NewzIntel.com

Category: Trumpism

  • MIL-OSI USA: ‘Bad Policy to Downright Dangerous,’ King says on Floor in Preparation for Vote on Recissions Legislation

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Angus King (I-ME) today spoke on the Senate floor against the ‘Recissions Package’ currently being considered by the governing body. This legislation aims to remove Congressionally-approved funding from critical public services including, but not limited to, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) which helps to fund Maine Public broadcasting and public interest newsgathering nationwide, as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) which leads global efforts to expand universal health coverage and directs and coordinates the world’s response to health emergencies before they can pose a threat to American lives.

    More specifically, King made the point that this bill is a further abdication of congressional authority to fund national priorities, also known in the Constitution as “the power of the purse.”

    Early in the speech, King highlighted the importance of public broadcasting and its impact on the American people.

    King began, “Public broadcasting has a unique place in the United States and our media environment in that it is the only media form not driven by advertising and advertising dollars. It cannot be driven by ratings. It therefore is able to provide programming to the American people that they probably almost certainly would not have access to otherwise. It wouldn’t simply find a home on commercial broadcasting because the ratings wouldn’t be there, but that doesn’t mean the programming isn’t important.

    King then spoke about international interests that have wide-ranging effects on the health and safety of people here at home.

    “Vaccination campaigns, food security, nutrition programs, disaster response, refugee support. This aligns with our American values. As I say, it’s a relatively small part of the budget. It helps to stabilize fragile states. It cuts the risk of extremism and terrorism and conflict. And James Mattis put it best. General James Mattis, one of the most distinguished military officers of our time, said, ‘If you don’t fund the state department fully, then you’re going to have to buy me more bullets.’ That puts it most succinctly, you’re going to have to buy me more bullets, because the programs of USAID tend to stabilize the world and mitigate the tendency toward extremism and violence. And since we have started to gut A.I.D., which was one of the first actions of this administration in January and February, China has stepped into our shoes,” King continued.

    King concluded the speech by speaking about the critical separation of powers that is ‘melting away.’

    “All of those checks and balances which has become a kind of cliche are there for a fundamental reason, and that’s to protect our liberty. To protect us from the danger of power being concentrated in one set of hands. Now the framers thought that they didn’t have to worry about this, having set up the Constitution the way they did, because they said never will the Congress give up its power. The term they used was ambition must be made to counteract ambition. That there would be institutional rivalry and we would never give up. They didn’t reckon on parties. They didn’t reckon on party primaries. They didn’t reckon on the executive having such sway with the legislative branch that the checks and balances essentially have melted away.” King concluded.

    Senator King has been consistently sounding the alarm on President Donald Trump’s existential threat to the Constitution, and the need for Congress to assert its institutional role. Most recently, he invoked former Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith calling on his Republican colleagues to stand up to the President’s threats to democracy. King previously gave a speech on the Senate floor sharing that this administration is doing ‘exactly what the Framers [of the Constitution] most feared” and a speech where he shared his growing concerns over the Trump Administration’s usurpation of Congressional authority. Senator King also previously declared that the proposal to halt all federal grant and loan disbursement was illegal and a direct assault on the Constitution. More recently, he joined 36 Senators in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, sharing the detrimental effects of  the Trump Administration’s dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). He also joined fellow Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) colleagues in writing a letter to the White House about the risks to national security by allowing unvetted Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staff and representatives to access classified and sensitive government materials.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Press Trump Admin. on Reversal of Medical Debt Rule

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WASHINGTON, DC – Nearly 15 million Americans were poised to see their credit scores rise by an average of 20 points under a Biden Administration rule that would have removed medical bills from consumer credit reports.  But the Trump Administration reversed course and joined credit reporting agencies in opposing the rule.  On Friday, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas overturned the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) efforts to leave medical debt off consumer credit reports.

    Now, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with U.S. Senators Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and 26 other senators in pressing the Trump Administration for answers regarding the CFPB’s decision to vacate the medical debt rule finalized in January 2025.  

    100 million people in America — including 41 percent of adults – are burdened by over $220 billion in medical debt, according to KFF Health News.

    The American Medical Association contends that medical debt isn’t an accurate barometer of people’s ability to repay other loans, because most bills are a one-time or short-term expense from a hospital stay or accident. 

    Warnock, Warren, Reed, Whitehouse and their colleagues are demanding the CFPB share any data the agency relied on in deciding to petition a court to vacate the rule and any communications it had with entities during the process that would profit from its decision.

    “On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with collection agencies that stand to profit from it,” the 30 U.S. Senators wrote.

    “Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts…Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care,” they continued.

    At the conclusion of the letter, the senators emphasize the need for transparency into the agency’s decision-making process.

    “On April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it – lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry,” the senators closed.

    Senator Reed is a member of the Senate Banking Committee and has strongly criticized the Trump Administration’s efforts to diminish and downsize the CFPB. In May, President Trump withdrew his nominee for the CFPB.  Currently, OMB Director Russell Vought serves as acting director of the agency and has failed to take action to ensure the CFPB protects Americans from predatory medical debt collection practices.

    In addition to Senators Warnock, Warren, Reed, and Whitehouse, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Adam Schiff (D-CA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Tina Smith (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Angus King (I-ME), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Jacky Rosen (D-NV).

    Full text of the letter follows:

    Dear Acting Director Vought,

    On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with debt collection agencies that stand to profit from it.

    Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts. One major credit scoring company, VantageScore, has stopped using medical debt in its newer models entirely. Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care. People often receive collection notices for debts they did not owe, in the wrong amount, or that should have been covered by insurance—but still end up experiencing long-lasting damage to their credit scores.

    Listing medical debt on a person’s credit report drives down their credit score, which hurts their ability to purchase a car, buy a home or rent an apartment, get utility service, start a business, or access other banking services. This has profound effects on families that can last generations. To make matters worse, medical debt is the most common reason debt collectors contact consumers; the debt collection industry makes one-fourth of its annual revenue from health care debt. Including medical debt on credit reports makes consumers more vulnerable to predatory debt collection practices.

    Medical debt on credit reports also blocks working families from access to credit that they would be able to repay.The CFPB found that people who had all their medical debts completely removed from their credit reports experienced an average credit score increase of 20 points, in some cases elevating families into a higher credit score tier.

    In response to growing data that medical debt is not a good indicator of creditworthiness, states across the country have acted to ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. And on January 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a final rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. The rule would remove an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of 15 million Americans, prohibit credit reporting companies from sharing medical debt information with lenders, and bar lenders from considering medical debt in underwriting decisions. It was designed to help the millions of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, by lowering costs and increasing access to affordable credit for working families without affecting the predictive value of their credit reports. The rule would also help reduce the effects of structural racism and other prejudices. People of color are disproportionately harmed by the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. Meanwhile, adults with a disability and new moms are more than twice as likely to carry medical debt.

    Despite the critical importance of the medical debt rule, on April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it—lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry, by July 28, 2025. We specifically request that CFPB publicly publish all data about how medical debt relates to key economic indicators, including:

    • Barriers to home and car ownership, including challenges getting loans or not being approved to rent or lease,
    • Paying higher premiums for auto, homeowner’s and other types of insurance,
    • Losing job opportunities as a result of credit reporting on background checks,
    • Obstacles to starting small businesses because of challenges with securing loans,
    • Paying more for everyday services such as household utilities or cell phone contracts

    We are particularly concerned about the outsize impact that medical debt has on the credit scores of seniors, veterans, new parents, people with disabilities, cancer patients and survivors, and small business owners.

    Thank you for your attention to this matter.

    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner & Kaine Slam Republican Attempts to Defund Public Broadcasting

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner

     

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) slammed efforts by congressional Republicans to defund public media and revoke more than $1.07 billion in previously-appropriated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, including $100 million for Virginia. This move would cut federal support for more than 1,500 public radio and TV stations, nearly half of which serve rural communities.

    “In yet another shortsighted effort, President Trump is now trying to gut public radio and broadcast TV news, which deliver impartial news, critical information, and educational programming to communities all across the country. As former governors, we are deeply disturbed by these efforts because we know that public media is often the only source of local news available to rural communities. We also know that public radio plays a key role in public safety, delivering emergency alerts during disasters like floods, hurricanes, and wildfires,” said the senators. “While our Republican colleagues in the House may be comfortable ceding their constitutionally-established authority over to a power-hungry president, we plan to fight this backwards legislation and protect the funding that was approved by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress.”

    Since 2013, public TV stations have helped the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) system deliver emergency alerts to people’s cell phones via the stations’ own transmitters when cell companies’ connections fail. In 2024, over 11,000 alerts were issued by federal, state, and local authorities via the PBS WARN system. Similarly, the Public Radio Satellite System (PRSS), which is managed by NPR, helps send presidential emergency alerts to local public radio stations nationwide—allowing critical communications to reach people, even when the internet or cellular connections fail.

    The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the authority to approve and appropriate federal dollars. While a sitting president can propose the cancelation of appropriated funding, only Congress has the authority to revoke it, and must do so by passing a rescissions bill. The rescissions package being championed by Republicans comes in response to President Trump’s demand that Congress cancel $9.4 billion in federal funding, including $1.07 billion in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which was authorized by Congress in 1967 in order to ensure universal access to non-commercial, high-quality content and telecommunications services. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting delivers funding to more than 1,500 locally owned public radio and TV stations and serves as the largest single source of funding for public radio, television, and related online and mobile services.

    The legislation, passed by the House of Representatives earlier this month, is now under consideration by the Senate.

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner & Kaine Slam Republican Attempts to Defund Public Broadcasting

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner

     

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) slammed efforts by congressional Republicans to defund public media and revoke more than $1.07 billion in previously-appropriated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, including $100 million for Virginia. This move would cut federal support for more than 1,500 public radio and TV stations, nearly half of which serve rural communities.

    “In yet another shortsighted effort, President Trump is now trying to gut public radio and broadcast TV news, which deliver impartial news, critical information, and educational programming to communities all across the country. As former governors, we are deeply disturbed by these efforts because we know that public media is often the only source of local news available to rural communities. We also know that public radio plays a key role in public safety, delivering emergency alerts during disasters like floods, hurricanes, and wildfires,” said the senators. “While our Republican colleagues in the House may be comfortable ceding their constitutionally-established authority over to a power-hungry president, we plan to fight this backwards legislation and protect the funding that was approved by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress.”

    Since 2013, public TV stations have helped the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) system deliver emergency alerts to people’s cell phones via the stations’ own transmitters when cell companies’ connections fail. In 2024, over 11,000 alerts were issued by federal, state, and local authorities via the PBS WARN system. Similarly, the Public Radio Satellite System (PRSS), which is managed by NPR, helps send presidential emergency alerts to local public radio stations nationwide—allowing critical communications to reach people, even when the internet or cellular connections fail.

    The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the authority to approve and appropriate federal dollars. While a sitting president can propose the cancelation of appropriated funding, only Congress has the authority to revoke it, and must do so by passing a rescissions bill. The rescissions package being championed by Republicans comes in response to President Trump’s demand that Congress cancel $9.4 billion in federal funding, including $1.07 billion in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which was authorized by Congress in 1967 in order to ensure universal access to non-commercial, high-quality content and telecommunications services. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting delivers funding to more than 1,500 locally owned public radio and TV stations and serves as the largest single source of funding for public radio, television, and related online and mobile services.

    The legislation, passed by the House of Representatives earlier this month, is now under consideration by the Senate.

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Press Trump Admin. on Reversal of Medical Debt Rule

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
    WASHINGTON, DC – Nearly 15 million Americans were poised to see their credit scores rise by an average of 20 points under a Biden Administration rule that would have removed medical bills from consumer credit reports.  But the Trump Administration reversed course and joined credit reporting agencies in opposing the rule.  On Friday, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas overturned the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) efforts to leave medical debt off consumer credit reports.
    Now, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with U.S. Senators Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and 26 other senators in pressing the Trump Administration for answers regarding the CFPB’s decision to vacate the medical debt rule finalized in January 2025.  
    100 million people in America — including 41 percent of adults – are burdened by over $220 billion in medical debt, according to KFF Health News.
    The American Medical Association contends that medical debt isn’t an accurate barometer of people’s ability to repay other loans, because most bills are a one-time or short-term expense from a hospital stay or accident. 
    Warnock, Warren, Reed, Whitehouse and their colleagues are demanding the CFPB share any data the agency relied on in deciding to petition a court to vacate the rule and any communications it had with entities during the process that would profit from its decision.
    “On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with collection agencies that stand to profit from it,” the 30 U.S. Senators wrote.
    “Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts…Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care,” they continued.
    At the conclusion of the letter, the senators emphasize the need for transparency into the agency’s decision-making process.
    “On April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it – lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry,” the senators closed.
    Senator Reed is a member of the Senate Banking Committee and has strongly criticized the Trump Administration’s efforts to diminish and downsize the CFPB. In May, President Trump withdrew his nominee for the CFPB.  Currently, OMB Director Russell Vought serves as acting director of the agency and has failed to take action to ensure the CFPB protects Americans from predatory medical debt collection practices.
    In addition to Senators Warnock, Warren, Reed, and Whitehouse, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Adam Schiff (D-CA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Tina Smith (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Angus King (I-ME), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Jacky Rosen (D-NV).
    Full text of the letter follows:
    Dear Acting Director Vought,
    On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with debt collection agencies that stand to profit from it.
    Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts. One major credit scoring company, VantageScore, has stopped using medical debt in its newer models entirely. Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care. People often receive collection notices for debts they did not owe, in the wrong amount, or that should have been covered by insurance—but still end up experiencing long-lasting damage to their credit scores.
    Listing medical debt on a person’s credit report drives down their credit score, which hurts their ability to purchase a car, buy a home or rent an apartment, get utility service, start a business, or access other banking services. This has profound effects on families that can last generations. To make matters worse, medical debt is the most common reason debt collectors contact consumers; the debt collection industry makes one-fourth of its annual revenue from health care debt. Including medical debt on credit reports makes consumers more vulnerable to predatory debt collection practices.
    Medical debt on credit reports also blocks working families from access to credit that they would be able to repay.The CFPB found that people who had all their medical debts completely removed from their credit reports experienced an average credit score increase of 20 points, in some cases elevating families into a higher credit score tier.
    In response to growing data that medical debt is not a good indicator of creditworthiness, states across the country have acted to ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. And on January 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a final rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. The rule would remove an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of 15 million Americans, prohibit credit reporting companies from sharing medical debt information with lenders, and bar lenders from considering medical debt in underwriting decisions. It was designed to help the millions of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, by lowering costs and increasing access to affordable credit for working families without affecting the predictive value of their credit reports. The rule would also help reduce the effects of structural racism and other prejudices. People of color are disproportionately harmed by the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. Meanwhile, adults with a disability and new moms are more than twice as likely to carry medical debt.
    Despite the critical importance of the medical debt rule, on April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it—lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry, by July 28, 2025. We specifically request that CFPB publicly publish all data about how medical debt relates to key economic indicators, including:
    Barriers to home and car ownership, including challenges getting loans or not being approved to rent or lease,
    Paying higher premiums for auto, homeowner’s and other types of insurance,
    Losing job opportunities as a result of credit reporting on background checks,
    Obstacles to starting small businesses because of challenges with securing loans,
    Paying more for everyday services such as household utilities or cell phone contracts
    We are particularly concerned about the outsize impact that medical debt has on the credit scores of seniors, veterans, new parents, people with disabilities, cancer patients and survivors, and small business owners.
    Thank you for your attention to this matter.
    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Press Trump Admin. on Reversal of Medical Debt Rule

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
    WASHINGTON, DC – Nearly 15 million Americans were poised to see their credit scores rise by an average of 20 points under a Biden Administration rule that would have removed medical bills from consumer credit reports.  But the Trump Administration reversed course and joined credit reporting agencies in opposing the rule.  On Friday, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas overturned the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) efforts to leave medical debt off consumer credit reports.
    Now, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with U.S. Senators Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and 26 other senators in pressing the Trump Administration for answers regarding the CFPB’s decision to vacate the medical debt rule finalized in January 2025.  
    100 million people in America — including 41 percent of adults – are burdened by over $220 billion in medical debt, according to KFF Health News.
    The American Medical Association contends that medical debt isn’t an accurate barometer of people’s ability to repay other loans, because most bills are a one-time or short-term expense from a hospital stay or accident. 
    Warnock, Warren, Reed, Whitehouse and their colleagues are demanding the CFPB share any data the agency relied on in deciding to petition a court to vacate the rule and any communications it had with entities during the process that would profit from its decision.
    “On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with collection agencies that stand to profit from it,” the 30 U.S. Senators wrote.
    “Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts…Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care,” they continued.
    At the conclusion of the letter, the senators emphasize the need for transparency into the agency’s decision-making process.
    “On April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it – lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry,” the senators closed.
    Senator Reed is a member of the Senate Banking Committee and has strongly criticized the Trump Administration’s efforts to diminish and downsize the CFPB. In May, President Trump withdrew his nominee for the CFPB.  Currently, OMB Director Russell Vought serves as acting director of the agency and has failed to take action to ensure the CFPB protects Americans from predatory medical debt collection practices.
    In addition to Senators Warnock, Warren, Reed, and Whitehouse, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Adam Schiff (D-CA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Tina Smith (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Angus King (I-ME), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Jacky Rosen (D-NV).
    Full text of the letter follows:
    Dear Acting Director Vought,
    On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with debt collection agencies that stand to profit from it.
    Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts. One major credit scoring company, VantageScore, has stopped using medical debt in its newer models entirely. Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care. People often receive collection notices for debts they did not owe, in the wrong amount, or that should have been covered by insurance—but still end up experiencing long-lasting damage to their credit scores.
    Listing medical debt on a person’s credit report drives down their credit score, which hurts their ability to purchase a car, buy a home or rent an apartment, get utility service, start a business, or access other banking services. This has profound effects on families that can last generations. To make matters worse, medical debt is the most common reason debt collectors contact consumers; the debt collection industry makes one-fourth of its annual revenue from health care debt. Including medical debt on credit reports makes consumers more vulnerable to predatory debt collection practices.
    Medical debt on credit reports also blocks working families from access to credit that they would be able to repay.The CFPB found that people who had all their medical debts completely removed from their credit reports experienced an average credit score increase of 20 points, in some cases elevating families into a higher credit score tier.
    In response to growing data that medical debt is not a good indicator of creditworthiness, states across the country have acted to ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. And on January 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a final rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. The rule would remove an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of 15 million Americans, prohibit credit reporting companies from sharing medical debt information with lenders, and bar lenders from considering medical debt in underwriting decisions. It was designed to help the millions of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, by lowering costs and increasing access to affordable credit for working families without affecting the predictive value of their credit reports. The rule would also help reduce the effects of structural racism and other prejudices. People of color are disproportionately harmed by the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. Meanwhile, adults with a disability and new moms are more than twice as likely to carry medical debt.
    Despite the critical importance of the medical debt rule, on April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it—lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry, by July 28, 2025. We specifically request that CFPB publicly publish all data about how medical debt relates to key economic indicators, including:
    Barriers to home and car ownership, including challenges getting loans or not being approved to rent or lease,
    Paying higher premiums for auto, homeowner’s and other types of insurance,
    Losing job opportunities as a result of credit reporting on background checks,
    Obstacles to starting small businesses because of challenges with securing loans,
    Paying more for everyday services such as household utilities or cell phone contracts
    We are particularly concerned about the outsize impact that medical debt has on the credit scores of seniors, veterans, new parents, people with disabilities, cancer patients and survivors, and small business owners.
    Thank you for your attention to this matter.
    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Press Trump Admin. on Reversal of Medical Debt Rule

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
    WASHINGTON, DC – Nearly 15 million Americans were poised to see their credit scores rise by an average of 20 points under a Biden Administration rule that would have removed medical bills from consumer credit reports.  But the Trump Administration reversed course and joined credit reporting agencies in opposing the rule.  On Friday, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas overturned the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) efforts to leave medical debt off consumer credit reports.
    Now, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with U.S. Senators Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and 26 other senators in pressing the Trump Administration for answers regarding the CFPB’s decision to vacate the medical debt rule finalized in January 2025.  
    100 million people in America — including 41 percent of adults – are burdened by over $220 billion in medical debt, according to KFF Health News.
    The American Medical Association contends that medical debt isn’t an accurate barometer of people’s ability to repay other loans, because most bills are a one-time or short-term expense from a hospital stay or accident. 
    Warnock, Warren, Reed, Whitehouse and their colleagues are demanding the CFPB share any data the agency relied on in deciding to petition a court to vacate the rule and any communications it had with entities during the process that would profit from its decision.
    “On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with collection agencies that stand to profit from it,” the 30 U.S. Senators wrote.
    “Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts…Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care,” they continued.
    At the conclusion of the letter, the senators emphasize the need for transparency into the agency’s decision-making process.
    “On April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it – lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry,” the senators closed.
    Senator Reed is a member of the Senate Banking Committee and has strongly criticized the Trump Administration’s efforts to diminish and downsize the CFPB. In May, President Trump withdrew his nominee for the CFPB.  Currently, OMB Director Russell Vought serves as acting director of the agency and has failed to take action to ensure the CFPB protects Americans from predatory medical debt collection practices.
    In addition to Senators Warnock, Warren, Reed, and Whitehouse, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Adam Schiff (D-CA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Tina Smith (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Angus King (I-ME), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Jacky Rosen (D-NV).
    Full text of the letter follows:
    Dear Acting Director Vought,
    On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with debt collection agencies that stand to profit from it.
    Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts. One major credit scoring company, VantageScore, has stopped using medical debt in its newer models entirely. Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care. People often receive collection notices for debts they did not owe, in the wrong amount, or that should have been covered by insurance—but still end up experiencing long-lasting damage to their credit scores.
    Listing medical debt on a person’s credit report drives down their credit score, which hurts their ability to purchase a car, buy a home or rent an apartment, get utility service, start a business, or access other banking services. This has profound effects on families that can last generations. To make matters worse, medical debt is the most common reason debt collectors contact consumers; the debt collection industry makes one-fourth of its annual revenue from health care debt. Including medical debt on credit reports makes consumers more vulnerable to predatory debt collection practices.
    Medical debt on credit reports also blocks working families from access to credit that they would be able to repay.The CFPB found that people who had all their medical debts completely removed from their credit reports experienced an average credit score increase of 20 points, in some cases elevating families into a higher credit score tier.
    In response to growing data that medical debt is not a good indicator of creditworthiness, states across the country have acted to ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. And on January 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a final rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. The rule would remove an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of 15 million Americans, prohibit credit reporting companies from sharing medical debt information with lenders, and bar lenders from considering medical debt in underwriting decisions. It was designed to help the millions of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, by lowering costs and increasing access to affordable credit for working families without affecting the predictive value of their credit reports. The rule would also help reduce the effects of structural racism and other prejudices. People of color are disproportionately harmed by the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. Meanwhile, adults with a disability and new moms are more than twice as likely to carry medical debt.
    Despite the critical importance of the medical debt rule, on April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it—lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry, by July 28, 2025. We specifically request that CFPB publicly publish all data about how medical debt relates to key economic indicators, including:
    Barriers to home and car ownership, including challenges getting loans or not being approved to rent or lease,
    Paying higher premiums for auto, homeowner’s and other types of insurance,
    Losing job opportunities as a result of credit reporting on background checks,
    Obstacles to starting small businesses because of challenges with securing loans,
    Paying more for everyday services such as household utilities or cell phone contracts
    We are particularly concerned about the outsize impact that medical debt has on the credit scores of seniors, veterans, new parents, people with disabilities, cancer patients and survivors, and small business owners.
    Thank you for your attention to this matter.
    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Press Trump Admin. on Reversal of Medical Debt Rule

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
    WASHINGTON, DC – Nearly 15 million Americans were poised to see their credit scores rise by an average of 20 points under a Biden Administration rule that would have removed medical bills from consumer credit reports.  But the Trump Administration reversed course and joined credit reporting agencies in opposing the rule.  On Friday, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas overturned the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) efforts to leave medical debt off consumer credit reports.
    Now, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with U.S. Senators Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and 26 other senators in pressing the Trump Administration for answers regarding the CFPB’s decision to vacate the medical debt rule finalized in January 2025.  
    100 million people in America — including 41 percent of adults – are burdened by over $220 billion in medical debt, according to KFF Health News.
    The American Medical Association contends that medical debt isn’t an accurate barometer of people’s ability to repay other loans, because most bills are a one-time or short-term expense from a hospital stay or accident. 
    Warnock, Warren, Reed, Whitehouse and their colleagues are demanding the CFPB share any data the agency relied on in deciding to petition a court to vacate the rule and any communications it had with entities during the process that would profit from its decision.
    “On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with collection agencies that stand to profit from it,” the 30 U.S. Senators wrote.
    “Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts…Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care,” they continued.
    At the conclusion of the letter, the senators emphasize the need for transparency into the agency’s decision-making process.
    “On April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it – lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry,” the senators closed.
    Senator Reed is a member of the Senate Banking Committee and has strongly criticized the Trump Administration’s efforts to diminish and downsize the CFPB. In May, President Trump withdrew his nominee for the CFPB.  Currently, OMB Director Russell Vought serves as acting director of the agency and has failed to take action to ensure the CFPB protects Americans from predatory medical debt collection practices.
    In addition to Senators Warnock, Warren, Reed, and Whitehouse, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Adam Schiff (D-CA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Tina Smith (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Angus King (I-ME), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Jacky Rosen (D-NV).
    Full text of the letter follows:
    Dear Acting Director Vought,
    On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with debt collection agencies that stand to profit from it.
    Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts. One major credit scoring company, VantageScore, has stopped using medical debt in its newer models entirely. Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care. People often receive collection notices for debts they did not owe, in the wrong amount, or that should have been covered by insurance—but still end up experiencing long-lasting damage to their credit scores.
    Listing medical debt on a person’s credit report drives down their credit score, which hurts their ability to purchase a car, buy a home or rent an apartment, get utility service, start a business, or access other banking services. This has profound effects on families that can last generations. To make matters worse, medical debt is the most common reason debt collectors contact consumers; the debt collection industry makes one-fourth of its annual revenue from health care debt. Including medical debt on credit reports makes consumers more vulnerable to predatory debt collection practices.
    Medical debt on credit reports also blocks working families from access to credit that they would be able to repay.The CFPB found that people who had all their medical debts completely removed from their credit reports experienced an average credit score increase of 20 points, in some cases elevating families into a higher credit score tier.
    In response to growing data that medical debt is not a good indicator of creditworthiness, states across the country have acted to ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. And on January 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a final rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. The rule would remove an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of 15 million Americans, prohibit credit reporting companies from sharing medical debt information with lenders, and bar lenders from considering medical debt in underwriting decisions. It was designed to help the millions of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, by lowering costs and increasing access to affordable credit for working families without affecting the predictive value of their credit reports. The rule would also help reduce the effects of structural racism and other prejudices. People of color are disproportionately harmed by the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. Meanwhile, adults with a disability and new moms are more than twice as likely to carry medical debt.
    Despite the critical importance of the medical debt rule, on April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it—lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry, by July 28, 2025. We specifically request that CFPB publicly publish all data about how medical debt relates to key economic indicators, including:
    Barriers to home and car ownership, including challenges getting loans or not being approved to rent or lease,
    Paying higher premiums for auto, homeowner’s and other types of insurance,
    Losing job opportunities as a result of credit reporting on background checks,
    Obstacles to starting small businesses because of challenges with securing loans,
    Paying more for everyday services such as household utilities or cell phone contracts
    We are particularly concerned about the outsize impact that medical debt has on the credit scores of seniors, veterans, new parents, people with disabilities, cancer patients and survivors, and small business owners.
    Thank you for your attention to this matter.
    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed & Whitehouse Press Trump Admin. on Reversal of Medical Debt Rule

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WASHINGTON, DC – Nearly 15 million Americans were poised to see their credit scores rise by an average of 20 points under a Biden Administration rule that would have removed medical bills from consumer credit reports.  But the Trump Administration reversed course and joined credit reporting agencies in opposing the rule.  On Friday, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas overturned the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) efforts to leave medical debt off consumer credit reports.

    Now, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are teaming up with U.S. Senators Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-GA) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and 26 other senators in pressing the Trump Administration for answers regarding the CFPB’s decision to vacate the medical debt rule finalized in January 2025.  

    100 million people in America — including 41 percent of adults – are burdened by over $220 billion in medical debt, according to KFF Health News.

    The American Medical Association contends that medical debt isn’t an accurate barometer of people’s ability to repay other loans, because most bills are a one-time or short-term expense from a hospital stay or accident. 

    Warnock, Warren, Reed, Whitehouse and their colleagues are demanding the CFPB share any data the agency relied on in deciding to petition a court to vacate the rule and any communications it had with entities during the process that would profit from its decision.

    “On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with collection agencies that stand to profit from it,” the 30 U.S. Senators wrote.

    “Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts…Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care,” they continued.

    At the conclusion of the letter, the senators emphasize the need for transparency into the agency’s decision-making process.

    “On April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it – lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry,” the senators closed.

    Senator Reed is a member of the Senate Banking Committee and has strongly criticized the Trump Administration’s efforts to diminish and downsize the CFPB. In May, President Trump withdrew his nominee for the CFPB.  Currently, OMB Director Russell Vought serves as acting director of the agency and has failed to take action to ensure the CFPB protects Americans from predatory medical debt collection practices.

    In addition to Senators Warnock, Warren, Reed, and Whitehouse, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Adam Schiff (D-CA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Tina Smith (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Angus King (I-ME), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Jacky Rosen (D-NV).

    Full text of the letter follows:

    Dear Acting Director Vought,

    On April 30, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) asked a court to vacate the agency’s recently released rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. We write to request the information you relied on in making that determination, including any communications with debt collection agencies that stand to profit from it.

    Medical debt collections information is often inaccurate, and studies show that it is not useful in determining a consumer’s ability to repay other debts. One major credit scoring company, VantageScore, has stopped using medical debt in its newer models entirely. Almost half of all medical bills contain at least one error, and almost half of nonprofit hospitals have routinely and mistakenly billed patients who were eligible for free or discounted care. People often receive collection notices for debts they did not owe, in the wrong amount, or that should have been covered by insurance—but still end up experiencing long-lasting damage to their credit scores.

    Listing medical debt on a person’s credit report drives down their credit score, which hurts their ability to purchase a car, buy a home or rent an apartment, get utility service, start a business, or access other banking services. This has profound effects on families that can last generations. To make matters worse, medical debt is the most common reason debt collectors contact consumers; the debt collection industry makes one-fourth of its annual revenue from health care debt. Including medical debt on credit reports makes consumers more vulnerable to predatory debt collection practices.

    Medical debt on credit reports also blocks working families from access to credit that they would be able to repay.The CFPB found that people who had all their medical debts completely removed from their credit reports experienced an average credit score increase of 20 points, in some cases elevating families into a higher credit score tier.

    In response to growing data that medical debt is not a good indicator of creditworthiness, states across the country have acted to ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. And on January 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a final rule to remove medical debt from consumer credit reports. The rule would remove an estimated $49 billion in medical bills from the credit reports of 15 million Americans, prohibit credit reporting companies from sharing medical debt information with lenders, and bar lenders from considering medical debt in underwriting decisions. It was designed to help the millions of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, by lowering costs and increasing access to affordable credit for working families without affecting the predictive value of their credit reports. The rule would also help reduce the effects of structural racism and other prejudices. People of color are disproportionately harmed by the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. Meanwhile, adults with a disability and new moms are more than twice as likely to carry medical debt.

    Despite the critical importance of the medical debt rule, on April 30, the CFPB filed a joint motion with the industry groups that oppose the rule, petitioning the court to vacate it—lining the pockets of corporations off the backs of American consumers. Given the substantial evidence that the CFPB’s rule was well-considered and would help consumers without reducing the accuracy of their credit scores, we write to request that the CFPB make public all information relied on by the agency in its decision to drop the rule, including any communications with the debt collection industry, by July 28, 2025. We specifically request that CFPB publicly publish all data about how medical debt relates to key economic indicators, including:

    • Barriers to home and car ownership, including challenges getting loans or not being approved to rent or lease,
    • Paying higher premiums for auto, homeowner’s and other types of insurance,
    • Losing job opportunities as a result of credit reporting on background checks,
    • Obstacles to starting small businesses because of challenges with securing loans,
    • Paying more for everyday services such as household utilities or cell phone contracts

    We are particularly concerned about the outsize impact that medical debt has on the credit scores of seniors, veterans, new parents, people with disabilities, cancer patients and survivors, and small business owners.

    Thank you for your attention to this matter.

    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Booker, NJ Democrats Demand ED Release Funding for K-12, Adult Education Funding

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
    WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Today, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) led his Democratic colleagues in the New Jersey delegation in a letter to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought and Department of Education (ED) Secretary Linda McMahon to demand clarity regarding the Trump Administration’s unlawful decision to withhold nearly $7 billion in Congressionally Appropriated funding for K–12 and adult education programs nationwide, including over $162 million from the state of New Jersey. 
    “On June 30, 2025, just one day before these funds were supposed to become available, the Department of Education abruptly informed states that they would not receive funding as scheduled on July 1… No timeline was given for when states could expect a resolution. Typically, the Department provides state educational agencies with the formula program allocation tables and access to draw down those funds by July 1, which allows states and districts to plan, budget, and begin spending for the upcoming school year. This decision is financially destabilizing school districts across the country and directly jeopardizes the operation of the upcoming school year,” the lawmakers wrote. 
    “The withholding of these funds will have a widespread and detrimental impact on school communities throughout New Jersey, with disproportionate harm to high-need districts. The funds currently frozen represent almost 13 percent of the total federal K-12 funding that New Jersey schools received last year. Compounding this issue, New Jersey public school districts finalized their budgets for the 2025-2026 school year this past spring. Any loss of expected funding will create budget shortfalls, forcing districts to cut essential programs designed to serve students, their families, and educators,” the lawmakers continued. 
    “Congress lawfully appropriated these funds to address critical education needs, including student achievement, after-school enrichment, teacher training, and adult literacy. Withholding these funds is a reckless decision that jeopardizes the education of millions of students, resulting in layoffs, program delays, disrupted planning cycles, and delayed hiring. This also deprives students, especially those in high-need districts, of key academic support. Our schools, teachers, families, and adult learners cannot afford continued uncertainty. We look forward to your prompt response and the immediate release of the funds,” the lawmakers concluded. 
    To see a district by district breakdown of how the cuts will affect schools across America, click here. 
    The letter is cosigned by U.S. Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ) and U.S. Representatives Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ-05), Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ-06), Robert Menendez (D-NJ-08), LaMonica McIver (D-NJ-10), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ-12), Herbert Conaway Jr. (D-NJ-03), Donald Norcross (D-NJ-01), Nellie Pou (D-NJ-09), and Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ-11). 
    To read the full text of the letter, click here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Booker, Senate Judiciary Democrats Demand Hearing with Whistleblower Ahead of Bove Nomination Vote

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Cory Booker joined all of his Democratic colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee in calling for Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to schedule a hearing to have Erez Reuveni, the former Acting Deputy Director for the Office of Immigration Litigation at the Department of Justice, testify under oath about the recent disclosures of serious misconduct allegations against judicial nominee Emil Bove, including directing Department of Justice attorneys to ignore a court order. Last week, Mr. Reuveni provided the Committee  documentation that corroborates the allegations. The Senators called for the hearing before the Judiciary Committee vote on Bove’s nomination, which is set to take place on Thursday, July 17.
    In a letter to Grassley, the Senators wrote: “We respectfully request that you call Erez Reuveni to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee prior to the Committee’s vote on the nomination of Emil J. Bove III to be a U.S. Circuit Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Mr. Reuveni has made credible allegations against Mr. Bove, which, if true, clearly disqualify him for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench. Thus, it is imperative that the Committee hear from Mr. Reuveni, under oath, before we vote on Mr. Bove’s nomination.”
    The Senators then cited Mr. Reuveni’s document production related to J.G.G. v. Trump, Abrego Garcia v. Noem, and D.V.D. v. DHS, writing: “Documentation provided by Mr. Reuveni demonstrates that he unsuccessfully attempted to secure government compliance with court orders in three separate cases being overseen by Mr. Bove in his role as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General.”
    The Senators concluded by highlighting the importance of understanding Mr. Bove’s role in these concerning episodes before voting on his judicial nomination and requested testimony, writing: “Mr. Bove repeatedly gestured at but never invoked deliberative process privilege at his hearing and in answers to written questions, undermining our ability to assess whether Mr. Bove engaged in the alleged misconduct and continuing executive branch officials’ use of ‘non-assertion’ assertions of privilege to defy congressional inquiries.  Calling Mr. Reuveni to testify under oath will allow members of this Committee to appraise the veracity of his claims while defending the Committee’s prerogative to assess Mr. Bove’s qualifications…It is critical that this Committee understands the full scope of Mr. Bove’s actions at the Justice Department prior to voting on his nomination to a lifetime appointment on the federal bench. Given that Mr. Reuveni is willing to testify regarding this matter, we urge you to invite him before the Committee before proceeding to a vote on Mr. Bove’s nomination.”
    To read the full text of the letter, click here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: New Warren Report Exposes Potential Trump Corruption, Bribery Through Presidential Library Donations

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren

    July 15, 2025

    Warren analysis reveals at least half a billion dollars in monetary contributions, gifts, in-kind donations flowing into Trump Presidential Library

    Donations come while Trump makes critical decisions that may impact donors; raises serious concerns about bribery, influence-peddling

    Report (PDF) 

    Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released a new report exposing how companies, special interests, and foreign governments may be pledging donations to President Trump’s future Presidential Library as a corrupt tool to secure favorable outcomes from his administration. 

    “Donald Trump may be using his presidential library as a tool for corruption and bribery while still in office. We could be seeing giant companies like Paramount and Meta and foreign countries like Qatar pay Trump off in plain sight,” said Senator Warren. “Government should work for the American people, not just whichever giant company or foreign government can dump the most money into the president’s future library.”

    Senator Warren’s new analysis reveals that companies seeking favorable outcomes from the Trump administration have pledged to funnel at least $63 million into Trump’s future presidential library. Other gifts and in-kind donations — including a $400 million luxury jet from Qatar, expensive candlelight dinners at Mar-a-Lago, leftover inauguration donations, and more — bring the total value of gifts flowing into Trump’s library to at least half a billion dollars. 

    Presidential Libraries are used to honor a president’s legacy and allow scholars and the public to learn about their time in office. This new report details how giant corporations, special interests, and at least one foreign government are promising donations to President Trump’s future library while his administration makes decisions on mega-mergers, the preservation of a U.S. military base in Qatar, Big Tech regulation, and more. 

    Just weeks ago, Paramount settled President Trump’s lawsuit against CBS’s 60 Minutes for $16 million, with the money funneling straight into Trump’s library. Paramount is currently vying for approval by the Trump administration of its proposed megamerger with Skydance.

    In December 2024, ABC News settled a defamation lawsuit with Donald Trump by agreeing to pay $15 million toward his Presidential Library.

    Past presidents have also accepted suspicious donations while in office — such as the Clinton Foundation accepting a $450,000 donation from a woman pushing for a presidential pardon for her ex-husband, which President Clinton later granted, or a Bush Administration advisor soliciting Presidential Library donations in exchange for arranging meetings with top administration officials.

    “But Trump is doing so at a magnitude that makes glaringly clear the need for common-sense guardrails around donations,” said Senator Warren’s report. 

    Unlike donations to presidential campaigns or inaugural committees, there are almost no restrictions on donations to Presidential Libraries. Even while in office, presidents can solicit unlimited, undisclosed donations from anyone — including foreign nationals, lobbyists, federal contractors, individuals seeking presidential pardons, and corporations with business before federal agencies.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warren, Wyden, Baldwin Tell Social Security: Stop Lying to Stroke Trump’s Ego

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren

    July 15, 2025

    Senate Democrats Call on SSA Commissioner Bisignano to Retract False Claims About Social Security Taxes That Could Confuse, Hurt Seniors

    “Rather than focusing on improving customer service, you are using your position as Commissioner to stroke Donald Trump’s ego and peddle lies on his behalf.”

    Text of Letter (PDF)

    Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) led eight Senate Democrats in demanding that the Social Security Administration (SSA) stop peddling lies about the Republican budget bill using the agency’s email platform, which reaches tens of millions of Americans. 

    “We are appalled that the agency distributed misleading and blatantly inaccurate information regarding tax changes affecting older Americans, transforming the agency into a partisan megaphone for Donald Trump while sowing confusion and distrust in Social Security among Americans,” wrote the senators.

    On July 3, SSA issued a press release and sent a mass email to all “mySocial Security” account users falsely announcing that the Republican budget bill would cut taxes on Social Security benefits for 90% of beneficiaries — in addition to providing older Americans with a tax deduction. But the Republican bill does not amend, reduce, or eliminate federal taxes on Social Security benefits. While the bill provides a temporary deduction for some older Americans, fewer than half of Americans will benefit from this deduction — very much shy of the 90% of Americans that SSA claims. The bill also does not include any provisions to change the tax filing requirements for Social Security recipients. 

    Days later, the SSA quietly updated its press release to correct the false claim, but it did not send a follow-up email to the millions of users who received the initial email.

    Commissioner Bisignano’s lies on behalf of Trump could mislead millions of American seniors who depend on Social Security benefits. The initial email may leave recipients expecting both a deduction and a tax break and could result in millions of Americans’ falsely believing they don’t have to file taxes on Social Security. Inaccurate information could lead to Americans making benefit claims against their best interests or even missing payments on taxes they owe.

    Commissioner Bisignano has abandoned his promise to the Finance Committee and to the American people that, under his leadership, SSA would not become a partisan agency subject to the whims of Trump. 

    “We urge you to retract SSA’s July 3 statement and issue a correction — on SSA’s website and via email for ‘my Social Security’ account users — clarifying the federal tax treatment of Social Security benefits,” concluded the senators. 

    Other senators signing on to the letter include Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.).

    Senate Democrats’ Social Security War Room is a coordinated effort to fight back against the Trump administration’s attack on Americans’ Social Security. The War Room coordinates messaging across the Senate Democratic Caucus and external stakeholders; encourages grassroots engagement by providing opportunities for Americans to share what Social Security means to them; and educates Senate staff, the American public, and stakeholders about Republicans’ agenda and their continued cuts to Americans’ Social Security services and benefits.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Pennsylvania Data Center Partners and PowerHouse Data Centers Launch Joint Venture to Build Next-Gen 1.35 GW Hyperscale Data Center Campus in Carlisle, Pennsylvania

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PITTSBURGH, July 15, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Pennsylvania Data Center Partners, a leader in data center development within the Commonwealth, together with PowerHouse Data Centers, the fifth largest data center developer in the United States, announced plans for their first joint venture: a $15 billion project with three hyperscale data center campuses in Central Pennsylvania. The new AI data hub, Pennsylvania Digital I (PAX) will deliver 1.35 GW of capacity with expandability up to 1.8 GW, comprising scale and speed for AI data center development.

    The project was announced today before President Donald Trump and distinguished global leaders in energy and artificial intelligence, international investors, representatives from labor and trades, as well as Pennsylvania officials at the inaugural Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit hosted by Senator Dave McCormick (R-PA) at Carnegie Mellon University.

    The master plan for PAX includes the construction of three data center campuses with each campus featuring six buildings and a dedicated 450 MW substation. PAX will have access to 17 metropolitan fiber networks, including direct peering with Ashburn, Virginia.

    “This venture between Pennsylvania Data Center Partners and PowerHouse Data Centers is groundbreaking for AI infrastructure,” said Senator Dave McCormick. “It’s a bold and meaningful investment that puts Pennsylvania at the heart of America’s emerging AI tech economy.”

    The project is anticipated to deliver significant economic benefits for the local community, including generating more than $65 million in direct tax revenue with allocations of $45 + million to the Cumberland Valley School District, $10 + million to Middlesex Township, and $10 + million to Cumberland County. Furthermore, the development is expected to create high-skilled employment positions spanning areas such as construction, project management, engineering, and electrical work.

    “This landmark deal with PowerHouse represents a pivotal step for our expansion across Pennsylvania—a state uniquely positioned for data center development thanks to our state and local leaders willing to tap its abundant natural power resources. We’re proud to help lead the charge in building the infrastructure that will define the next era of AI and technological innovation,” said Pennsylvania Data Center Partners CEO Igal J. Feibush.

    “Pennsylvania is important as a growing AI data center market for the Nation and our Pennsylvania Digital I (PAX) project is in the very heart of the state with its access to not only Ashburn, but all of the most important markets in the Eastern United States,” said Doug Fleit, CEO and Co-founder of PowerHouse Data Centers. “This campus is built for speed, engineered for growth, and located where the next wave of infrastructure will take shape for our customers.”

    As part of this transformative project, PPL Electric Utilities will connect the campuses to their transmission system, ensuring the reliable delivery of power to the data center campuses and the surrounding community.

    “PPL Electric Utilities’ investments in its transmission system position us to support economic growth and reliably serve all customers. We’re ready to serve new customers when they’re ready to interconnect,” said Christine Martin, president of PPL Electric Utilities. “Our commitment to innovation and grid reliability aligns seamlessly with the vision for this project and the emergence of Central Pennsylvania as a technology hub. We’re excited to be part of Pennsylvania Data Center Partners and PowerHouse Data Centers’ investment in the state and look forward to the positive effects it can have for our customers and the local economy.”

    The new data center campus is generating significant interest among hyperscalers.

    Pennsylvania Data Center Partners and PowerHouse Data Centers are committed to building lasting relationships with the local community. Both organizations are actively engaging with area nonprofits, investing in STEM education, and providing resources to support charitable initiatives across the region. “Our shared vision goes beyond infrastructure—it’s about strengthening the fabric of the communities where we operate,” added Feibush.

    Project Highlights:

    • Footprint: Approximately 700-acre site with three campuses with 450 MW each.
    • Utility Capacity: 1.35 GW with scalable growth up to 1.8 GW.
    • Near-Term Power Delivery: 300 MW by 2Q 2027.
    • Tax Incentives: Pennsylvania’s data center tax exemption provides 100% abatement of sales and use taxes on equipment and electricity for up to 15 years.
    • Robust Fiber Infrastructure: Direct peering to Ashburn, VA and connectivity to 17 metro fiber providers.
    • Strategic Location: Carlisle is in the heart of the Northeast’s emerging AI corridor, with the scale, power and location hyperscale clients are demanding.
    • Aesthetic Design: PowerHouse Data Centers is a leader in thoughtful and aesthetic architectural for data center development.

    Further project updates will be shared as development progresses.

    About Pennsylvania Data Center Partners
    Pennsylvania Data Center Partners is a developer and owner of hyperscale data centers throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Through our land acquisition, power, procurement and speed-to-market development process, we build next generation hyperscale data center campuses that meet the demand for massive computing resources which train and deploy complex generative AI models. Our ready-to-scale, strategically located sites ensure hyperscalers, investors and communities all benefit from the ensuing world-class digital infrastructure. For more information, visit PADataCenters.com.

    About PowerHouse Data Centers
    PowerHouse Data Centers, wholly owned and operated by American Real Estate Partners (AREP), is a pioneering developer and owner of next-generation data centers, providing sophisticated real estate solutions for hyperscalers that meet their market, data, utility, and space demands. PowerHouse is an established leader in world-class data center development, with 86 data centers underway or in planning, representing over 24 million square feet and 6 GW in seven major Tier I and Tier II markets. PowerHouse’s full suite of development services integrates asset strategy, fast-track approvals, infrastructure, on-site power procurement, and sustainable building practices into every project. Visit our newsroom for more information, and follow us on LinkedIn, YouTube, and X.

    Media Contacts:

    Pennsylvania Data Center Partners
    Tisha Kresler
    Pennsylvania Data Center Partners
    tisha@padatacenters.com
    917-270-0079

    PowerHouse Data Centers
    Jaymie Scotto & Associates (JSA)
    jsa_arep@jsa.net
    +1 866.695.3629 ext. 11

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/ed166acf-7b8f-4df7-a407-582b31d094fd

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Mullin for the Daily Wire: “How The One Big, Beautiful Bill Sustains And Saves Medicaid”

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator MarkWayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma)

    ICYMI: Mullin for the Daily Wire: “How The One Big, Beautiful Bill Sustains And Saves Medicaid”

    “Today, roughly 35 million Americans are living below the poverty line. Over 70 million people are on Medicaid.”
    Washington, D.C. – On Monday, The Daily Wire published U.S. Senator Markwayne Mullin’s (R-OK) op-ed detailing how President Trump’s ‘One, Big, Beautiful Bill’ will protect and strengthen Medicaid for those who need it most. The senator notes, “Medicaid’s long-term stability is at risk” and that “Republicans are getting the waste, fraud, and abuse out of Medicaid to protect the well-being of America’s most vulnerable.”
    Read the full story from The Daily Wire HERE and below:
    How The One Big, Beautiful Bill Sustains And Saves Medicaid
    By Senator Markwayne Mullin | July 14, 2025
    In a huge victory for Oklahoma, Congress recently passed President Donald Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill,” which, among many wins, will deliver the largest-ever tax cut for working and middle-class families, secure the border, and lower energy costs.
    Unfortunately, Washington Democrats who are desperate to change the media narrative after a brutal 2024 election loss have made it their mission to lie about this bill and mislead American families — especially on Medicaid program improvements.
    Democrats claim the bill guts the program. But in reality, Republicans voted to protect and strengthen Medicaid for those who need it most.
    Medicaid’s long-term stability is at risk. During the Obama administration, Democrats expanded Medicaid eligibility to include able-bodied adults — adding 20 million able-bodied people to the program rolls between 2013 and 2021. Today, roughly 35 million Americans are living below the poverty line, while over 70 million people are on Medicaid. What’s worse, a stunning 36% of Medicaid spending is on able-bodied working-age adults — most of whom are not working.
    What was first designed as a critical social safety net for America’s most vulnerable — including pregnant women, children, people with disabilities, and low-income seniors and families — has quickly ballooned into an unsustainable mess at risk of bankruptcy.
    The Big, Beautiful Bill will protect Medicaid benefits for those who need them most and help move millions of able-bodied adults with no children from welfare to work — all while saving taxpayers billions of dollars. By the way, only in Washington is increasing current Medicaid spending levels by 20% over the next 10 years seen as a “cut.”
    This bill includes popular Clinton-era work requirements for able-bodied adults ages 19-64 with no dependents, and includes exceptions for pregnant women, new mothers, and those facing short-term hardships. Under this commonsense law, eligible recipients must complete 20 hours of work, education, or volunteering per week to receive taxpayer-funded Medicaid benefits.
    To protect and sustain the Medicaid program, the only people who will see a change in coverage are illegal immigrants, those who are already ineligible for the program, and able-bodied adults ages 19-64 with dependents over 14 years old who choose not to work, volunteer, or go to school for just 20 hours per week.
    Most Americans recognize that without commonsense reform, Medicaid would be at a higher risk of collapse. As promised, Republicans are getting the waste, fraud, and abuse out of Medicaid to protect the well-being of America’s most vulnerable. Despite the Democrats’ gross lies, the “Big, Beautiful Bill” will strengthen and protect the social safety net for every eligible American who needs it. In passing President Trump’s historic bill, Republicans are ensuring Medicaid can better serve the neediest Americans for generations to come.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Bryan Keogh, Managing Editor

    Protesters gather during a demonstration at the headquarters of the Department of Education in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    The Trump administration was given the green light by the Supreme Court on July 14, 2025, to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education – part of a wider plan to dismantle the agency. In doing so, the conservative majority on the bench overruled a lower court judge that had blocked the move.

    While the court didn’t explain its decision – and didn’t rule on the merits of the case – Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three liberal justices who objected, issued a strongly worded dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it.”

    The Conversation has been following the administration’s efforts to take apart the Department of Education since President Donald Trump won the presidential election in November. Here are a few stories from our archives that explain the executive order targeting the department, why the agency has been in the crosshairs of conservatives, and some of the impacts of carrying out the order.

    1. Hollowing out education

    Trump has promised to eliminate the Department of Education since at least September 2023. What started out as a campaign promise eventually became the executive order he issued on March 20, 2025, released shortly after the administration announced plans to lay off about 1,300 of the 4,000 employees in the department.

    “Although the president has broad executive authority, there are many things he cannot order by himself,” wrote Joshua Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University. “And one of those is the dismantling of a Cabinet agency created by law. But he seems determined to hollow the agency out.”

    And that’s what the Supreme Court says he can do while the case plays out in lower courts. Ultimately, Trump’s order creates a lot of “legal and policy uncertainty around funding for children in local schools and communities.”



    Read more:
    Mass layoffs at Education Department signal Trump’s plan to gut the agency

    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon is responsible for carrying out Trump’s executive order.
    AP Photo/Rod Lamkey Jr.

    2. What the education secretary normally does

    The person directed to actually carry our the president’s order is the education secretary, Linda McMahon. She has called dismantling the department its “final mission.”

    But the secretary – and the department – have many other missions, such as managing students loans and administering Title I funding to help schools serving low-income students obtain an equitable education regardless of their socioeconomic status.

    “Every child in the United States is required to attend school in some capacity, and what happens at the federal level can have real-world impacts on students ranging from preschool to grad school,” wrote Dustin Hornbeck, a scholar of educational policy at the University of Memphis.

    In his article, Hornbeck explored the key duties of the education secretary and the role of the federal government in education, which he argued will continue even if the Education Department is abolished.



    Read more:
    US secretary of education helps set national priorities in a system primarily funded and guided by local governments

    3. Why MAGA targeted the department

    So why did Trump decide getting rid of the Education Department was a top priority and worth the legal risks?

    Fighting what he perceived as “wokeness” was likely one reason, wrote Alex Hinton, an anthropologist who has been studying U.S. political culture at Rutgers University − Newark.

    “First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a ‘radical woke agenda’ that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views,” he explains.

    Trump’s battle against DEI – or diversity, equity and inclusion – is of course a big part of that, but so too are what he and his supporters call “radical” race and gender policies.

    Hinton goes on to describe three other reasons – including supposed “Marxist indoctrination” and school choice – he argues that the MAGA faithful want to eliminate the Department of Education.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    4. It didn’t begin with Trump

    But conservative efforts to gut the department didn’t begin with Trump or MAGA. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, which created the Project 2025 blueprint for remaking the federal government, has been trying to limit or end its role in education since at least 1981 – just two years after the Department of Education was created.

    “In its 1981 mandate, the Heritage Foundation struck now-familiar themes,” including closing the Department of Education and ending funding for disadvantaged students, wrote Fred L. Pincus, a sociology professor focused on diversity and social inequality at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “And the Heritage Foundation called for ending federal support for programs it claimed were designed to ‘turn elementary- and secondary-school classrooms into vehicles for liberal-left social and political change.’”

    The conservative think tank struck similar themes in its Project 2025 playbook, though it went even further in calling out “leftist indoctrination” and “gender ideology extremism,” Pincus noted.



    Read more:
    Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Education Department was inspired by the Heritage Foundation’s decades-long disapproval of the agency

    Changes at the Department of Education will have a big impact on students across the country.
    skynesher/E+ via Getty Images

    5. Impact on most vulnerable students

    After all the already planned layoffs go into effect, the Department of Education will have roughly half the staff it started the year with. That will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out its many tasks, such as managing federal loans for college and tracking student achievement.

    The department also enforces civil rights for schools and universities, and that office has been hit especially hard by the job cuts, wrote education professors Erica Frankenberg of Penn State and Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon.

    “The Office for Civil Rights has played an important role in facilitating equitable education for all students,” they wrote. “The full effects of these changes on the most vulnerable public school students will likely be felt for many years.”



    Read more:
    Big cuts at the Education Department’s civil rights office will affect vulnerable students for years to come

    This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.

    – ref. Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads – https://theconversation.com/trump-free-to-begin-gutting-department-of-education-after-supreme-court-shadow-ruling-5-essential-reads-261218

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Bryan Keogh, Managing Editor

    Protesters gather during a demonstration at the headquarters of the Department of Education in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    The Trump administration was given the green light by the Supreme Court on July 14, 2025, to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education – part of a wider plan to dismantle the agency. In doing so, the conservative majority on the bench overruled a lower court judge that had blocked the move.

    While the court didn’t explain its decision – and didn’t rule on the merits of the case – Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three liberal justices who objected, issued a strongly worded dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it.”

    The Conversation has been following the administration’s efforts to take apart the Department of Education since President Donald Trump won the presidential election in November. Here are a few stories from our archives that explain the executive order targeting the department, why the agency has been in the crosshairs of conservatives, and some of the impacts of carrying out the order.

    1. Hollowing out education

    Trump has promised to eliminate the Department of Education since at least September 2023. What started out as a campaign promise eventually became the executive order he issued on March 20, 2025, released shortly after the administration announced plans to lay off about 1,300 of the 4,000 employees in the department.

    “Although the president has broad executive authority, there are many things he cannot order by himself,” wrote Joshua Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University. “And one of those is the dismantling of a Cabinet agency created by law. But he seems determined to hollow the agency out.”

    And that’s what the Supreme Court says he can do while the case plays out in lower courts. Ultimately, Trump’s order creates a lot of “legal and policy uncertainty around funding for children in local schools and communities.”



    Read more:
    Mass layoffs at Education Department signal Trump’s plan to gut the agency

    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon is responsible for carrying out Trump’s executive order.
    AP Photo/Rod Lamkey Jr.

    2. What the education secretary normally does

    The person directed to actually carry our the president’s order is the education secretary, Linda McMahon. She has called dismantling the department its “final mission.”

    But the secretary – and the department – have many other missions, such as managing students loans and administering Title I funding to help schools serving low-income students obtain an equitable education regardless of their socioeconomic status.

    “Every child in the United States is required to attend school in some capacity, and what happens at the federal level can have real-world impacts on students ranging from preschool to grad school,” wrote Dustin Hornbeck, a scholar of educational policy at the University of Memphis.

    In his article, Hornbeck explored the key duties of the education secretary and the role of the federal government in education, which he argued will continue even if the Education Department is abolished.



    Read more:
    US secretary of education helps set national priorities in a system primarily funded and guided by local governments

    3. Why MAGA targeted the department

    So why did Trump decide getting rid of the Education Department was a top priority and worth the legal risks?

    Fighting what he perceived as “wokeness” was likely one reason, wrote Alex Hinton, an anthropologist who has been studying U.S. political culture at Rutgers University − Newark.

    “First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a ‘radical woke agenda’ that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views,” he explains.

    Trump’s battle against DEI – or diversity, equity and inclusion – is of course a big part of that, but so too are what he and his supporters call “radical” race and gender policies.

    Hinton goes on to describe three other reasons – including supposed “Marxist indoctrination” and school choice – he argues that the MAGA faithful want to eliminate the Department of Education.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    4. It didn’t begin with Trump

    But conservative efforts to gut the department didn’t begin with Trump or MAGA. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, which created the Project 2025 blueprint for remaking the federal government, has been trying to limit or end its role in education since at least 1981 – just two years after the Department of Education was created.

    “In its 1981 mandate, the Heritage Foundation struck now-familiar themes,” including closing the Department of Education and ending funding for disadvantaged students, wrote Fred L. Pincus, a sociology professor focused on diversity and social inequality at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “And the Heritage Foundation called for ending federal support for programs it claimed were designed to ‘turn elementary- and secondary-school classrooms into vehicles for liberal-left social and political change.’”

    The conservative think tank struck similar themes in its Project 2025 playbook, though it went even further in calling out “leftist indoctrination” and “gender ideology extremism,” Pincus noted.



    Read more:
    Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Education Department was inspired by the Heritage Foundation’s decades-long disapproval of the agency

    Changes at the Department of Education will have a big impact on students across the country.
    skynesher/E+ via Getty Images

    5. Impact on most vulnerable students

    After all the already planned layoffs go into effect, the Department of Education will have roughly half the staff it started the year with. That will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out its many tasks, such as managing federal loans for college and tracking student achievement.

    The department also enforces civil rights for schools and universities, and that office has been hit especially hard by the job cuts, wrote education professors Erica Frankenberg of Penn State and Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon.

    “The Office for Civil Rights has played an important role in facilitating equitable education for all students,” they wrote. “The full effects of these changes on the most vulnerable public school students will likely be felt for many years.”



    Read more:
    Big cuts at the Education Department’s civil rights office will affect vulnerable students for years to come

    This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.

    – ref. Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads – https://theconversation.com/trump-free-to-begin-gutting-department-of-education-after-supreme-court-shadow-ruling-5-essential-reads-261218

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mark Schlakman, Senior Program Director, The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights, Florida State University

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leads a tour of the new Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention facility for President Donald Trump and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Andrew Cabellero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    The state of Florida has opened a migrant detention center in the Everglades. Its official name is Alligator Alcatraz, a reference to the former maximum security federal penitentiary in San Francisco Bay.

    While touring Alligator Alcatraz on July 1, 2025, President Donald Trump said, “This facility will house some of the menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on the planet.” But new reporting from the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times reveals that of more than 700 detainees, only a third have criminal convictions.

    To find out more about the state of Florida’s involvement in immigration enforcement and who can be detained at Alligator Alcatraz, The Conversation spoke with Mark Schlakman. Schlakman is a lawyer and senior program director for The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights. He also served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles, working as a liaison of sorts with the federal government during the mid-1990s when tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans fled their island nations on makeshift boats, hoping to reach safe haven in Florida.

    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has characterized the migrants being detained in facilities like Alligator Alcatraz as “murderers and rapists and traffickers and drug dealers.” Do we know if the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz have been convicted of these sorts of crimes?

    The Times/Herald published a list of 747 current detainees as of Sunday, July 13, 2025. Their reporters found that about a third of the detainees have criminal convictions, including attempted murder, illegal reentry to the U.S., which is a federal crime, and traffic violations. Apparently hundreds more have charges pending, though neither the federal nor state government have made public what those charges are.

    There are also more than 250 detainees with no criminal history, just immigration violations.

    Is it a crime for someone to be in the U.S. without legal status? In other words, is an immigration violation a crime?

    No, not necessarily. It’s well established as a matter of law that physical presence in the U.S. without proper authorization is a civil violation, not a criminal offense.

    However, if the federal government previously deported someone, they can be subject to federal criminal prosecution if they attempt to return without permission. That appears to be the case with some of the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz.

    What usually happens if a noncitizen commits a crime in the U.S.?

    Normally, if a foreign national is accused of committing a crime, they are prosecuted in a state court just like anyone else. If found guilty and sentenced to incarceration, they complete their sentence in a state prison. Once they’ve served their time, state officials can hand them over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. They are subject to deportation, but a federal immigration judge can hear any grounds for relief.

    DHS has clarified that it “has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded” Alligator Alcatraz, but rather the state of Florida is providing startup funds and running this facility. What is Florida’s interest in this? Are these mostly migrants who have been scooped up by ICE in Florida?

    It’s still unclear where most of these detainees were apprehended. But based on a list of six detainees released by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office, it is clear that at least some were apprehended outside of Florida, and others simply may have been transferred to Alligator Alcatraz from federal custody elsewhere.

    This calls to mind the time in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis flew approximately 50 migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts at Florida taxpayer expense. Those migrants also had no discernible presence in Florida.

    To establish Alligator Alcatraz, DeSantis leveraged an immigration emergency declaration, which has been ongoing since Jan. 6, 2023. A state of emergency allows a governor to exercise extraordinary executive authority. This is how he avoided requirements such as environmental impact analysis in the Everglades and concerns expressed by tribal governance surrounding that area.

    For now, the governor’s declaration remains unchallenged by the Florida Legislature. Environmental advocates have filed a lawsuit over Alligator Alcatraz, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a federal judge temporarily barring Florida from enforcing its new immigration laws, which DeSantis had championed. But no court has yet intervened to contest this prolonged state of emergency.

    This presents a stark contrast to Gov. Lawton Chiles’ declaration of an immigration emergency during the mid-1990s. At that time, tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians attempted to reach Florida shores in virtually anything that would float. Chiles’ actions as governor were informed by his experience as a U.S. senator during the Mariel boatlift in 1980, when 125,000 Cubans made landfall in Florida over the course of just six months.

    Chiles sued the Clinton administration for failing to adequately enforce U.S. immigration law. But Chiles also entered into unprecedented agreements with the federal government, such as the 1996 Florida Immigration Initiative with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. His intent was to protect Florida taxpayers while enhancing federal enforcement capacity, without dehumanizing people fleeing desperate circumstances.

    During my tenure on Chiles’ staff, the governor generally opposed state legislation involving immigration. In the U.S.’s federalist system of government, immigration falls under the purview of the federal government, not the states. Chiles’ primary concern was that Floridians wouldn’t be saddled with what ought to be federal costs and responsibilities.

    Chiles was open to state and local officials supporting federal immigration enforcement. But he was mindful this required finesse to avoid undermining community policing, public health priorities and the economic health of key Florida businesses and industries. To this day, the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s position reflects Chiles’ concerns about such cooperation with the federal government.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis outlines his plans for Alligator Alcatraz to the media on July 1, 2025.
    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Now, in 2025, DeSantis has taken a decidedly different tack by using Florida taxpayer dollars to establish Alligator Alcatraz. The state of Florida has fronted the US$450 million to pay for this facility. DeSantis reportedly intends to seek reimbursement from FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program. Ultimately, congressional action may be necessary to obtain reimbursement. Florida is essentially lending the federal government half a billion dollars and providing other assistance to help support the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda.

    Florida is also establishing another migrant detention facility at Camp Blanding Joint Training Center near Jacksonville. A third apparently is being contemplated for the Panhandle.

    ICE claims that the ultimate decision of whom to detain at these facilities belongs to the state of Florida, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Members of Congress who visited Alligator Alcatraz earlier this week have disputed ICE’s claim that Florida is in charge.

    You advised Florida Division of Emergency Management leadership directly for several years during the administrations of Gov. Charlie Crist and Gov. Rick Scott. Does running a detention facility like Alligator Alcatraz fall within its typical mission?

    The division is tasked with preparing for and responding to both natural and human-caused disasters. In Florida, that generally means hurricanes. While the division may engage to facilitate shelter, I don’t recall any policies or procedures contemplating anything even remotely similar to Alligator Alcatraz.

    DeSantis could conceivably argue that this is consistent with a 287(g) agreement authorizing state and local support for federal immigration enforcement. But such agreements typically require federal supervision of state and local activities, not the other way around.

    Mark Schlakman served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles and as a consultant to Emilio Gonzalez at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during his tenure as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director during the George W. Bush administration.

    – ref. Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees – https://theconversation.com/florida-is-fronting-the-450m-cost-of-alligator-alcatraz-a-legal-scholar-explains-what-we-still-dont-know-about-the-detainees-260665

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: US Departments of Labor, Education implement workforce development partnership

    Source: US Department of Labor

    WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. departments of Labor and Education announced the implementation of a workforce development partnership to create an integrated federal education and workforce system. The Labor Department will take on a greater role in administering the adult education and family literacy programs funded under Title II of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and career and technical education programs funded by the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act. The programs will be managed alongside Department of Education staff, with continued leadership and oversight by Education. 

    The workforce development partnership marks a major step in shifting management of select Education Department programs to partner agencies. 

    “Our bloated federal bureaucracy has made it increasingly difficult to administer workforce development programs effectively, and our students and workers have been left behind as a result. Under President Trump’s leadership, we are restructuring to meet the needs of our workforce,” said U.S. Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer. “I’m excited to team up with Secretary McMahon as we work together to provide states with clearer guidance, reduced regulatory burdens, and more resources that are directly invested in opportunities for American workers.” 

    “The current structure with various federal agencies each managing pieces of the federal workforce portfolio is inefficient and duplicative. Support from the Department of Labor in administering the Department of Education’s workforce programs is a commonsense step in streamlining these programs to better serve students, families, and educators,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. “I look forward to collaborating with Secretary Chavez-DeRemer to create a stronger talent pipeline for our nation’s workforce.” 

    Background 

    The Department of Education signed an Interagency Agreement with the Department of Labor on May 21. One day later, a Massachusetts District Judge granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiffs in McMahon v. New York, forcing the Department of Education to pause implementation of the IAA. Yesterday, the Supreme Court granted an emergency request to stay the injunction, allowing the Education Department to implement this IAA and proceed with the reduction in force to administer its programs more efficiently. 

    The workforce development partnership was created under an IAA, a tool routinely utilized by government agencies to share resources, collaborate, and ensure efficient service delivery. Under the partnership, the Labor Department will provide day-to-day administration of Education’s Perkins and WIOA Title II programs alongside the larger suite of workforce programs the Labor Department already administers. Administering Perkins V and WIOA Title I, II, and III through the Labor Department will facilitate streamlined services for states and grantees, such as allowing for a unified state plan portal and consistent timelines for submitting the required state plans for WIOA and Perkins. The Department of Education will maintain all statutory responsibilities and positions, policy authority, and oversight of these programs. 

    This shared effort will provide a coordinated federal education and workforce system, consistent with Executive Order No. 14278 signed on April 23, 2025. 

    The Department of Labor presently administers the majority of federally funded workforce programs. Greater involvement by the Labor Department in administration of these programs will give states central points of contact in the federal government, reducing duplication of effort and conflicting directives from different agencies. It will ensure more funds can be spent on workforce training and less on state and federal bureaucracy and compliance costs. 

    Education and Labor will provide states with additional guidance in the coming weeks as these changes are implemented. For any immediate program questions, state partners and grantees should reach out to their respective Employee and Training Administration or Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education points of contact. 

    Learn more about the Interagency Agreement. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rosen Joins Amicus Brief Opposing Trump’s Unconstitutional Dismantling of Department of Education

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV)
    Trump’s Dismantling Of Department Of Education Puts In Jeopardy Critical Funding For Schools, Will Lead To Worse Outcomes For Students
    WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) has joined her colleagues in Congress in filing an amicus brief in a lawsuit urging a federal court to stop Donald Trump from shutting down the U.S. Department of Education. The lawsuit argues that the President does not have the power to eliminate a government agency that Congress created, and that only Congress can make such a decision. The effort comes in response to actions by the Trump Administration to fire staff, cancel programs, and move key education functions to other parts of the government.
    “Donald Trump’s attempt to dismantle the Department of Education is not only unconstitutional—it’s a direct attack on students and teachers in Nevada who depend on its programs and funding to support our schools,” said Senator Rosen. “I’m proud to join this legal effort to fight back against Trump’s actions and ensure the federal government fulfills its responsibility to support public education, teachers, and students.”
    Senator Rosen has consistently fought to protect and strengthen public education. In March, she spoke out forcefully against President Trump’s plan to dismantle the Department of Education, calling it “an illegal, irresponsible attack on students and families” and warning of its harmful impact on Nevada schools. In April, she also condemned the Trump Administration’s proposal to eliminate Head Start funding, calling the cuts “outrageous and cruel” and pledging to defend early childhood education programs that help Nevada families thrive. In addition, Senator Rosen helped introduce legislation to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), ensuring students with disabilities receive the support and resources they are legally entitled to in the classroom.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Wyden, Merkley, Colleagues Press Trump Administration on Weaponizing Immigration Hearings to Trap, Arrest, Deport Immigrants

    US Senate News:

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

    July 15, 2025

    The Trump administration has been terminating immigration court cases and deporting individuals without due process.

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, both D-Ore., said today they have joined a group of 21 Senate Democrats in pressing the Trump administration on its recent initiatives to weaponize immigration court hearings by terminating those cases and deporting people without due process.

    In a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons, the senators condemned these actions as an affront to constitutionally-mandated due process.

    “We are extremely concerned by reports of a recent initiative to arrest and detain noncitizens at their immigration court hearings, and in many cases, dismiss their immigration cases without advance notice and while hiding the government’s intent to arrest them,” the senators wrote, citing recent reporting of the Trump administration’s inhumane initiatives. “These actions prevent noncitizens from having their fair day in court and raise serious legal and due process concerns.” 

    The senators wrote that the Trump administration’s actions place noncitizens in an impossible position. 

    “If noncitizens who fear arrest do not attend their immigration court hearing, they may receive an in absentia removal order that will newly subject them to swift detention and removal,” they wrote. “If they do attend, they risk arrest, detention, and a swift deportation, possibly to South Sudan, Libya, or El Salvador — countries they may have no connection to. This manipulation of existing laws to enact this Administration’s mass deportation agenda is creating chaos in our immigration system while doing nothing to make our communities safer.”

    In addition to Wyden and Merkley, the letter was led by U.S. Senators Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Alex Padilla, D-Calif., and Mark Kelly, D-Ariz. It was signed by U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks, D-Md., Michael Bennet, D-Colo., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Chris Coons, D-Del., Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., Mazie Hirono, D-Hawai’i, Andy Kim, D-N.J., Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., Patty Murray, D-Wash., Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Tina Smith, D-Minn., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.

    The text of the letter is here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cortez Masto, Rosen Demand Trump Administration Release Nearly $7 Billion for K-12 Education

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) joined Senator Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) in a letter to U.S. Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon demanding answers over the Trump administration’s decision to withhold nearly $7 billion in federal funding for K-12 public schools, including more than $60 million for schools in Nevada. The Senators urged the Department to restore the funding and provide clarity for schools and educators.

    “These funds, which represent longstanding investments in K–12 education, support a wide range of priorities such as teacher recruitment, after-school programs, English learner instruction, school-based mental health services, and academic enrichment,” the Senators wrote. “Withholding funds for these important programs will disrupt essential services and undermine the support structures that students, families, and educators rely on every day.”

    On July 1, schools across the country reported they were unable to access their federal funding after the Department of Education abruptly froze nearly $7 billion in grants, even though the funds were appropriated by Congress and already factored into school budgets. The lack of clarity has left schools scrambling just weeks before the new school year begins, forcing districts to delay staffing decisions, scale back programs, and reconsider essential student support services. 

    In Nevada, affected programs include after-school programs, English-learner services, professional development, and migrant education. At least fourteen percent of Nevada students are English-Language Learners.

    “Federal education programs play a crucial role in advancing equity and expanding opportunity, especially for students from low-income and historically underserved communities,” the Senators continued. “With learning gaps widening and student needs growing more complex, limiting access to these resources risks deepening disparities and undermining progress across the education system.”

    “Congress has a constitutional responsibility to appropriate federal education funds, and it is essential that those funds are administered transparently and in accordance with federal law. We urge the Department to work with school districts to provide clarity, minimize disruption, and ensure that critical educational services remain accessible to the students who need them most,” the Senators concluded. 

    Read the full letter here.

    Senators Cortez Masto and Rosen have pushed multiple Departments under the Trump Administration for detailed, public information regarding the impacts of President Trump’s federal funding freeze, hiring freeze, and terminations on Nevada – including to the Department of the Interior, the U.S. Forest Service, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Agriculture, General Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, and Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. The Senators have also pushed back against cuts that hurt students and families in need across Nevada, including to Sierra Nevada Job Corps, mental health grant funding, and food and nutrition programs.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: SIGNED: Cortez Masto’s Legislation to Create Jobs at Apex Industrial Park in North Las Vegas

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto
    Washington, D.C. – Today, President Trump signed Senator Catherine Cortez Masto’s (D-Nev.) bill to create thousands of new jobs at North Las Vegas’ Apex Industrial Park into law. The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act would allow new and existing businesses at Apex to expand without going through a burdensome permitting process for basic utilities and infrastructure.
    “I am proud to have worked with my colleagues in both the House and the Senate to deliver real solutions for Southern Nevadans,” said Senator Cortez Masto. “Now that President Trump has signed my bill into law, businesses in North Las Vegas will have more opportunities to innovate, expand, and create good-paying jobs.”
    “The City of North Las Vegas strongly supports the Apex Area Technical Corrections Act,” said North Las Vegas Mayor Pamela Goynes-Brown. “This act fast tracks infrastructure development that will lead to quality jobs. In the past, securing BLM rights-of-way for roads, water, power, and other utilities took years for each individual use which delayed progress and investment. This legislation allows for a unified, streamlined process that will save time, reduce redundancy, and unlock Apex’s full potential without compromising environmental review or agency oversight. We thank Senator Cortez Masto and Congressman Horsford for championing this commonsense solution and look forward to continued collaboration to grow our economy and deliver results for North Las Vegas and the region.”
    “The Apex Owners and stakeholders have worked tirelessly with Senator Cortez Masto and the City of North Las Vegas to modernize the Apex Act and streamline the BLM permitting process,” said Lisa Cole, Esq., In-house Counsel and Vice President of Land Development Associates, LLC. “Previously, each road and utility right-of-way could take 1 to 3 years to secure per project even when in the same location. The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act is a major breakthrough that allows one consolidated permit, saving years while preserving environmental and federal oversight. We’re deeply grateful to Senator Cortez Masto and Congressman Horsford for their leadership in making this long-overdue fix a reality.”
    The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act was introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Steven Horsford (D-Nev.04), where it was passed in May. In June, Senator Cortez Masto successfully passed the bill in the Senate by unanimous consent. Senator Cortez Masto first introduced this legislation in 2023.
    Senator Cortez Masto has worked across the board to strengthen and diversify Nevada’s economy and create new jobs by passing legislation to upgrade American infrastructure, support Nevada’s manufacturing industry, and invest in Nevada’s booming clean-energy economy. She has consistently supported programs and grants that provide job training to young Nevadans so they can access good-paying jobs without a four-year degree.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: SIGNED: Cortez Masto’s Legislation to Create Jobs at Apex Industrial Park in North Las Vegas

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto
    Washington, D.C. – Today, President Trump signed Senator Catherine Cortez Masto’s (D-Nev.) bill to create thousands of new jobs at North Las Vegas’ Apex Industrial Park into law. The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act would allow new and existing businesses at Apex to expand without going through a burdensome permitting process for basic utilities and infrastructure.
    “I am proud to have worked with my colleagues in both the House and the Senate to deliver real solutions for Southern Nevadans,” said Senator Cortez Masto. “Now that President Trump has signed my bill into law, businesses in North Las Vegas will have more opportunities to innovate, expand, and create good-paying jobs.”
    “The City of North Las Vegas strongly supports the Apex Area Technical Corrections Act,” said North Las Vegas Mayor Pamela Goynes-Brown. “This act fast tracks infrastructure development that will lead to quality jobs. In the past, securing BLM rights-of-way for roads, water, power, and other utilities took years for each individual use which delayed progress and investment. This legislation allows for a unified, streamlined process that will save time, reduce redundancy, and unlock Apex’s full potential without compromising environmental review or agency oversight. We thank Senator Cortez Masto and Congressman Horsford for championing this commonsense solution and look forward to continued collaboration to grow our economy and deliver results for North Las Vegas and the region.”
    “The Apex Owners and stakeholders have worked tirelessly with Senator Cortez Masto and the City of North Las Vegas to modernize the Apex Act and streamline the BLM permitting process,” said Lisa Cole, Esq., In-house Counsel and Vice President of Land Development Associates, LLC. “Previously, each road and utility right-of-way could take 1 to 3 years to secure per project even when in the same location. The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act is a major breakthrough that allows one consolidated permit, saving years while preserving environmental and federal oversight. We’re deeply grateful to Senator Cortez Masto and Congressman Horsford for their leadership in making this long-overdue fix a reality.”
    The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act was introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Steven Horsford (D-Nev.04), where it was passed in May. In June, Senator Cortez Masto successfully passed the bill in the Senate by unanimous consent. Senator Cortez Masto first introduced this legislation in 2023.
    Senator Cortez Masto has worked across the board to strengthen and diversify Nevada’s economy and create new jobs by passing legislation to upgrade American infrastructure, support Nevada’s manufacturing industry, and invest in Nevada’s booming clean-energy economy. She has consistently supported programs and grants that provide job training to young Nevadans so they can access good-paying jobs without a four-year degree.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: SIGNED: Cortez Masto’s Legislation to Create Jobs at Apex Industrial Park in North Las Vegas

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto
    Washington, D.C. – Today, President Trump signed Senator Catherine Cortez Masto’s (D-Nev.) bill to create thousands of new jobs at North Las Vegas’ Apex Industrial Park into law. The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act would allow new and existing businesses at Apex to expand without going through a burdensome permitting process for basic utilities and infrastructure.
    “I am proud to have worked with my colleagues in both the House and the Senate to deliver real solutions for Southern Nevadans,” said Senator Cortez Masto. “Now that President Trump has signed my bill into law, businesses in North Las Vegas will have more opportunities to innovate, expand, and create good-paying jobs.”
    “The City of North Las Vegas strongly supports the Apex Area Technical Corrections Act,” said North Las Vegas Mayor Pamela Goynes-Brown. “This act fast tracks infrastructure development that will lead to quality jobs. In the past, securing BLM rights-of-way for roads, water, power, and other utilities took years for each individual use which delayed progress and investment. This legislation allows for a unified, streamlined process that will save time, reduce redundancy, and unlock Apex’s full potential without compromising environmental review or agency oversight. We thank Senator Cortez Masto and Congressman Horsford for championing this commonsense solution and look forward to continued collaboration to grow our economy and deliver results for North Las Vegas and the region.”
    “The Apex Owners and stakeholders have worked tirelessly with Senator Cortez Masto and the City of North Las Vegas to modernize the Apex Act and streamline the BLM permitting process,” said Lisa Cole, Esq., In-house Counsel and Vice President of Land Development Associates, LLC. “Previously, each road and utility right-of-way could take 1 to 3 years to secure per project even when in the same location. The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act is a major breakthrough that allows one consolidated permit, saving years while preserving environmental and federal oversight. We’re deeply grateful to Senator Cortez Masto and Congressman Horsford for their leadership in making this long-overdue fix a reality.”
    The Apex Area Technical Corrections Act was introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Steven Horsford (D-Nev.04), where it was passed in May. In June, Senator Cortez Masto successfully passed the bill in the Senate by unanimous consent. Senator Cortez Masto first introduced this legislation in 2023.
    Senator Cortez Masto has worked across the board to strengthen and diversify Nevada’s economy and create new jobs by passing legislation to upgrade American infrastructure, support Nevada’s manufacturing industry, and invest in Nevada’s booming clean-energy economy. She has consistently supported programs and grants that provide job training to young Nevadans so they can access good-paying jobs without a four-year degree.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fourth NASA-Enabled Private Flight to Space Station Completes Safely

    Source: NASA

    The NASA-supported fourth private astronaut mission to the International Space Station, Axiom Mission 4, completed its flight as part of the agency’s efforts to demonstrate demand and build operational knowledge for future commercial space stations.
    The four-person crew safely returned to Earth, splashing down off the coast of California at 5:31 a.m. EDT on Tuesday, aboard a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft. Teams aboard SpaceX recovery vessels retrieved the spacecraft and astronauts. 
    Peggy Whitson, former NASA astronaut and director of human spaceflight at Axiom Space, ISRO (Indian Space Research Organization) astronaut Shubhanshu Shukla, and ESA (European Space Agency) project astronaut Sławosz Uznański-Wiśniewski of Poland, and Hungarian to Orbit (HUNOR) astronaut Tibor Kapu of Hungary, completed about two and a half weeks in space.
    The Axiom Mission 4 crew launched at 2:31 a.m. on June 25, on a Falcon 9 rocket from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Approximately 28 hours later, Dragon docked to the space-facing port of the space station’s Harmony module. The astronauts undocked at 7:15 a.m. on July 14, to begin the trip home.
    The crew conducted microgravity research, educational outreach, and commercial activities. The spacecraft will return to Florida for inspection and processing at SpaceX’s refurbishing facilities. Throughout their mission, the astronauts conducted about 60 science experiments, and returned science, including NASA cargo, back to Earth.
    A collaboration between NASA and ISRO allowed Axiom Mission 4 to deliver on a commitment highlighted by President Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to send the first ISRO astronaut to the station. The space agencies participated in five joint science investigations and two in-orbit science, technology, engineering, and mathematics demonstrations. NASA and ISRO have a long-standing relationship built on a shared vision to advance scientific knowledge and expand space collaboration.
    The private mission also carried the first astronauts from Poland and Hungary to stay aboard the space station.
    The International Space Station is a springboard for developing a low Earth orbit economy. NASA’s goal is to achieve a strong economy off the Earth where the agency can purchase services as one of many customers to meet its science and research objectives in microgravity. NASA’s commercial strategy for low Earth orbit provides the government with reliable and safe services at a lower cost, enabling the agency to focus on Artemis missions to the Moon in preparation for Mars while also continuing to use low Earth orbit as a training and proving ground for those deep space missions.
    Learn more about NASA’s commercial space strategy at:
    https://www.nasa.gov/commercial-space
    News Media Contacts:Claire O’Shea Headquarters, Washington 202-358-1100 claire.a.o’shea@nasa.gov
    Anna Schneider Johnson Space Center, Houston 281-483-5111 anna.c.schneider@nasa.gov

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Home Depot Co-Founder Now “Sold on Trump”

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    Ken Langone, co-founder of The Home Depot, says he has “never been more excited about the future of America” than he is under President Donald J. Trump. In an interview on CNBC, Langone praised President Trump’s economic policies, leadership, and return of the American spirit.
    Here’s what you missed:
    On optimism: “If I told you how bullish I was, you wouldn’t believe it. I have never been more excited about the future of America than I am right now, right this minute, for a lot of reasons. Number one, like it or not, this guy is getting things done … He’s acting presidential. I’m impressed with the people he’s got around him.”
    On his past reluctance: “I am sold on Trump … I think he’s got a good shot at going down in history as one of our best presidents ever … What I’m seeing happening is absolutely nothing short of a great thing. People are walking with more bounce in their [step] — it’s all around … When you made a mistake, admit it.”
    On tariffs: “Initially, my concern was I don’t like tariffs; I like free trade. However, I think — damn it, give Trump credit. His instincts are good. Some of these things need to be fixed.”
    On the One Big Beautiful Bill: “I was worried about inflation and I was worried about the deficit. I think there’s a lot of merit to the notion that it’s going to trigger such significant economic growth that we might see tax revenues going up through the profitability bracket.”
    On foreign policy: “The world is a mess, but I think it’s coming more in our direction than it was. I think that strike in Iran had significant symbolic meaning for the world that America is here and when our interests are at risk, we’re going to do something about it.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact: Trump lied — again. California gas prices remain lower than a week ago, month ago, and a year ago

    Source: US State of California 2

    Jul 15, 2025

    SACRAMENTO – Despite a concerted misinformation campaign driven by Republicans – from the President to state lawmakers – to create confusion around gas prices in California, prices actually remain lower now than they were one week ago, one month ago and one year ago. 

    🤥 Trump’s bogus claim about California’s gas prices: “You’re at $6-$7 [a gallon]”

    As of Tuesday morning, AAA reported the statewide average price of a gallon of gasoline to be $4.51. This is four cents lower than a week ago, 14 cents lower than a month ago and 24 cents lower than a year ago. 

    Press releases, Recent news

    Recent news

    Jul 15, 2025

    News What you need to know: Governor Newsom is advancing California’s efficiency strategy by connecting state agencies with tech executives to identify new opportunities for efficiency, engagement, and effectiveness throughout the state government to improve services…

    Jul 14, 2025

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that he has signed a tribal-state gaming compact with the Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria.A copy of the Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria compact can be found…

    Jul 14, 2025

    News SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that he has signed the following bills:AB 78 by Assemblymember Phillip Chen (R-Yorba Linda) – Attorney’s fees: book accounts.AB 223 by Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco (D-Downey) – Jury selection: acknowledgment and…

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Larsen Releases Statement on Lelo Juarez Choosing to Self-Deport

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

    Larsen Releases Statement on Lelo Juarez Choosing to Self-Deport

    Washington, D.C., July 15, 2025

    Today, Representative Rick Larsen released the following statement:

    “In arrests across the country, the Trump administration and ICE have claimed that they are going after “the worst of the worst.” But like so many others who have been detained, Lelo Juarez does not represent the worst of the worst. He is an activist, a union leader and a beloved family member. It is a tragedy he will not be able to return to his home and loved ones in Skagit County.”

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Schlakman, Senior Program Director, The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights, Florida State University

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leads a tour of the new Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention facility for President Donald Trump and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Andrew Cabellero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    The state of Florida has opened a migrant detention center in the Everglades. Its official name is Alligator Alcatraz, a reference to the former maximum security federal penitentiary in San Francisco Bay.

    While touring Alligator Alcatraz on July 1, 2025, President Donald Trump said, “This facility will house some of the menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on the planet.” But new reporting from the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times reveals that of more than 700 detainees, only a third have criminal convictions.

    To find out more about the state of Florida’s involvement in immigration enforcement and who can be detained at Alligator Alcatraz, The Conversation spoke with Mark Schlakman. Schlakman is a lawyer and senior program director for The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights. He also served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles, working as a liaison of sorts with the federal government during the mid-1990s when tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans fled their island nations on makeshift boats, hoping to reach safe haven in Florida.

    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has characterized the migrants being detained in facilities like Alligator Alcatraz as “murderers and rapists and traffickers and drug dealers.” Do we know if the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz have been convicted of these sorts of crimes?

    The Times/Herald published a list of 747 current detainees as of Sunday, July 13, 2025. Their reporters found that about a third of the detainees have criminal convictions, including attempted murder, illegal reentry to the U.S., which is a federal crime, and traffic violations. Apparently hundreds more have charges pending, though neither the federal nor state government have made public what those charges are.

    There are also more than 250 detainees with no criminal history, just immigration violations.

    Is it a crime for someone to be in the U.S. without legal status? In other words, is an immigration violation a crime?

    No, not necessarily. It’s well established as a matter of law that physical presence in the U.S. without proper authorization is a civil violation, not a criminal offense.

    However, if the federal government previously deported someone, they can be subject to federal criminal prosecution if they attempt to return without permission. That appears to be the case with some of the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz.

    What usually happens if a noncitizen commits a crime in the U.S.?

    Normally, if a foreign national is accused of committing a crime, they are prosecuted in a state court just like anyone else. If found guilty and sentenced to incarceration, they complete their sentence in a state prison. Once they’ve served their time, state officials can hand them over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. They are subject to deportation, but a federal immigration judge can hear any grounds for relief.

    DHS has clarified that it “has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded” Alligator Alcatraz, but rather the state of Florida is providing startup funds and running this facility. What is Florida’s interest in this? Are these mostly migrants who have been scooped up by ICE in Florida?

    It’s still unclear where most of these detainees were apprehended. But based on a list of six detainees released by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office, it is clear that at least some were apprehended outside of Florida, and others simply may have been transferred to Alligator Alcatraz from federal custody elsewhere.

    This calls to mind the time in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis flew approximately 50 migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts at Florida taxpayer expense. Those migrants also had no discernible presence in Florida.

    To establish Alligator Alcatraz, DeSantis leveraged an immigration emergency declaration, which has been ongoing since Jan. 6, 2023. A state of emergency allows a governor to exercise extraordinary executive authority. This is how he avoided requirements such as environmental impact analysis in the Everglades and concerns expressed by tribal governance surrounding that area.

    For now, the governor’s declaration remains unchallenged by the Florida Legislature. Environmental advocates have filed a lawsuit over Alligator Alcatraz, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a federal judge temporarily barring Florida from enforcing its new immigration laws, which DeSantis had championed. But no court has yet intervened to contest this prolonged state of emergency.

    This presents a stark contrast to Gov. Lawton Chiles’ declaration of an immigration emergency during the mid-1990s. At that time, tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians attempted to reach Florida shores in virtually anything that would float. Chiles’ actions as governor were informed by his experience as a U.S. senator during the Mariel boatlift in 1980, when 125,000 Cubans made landfall in Florida over the course of just six months.

    Chiles sued the Clinton administration for failing to adequately enforce U.S. immigration law. But Chiles also entered into unprecedented agreements with the federal government, such as the 1996 Florida Immigration Initiative with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. His intent was to protect Florida taxpayers while enhancing federal enforcement capacity, without dehumanizing people fleeing desperate circumstances.

    During my tenure on Chiles’ staff, the governor generally opposed state legislation involving immigration. In the U.S.’s federalist system of government, immigration falls under the purview of the federal government, not the states. Chiles’ primary concern was that Floridians wouldn’t be saddled with what ought to be federal costs and responsibilities.

    Chiles was open to state and local officials supporting federal immigration enforcement. But he was mindful this required finesse to avoid undermining community policing, public health priorities and the economic health of key Florida businesses and industries. To this day, the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s position reflects Chiles’ concerns about such cooperation with the federal government.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis outlines his plans for Alligator Alcatraz to the media on July 1, 2025.
    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Now, in 2025, DeSantis has taken a decidedly different tack by using Florida taxpayer dollars to establish Alligator Alcatraz. The state of Florida has fronted the US$450 million to pay for this facility. DeSantis reportedly intends to seek reimbursement from FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program. Ultimately, congressional action may be necessary to obtain reimbursement. Florida is essentially lending the federal government half a billion dollars and providing other assistance to help support the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda.

    Florida is also establishing another migrant detention facility at Camp Blanding Joint Training Center near Jacksonville. A third apparently is being contemplated for the Panhandle.

    ICE claims that the ultimate decision of whom to detain at these facilities belongs to the state of Florida, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Members of Congress who visited Alligator Alcatraz earlier this week have disputed ICE’s claim that Florida is in charge.

    You advised Florida Division of Emergency Management leadership directly for several years during the administrations of Gov. Charlie Crist and Gov. Rick Scott. Does running a detention facility like Alligator Alcatraz fall within its typical mission?

    The division is tasked with preparing for and responding to both natural and human-caused disasters. In Florida, that generally means hurricanes. While the division may engage to facilitate shelter, I don’t recall any policies or procedures contemplating anything even remotely similar to Alligator Alcatraz.

    DeSantis could conceivably argue that this is consistent with a 287(g) agreement authorizing state and local support for federal immigration enforcement. But such agreements typically require federal supervision of state and local activities, not the other way around.

    Mark Schlakman served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles and as a consultant to Emilio Gonzalez at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during his tenure as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director during the George W. Bush administration.

    – ref. Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees – https://theconversation.com/florida-is-fronting-the-450m-cost-of-alligator-alcatraz-a-legal-scholar-explains-what-we-still-dont-know-about-the-detainees-260665

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –