in 1997. Of the more than 1,000 cases, 792 – the vast majority – were initiated following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Russian law enforcement has also used nebulous anti-extremism and anti-terrorism legislation to crack down on dissenting voices. Three of Navalny’s lawyers were sentenced in January 2025 for participating in an “extremist organisation”, as the ACF was designated by a Moscow court in June 2021. The Russian legislature has also passed a barrage of legislation relating to so-called “foreign agents”, to tarnish the work of those the regime regards as foreign-backed “fifth columnists”.
Mass street protests are largely a thing of the past in Russia. Restrictions were placed on public gatherings during the COVID pandemic – but these rules were applied selectively, with opposition individuals and groups being targeted. And opportunities for collective action were further reduced following the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Freedom of speech has also come under assault. Article 29, point five of the Russian constitution states: “Censorship shall be prohibited.” But in September 2024, Kremlin spokesperson Peskov said: “In the state of war that we are in, restrictions are justified, and censorship is justified.”
Legislation passed very soon after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine made it illegal to comment on the Russian military’s activities truthfully – and even to call the war a war.
YouTube – the platform so central to Navalny’s ability to spread his message – has been targeted. Without banning it outright – perhaps afraid of the public backlash this might cause – the Russian state media regulator, Roskomnadzor, has slowed down internet traffic to the site within Russia. The result has been a move of users to other websites supporting video content, including VKontakte – a Russian social media platform.
In short, conditions in Russia are very different now compared to when Navalny first emerged. The relative freedom of the 2000s and 2010s gave him the space to challenge the corruption and authoritarianism of an evolving system headed by Putin. But this space has shrunk over time, to the point where no room remains for a figure like him within Russia.
In 2019, Navalny told Ivan Zhdanov, who is now director of the ACF: “We changed the regime, but not in the way we wanted.” So, did Navalny and his team push the Kremlin to become more authoritarian – making it not only intolerant of him but also any possible successor?
There may be some truth in this. And yet, the drastic steps taken by the regime following the start of the war on Ukraine suggest there were other, even more significant factors that have laid bare the violent nature of Putin’s personal autocracy – and the president’s disdain for dissenters.
Plenty for Russians to be angry about
How can we win the war when dedushka [grandpa] is a moron?
In June 2023, Evgeny Prigozhin – a long-time associate of Putin and head of the private military Wagner Group – staged an armed rebellion, marching his forces on the Russian capital. This was not a full-blown political movement against Putin. But the target of Prigozhin’s invective against Russia’s military leadership had become increasingly blurry, testing the taboo of direct criticism of the president – who is sometimes referred to, disparagingly, as “grandpa” in Russia.
And Prigozhin paid the price. In August 2023, he was killed when the private jet he was flying in crashed after an explosion on board. Afterwards, Putin referred to Prigozhin as a “talented person” who “made serious mistakes in life”.
In the west, opposition to the Kremlin is often associated with more liberal figures like Navalny. Yet the most consequential domestic challenge to Putin’s rule came from a very different part of the ideological spectrum – a figure in Prigozhin leading a segment of Russian society that wanted the Kremlin to prosecute its war on Ukraine even more aggressively.
Video: BBC.
Today, there is plenty for Russians to be angry about, and Putin knows it. He recently acknowledged an “overheating of the economy”. This has resulted in high inflation, in part due to all the resources being channelled into supporting the war effort. Such cost-of-living concerns weigh more heavily than the war on the minds of most Russians.
A favourite talking point of the Kremlin is how Putin imposed order in Russia following the “wild 1990s” – characterised by economic turbulence and symbolised by then-president Boris Yeltsin’s public drunkenness. Many Russians attribute the stability and rise in living standards they experienced in the 2000s with Putin’s rule – and thank him for it by providing support for his continued leadership.
The current economic problems are an acute worry for the Kremlin because they jeopardise this basic social contract struck with the Russian people. In fact, one way the Kremlin tried to discredit Navalny was by comparing him with Yeltsin, suggesting he posed the same threats as a failed reformer. In his memoir, Navalny concedes that “few things get under my skin more”.
Although originally a fan of Yeltsin, Navalny became an ardent critic. His argument was that Yeltsin and those around him squandered the opportunity to make Russia a “normal” European country.
Navalny also wanted Russians to feel entitled to more. Rather than be content with their relative living standards compared with the early post-Soviet period, he encouraged them to imagine the level of wealth citizens could enjoy based on Russia’s extraordinary resources – but with the rule of law, less corruption, and real democratic processes.
‘Think of other possible Russias’
When looking at forms of criticism and dissent in Russia today, we need to distinguish between anti-war, anti-government, and anti-Putin activities.
Despite the risk of harsh consequences, there are daily forms of anti-war resistance, including arson attacks on military enlistment offices. Some are orchestrated from Ukraine, with Russians blackmailed into acting. But other cases are likely to be forms of domestic resistance.
Criticism of the government is still sometimes possible, largely because Russia has a “dual executive” system, consisting of a prime minister and presidency. This allows the much more powerful presidency to deflect blame to the government when things go wrong.
There are nominal opposition parties in Russia – sometimes referred to as the “systemic opposition”, because they are loyal to the Kremlin and therefore tolerated by the system. Within the State Duma, these parties often criticise particular government ministries for apparent failings. But they rarely, if ever, now dare criticise Putin directly.
Nothing anywhere close to the challenge presented by Navalny appears on the horizon in Russia – at either end of the political spectrum. But the presence of clear popular grievances, and the existence of organisations (albeit not Navalny’s) that could channel this anger should the Kremlin’s grip loosen, mean we cannot write off all opposition in Russia.
Navalny’s wife, Yulia, has vowed to continue her husband’s work. And his team in exile maintain focus on elite corruption in Russia, now from their base in Vilnius, Lithuania. The ACF’s most recent investigation is on Igor Sechin, CEO of the oil company Rosneft.
But some have argued this work is no longer as relevant as it was. Sam Greene, professor in Russian politics at King’s College London, captured this doubt in a recent Substack post:
[T]here is a palpable sense that these sorts of investigations may not be relevant to as many people as they used to be, given everything that has transpired since the mid-2010s, when they were the bread and butter of the Anti-Corruption Foundation. Some … have gone as far as to suggest that they have become effectively meaningless … and thus that Team Navalny should move on.
Navalny’s team are understandably irritated by suggestions they’re no longer as effective as they once were. But it’s important to note that this criticism has often been sharpest within Russia’s liberal opposition. The ACF has been rocked, for example, by recent accusations from Maxim Katz, one such liberal opposition figure, that the organisation helped “launder the reputations” of two former bank owners. In their response, posted on YouTube, the ACF referred to Katz’s accusations as “lies” – but this continued squabbling has left some Russians feeling “disillusioned and unrepresented”.
So, what will Navalny’s long-term legacy be? Patriot includes a revealing section on Mikhail Gorbachev – the last leader of the Soviet Union, whom Navalny describes as “unpopular in Russia, and also in our family”. He continues:
Usually, when you tell foreigners this, they are very surprised, because Gorbachev is thought of as the person who gave Eastern Europe back its freedom and thanks to whom Germany was reunited. Of course, that is true … but within Russia and the USSR he was not particularly liked.
At the moment, there is a similar split in perceptions of Navalny. Internationally, he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, awarded the Sakharov Prize by the European Parliament, and a documentary about him won an Oscar.
But there are also those outside of Russia who remain critical: “Navalny’s life has brought no benefit to the Ukrainian victory; instead, he has caused considerable harm,” wrote one Ukrainian academic. “He fuelled the illusion in the west that democracy in Russia is possible.”
Trailer for the Oscar-winning documentary Navalny.
Inside Russia, according to Levada Center polling shortly after his death, 53% of Russians thought Navalny played “no special role” in the history of the country, while 19% said he played a “rather negative” role. Revealingly, when commenting on Navalny’s death, one man in Moscow told RFE/RL’s Russian Service: “I think that everyone who is against Russia is guilty, even if they are right.”
But, for a small minority in Russia, Navalny will go down as a messiah-like figure who miraculously cheated death in 2020, then made the ultimate sacrifice in his battle of good and evil with the Kremlin. This view may have been reinforced by Navalny’s increasing openness about his Christian faith.
Ultimately, Navalny’s long-term status in Russia will depend on the nature of the political system after Putin has gone. Since it seems likely that authoritarianism will outlast Putin, a more favourable official story about Navalny is unlikely to emerge any time soon. However, how any post-Putin regime tries to make sense of Navalny’s legacy will tell us a lot about that regime.
While he was alive, Navalny stood for the freer Russia in which he had emerged as a leading opposition figure – and also what he called the “Beautiful Russia of the Future”. Perhaps, after his death, his lasting legacy in Russia remains the ability for some to think – if only in private – of other possible Russias.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Ben Noble has previously received funding from the British Academy and the Leverhulme Trust. He is an Associate Fellow of Chatham House.
In the opening scene of Love, Actually, Hugh Grant’s character says how, whenever he gets gloomy with the state of the world, he thinks about the arrivals gate at Heathrow airport. The reason is on screen: we see couples kissing, old friends embracing, children smiling and laughing as they jump into the arms of their parents.
Airports are great places to really understand the importance of physical affection – hugging, kissing, cuddling, holding hands, or even just touching. But physical affection is ubiquitous in everyday life, too – and with good reason. Science shows that non-sexual physical affection produces more than just moments of joy – it also benefits our mental and physical health.
Physical affection is one of the most direct and important ways that people communicate intimacy in their romantic relationships. And it seems to occur in romantic relationships all over the world, despite cross-cultural differences in ideas of love and romance.
People in romantic relationships report more intimate physical affection than singletons. They’re also more comfortable allowing their partners to touch more of their bodies than strangers or friends. For example, most people are comfortable being touched on their thighs and abdomen by their partner, but not by other people.
Even how we touch our partners is different to how we touch other people. When participants in one study were asked to stroke their partner, a friend, a stranger, or an artificial arm, they did so more slowly with their partner. Slower strokes may may be experienced as more pleasant and erotic than quicker strokes. Even just thinking about physical affection from a partner evokes pleasant and erotic sensations.
There is now strong evidence showing that physical contact is associated with better physical and mental health. One review of “touch interventions” – think massage – in 212 studies involving more than 13,000 participants found that physical touch benefited everything from sleep patterns to blood pressure to fatigue. Touch interventions were especially helpful in reducing pain, depression and anxiety.
Couple’s therapy
Before you rush off to book yourself a massage, you should know that much of the evidence suggests the strongest benefits come from physical affection with romantic partners. Several studies have found that, in couples, physical affection is associated with a range of physiological effects, including lower blood pressure and better immune responses.
In couples, physical affection is also associated with better psychological wellbeing. One study found that couples who sleep-touched – cuddling shortly before or after sleep – felt happier and calmer in the morning, which meant they were more likely to enjoy the company of their partners.
Physical affection – including kissing and affection after sex – is also associated with greater relationship and sexual satisfaction, and better ratings of one’s relationship overall, which in turn contribute to better psychological wellbeing. And even when conflicts do occur, hugging seems to reduce levels of negative mood in couples.
Cuddle up, because there’s more. Receiving physical affection from a partner makes us feel psychologically stronger. One study found that women showed less activation in parts of the brain that respond to threat when holding their husband’s hand. Even just imagining touch from a partner can increase one’s willingness to take on challenging tasks.
Another way to look at this is to examine what happens when we lose physical affection. Studies have shown that “touch deprivation” – the absence of touch – is associated with greater symptoms of depression and anxiety. Indeed, the loss of affection from others during the pandemic hit many people hard. Among couples, a lack of physical affection is associated with lower relationship satisfaction, stress, and feelings of loneliness.
There are several ways in which physical affection provides these benefits. Affectionate touch is known to activate reward centres of the brain, which boosts our mood and promotes feelings of wellbeing. Touch also stimulates the release of oxytocin, which can strengthen social bonds and increase feelings of trust between individuals. It’s for these reasons that oxytocin is sometimes called the “cuddle chemical”.
Physical affection also reduces levels of the stress hormone cortisol and reduces perceived pain, which suppress physiological stress systems. One study found that a ten-minute neck-and-shoulder massage from one’s partner helped lower cortisol responses, helping to regulate levels of stress.
Psychologically, physical affection in romantic relationships is an important way to keep our emotions under control. Touching one’s partner in a caring manner helps to improve their mood and makes them feel loved, secure, and safe. As feelings of connection, trust, and belonging are strengthened through non-sexual physical signs of affection, negative effect is reduced and psychological well-being is improved.
However, not everyone likes to be touched, even if it is by their romantic partners. Some people are “touch avoidant” – and some people may actually be apprehensive about being touched. For instance, people with avoidant attachment styles – characterised by a discomfort with emotional closeness – often have very negative views about cuddling and are more hesitant to touch their partners. Conversely, people with anxious attachment styles – characterised by a fear of abandonment – may desire more touch than they receive.
But when couples have similar touch preferences, it can lead to greater attraction, closeness, and commitment to one another. And if you’re looking for a fun way to incorporate non-sexual physical affection into your relationships, consider home massage. One study found that couples who took turns massaging each other at home felt a deeper connection with each other, and felt more relaxed and less stressed.
Viren Swami 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.
European defence ministers left their meeting in Brussels on February 12 in shock after the new US secretary of defence, Pete Hegseth, told them they could no longer rely on the US to guarantee their security.
Hegseth said he was there “to directly and unambiguously express that stark strategic realities prevent the United States of America from being primarily focused on the security of Europe”.
He also insisted that European countries provide the “overwhelming” share of funding for Ukraine in the future. The US has been the biggest source of military aid to Ukraine, with its weapons, equipment and financial assistance crucial in helping Kyiv resist the Russian invasion.
Hegseth’s comments are in keeping with the stance of the US president, Donald Trump, on the Nato transatlantic military alliance. Trump sees Nato as an excessive financial burden on the US and has repeatedly called on its members to increase their defence spending.
But Hegseth’s remarks could also be seen as a sign of America’s waning commitment to the terms of Nato’s founding treaty. Signed in 1949 by the US, Canada and several western European nations, Article 5 of the treaty requires member states to defend each other in the event of an armed attack.
The US has the largest military – and the biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons – in Nato. So, on the face of it, efforts to recast the alliance appear a drastic shift in Europe’s security landscape in the post-cold war era.
However, those familiar with the political sentiment around Nato and the defence of Europe in the US will see that this move follows in the footsteps of what others have sought to do – starting from the very end of the cold war.
Changing over time
In 1991, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Nato was under considerable pressure to change for the new world order. A rising China was not yet on the minds of many in Washington, but the feeling was that the financial commitments the US had made to defend western Europe during the cold war could not continue.
The so-called “peace dividend”, a slogan popularised by former US president George H.W. Bush and former UK prime minister Margaret Thatcher, allowed nearly all Nato states to reduce their military spending at this time.
In 1992, almost as soon as European Nato countries were shrinking their forces and moving away from mass armies to professional soldiering, the alliance became actively engaged in maintaining a no-fly zone over Yugoslavia.
A new Nato was becoming apparent. It was transitioning from being a collective defence organisation to one of collective security, where conflicts were managed on Nato’s borders.
This collective security arrangement worked well to keep the alliance together until 2001, when the administration of George W. Bush entered the White House and involved the US in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, Nato invoked Article 5 and returned to the principle of collective defence.
Many European countries, including the new, smaller Nato states like Estonia and Latvia, sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. The persistent justification I heard in the Baltic states was “we need to be there when the US needs us so that they will be there when we need them”.
Yet in 2011, before the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were over, the administration of Barack Obama introduced a foreign policy strategy known as the “pivot to Asia”. The implication was that the US would shift its attention from primarily the western hemisphere to China.
By this point, China had become the second-largest economy in the world and was rapidly developing its military. The reaction to this US policy shift in European capitals was one of shock and disappointment. They saw it as the US deciding that its own security did not sit in Europe like it had since 1945.
Then, in 2014, Russia invaded Crimea and the Donbas in eastern Ukraine. The pivot to Asia looked like it had stalled. But US interest and investment in European defence continued to decline, with American military bases across Europe closed down. The first Trump administration continued the pattern set by Obama.
President Joe Biden, who entered office in 2021, used Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 to show European leaders that the US still saw its own security in Europe and that it would stand beside Ukraine.
But the US continued to insist that European countries invest in their own defence. The UK, Poland and France have all committed to increase their defence spending over recent years – though spending by European Nato states as a whole continued to fall.
There has been a long-held belief in the US that Europe is “freeriding” on American power. While the US saw its own security in Europe, this freeriding was allowed to continue.
But as the perspective of the US has changed, with the focus now on countering China, it has been keen to suggest that European defence should increasingly become the job of Europe itself.
Nato will not go out with a bang. It is much more likely to gradually disappear with a whimper. After all, who did Trump meet on his second day in office? Not Nato but the Quad: an alliance between Australia, India, Japan and the US in the Indo-Pacific.
David J. Galbreath has received research funding from the UKRI.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Hastings Dunn, Professor of International Politics in the Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham
Donald Trump likes to portray himself as the great deal maker. Typically, his idea of the “Art of the Deal” had tended to involve outlandishly bullish opening demands – whether that’s on tariffs or trade deals – before settling on more moderate, but still exacting conditions. This context makes what happened when the US president spoke with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin about Ukraine so remarkable.
The very fact that Trump spoke with Putin at all was a diplomatic gift to the pariah state and its leader. For three years Russia has been diplomatically isolated by most western leaders, many of whom have called for Putin to face war crimes charges (there is currently an ICC arrest warrant out for Putin for the alleged illegal transfer of children from, Ukraine to Russia).
Indeed, the fact that Trump spoke with Putin and only then called the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to inform him of their conversation indicates the subordination of Ukraine’s role in the talks.
Trumpeting the call as “highly productive” on his TruthSocial website, Trump wrote that the two leaders had spoken about the “strengths of our respective nations, and the great benefit that we will someday have in working together”. He said they had arranged to visit each other’s nations. In fact, the two will initially meet in Saudi Arabia – where Putin would not be arrested under the ICC’s warrant.
At the same time, Trump’s new defense secretary spelled out to a meeting of European defence officials the administration’s position on some of the key issues. It was clear that several of Ukraine’s “red lines” had already fallen by the wayside as far as the US is concerned.
Hegseth said that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is “an unrealistic objective” and an “illusionary goal” and that any deal must be based on “a realistic assessment of the battlefield.”
Likewise Ukraine’s future Nato membership – something the US committed to support in the 2008 Budapest Declaration, was also a non-starter. And he said the US would not onlynot join any international force deployed to ensure Ukrainian security, but that if such a force were constituted it would not be a Nato operation. As such, he said, it would not be covered by the alliance’s article 5 pledge for collective security. This effectively dooms this initiative to failure.
As important as what was announced by the Trump administration on this subject, was what was omitted. Trump has never condemned Putin for his illegal invasion of Ukraine. And there has been no mention in his social media posts that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was a violation of international law. Or the inviolability of Ukraine’s borders or the issue of Russian reparations for the material and human damage inflicted on Ukraine.
Russia celebrates
Russia, meanwhile, is cock-a-hoop. Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov reported that Putin talked about Moscow’s demands, telling Trump of “the need to eliminate the root causes of the conflict”. This suggests that while Ukraine’s red lines are going to be ignored by the US, Russia will continue to insist on its maximalist demands that the Russians intend to take in their approach to the negotiation.
In addition to the concessions that Hegseth indicated the Trump administration has already decided to go along with, Russia is also likely to press for the demilitarisation of Ukraine. It will demand control, not just of the territory that it occupies, but of the remainder of the Ukrainian provinces that Putin has already declared to be “Russian”: Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, in the south and east of Ukraine.
Both the Russian stock market and the ruble rose sharply on the US announcement of the talks, and the government-controlled press in Russian could hardly hide their glee, reporting that: “Russia is ready for talks. But on its terms”.
European leaders shocked
The pace and scale of US concessions on Ukraine seen to have caught the US’s European Nato allies off guard. Like Ukraine itself, they have been sidelined by Trump’s decision to seek direct negotiations with Putin. The UK’s defence secretary, John Healey, issued a statement appealing that “that there can be no negotiation about Ukraine without Ukraine and Ukraine’s voice must be at the heart of any talks”.
German foreign minister, Anna Baerbock, meanwhile, said the call had come out of the blue without any consultation with Europe: “This is the way the Trump administration operates,” she said, adding: “This is not how others do foreign policy, but this is now the reality.” Baerbock said a deal must not be imposed on Ukraine and that Europe should be involved in negotiations: “This is about European peace. That’s why we Europeans must be involved.”
The French foreign ministry put out a statement saying that: “Ukraine and Europe must be part of any negotiations. Ukraine should be provided with strong security guarantees.”
Other commentators have been less diplomatic. Michael McFaul, who served as US ambassador to Russia under Barack Obama, took to X to question Trump’s tactics: “Diplomacy 101: Don’t give anything without getting something in return. Don’t negotiate in public. Don’t negotiate about Ukraine’s future without first coordinating your position with Ukrainians.”
We’ll know more about what – if any – agency Volodymyr Zelensky and his diplomats have in the future of their country after US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and vice-president, JD Vance, meet with Zelensky at the Munich Security Conference on February 14-16.
But for the present at least, it appears that negotiations will be less about pressuring Putin to bring a just end to the war he started, than forcing Ukraine to give in to the Russian leader’s demands.
David Hastings Dunn has previously received funding from the ESRC, the Gerda Henkel Foundation, the Open Democracy Foundation and has previously been both a NATO and a Fulbright Fellow.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel Alge, Senior Lecturer in Criminology & Criminal Justice, Brunel University of London
Lucy Letby was convicted in two trials in 2023 and 2024 of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder six others in her care at the Countess of Chester hospital in north-west England between 2015 and 2016.
She is currently serving 15 whole life sentences for the murders. But the case has been called into question as a result of growing concerns about the expert evidence presented at her trial. Will she get a retrial? Here’s what happens next.
In the context of usually cautious expert opinion, the press conference held on February 4 2025 was extraordinary. An international panel of medical experts investigating the medical evidence against Lucy Letby concluded that there were alternative explanations for each of the deaths. They said they found no evidence of deliberate harm, and believe Letby did not murder any babies.
The panel’s chair, Dr Shoo Lee, is a retired neonatal care expert. His 1989 paper on air embolisms was heavily relied on by the prosecution in the Letby trial and appeals. However, Lee has previously said that his research was misinterpreted at trial. At the press conference he said, “we did not find any murders. In all cases, death or injury were due to natural causes or just bad medical care.”
Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.
The panel’s findings put the case in uncharted territory, given Letby’s very recent convictions and the continuing public inquiry into the case.
The public inquiry – the Thirlwall Inquiry into events at the Countess of Chester hospital – will operate based on the assumption, following her convictions, that Letby is guilty. Letby’s barrister has called for the inquiry to be halted pending the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) review of her case.
Despite the findings of the expert panel, Letby’s release or even a retrial is by no means imminent, let alone guaranteed. Letby has already had two applications for leave to appeal refused. The grounds of appeal were related to what her defence argued were errors in judicial decision making during the trial, rather than the medical evidence. Nonetheless, this means that the CCRC is the only route left open to Letby to challenge her convictions.
Letby’s defence team confirmed that a preliminary application has been made to the CCRC, with a full submission to follow. The CCRC investigates potential miscarriages of justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The commission is expected to treat Letby’s case as a priority given the public interest. But it is still likely to take at least a year to review the considerable evidence before a referral back to the Court of Appeal could even be considered.
What evidence will be considered?
The CCRC aims to complete cases within 12 months of receiving the application. But the organisation has recently come under criticism over how it handled the case of Andrew Malkinson, who was wrongly jailed for 17 years for a crime he did not commit.
When the CCRC considers the full application, they have the power to refer the case back to the Court of Appeal. In order to do so, the commission requires new evidence or other relevant factors which would support a fresh appeal.
The findings of the medical panel will be part of the defence submission. The CCRC will decide, with other factors, whether they constitute fresh grounds for an appeal. It is particularly compelling that the prosecution case relied on Dr Lee’s research, and yet it is in part his expertise that has become a crucial element of the defence.
To send the case back for appeal, the CCRC would also need to conclude that there was a “real possibility” of the conviction being overturned.
It is important to remember that the case against Letby included statistical and circumstantial evidence as well as medical opinion. However, what are alleged to be numerous fallacies in the statistical evidence have been highlighted. And circumstantial evidence is just that – circumstantial. Letby was convicted on the medical evidence.
The evidence given as part of the Thirlwall Inquiry will be within the remit of the CCRC too. Although the inquiry has not yet formally concluded, all oral testimony has taken place. As would be expected given the inquiry’s terms of reference, much of the evidence heard has been less favourable to Letby.
The CCRC also has the power under the Criminal Appeals Act 1995 to instruct its own expert witnesses and interview previous and potential new witnesses.
If the CCRC ultimately decides to refer the case to the Court of Appeal, it will be treated like any other appeal. It could result either in the conviction being quashed and Letby going free, or a retrial.
A retrial would follow if the appeal judges believed that a retrial met the criteria set out in the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 and was in the interests of justice. The likelihood of this outcome depends on the strength of the medical evidence presented to the CCRC and the Court of Appeal.
As the Thirlwall Inquiry and the CCRC application are separate processes, is it technically not essential that the inquiry concludes before the CCRC makes a decision. Closing submissions to the inquiry are scheduled for March 2025, with the report expected later in the year. This should fit within the expected timeframe of the CCRC taking at least a year to consider the application.
A further complicating factor is Lee’s assertion that the Countess of Chester hospital provided such bad care that it would have been “shut down” in his home country of Canada. This will no doubt lead to legal claims against the NHS trust, particularly if Letby is exonerated and culpability for avoidable deaths is sought elsewhere.
Some, including Lee, have gone so far as to suggest the new evidence is so compelling that Letby should be released on house arrest pending the CCRC review. This would be highly unusual, and for the time being, Letby remains imprisoned as one of the worst child serial killers in modern British history.
Daniel Alge 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.
Check against delivery.
1 Introduction
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am delighted to be here with you today. What better place than Glasgow to discuss the economic impacts of climate change and the green transition! And not just because it played host to the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference.
Glasgow is also where Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, studied and taught as a professor. Have you ever wondered what he would have thought of climate change? As a famed free-market economist, he might not be the first person you would think of. But even Adam Smith acknowledged that the invisible hand can sometimes lead to suboptimal outcomes.
Climate change is a prime example of this: market prices do not reflect the negative side effects of greenhouse gas emissions. Fortunately, it is now widely acknowledged that governments need to intervene and encourage individuals and companies to reduce their emissions.
Switching to a net-zero emissions economy is a major task. It requires changes in behaviour, innovation and significant investment to rebuild our capital stock. And this transition requires significant financing.
In my speech, I will explore what financing the transition to a greenhouse gas-neutral economy could look like. More specifically, I will focus on two key issues. First, how much investment is needed to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality, and how much of this investment is “additional”? Second, what could the financing mix to fund this investment look like?
I know that answering these questions seems like a tough challenge – a taughy fleece tae scoor. But I will do my best to illustrate my points with clear, practical examples. Along the way, I will discuss electric cars and heating systems to help us understand the issues.
My remarks will focus on the European Union (EU), borrowing some detailed insights from Germany. Unfortunately, these data do not cover the United Kingdom (UK). But I will do my best to infer some insights for the UK as well.
2 How much needs to be invested?
Let me start with the question of how much the EU needs to invest to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality. The EU’s Fit for 55 package aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 per cent by 2030. These reductions are benchmarked against 1990 emission levels. This is an intermediate step towards full greenhouse gas neutrality, for which the EU still needs to pass legislation.
From 2021 to 2030, the European Commission estimates that EU countries need to invest over €1.2 trillion annually.[1] This amounts to nearly 8 per cent of the EU’s GDP. The private sector must take on the bulk of these investments. The investment needs are significantly more than the actual annual investment of €760 billion in the previous decade.
The European Commission defines the difference between the investment required and the actual investment as the “additional” investment need. This additional investment need amounts to €480 billion, or around 3 per cent of GDP.
This definition of “additional” investment is very useful from an accounting perspective. It gives a clear picture of how much more the EU needs to invest to meet its climate goals. However, from a financing perspective, it helps to define additional investment differently.
There are two types of investment needed to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality. The first type is investment that would not happen without the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. A prime example of this type of investment is technology to capture and store carbon dioxide. This technology will play a crucial role in sectors that are difficult to decarbonise. These investments need economic resources and financing beyond what an economy spends just to maintain its capital stock.
The second type is investment where a greenhouse gas-neutral alternative replaces a fossil fuel-based technology. To illustrate this point, imagine two households buying a new car. The Jones family spend €45,000 on a new combustion engine car. From a technical perspective, the Jones family are making a replacement investment. No additional financing is needed. Meanwhile, the Smith family decide to switch from a combustion engine car to an electric vehicle. Let us say a comparable electric car costs €50,000. Of this amount, €45,000 is a replacement investment. Only the remaining €5,000 requires additional financing.
Contrast this with how the European Commission defines additional investment: They subtract the annual average value of electric cars bought in the past from the value of electric vehicles needed to meet the EU’s intermediate greenhouse gas reduction goals. Past registrations of electric vehicles fell significantly short of what is needed. Accordingly, the additional investments, as defined by the European Commission’s accounting perspective, are presumably much higher than the additional financing needs.
How great could the additional financing needs be? While we do not yet have specific figures for the EU, there are some numbers for Germany. A recent study estimates that Germany needs to invest around €390 billion annually from 2021 to 2030 to reduce emissions by 65 per cent compared to 1990.[2] They measure this absolute sum in 2020 prices. Relative to GDP, the investment amounts to 11 per cent.
This is fairly close to the 8 per cent investment needs calculated by the European Commission for the EU.[3] However, only around 30 per cent of this investment requires additional financing. In absolute terms, this amounts to about €120 billion.
Let me pause for a moment to summarise the two key takeaways from my remarks so far. First, the transition to greenhouse gas neutrality calls for significant investment. However, in many cases, we are replacing fossil-based technologies with greenhouse gas-neutral alternatives. Accordingly, the additional financing needs are much smaller and seem manageable.
Second, we can minimise the additional financing needs by replacing already largely depreciated capital stock. By contrast, replacing relatively new capital stock that has barely depreciated would increase the economic and financial costs. Let me illustrate this point with a brief anecdote.
On 1 January 2024, the German government introduced a new law governing heating systems. In German, it is known by the beautiful name “Gebäudeenergiegesetz”. This law mandates that heating systems use around two-thirds renewable energy. In anticipation of this new law, many households replaced their old gas heating systems with new ones. These heating systems can run for around 25 years, so they depreciate over a long period.
Bad luck if you just installed a new gas heating system and live in the German city of Mannheim. Here, the local gas provider has said it intends to stop its services in 2035. This means that a long-term investment will become unviable when little more than half of it has depreciated: A waste of both financial and economic resources.
This anecdote highlights one key point: to avoid wasting money, we need a clear and reliable path to greenhouse gas neutrality. With a clear path mapped out, people can confidently invest in the transition.
3 What could the financing mix look like?
Now, let us explore what the potential financing mix could look like. To achieve a greenhouse gas-neutral economy, households, firms and the public sector all need to invest. They can fund these investments using both internal and external sources.
As the name would suggest, internal financing comes from within. Like the Smith family putting aside some of their income to pay for their new car. Or think of a firm that sells its products and saves some of the profits. That is internal financing, too. External financing, on the other hand, comes from outside sources such as banks or investors.
Regarding their financing mix, households, non-financial firms and the public sector differ considerably. Households tend to save significantly and mainly use bank loans as a source of external finance. The public sector, on the other hand, raises most of its funds from external sources by issuing debt securities. Only firms have a more diversified financing mix. Equity and bank loans play prominent roles here. Note that these observations hold for the EU, the UK and Germany alike.
So, what might the financing mix for the transition to a greenhouse gas-neutral economy look like? To estimate these figures, we need two key components: First, the respective shares of households, firms and the public sector in total investment. According to rough estimates by Bundesbank staff for Germany, households might have to cover about one-third of the investment, the public sector around 20 per cent, and firms just under half.[4]
Second, estimates for the future financing structure of the sectors. We assume that future financing structures will remain unchanged from today.[5] This implies that past financing structures are suitable for future climate investment. If this were not the case, perhaps due to the need for innovative financing instruments, the financing structure may differ.
What result do we get when we combine the two components? For Germany, we estimate that about 20 per cent of the financing mix could come from internal financing, primarily household savings. In terms of external financing, bank loans might play the largest role. They account for over one-quarter of the estimated financing mix. Households in particular obtain almost all their external financing from banks.
The second-largest external financing source could be debt securities, accounting for around 20 per cent. The public sector plays a prominent role here, with funding coming almost exclusively from bonds. Finally, the third-largest external financing source could be equity financing, comprising around one-sixth. Firms are the only users of this financing source, as households and the public sector do not issue equity. Different instruments, like loans from non-bank financial intermediaries, might cover the final sixth of the overall investment needs.
So, what does this mean for the EU and the UK? Can the findings for Germany be generalised? Fortunately, the financing structures of households, firms and governments are largely comparable across these regions.[6] Therefore, one of the two components in the calculations is roughly equal.
The second component – the sectoral investment needs – is less certain. I am not aware of any studies for the EU or the UK that divide the investment needs across households, firms and the public sector.[7] Without a better alternative, the findings for Germany may provide a reasonable initial estimate for both the EU and the UK.
4 Concluding remarks
Let me summarise and conclude. I have three main takeaways to share.
First, “additional” investment needs to become greenhouse gas-neutral can also be defined from a financing perspective. In many cases, we are replacing fossil fuel-based technologies with greenhouse gas-neutral alternatives. And this requires additional financing only if greenhouse gas-neutral technologies are more expensive or if the capital stock being replaced is not yet fully depreciated. The additional financing needs are significantly smaller than the total investment required. Accordingly, I am confident that our financial system can mobilise the necessary financing.
Second, banks may play a larger role in financing the climate transition than is commonly anticipated. The main reason for this conclusion is that a substantial portion of climate investments falls on households. They need to make their homes more energy-efficient and replace fossil-fuelled heating systems with greenhouse gas-neutral alternatives. And households simply do not have many viable alternatives to bank loans.
Accordingly, a robust banking system is essential for achieving greenhouse gas neutrality. That is why we at the Bundesbank are committed to completing the European banking union. However, we also need to improve access to alternative financing sources. Non-financial firms, in particular, would greatly benefit from better capital market financing. That is why we at the Bundesbank are dedicated to creating a European capital markets union.
Third, legislators can minimise the additional financing needs by ensuring that the path to greenhouse gas neutrality is planned stringently and for the long term. Why? Because it provides incentives to avoid investments in fossil fuel technologies that may not be fully depreciated before they become non-viable.
Footnotes:
See European Commission (2023), Investment needs assessment and funding availabilities to strengthen EU’s Net-Zero technology manufacturing capacity, SWD (2023) 68 final.
Kemmler et al. (2024), Klimaschutzinvestitionen für die Transformation des Energiesystems, Prognos. This study is only available in German.
One reason why Germany’s investment needs relative to GDP are higher than the EU’s is that Germany intends to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality sooner (in 2045 rather than 2050).
The estimates are based on the public sector shares provided in Brand and Römer (2022), Öffentliche Investitionsbedarfe zur Erreichung der Klimaneutralität in Deutschland, KfW Research – Fokus Volkswirtschaft, Nr. 395 and various plausibility assumptions. The analysis assumes that the public sector’s involvement in industry and the residential investment sector is minimal or non-existent. This is because the analysis looks at financing flows before any government support, such as subsidies.
More precisely, the financing structure is derived from the average internal and external financing flows over the period 2018 to 2022. This averaging smooths out short-term fluctuations and centres on the reference year of 2020 used in the Kemmler et al (2024) study. Internal financing enters the calculation on a net basis, assuming that the depreciation inflows finance the replacement investments.
In the EU and UK, households rely slightly less on bank loans than in Germany, but the share is still high. In the public sector, Germany has a significantly higher share of debt security financing, particularly compared to the EU. In the UK, non-financial firms have a significantly lower share of equity financing and a higher share of (bank) loans compared to Germany. In contrast, in the EU, non-financial firms have a slightly higher share of equity financing and a smaller share of (bank) loans compared to Germany. All figures are based on average financial flows from 2018 to 2022.
European Commission, op. cit., estimates that, in the EU, the public sector could account for 17 to 20 per cent of total investment. However, it does not clarify how this investment will be split between households and firms. For the UK, HM Government (2023), Mobilising Green Investment – 2023 Green Finance Strategy, mentions that most investment must come from the private sector. However, it likewise does not provide any details on how this investment will be split between households and firms.
Best Conditions in a Decade Await Skiers, Snowboarders, and Winter Enthusiasts
CHARLESTON, W.VA – Feb. 12, 2025 –West Virginia’s ski season is still in full swing, delivering the best winter conditions in over a decade. While West Virginia was one of the first states in the region to welcome snow this winter, the state’s ski season is far from over. An additional eight to 10 inches of snowfall is expected over Presidents’ Day Weekend, making it the ideal time for a Mountain State winter getaway.
This season, West Virginia’s mountainous terrain has been transformed with snowfall reaching 142 cumulative inches and counting. Ski resorts have further enhanced these prime conditions by producing billions of gallons of man-made snow to ensure nearly all terrain is open and ready for action. With feet of natural snowfall enhanced by man-made snow blanketing the slopes, the majority of trails are open and ready to welcome skiers and snowboarders of all skill levels. Now is the perfect time to experience West Virginia’s spectacular winter wonderland.
“The conditions are incredible right now, setting up for a perfect holiday weekend,” says Tom Wagner, President of the West Virginia Ski Areas Association. “I can’t remember the last time we’ve seen such pristine conditions.”
From thrilling ski runs to serene Nordic trails, the Mountain State is home to world-class winter sports destinations, including Snowshoe Mountain Resort, Canaan Valley Resort State Park, Winterplace Ski Resort, Timberline Mountain, and Oglebay’s Nutting Winter Sports Complex. The state’s alpine resorts are delivering excellent conditions for skiing, snowboarding, and snow tubing against the backdrop of stunning mountain vistas. Nordic skiing enthusiasts can explore serene cross-country skiing and snowshoeing at destinations like White Grass Ski Touring Center, Blackwater Falls State Park, and the Monongahela National Forest.
“This winter has brought with it an incredible amount of snow that has created the perfect conditions for winter outdoor adventures,” said West Virginia Tourism Secretary Chelsea Ruby. “We’re anticipating these conditions will continue for weeks to come. If you’ve been dreaming of a winter getaway, West Virginia awaits.”
Beyond traditional winter sports, the state offers a range of unique activities to make every visit memorable. Canaan Valley Resort features one of the longest multi-lane snow tubing parks in the Mid-Atlantic, while Snow Riders Tubing Hill in Harpers Ferry provides an unforgettable multicolor, LED-lit tubing experience. Adventure awaits on snow-covered trails at the Hatfield-McCoy Trail System and Snowshoe Mountain, perfect for snowmobiling and ATV riding.
West Virginia’s commitment to inclusivity shines with adaptive skiing programs at Snowshoe Mountain, Canaan Valley, and Timberline Mountain. In collaboration with the Challenged Athletes of West Virginia, these programs offer personalized lessons and specialized equipment, ensuring everyone can share in the magic of the slopes.
With a combination of stunning mountain scenery, top-tier resorts, and a wide range of winter activities, West Virginia stands out as the ultimate destination for snowy escapes. Don’t miss the chance to enjoy these exceptional conditions this season. Now is the time to plan your winter getaway!
For more information about West Virginia, visit WVtourism.com and start planning your trip today.
To access images of winter in West Virginia,click here.
BOSTON – A Colombian woman residing in Boston was arrested for identity theft offenses and stealing housing benefits.
Lina Maria Orovio-Hernandez, 58, was indicted by a federal grand jury on one count of misuse of a Social Security number, one count of making a false statement in an application for a United States passport and one count of theft of government money. Orovio-Hernandez appeared in federal court in Boston yesterday.
According to court documents, Orovio-Hernandez, a citizen of Colombia, applied for a United States passport and a Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles Real ID using the name and other biographical information of another individual. Additionally, Orovio-Hernandez is alleged to have stolen approximately $259,589 in Section 8 housing assistance benefits from October 2011 through January 2025.
The charge of misuse of a Social Security number provides for a sentence of up to five years of in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000. The charge of making a false statement in an application for a United States passport provides for a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000. The charge of theft of government money provides for a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss, whichever is greater. If convicted, the defendant will also be subject to deportation proceedings upon completion of any sentenced imposed. Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and statutes which govern the determination of a sentence in a criminal case.
United States Attorney Leah B. Foley; Matthew O’Brien, Special Agent in Charge of U.S. Department of State’s Diplomatic Security Service, Boston Field Office; Amy Connelly, Special Agent in Charge of the Social Security Administration, Office of Inspector General, Office of Investigations, Boston Field Division; Vicky Vazquez, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General, Northeast Regional Office; and Charmeka Parker, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, Office of Investigations – Northeast Region made the announcement. Valuable assistance in the investigation was provided by the United States Postal Inspection Service. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney James J. Nagelberg of the Major Crimes Unit is prosecuting the case.
The details contained in the Indictment are allegations. The defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
WASHINGTON—Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman James Comer (R-KY) today introduced the Reorganizing Government Act of 2025. This legislation ensures Congress takes an up or down vote on government-wide reorganization plans submitted to Congress by President Donald Trump to streamline government operations and better serve the American people.
“This legislation allows the President to use his constitutional authority as Chief Executive to reorganize federal agencies, eliminate weaponization, and right-size the government to better serve the American people,” said Sen. Lee. “Congress cannot afford to sit on its hands in this fight. Reauthorizing presidential reorganization authority is the most comprehensive tool that the President can use to restore good governance to Washington.”
“Americans elected President Trump to reform Washington, and his team is working around the clock to deliver on that promise,” said Chairman Comer. “The federal bureaucracy has grown dramatically in size and scope, creating unnecessary red tape. We must cut through the inefficiency and streamline government to improve service delivery and save taxpayers money. Congress can fast-track President Trump’s government reorganization plans by renewing a key tool to approve them swiftly in Congress. The Reorganizing Government Act of 2025 does just that. I look forward to advancing this bill in the House Oversight Committee soon. We owe it to the American people to make government efficient, effective, and accountable.”
The federal government has expanded significantly over the past 200 years, leading to inefficiencies, redundancies, and bureaucratic obstacles. With a federal budget that has grown from $3.6 billion to $7.3 trillion and over 400 executive agencies, streamlining government operations is essential for cost savings and improved service delivery.
The Reorganizing Government Act of 2025 seeks to renew and extend the President’s authority to propose executive branch reorganization plans until December 2026. This legislation restores a reorganization authority that was last in effect in 1984, aiming to modernize and improve government efficiency. Under this bill:
Congress must vote on proposed reorganization plans within 90 days, using an expedited process that cannot be filibustered.
The President’s authority expands to include entire executive departments, not just agencies.
The bill prohibits reorganization plans that increase federal workforce size or expenditures.
The Reorganizing Government Act of 2025 has been endorsed by Heritage Action, Pacific Legal Foundation, and Job Creators Network.
“Thank you, Chairman Comer and Sen. Lee for introducing the Reorganizing Government Act of 2025 to empower the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce the size and scope of government burdening small businesses and ordinary Americans. As the Trump administration and Department of Government Efficiency have uncovered, there is tremendous waste, fraud, and abuse in federal agencies and departments. This legislation will make it easier to eliminate this reckless spending, reduce the deficit, and return savings to taxpayers.” – Alfredo Ortiz, CEO of Job Creators Network
You can read the bill text by clicking HERE.
You can read the one-pager by clicking HERE.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3
The government commits to a new, permanent, comprehensive mortgage guarantee scheme to increase homeownership.
Further plans to modernise home buying have been unveiled this week, helping more people to realise their ambitions of owning their own home as part of the government’s Plan for Change.
The government has committed to launching a new, permanent, comprehensive mortgage guarantee scheme that will open the door to homeownership for more young families and hardworking renters.
Alongside this the Economic Secretary to the Treasury has written to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) following their response to the government’s call for regulators to support growth, setting out the government’s support for their proposal to review mortgage rules. The government has made clear it wants the FCA’s review to be as ambitious and rapid as possible to help as many people as possible to achieve the dream of owning a place of their own.
It follows an announcement last week that the government is streamlining and digitising the process for buying and selling homes to help homebuyers save time and money, and reducing the number of house sales that fall through. Fall throughs impact one in three transactions and cost people around £400million a year in total and currently there are delays of almost five months in the system.
Millions of hardworking people have been locked out of home ownership – the number of first-time buyers fell to a 10 year low in 2023 and today’s under 30s are less than half as likely to be home owners than those at the same age in 1990.
The government’s Plan for Change has clear ambitions for delivering 1.5 million more homes and driving growth – cutting unnecessary red tape in order to be on the side of builders and working people who want to get on the property ladder.
City Minister Emma Reynolds said:
“For too long politicians have ducked and dodged the decisions needed to support homeownership.
“Simplifying responsible lending rules and putting in place a permanent mortgage guarantee scheme shows our commitment to making the dream of owning a home a reality. I will work closely with regulators and industry to get this done quickly and in a way that supports as many people as possible.”
Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook said:
“The affordability challenges facing first-time buyers mean that we now have a generation locked out of homeownership . This government is determined to change that, ensuring that young families and hardworking renters can buy a home of their own.”
New details on the new Mortgage Guarantee Scheme will be announced in due course and will replace the existing Mortgage Guarantee Scheme, which was due to expire this year. By making the Mortgage Guarantee Scheme permanent and comprehensive, banks and building societies will have long-term confidence to continue offering low-deposit mortgages.
Many working people continue to find it extremely difficult to secure a deposit, meaning for too many the dream of home ownership has depended on access to the ‘Bank of Mum and Dad’, leaving those without that option often trapped in a cycle of renting without a way out.
This commitment to a new Mortgage Guarantee Scheme means first-time buyers, including young families, will be able to take that crucial first step onto the property ladder, with only a small deposit, tackling one of the biggest barriers to homeownership and giving them the stability they need to plan for the future.
