Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he believed his discussions with U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday would help advance talks on a Gaza hostage release and ceasefire deal, as Trump predicted an agreement could be reached this week.
Israeli negotiators taking part in the ceasefire talks that resumed in Doha on Sunday have clear instructions to achieve a ceasefire agreement under conditions that Israel has accepted, Netanyahu said on Sunday before flying to Washington.
“I believe the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results,” he said, adding his determination to ensure the return of hostages held in Gaza and to remove the threat of the Palestinian militant group Hamas to Israel.
It will be Netanyahu’s third visit to the White House since Trump returned to power nearly six months ago.
Trump said he believed a hostage release and ceasefire deal could be reached this week, which could lead to the release of “quite a few hostages.”
“I think there’s a good chance we have a deal with Hamas during the week,” Trump told reporters before flying back to Washington after a weekend golfing in New Jersey.
Public pressure is mounting on Netanyahu to secure a permanent ceasefire and end the war in Gaza, a move opposed by some hardline members of his right-wing coalition. Others, including Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, have expressed support.
Palestinian group Hamas said on Friday it had responded to a U.S.-backed Gaza ceasefire proposal in a “positive spirit”, a few days after Trump said Israel had agreed “to the necessary conditions to finalize” a 60-day truce.
But in a sign of the potential challenges still facing the two sides, a Palestinian official from a militant group allied with Hamas said concerns remained over humanitarian aid, passage through the Rafah crossing in southern Israel to Egypt and clarity over a timetable for Israeli troop withdrawals.
The first session of indirect Hamas-Israel ceasefire talks in Qatar ended inconclusively, two Palestinian sources familiar with the matter said early on Monday, adding that the Israeli delegation didn’t have a sufficient mandate to reach an agreement with Hamas.
Netanyahu’s office said in a statement that changes sought by Hamas to the ceasefire proposal were “not acceptable to Israel”. However, his office said the delegation would still fly to Qatar to “continue efforts to secure the return of our hostages based on the Qatari proposal that Israel agreed to.”
Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a demand the militant group has so far refused to discuss.
Netanyahu said he believed he and Trump would also build on the outcome of the 12-day air war with Iran last month and seek to further ensure that Tehran never has a nuclear weapon. He said recent Middle East developments had created an opportunity to widen the circle of peace.
HOSTAGES
On Saturday evening, crowds gathered at a public square in Tel Aviv near the defence ministry headquarters to call for a ceasefire deal and the return of around 50 hostages still held in Gaza. The demonstrators waved Israeli flags, chanted and carried posters with photos of the hostages.
The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered on October 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing around 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.
Gaza’s health ministry says Israel’s retaliatory military assault on the enclave has killed over 57,000 Palestinians. It has also caused a hunger crisis, displaced the population, mostly within Gaza, and left the territory in ruins.
Around 20 of the remaining hostages are believed to be still alive. A majority of the original hostages have been freed through diplomatic negotiations, though the Israeli military has also recovered some.
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he believed his discussions with U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday would help advance talks on a Gaza hostage release and ceasefire deal, as Trump predicted an agreement could be reached this week.
Israeli negotiators taking part in the ceasefire talks that resumed in Doha on Sunday have clear instructions to achieve a ceasefire agreement under conditions that Israel has accepted, Netanyahu said on Sunday before flying to Washington.
“I believe the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results,” he said, adding his determination to ensure the return of hostages held in Gaza and to remove the threat of the Palestinian militant group Hamas to Israel.
It will be Netanyahu’s third visit to the White House since Trump returned to power nearly six months ago.
Trump said he believed a hostage release and ceasefire deal could be reached this week, which could lead to the release of “quite a few hostages.”
“I think there’s a good chance we have a deal with Hamas during the week,” Trump told reporters before flying back to Washington after a weekend golfing in New Jersey.
Public pressure is mounting on Netanyahu to secure a permanent ceasefire and end the war in Gaza, a move opposed by some hardline members of his right-wing coalition. Others, including Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, have expressed support.
Palestinian group Hamas said on Friday it had responded to a U.S.-backed Gaza ceasefire proposal in a “positive spirit”, a few days after Trump said Israel had agreed “to the necessary conditions to finalize” a 60-day truce.
But in a sign of the potential challenges still facing the two sides, a Palestinian official from a militant group allied with Hamas said concerns remained over humanitarian aid, passage through the Rafah crossing in southern Israel to Egypt and clarity over a timetable for Israeli troop withdrawals.
The first session of indirect Hamas-Israel ceasefire talks in Qatar ended inconclusively, two Palestinian sources familiar with the matter said early on Monday, adding that the Israeli delegation didn’t have a sufficient mandate to reach an agreement with Hamas.
Netanyahu’s office said in a statement that changes sought by Hamas to the ceasefire proposal were “not acceptable to Israel”. However, his office said the delegation would still fly to Qatar to “continue efforts to secure the return of our hostages based on the Qatari proposal that Israel agreed to.”
Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a demand the militant group has so far refused to discuss.
Netanyahu said he believed he and Trump would also build on the outcome of the 12-day air war with Iran last month and seek to further ensure that Tehran never has a nuclear weapon. He said recent Middle East developments had created an opportunity to widen the circle of peace.
HOSTAGES
On Saturday evening, crowds gathered at a public square in Tel Aviv near the defence ministry headquarters to call for a ceasefire deal and the return of around 50 hostages still held in Gaza. The demonstrators waved Israeli flags, chanted and carried posters with photos of the hostages.
The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered on October 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing around 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.
Gaza’s health ministry says Israel’s retaliatory military assault on the enclave has killed over 57,000 Palestinians. It has also caused a hunger crisis, displaced the population, mostly within Gaza, and left the territory in ruins.
Around 20 of the remaining hostages are believed to be still alive. A majority of the original hostages have been freed through diplomatic negotiations, though the Israeli military has also recovered some.
President Donald Trump on Sunday called Elon Musk’s plans to form a new political party “ridiculous,” launching new barbs at the tech billionaire and saying the Musk ally he once named to lead NASA would have presented a conflict of interest given Musk’s business interests in space.
A day after Musk escalated his feud with Trump and announced the formation of a new U.S. political party, the Republican president was asked about it before boarding Air Force One in Morristown, New Jersey, as he returned to Washington upon visiting his nearby golf club.
“I think it’s ridiculous to start a third party. We have a tremendous success with the Republican Party. The Democrats have lost their way, but it’s always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion,” Trump told reporters.
“It really seems to have been developed for two parties. Third parties have never worked, so he can have fun with it, but I think it’s ridiculous.”
Shortly after speaking about Musk, Trump posted further comments on his Truth Social platform, saying, “I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks.”
Musk announced on Saturday that he is establishing the “America Party” in response to Trump’s tax-cut and spending bill, which Musk said would bankrupt the country.
“What the heck was the point of @DOGE if he’s just going to increase the debt by $5 trillion??” Musk wrote on X on Sunday, referring to the government downsizing agency he briefly led. Critics have said the bill will damage the U.S. economy by significantly adding to the federal budget deficit.
Musk said his new party would in next year’s midterm elections look to unseat Republican lawmakers in Congress who backed the sweeping measure known as the “big, beautiful bill.”
Musk spent millions of dollars underwriting Trump’s 2024 re-election effort and, for a time, regularly showed up at the president’s side in the White House Oval Office and elsewhere. Their disagreement over the spending bill led to a falling out that Musk briefly tried unsuccessfully to repair.
Trump has said Musk is unhappy because the measure, which Trump signed into law on Friday, takes away green-energy credits for Tesla’s electric vehicles. The president has threatened to pull billions of dollars Tesla and SpaceX receive in government contracts and subsidies in response to Musk’s criticism.
NASA APPOINTMENT ‘INAPPROPRIATE’
Trump in his social media comments also said it was “inappropriate” to have named Musk ally Jared Isaacman as NASA administrator considering Musk’s business with the space agency. In December Trump named Isaacman, a billionaire private astronaut, to lead NASA but withdrew the nomination on May 31, before his Senate confirmation vote and without explanation.
Trump, who has yet to announce a new NASA nominee, on Sunday confirmed media reports he disapproved of Isaacman’s previous support for Democratic politicians.
“I also thought it inappropriate that a very close friend of Elon, who was in the Space Business, run NASA, when NASA is such a big part of Elon’s corporate life,” Trump said on Truth Social. “My Number One charge is to protect the American Public!”
Musk’s announcement of a new party immediately brought a rebuke from Azoria Partners, which said on Saturday it will postpone the listing of its Azoria Tesla Convexity exchange-traded fund because the party’s creation posed “a conflict with his full-time responsibilities as CEO.” Azoria was set to launch the Tesla ETF this week.
Azoria CEO James Fishback posted on X several critical comments about the new party and reiterated his support for Trump.
“I encourage the Board to meet immediately and ask Elon to clarify his political ambitions and evaluate whether they are compatible with his full-time obligations to Tesla as CEO,” Fishback said.
President Donald Trump on Sunday called Elon Musk’s plans to form a new political party “ridiculous,” launching new barbs at the tech billionaire and saying the Musk ally he once named to lead NASA would have presented a conflict of interest given Musk’s business interests in space.
A day after Musk escalated his feud with Trump and announced the formation of a new U.S. political party, the Republican president was asked about it before boarding Air Force One in Morristown, New Jersey, as he returned to Washington upon visiting his nearby golf club.
“I think it’s ridiculous to start a third party. We have a tremendous success with the Republican Party. The Democrats have lost their way, but it’s always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion,” Trump told reporters.
“It really seems to have been developed for two parties. Third parties have never worked, so he can have fun with it, but I think it’s ridiculous.”
Shortly after speaking about Musk, Trump posted further comments on his Truth Social platform, saying, “I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks.”
Musk announced on Saturday that he is establishing the “America Party” in response to Trump’s tax-cut and spending bill, which Musk said would bankrupt the country.
“What the heck was the point of @DOGE if he’s just going to increase the debt by $5 trillion??” Musk wrote on X on Sunday, referring to the government downsizing agency he briefly led. Critics have said the bill will damage the U.S. economy by significantly adding to the federal budget deficit.
Musk said his new party would in next year’s midterm elections look to unseat Republican lawmakers in Congress who backed the sweeping measure known as the “big, beautiful bill.”
Musk spent millions of dollars underwriting Trump’s 2024 re-election effort and, for a time, regularly showed up at the president’s side in the White House Oval Office and elsewhere. Their disagreement over the spending bill led to a falling out that Musk briefly tried unsuccessfully to repair.
Trump has said Musk is unhappy because the measure, which Trump signed into law on Friday, takes away green-energy credits for Tesla’s electric vehicles. The president has threatened to pull billions of dollars Tesla and SpaceX receive in government contracts and subsidies in response to Musk’s criticism.
NASA APPOINTMENT ‘INAPPROPRIATE’
Trump in his social media comments also said it was “inappropriate” to have named Musk ally Jared Isaacman as NASA administrator considering Musk’s business with the space agency. In December Trump named Isaacman, a billionaire private astronaut, to lead NASA but withdrew the nomination on May 31, before his Senate confirmation vote and without explanation.
Trump, who has yet to announce a new NASA nominee, on Sunday confirmed media reports he disapproved of Isaacman’s previous support for Democratic politicians.
“I also thought it inappropriate that a very close friend of Elon, who was in the Space Business, run NASA, when NASA is such a big part of Elon’s corporate life,” Trump said on Truth Social. “My Number One charge is to protect the American Public!”
Musk’s announcement of a new party immediately brought a rebuke from Azoria Partners, which said on Saturday it will postpone the listing of its Azoria Tesla Convexity exchange-traded fund because the party’s creation posed “a conflict with his full-time responsibilities as CEO.” Azoria was set to launch the Tesla ETF this week.
Azoria CEO James Fishback posted on X several critical comments about the new party and reiterated his support for Trump.
“I encourage the Board to meet immediately and ask Elon to clarify his political ambitions and evaluate whether they are compatible with his full-time obligations to Tesla as CEO,” Fishback said.
As the peak international body on deep sea mining begins a three-week meeting, CSIRO has released aseries of reportscommissioned by mining proponent The Metals Company (TMC) that underscore the severe environmental risks andscientific uncertaintysurrounding the dangerous industry.
The findings confirm international consensus; the deep ocean is too poorly understood to proceed with deep sea mining safely or responsibly, prompting major environmental organisations to call on the Albanese Government to support a moratorium.
The timing of the CSIRO reports appears to align with what was, until recently, TMC’s plan to submit an application to the ISA on June 27 – plans the company has now abandoned in favour of a controversial U.S. based pathway via a dormant 1980s law and enabled by the Trump administration.
Pressure is mounting on the Albanese Government to adopt a precautionary stance supporting a moratorium at the ISA in line with many of its major partners, including the UK, Canada, France, Germany and New Zealand. Currently,37 countriesback a deep sea mining moratorium.
TMC continues to apply pressure on international regulators to accelerate approvals for this high-risk untested industry. With a state-funded agency producing research likely to be used to legitimise mining in international waters, ocean advocates are calling on the Albanese Government to direct CSIRO to take no further actions on behalf of TMC.
The CSIRO reports confirm the likely damage to the seafloor and to the marine environment that civil society, Indigenous Pacific communities, and independent scientists have warned about; deep sea mining is too destructive and there is too much uncertainty to proceed.
“These findings echo the concerns we’ve heard right across the Pacific region – that the deep ocean is a highly complex, precious environment, and that accelerating deep sea mining would be dangerous,”said Phil McCabe, Pacific Regional Coordinator at the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition.
There remains a severe lack of real-world data about deep sea ecosystems – particularly in relation to the long-term environmental impacts and the risk of toxic pollution entering the food chain. Scientists warn that many of these impacts are likely to be irreversible in human timeframes. The CSIRO reports acknowledge the potential for heavy metals to bioaccumulate in marine life, including tuna, swordfish, whales, and dolphins.
“We’ve seen this before; traffic light systems,digital twin technology, adaptive management systems – all designed to give the illusion of sustainable management,”said Dr. Helen Rosenbaum, Research Coordinator at the Deep Sea Mining Campaign.“When the science is this uncertain, the only responsible signal is red.”
TMC’s recent decision to abandon its application to the ISA and instead issue permits through a dormant U.S. law has been widely condemned by governments and legal experts as a direct challenge to international law and multilateralism. The move undermines the ISA’s authority just as states prepare to negotiate key regulations.
“Australia’s credibility is on the line,”said Duncan Currie, International Lawyer and advisor to the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition.“CSIRO’s involvement with The Metals Company (TMC) risks implicating Australia in their attempt to sidestep international governance. The Albanese Government must now draw a clear line; support a moratorium at the International Seabed Authority, and ensure CSIRO takes no further action on TMC’s behalf.”
“At the ISA, a moratorium or precautionary pause on deep sea mining is the only viable path to protecting the deep sea,”said Shiva Gounden, Head of Pacific at Greenpeace Australia Pacific.“Delegates at the ISA must listen to the science and the voices of Pacific nations and back a moratorium to stop deep sea mining before it starts.”
The Deep Sea Mining Campaign, Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, and Surfrider Australia call on the Albanese Government to announce its support for a Moratorium at the upcoming ISA meeting in Jamaica; and direct CSIRO to take no further actions on behalf of TMC.
Oil prices slipped on Monday after OPEC+ surprised markets by hiking output more than expected in August, while uncertainty over U.S. tariffs and their potential impact on global economic growth weighed on demand expectations.
Brent crude futures LCOc1 fell 47 cents, or 0.69%, to $67.83 a barrel by 0327 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude CLc1 was at $66.05, down $0.95, or 1.42%.
The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and their allies, a group known as OPEC+, agreed on Saturday to raise production by 548,000 barrels per day in August.
“The increased production clearly represents a more aggressive competition for market share and some tolerance for the resulting decline in price and revenue,” Tim Evans of Evans Energy said in a note.
The August increase represents a jump from monthly increases of 411,000 bpd OPEC+ had approved for May, June and July, and 138,000 bpd in April.
The decision will bring nearly 80% of the 2.2 million bpd voluntary cuts from eight OPEC producers back into the market, RBC Capital analysts led by Helima Croft said in a note.
However, the actual output increase has been smaller than planned so far and most of the supply has been from Saudi Arabia, they added.
In a show of confidence in oil demand, Saudi Arabia on Sunday raised the August price for its flagship Arab Light crude to a four-month high for Asia.
Goldman analysts expect OPEC+ to announce a final 550,000 bpd increase for September at the next meeting on August 3.
Oil also came under pressure as U.S. officials flagged a delay on tariffs but failed to provide details on the change.
The U.S. is close to finalising several trade agreements in the coming days and will notify other countries of higher tariff rates by July 9, President Donald Trump said on Sunday, with the higher rates scheduled to take effect on August 1.
Trump in April announced a 10% base tariff rate on most countries and higher “reciprocal” rates ranging up to 50%, with an original deadline of this Wednesday.
However, Trump also said levies could range in value from “maybe 60% or 70% tariffs to 10% and 20%”, further clouding the picture.
“Concerns over Trump’s tariffs continue to be the broad theme in the second half of 2025, with dollar weakness the only support for oil for now,” said Priyanka Sachdeva, a senior market analyst at Phillip Nova.
Oil prices slipped on Monday after OPEC+ surprised markets by hiking output more than expected in August, while uncertainty over U.S. tariffs and their potential impact on global economic growth weighed on demand expectations.
Brent crude futures LCOc1 fell 47 cents, or 0.69%, to $67.83 a barrel by 0327 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude CLc1 was at $66.05, down $0.95, or 1.42%.
The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and their allies, a group known as OPEC+, agreed on Saturday to raise production by 548,000 barrels per day in August.
“The increased production clearly represents a more aggressive competition for market share and some tolerance for the resulting decline in price and revenue,” Tim Evans of Evans Energy said in a note.
The August increase represents a jump from monthly increases of 411,000 bpd OPEC+ had approved for May, June and July, and 138,000 bpd in April.
The decision will bring nearly 80% of the 2.2 million bpd voluntary cuts from eight OPEC producers back into the market, RBC Capital analysts led by Helima Croft said in a note.
However, the actual output increase has been smaller than planned so far and most of the supply has been from Saudi Arabia, they added.
In a show of confidence in oil demand, Saudi Arabia on Sunday raised the August price for its flagship Arab Light crude to a four-month high for Asia.
Goldman analysts expect OPEC+ to announce a final 550,000 bpd increase for September at the next meeting on August 3.
Oil also came under pressure as U.S. officials flagged a delay on tariffs but failed to provide details on the change.
The U.S. is close to finalising several trade agreements in the coming days and will notify other countries of higher tariff rates by July 9, President Donald Trump said on Sunday, with the higher rates scheduled to take effect on August 1.
Trump in April announced a 10% base tariff rate on most countries and higher “reciprocal” rates ranging up to 50%, with an original deadline of this Wednesday.
However, Trump also said levies could range in value from “maybe 60% or 70% tariffs to 10% and 20%”, further clouding the picture.
“Concerns over Trump’s tariffs continue to be the broad theme in the second half of 2025, with dollar weakness the only support for oil for now,” said Priyanka Sachdeva, a senior market analyst at Phillip Nova.
Oil prices slipped on Monday after OPEC+ surprised markets by hiking output more than expected in August, while uncertainty over U.S. tariffs and their potential impact on global economic growth weighed on demand expectations.
Brent crude futures LCOc1 fell 47 cents, or 0.69%, to $67.83 a barrel by 0327 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude CLc1 was at $66.05, down $0.95, or 1.42%.
The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and their allies, a group known as OPEC+, agreed on Saturday to raise production by 548,000 barrels per day in August.
“The increased production clearly represents a more aggressive competition for market share and some tolerance for the resulting decline in price and revenue,” Tim Evans of Evans Energy said in a note.
The August increase represents a jump from monthly increases of 411,000 bpd OPEC+ had approved for May, June and July, and 138,000 bpd in April.
The decision will bring nearly 80% of the 2.2 million bpd voluntary cuts from eight OPEC producers back into the market, RBC Capital analysts led by Helima Croft said in a note.
However, the actual output increase has been smaller than planned so far and most of the supply has been from Saudi Arabia, they added.
In a show of confidence in oil demand, Saudi Arabia on Sunday raised the August price for its flagship Arab Light crude to a four-month high for Asia.
Goldman analysts expect OPEC+ to announce a final 550,000 bpd increase for September at the next meeting on August 3.
Oil also came under pressure as U.S. officials flagged a delay on tariffs but failed to provide details on the change.
The U.S. is close to finalising several trade agreements in the coming days and will notify other countries of higher tariff rates by July 9, President Donald Trump said on Sunday, with the higher rates scheduled to take effect on August 1.
Trump in April announced a 10% base tariff rate on most countries and higher “reciprocal” rates ranging up to 50%, with an original deadline of this Wednesday.
However, Trump also said levies could range in value from “maybe 60% or 70% tariffs to 10% and 20%”, further clouding the picture.
“Concerns over Trump’s tariffs continue to be the broad theme in the second half of 2025, with dollar weakness the only support for oil for now,” said Priyanka Sachdeva, a senior market analyst at Phillip Nova.
The United States is close to finalizing several trade pacts in coming days and will notify other countries of higher tariff rates by July 9, President Donald Trump said on Sunday, with the higher rates set to take effect on August 1.
Since taking office, Trump has set off a global trade war that has roiled financial markets and sent policymakers scrambling to protect their economies, through efforts such as deals with the United States and other countries.
In April Trump unveiled a base tariff rate of 10% on most countries and additional duties of up to 50%, but later gave a three-week reprieve until Wednesday for all but 10% of them.
Trump, whose remarks to reporters on Sunday came just before his return to Washington from a weekend golfing in New Jersey, had flagged the August 1 date earlier, but it was unclear if all tariffs would increase then.
Asked to clarify, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told reporters the higher tariffs would take effect on August 1, but Trump was “setting the rates and the deals right now.”
In a posting on his Truth Social website, Trump later said the U.S. would start delivering tariff letters from 12:00 pm ET (1600 GMT) on Monday.
In a separate post, he rolled out a wholly new tariff policy, calling for countries “aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies” of the BRICS developing nations to be charged an extra 10% tariff, with no exceptions to be granted.
The first BRICS summit in 2009 was attended by leaders from Brazil, China, India and Russia, with South Africa joining later while Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were included last year.
Trump has close ties to leaders of some of those countries, such as Saudi Arabia and UAE, and has been touting the prospect of a trade deal with India for weeks.
On Sunday, BRICS leaders condemned attacks on Gaza and Iran, called for reforms to global institutions and warned that the rise in tariffs threatened global trade.
It was not immediately clear if Trump’s tariff threat would derail trade talks with India, Indonesia and other BRICS nations, however.
Earlier on Sunday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNN’s “State of the Union” that several big trade agreements would be announced in the next days, adding that European Union talks had made good progress.
Trump would also send letters to 100 smaller countries with which the United States does not have much trade, notifying them of higher tariff rates, he added.
“President Trump’s going to be sending letters to some of our trading partners saying that if you don’t move things along, then on August 1 you will boomerang back to your April 2 tariff level,” Bessent said.
“So I think we’re going to see a lot of deals very quickly.”
Kevin Hassett, who heads the White House National Economic Council, told CBS’s “Face the Nation” program there might be wiggle room for countries engaged in earnest negotiations.
“There are deadlines, and there are things that are close, and so maybe things will push back past the deadline,” Hassett said, adding that Trump would decide.
‘I HEAR GOOD THINGS’
Stephen Miran, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, told ABC News’ “This Week” program that countries needed to make concessions to get lower tariff rates.
“I hear good things about the talks with Europe. I hear good things about the talks with India,” Miran said. “And so I would expect that a number of countries that are in the process of making those concessions … might see their date rolled.”
Bessent told CNN the Trump administration was focused on 18 important trading partners that account for 95% of the U.S. trade deficit. But he said there had been “a lot of foot-dragging” among countries in finalizing trade deals.
Thailand, keen to avert a 36% tariff, is now offering greater market access for U.S. farm and industrial goods and more purchases of U.S. energy and Boeing BA.N jets, Finance Minister Pichai Chunhavajira told Bloomberg News on Sunday.
India and the United States are likely to make a final decision on a mini trade deal in the next 24 to 48 hours, local Indian news channel CNBC-TV18 reported on Sunday, with average tariffs of 10% on Indian goods shipped to the U.S., it said.
Hassett told CBS News that framework agreements already reached with Britain and Vietnam offered guidelines for other countries. He said Trump’s pressure was prompting countries to move production to the United States.
The Vietnam deal was “fantastic,” Miran said.
“It’s extremely one-sided. We get to apply a significant tariff to Vietnamese exports. They’re opening their markets to ours, applying zero tariff to our exports.”
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Up to 80 people have died while more than 40 people remain missing on Sunday, three days after hours of heavy rain led to major flash flooding in the south-central U.S. state of Texas, authorities said Sunday afternoon.
U.S. President Donald Trump said Sunday he is planning to visit Texas on Friday, hours after signing a major disaster declaration, unlocking key federal resources as search and rescue efforts continue.
Kerr County, the hardest hit among 20 affected counties in the region, alone accounts for at least 68 of the fatalities, including 21 children, Kerr County Sheriff Larry Leitha said Sunday.
Four other counties have reported a combined total of 12 deaths.
Leitha said 10 girls and one counselor from Camp Mystic were still unaccounted for as of Sunday afternoon, noting search and rescue efforts are still underway.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott said at a press conference Sunday afternoon that at least 41 people were still unaccounted for across the state’s flood-impacted area.
He warned that additional heavy rainfall is expected in the coming days, keeping parts of the state at risk for further flooding.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has opened seven shelters, which are also providing food and water for central Texas communities, said a CNN report.
Also on Sunday, Trump pushed back on criticism that his administration’s budget cuts to the nation’s weather services had played a role in the deadly floods in Texas.
“I would just say this is a 100-year catastrophe and it’s just so horrible to watch,” Trump spoke to reporters as he left his New Jersey golf club after the weekend, “This was the thing that happened in seconds. Nobody expected it. Nobody saw it.”
Asked if the federal government needs to rehire the meteorologists who left during earlier budget and staffing cut after he returned to the White House, the president suggested it was not necessary.
Criticism has been mounting over how the National Weather Service (NWS) handled the emergency. Some local officials and residents said the flood warnings were late or insufficient.
Nim Kidd, chief of the Texas Division of Emergency Management, asserted Friday that the NWS “did not predict the amount of rain that we saw.”
Staffing data provided by the NWS’s labor union showed the San Angelo forecasting office currently has four vacancies out of 23 positions and San Antonio has six vacancies out of 26, according to a report from Texas Tribune. Both offices are in central Texas.
However, the NWS forecasting offices were operating normally at the time of the disaster, said the report, citing Greg Waller, service coordination hydrologist with the NWS West Gulf River Forecast Center in Fort Worth in northern Texas.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney
In recent weeks, the US State Department implemented a policy requiring all university, technical training, or exchange program visa applicants to disclose their social media handles used over the past five years. The policy also requires these applicants to set their profiles to public.
This move is an example of governments treating a person’s digital persona as their political identity. In doing so, they risk punishing lawful expression, targeting minority voices, and redefining who gets to cross borders based on how they behave online.
Anyone seeking one of these visas will have their social media searched for “indications of hostility” towards the citizens, culture or founding principles of the United States. This enhanced vetting is supposed to ensure the US does not admit anyone who may be deemed a threat.
However, this policy changes how a person’s online presence is evaluated in visa applications and raises many ethical concerns. These include concerns around privacy, freedom of expression, and the politicisation of digital identities.
It is unknown exactly which specific online actions will trigger a visa refusal, as the US government hasn’t disclosed detailed criteria. However, guidance to consular officers indicates that digital behaviour suggesting “hostility” toward the US or its values may be grounds for concern.
Internal advice suggests officers are trained to look for social media content that may reflect extremist views, criminal associations or ideological opposition to the US.
Political ‘passport’
In a sense, this policy turns a visa applicant’s online presence into a kind of political passport. It allows for scrutiny not just of past behaviour but also of ideological views.
Digital identity is not just a technical construct. It carries legal, philosophical and historical weight. It can influence access to rights, recognition and legitimacy, both online and offline.
Once this identity is interpreted by state institutions, it can become a tool for control shaped by institutional whims. Governments justify digital surveillance as a way to spot threats. But research consistently shows it leads to overreach.
A recent report found that US social media monitoring programs have frequently flagged activists and religious minorities. It also found the programs lacked transparency and oversight.
Digital freedom nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation has warned these tools risk punishing people for lawful expression or for simply being connected to certain communities.
The United Nations has raised concerns about the global trend toward digital vetting at borders, especially when used without judicial oversight or transparency.
A free speech issue
These new checks could have a chilling effect on self-expression. This is particularly true for those with views that don’t align with governments or who are from minority backgrounds.
We’ve seen this previously. After whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed widespread use of data gathering by US intelligence agencies, people stopped visiting politically sensitive Wikipedia articles. Not because they were told to, but because they feared being watched.
This policy won’t just affect visa applicants. It could shift how people use social media in general. That’s because there is no clear rulebook for what counts as “acceptable”. And when no one knows where the line is, people self-censor more than is necessary.
What can you do?
If you think you might apply for an affected visa in the future, here are some tips.
1. Audit your social media history now. Old posts, “likes” or follows from years ago may be reviewed and judged out of context. Review your public posts on platforms such as Instagram, Facebook and X. Delete or archive anything that might be misconstrued.
2. Separate personal and professional online identities. Consider keeping distinct accounts for private and public engagement. Use pseudonyms for creative or informal content. Immigration authorities are far less likely to misinterpret context when your online presence is clearly tied to your educational or professional goals.
3. Understand your online visibility and history. Even if you have privacy settings enabled, tagged content, public “likes”, comments and follows can still be seen. Algorithms expose content based on associations, not just what you post. Don’t assume your visibility is limited to your followers.
4. Keep records of any deleted or misinterpreted posts. If you think something might be questioned or if you delete posts ahead of an application, keep a backup. Consular officials may request clarification or evidence. It’s better to be prepared than to be caught off-guard without explanation.
Your social media is no longer a personal space. It may be used by governments to determine whether you fit in.
Samuel Cornell receives funding from an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.
Daniel Angus receives funding from Australian Research Council through Linkage Project ‘Young Australians and the Promotion of Alcohol on Social Media’. He is a Chief Investigator with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.
T.J. Thomson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is an affiliate with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.
Deep-sea mining promises critical minerals for the energy transition without the problems of mining on land. It also promises to bring wealth to developing nations. But the evidence suggests these promises are false, and mining would harm the environment.
The practice involves scooping up rock-like nodules from vast areas of the sea floor. These potato-sized lumps contain metals and minerals such as zinc, manganese, molybdenum, nickel and rare earth elements.
Technology to mine the deep sea exists, but commercial mining of the deep sea is not happening anywhere in the world. That could soon change. Nations are meeting this month in Kingston, Jamaica, to agree to a mining code. Such a code would make way for mining to begin within the next few years.
On Thursday, Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO, released research into the environmental impacts of deep-sea mining. It aims to promote better environmental management of deep-sea mining, should it proceed.
We have previously challenged the rationale for deep-sea mining, drawing on our expertise in international politics and environmental management. We argue mining the deep sea is harmful and the economic benefits have been overstated. What’s more, the metals and minerals to be mined are not scarce.
The best course of action is a ban on international seabed mining, building on the coalition for a moratorium.
The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.
Managing and monitoring environmental harm
Recent advances in technology have made deep-sea mining more feasible. But removing the nodules – which also requires pumping water around – has been shown to damage the seabed and endanger marine life.
CSIRO has developed the first environmental management and monitoring frameworks to protect deep sea ecosystems from mining. It aims to provide “trusted, science-based tools to evaluate the environmental risks and viability of deep-sea mining”.
Scientists from Griffith University, Museums Victoria, the University of the Sunshine Coast, and Earth Sciences New Zealand were also involved in the work.
The Metals Company Australia, a local subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining exploration company, commissioned the research. It involved analysing data from test mining the company carried out in the Pacific Ocean in 2022.
In a media briefing this week, CSIRO Senior Principal Research Scientist Piers Dunstan said the mining activity substantially affected the sea floor. Some marine life, especially that attached to the nodules, had very little hope of recovery. He said if mining were to go ahead, monitoring would be crucial.
We are sceptical that ecological impacts can be managed even with this new framework. Little is known about life in these deep-water ecosystems. But research shows nodule mining would cause extensive habitat loss and damage.
Do we really need to open the ocean frontier to mining? We argue the answer is no, on three counts.
How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)
1. Minerals are not scarce
The minerals required for the energy transition are abundant on land. Known global terrestrial reserves of cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum and nickel are enough to meet current production levels for decades – even with growing demand.
There is no compelling reason to extract deep-sea minerals, given the economics of both deep-sea and land-based mining. Deep-sea mining is speculative and inevitably too expensive given such remote, deep operations.
Claims about mineral scarcity are being used to justify attempting to legitimise a new extractive frontier in the deep sea. Opportunistic investors can make money through speculation and attracting government subsidies.
But deep-sea mining will not necessarily displace, replace or change mining on land. Land-based mining contracts span decades and the companies involved will not abandon ongoing or planned projects. Their activities will continue, even if deep-sea mining begins.
Deep-sea mining also faces many of the same challenges as mining on land, while introducing new problems. The social problems that arise during transport, processing and distribution remain the same.
3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the international seabed is the common heritage of humankind. This means the proceeds of deep-sea mining should be distributed fairly among all countries.
Deep-sea mining commercial partnerships between developing countries in the Global South and firms from the North have yet to pay off for the former. There is little indication this pattern will change.
For example, when Canadian company Nautilus went bankrupt in 2019, it saddled Papua New Guinea with millions in debt from a failed domestic deep-sea mining venture.
The Metals Company has partnerships with Nauru and Tonga but the latest deal with the US creates uncertainty about whether their agreements will be honoured.
European investors took control of Blue Minerals Jamaica, originally a Jamaican-owned company, shortly after orchestrating its start up. Any profits would therefore go offshore.
Given the threat of environmental harm, the evidence suggests deep-sea mining is not worth the risk.
Justin Alger receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
D.G. Webster receives funding from the National Science Foundation in the United States and various internal funding sources at Dartmouth University.
Jessica Green receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Kate J Neville receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Stacy D VanDeveer and Susan M Park do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Deep-sea mining promises critical minerals for the energy transition without the problems of mining on land. It also promises to bring wealth to developing nations. But the evidence suggests these promises are false, and mining would harm the environment.
The practice involves scooping up rock-like nodules from vast areas of the sea floor. These potato-sized lumps contain metals and minerals such as zinc, manganese, molybdenum, nickel and rare earth elements.
Technology to mine the deep sea exists, but commercial mining of the deep sea is not happening anywhere in the world. That could soon change. Nations are meeting this month in Kingston, Jamaica, to agree to a mining code. Such a code would make way for mining to begin within the next few years.
On Thursday, Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO, released research into the environmental impacts of deep-sea mining. It aims to promote better environmental management of deep-sea mining, should it proceed.
We have previously challenged the rationale for deep-sea mining, drawing on our expertise in international politics and environmental management. We argue mining the deep sea is harmful and the economic benefits have been overstated. What’s more, the metals and minerals to be mined are not scarce.
The best course of action is a ban on international seabed mining, building on the coalition for a moratorium.
The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.
Managing and monitoring environmental harm
Recent advances in technology have made deep-sea mining more feasible. But removing the nodules – which also requires pumping water around – has been shown to damage the seabed and endanger marine life.
CSIRO has developed the first environmental management and monitoring frameworks to protect deep sea ecosystems from mining. It aims to provide “trusted, science-based tools to evaluate the environmental risks and viability of deep-sea mining”.
Scientists from Griffith University, Museums Victoria, the University of the Sunshine Coast, and Earth Sciences New Zealand were also involved in the work.
The Metals Company Australia, a local subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining exploration company, commissioned the research. It involved analysing data from test mining the company carried out in the Pacific Ocean in 2022.
In a media briefing this week, CSIRO Senior Principal Research Scientist Piers Dunstan said the mining activity substantially affected the sea floor. Some marine life, especially that attached to the nodules, had very little hope of recovery. He said if mining were to go ahead, monitoring would be crucial.
We are sceptical that ecological impacts can be managed even with this new framework. Little is known about life in these deep-water ecosystems. But research shows nodule mining would cause extensive habitat loss and damage.
Do we really need to open the ocean frontier to mining? We argue the answer is no, on three counts.
How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)
1. Minerals are not scarce
The minerals required for the energy transition are abundant on land. Known global terrestrial reserves of cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum and nickel are enough to meet current production levels for decades – even with growing demand.
There is no compelling reason to extract deep-sea minerals, given the economics of both deep-sea and land-based mining. Deep-sea mining is speculative and inevitably too expensive given such remote, deep operations.
Claims about mineral scarcity are being used to justify attempting to legitimise a new extractive frontier in the deep sea. Opportunistic investors can make money through speculation and attracting government subsidies.
But deep-sea mining will not necessarily displace, replace or change mining on land. Land-based mining contracts span decades and the companies involved will not abandon ongoing or planned projects. Their activities will continue, even if deep-sea mining begins.
Deep-sea mining also faces many of the same challenges as mining on land, while introducing new problems. The social problems that arise during transport, processing and distribution remain the same.
3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the international seabed is the common heritage of humankind. This means the proceeds of deep-sea mining should be distributed fairly among all countries.
Deep-sea mining commercial partnerships between developing countries in the Global South and firms from the North have yet to pay off for the former. There is little indication this pattern will change.
For example, when Canadian company Nautilus went bankrupt in 2019, it saddled Papua New Guinea with millions in debt from a failed domestic deep-sea mining venture.
The Metals Company has partnerships with Nauru and Tonga but the latest deal with the US creates uncertainty about whether their agreements will be honoured.
European investors took control of Blue Minerals Jamaica, originally a Jamaican-owned company, shortly after orchestrating its start up. Any profits would therefore go offshore.
Given the threat of environmental harm, the evidence suggests deep-sea mining is not worth the risk.
Justin Alger receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
D.G. Webster receives funding from the National Science Foundation in the United States and various internal funding sources at Dartmouth University.
Jessica Green receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Kate J Neville receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Stacy D VanDeveer and Susan M Park do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
New York City, NY, July 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Ripple (XRP) has ended its battle with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and is getting rid of the supervision of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Garlinghouse tweeted: “True to our long-standing compliance roots, @Ripple is applying for a national bank charter from the OCC,” he added, “If approved, we would have both state (via NYDFS) and federal oversight, a new (and unique!) benchmark for trust in the stablecoin market.”
Against this backdrop, the LET Mining cloud mining platform provides XRP users with a way to participate that is both compliant with regulatory direction and can generate stable profits. Allow users to create more value for XRP through the LET Mining cloud mining service.
If Ripple Labs has any trump card, it is that it may be the most capital-rich cryptocurrency company in the world. If Ripple successfully obtains a national banking license, it will become the first crypto payment company licensed by a federal agency in the United States. This is not only a huge encouragement to the stablecoin market, but also directly enhances the credibility, use and legitimacy of XRP – this is good news for all crypto users.
And LET Mining is precisely under this compliance wave, providing users with a safer and more transparent passive income platform.
How does LET Mining achieve income? LET Mining maximizes revenue through the following mechanisms: ✅ AI computing power scheduling system: dynamically adjust mining strategies according to market difficulty and coin price ✅ Multi-node deployment: Global distributed servers ensure mining efficiency and stability ✅ Green energy drive: reduce operating costs and increase user revenue space ✅ Referral reward system: invite friends to get up to 3% additional rebate
How XRP holders can create revenue through LET Mining 1. Log in to the website https://letmining.com/ to register an account, and you can get a $12 reward after successful registration 2. Choose a cloud computing power contract that suits the user’s investment strategy. Users have the following options (minimum 50XRP to participate)
●Experience Contract: Investment amount: $100, contract period: 2 days, daily income of $4, expiration income: $100 + $8 ●BTC Classic Hash Power: Investment amount: $500, contract period: 5 days, daily income of $6, expiration income: $500 + $30 ●DOGE Classic Hash Power: Investment amount: $3,500, contract period: 24 days, daily income of $50.4, expiration income: $3,500 + $1,209.6 ●BTC Advanced Hash Power: Investment amount: $5,000, contract period: 30 days, daily income of $76, expiration income: $5,000 + $2,280 ●BTC Advanced Hash Power: Investment amount: $10,000, contract period: 45 days, daily income of $173, expiration income: $10,000 + $7,785
3. Automatically obtain revenue every day and withdraw funds at any time
Start mining with XRP to “empower” assets Although XRP itself cannot mine, LET Mining supports using XRP to activate contracts, purchase computing power, and participate in cloud mining of other currencies (such as BTC, LTC, DOGE). This model not only provides a new value channel for XRP holders, but also provides users with a way to steadily increase value in a compliant path.
Today, as the regulatory environment for XRP becomes increasingly clear, using its legal and compliant funding path to launch LET Mining computing power contracts will be the “ace combination” in asset management strategies.
As Ripple actively applies for a U.S. national banking license, XRP is gradually moving towards the core position of the mainstream financial system. In this wave of cryptocurrency compliance and financial integration, LET Mining is providing XRP holders with a new path to release value.
Through LET Mining cloud mining, users do not need to rely on traditional mining mechanisms, and can also make XRP the key to start digital wealth growth. Compliance is the direction, action is the beginning – now is the best time to use XRP to expand passive income opportunities.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu departed for an official visit to Washington on Sunday, calling the trip a “great opportunity” to expand the circle of peace in the Middle East.
Speaking before boarding his flight, Netanyahu said there were new prospects for Israel to reach normalization agreements with Arab countries “far beyond what we could previously imagine.”
Netanyahu has made expanding normalization efforts a central goal of his foreign policy. Under the 2020 Abraham Accords, Israel signed normalization agreements with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. The country has peace agreements also with Egypt and Jordan.
“We have already transformed the face of the Middle East beyond recognition,” he said, referring to Israel’s military offensive in the Gaza Strip and the cross-border fighting with Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well as conflicts with Iran, Yemen and Syria.
Earlier on Sunday, an Israeli delegation was sent to Qatar to resume indirect negotiations with Hamas over a ceasefire-for-hostages deal, according to an Israeli official.
Netanyahu said the delegation had received “clear instructions” to work toward a ceasefire under terms already accepted by Israel. He added that his upcoming meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump “can certainly help promote the outcome we all hope for.”
Netanyahu’s visit to Washington, which begins Monday, is his third since Trump returned to office in January.
The trip comes amid growing public pressure in Israel for a long-term ceasefire that would end the war in Gaza and secure the return of around 50 hostages, at least 20 of whom are believed to be alive. Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s far-right coalition partners have pushed him to continue the military campaign and establish a permanent Israeli control over parts of the Palestinian enclave.
Hamas announced on Friday it had responded “in a positive spirit” to a U.S.-backed proposal for a 60-day truce. Trump said Israel had agreed “to the necessary conditions to finalize” the deal.
Since Israel resumed its military campaign in Gaza on March 18, at least 6,860 Palestinians have been killed and 24,220 others wounded, according to figures released Sunday by Gaza health authorities. That brings the total death toll in Gaza since the war began in October 2023 to 57,418, with 136,261 injured.
The death toll from catastrophic floods in Texas reached at least 78 on Sunday, including at least 28 children, as the search for girls missing from a summer camp entered a third day and fears of more flash flooding as rain fell on saturated ground prompted fresh evacuations.
Larry Leitha, the Kerr County Sheriff in Texas Hill Country, said 68 people had died in flooding in his county, the epicenter of the flooding, among them 28 children. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, speaking at a press conference on Sunday afternoon, said another 10 had died elsewhere in Texas and 41 confirmed missing. The governor did not say how many of the dead outside Kerr were children.
Among the most devastating impacts of the flooding occurred at Camp Mystic summer camp, a nearly century-old Christian girls camp. Sheriff Leitha said on Sunday that 10 Camp Mystic campers and one counselor were still missing.
“It was nothing short of horrific to see what those young children went through,” said Abbott, who said he toured the area on Saturday and pledged to continue efforts to locate the missing.
The flooding occurred after the nearby Guadalupe River broke its banks after torrential rain fell in the central Texas area on Friday, the U.S. Independence Day holiday.
Texas Division of Emergency Management Chief Nim Kiddsaid at the press conference on Sunday afternoon the destruction killed three people in Burnet County, one in Tom Green County, five in Travis County and one in Williamson County.
“You will see the death toll rise today and tomorrow,” said Freeman Martin, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, also speaking on Sunday.
Officials said on Saturday that more than 850 people had been rescued, including some clinging to trees, after a sudden storm dumped up to 15 inches (38 cm) of rain across the region, about 85 miles (140 km) northwest of San Antonio.
“Everyone in the community is hurting,” Leitha told reporters.
A WALL OF WATER
Kidd said he was receiving unconfirmed reports of “an additional wall of water” flowing down some of the creeks in the Guadalupe Rivershed, as rain continued to fall on soil in the region already saturated from Friday’s rains.
He said aircraft were sent aloft to scout for additional floodwaters, while search-and-rescue personnel who might be in harm’s way were alerted to pull back from the river in the meantime.
The National Weather Service issued flood warnings and advisories for central Texas that were to last until 4:15 p.m. local time (2115 GMT) as rains fell, potentially complicating rescue efforts.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency was activated on Sunday and is deploying resources to first responders in Texas after President Donald Trump issued a major disaster declaration, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.
U.S. Coast Guard helicopters and planes are helping the search and rescue efforts, the department said.
SCALING BACK FEDERAL DISASTER RESPONSE
Trump, who said on Sunday he would visit the disaster scene, probably on Friday, has previously outlined plans to scale back the federal government’s role in responding to natural disasters, leaving states to shoulder more of the burden themselves.
Some experts questioned whether cuts to the federal workforce by the Trump administration, including to the agency that oversees the National Weather Service, led to a failure by officials to accurately predict the severity of the floods and issue appropriate warnings ahead of the storm.
Trump’s administration has overseen thousands of job cuts from the National Weather Service’s parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, leaving many weather offices understaffed, former NOAA director Rick Spinrad said.
Spinrad said he did not know if those staff cuts factored into the lack of advance warning for the extreme Texas flooding, but that they would inevitably degrade the agency’s ability to deliver accurate and timely forecasts.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who oversees NOAA, said a “moderate” flood watch issued on Thursday by the National Weather Service had not accurately predicted the extreme rainfall and said the Trump administration was working to upgrade the system.
Joaquin Castro, a Democratic U.S. congressman from Texas, told CNN’s “State of the Union” program that fewer personnel at the weather service could be dangerous.
“When you have flash flooding, there’s a risk that if you don’t have the personnel … to do that analysis, do the predictions in the best way, it could lead to tragedy,” Castro said.
‘COMPLETE DEVASTATION’
Camp Mystic had 700 girls in residence at the time of the flooding.
Katharine Somerville, a counselor on the Cypress Lake side of Camp Mystic, on higher ground than the Guadalupe River side, said her 13-year-old campers were scared as their cabins sustained damage and lost power in the middle of the night.
“Our cabins at the tippity top of hills were completely flooded with water. I mean, y’all have seen the complete devastation, we never even imagined that this could happen,” Somerville said in an interview on Fox News on Sunday.
Somerville said the campers in her care were put on military trucks and evacuated, and that all were safe.
The disaster unfolded rapidly on Friday morning as heavier-than-forecast rain drove river waters rapidly to as high as 29 feet (9 meters).
A day after the disaster struck, the summer camp was a scene of devastation. Inside one cabin, mud lines indicating how high the water had risen were at least six feet (1.83 m) from the floor. Bed frames, mattresses and personal belongings caked with mud were scattered inside. Some buildings had broken windows, one had a missing wall.
The death toll from catastrophic floods in Texas reached at least 78 on Sunday, including at least 28 children, as the search for girls missing from a summer camp entered a third day and fears of more flash flooding as rain fell on saturated ground prompted fresh evacuations.
Larry Leitha, the Kerr County Sheriff in Texas Hill Country, said 68 people had died in flooding in his county, the epicenter of the flooding, among them 28 children. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, speaking at a press conference on Sunday afternoon, said another 10 had died elsewhere in Texas and 41 confirmed missing. The governor did not say how many of the dead outside Kerr were children.
Among the most devastating impacts of the flooding occurred at Camp Mystic summer camp, a nearly century-old Christian girls camp. Sheriff Leitha said on Sunday that 10 Camp Mystic campers and one counselor were still missing.
“It was nothing short of horrific to see what those young children went through,” said Abbott, who said he toured the area on Saturday and pledged to continue efforts to locate the missing.
The flooding occurred after the nearby Guadalupe River broke its banks after torrential rain fell in the central Texas area on Friday, the U.S. Independence Day holiday.
Texas Division of Emergency Management Chief Nim Kiddsaid at the press conference on Sunday afternoon the destruction killed three people in Burnet County, one in Tom Green County, five in Travis County and one in Williamson County.
“You will see the death toll rise today and tomorrow,” said Freeman Martin, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, also speaking on Sunday.
Officials said on Saturday that more than 850 people had been rescued, including some clinging to trees, after a sudden storm dumped up to 15 inches (38 cm) of rain across the region, about 85 miles (140 km) northwest of San Antonio.
“Everyone in the community is hurting,” Leitha told reporters.
A WALL OF WATER
Kidd said he was receiving unconfirmed reports of “an additional wall of water” flowing down some of the creeks in the Guadalupe Rivershed, as rain continued to fall on soil in the region already saturated from Friday’s rains.
He said aircraft were sent aloft to scout for additional floodwaters, while search-and-rescue personnel who might be in harm’s way were alerted to pull back from the river in the meantime.
The National Weather Service issued flood warnings and advisories for central Texas that were to last until 4:15 p.m. local time (2115 GMT) as rains fell, potentially complicating rescue efforts.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency was activated on Sunday and is deploying resources to first responders in Texas after President Donald Trump issued a major disaster declaration, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.
U.S. Coast Guard helicopters and planes are helping the search and rescue efforts, the department said.
SCALING BACK FEDERAL DISASTER RESPONSE
Trump, who said on Sunday he would visit the disaster scene, probably on Friday, has previously outlined plans to scale back the federal government’s role in responding to natural disasters, leaving states to shoulder more of the burden themselves.
Some experts questioned whether cuts to the federal workforce by the Trump administration, including to the agency that oversees the National Weather Service, led to a failure by officials to accurately predict the severity of the floods and issue appropriate warnings ahead of the storm.
Trump’s administration has overseen thousands of job cuts from the National Weather Service’s parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, leaving many weather offices understaffed, former NOAA director Rick Spinrad said.
Spinrad said he did not know if those staff cuts factored into the lack of advance warning for the extreme Texas flooding, but that they would inevitably degrade the agency’s ability to deliver accurate and timely forecasts.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who oversees NOAA, said a “moderate” flood watch issued on Thursday by the National Weather Service had not accurately predicted the extreme rainfall and said the Trump administration was working to upgrade the system.
Joaquin Castro, a Democratic U.S. congressman from Texas, told CNN’s “State of the Union” program that fewer personnel at the weather service could be dangerous.
“When you have flash flooding, there’s a risk that if you don’t have the personnel … to do that analysis, do the predictions in the best way, it could lead to tragedy,” Castro said.
‘COMPLETE DEVASTATION’
Camp Mystic had 700 girls in residence at the time of the flooding.
Katharine Somerville, a counselor on the Cypress Lake side of Camp Mystic, on higher ground than the Guadalupe River side, said her 13-year-old campers were scared as their cabins sustained damage and lost power in the middle of the night.
“Our cabins at the tippity top of hills were completely flooded with water. I mean, y’all have seen the complete devastation, we never even imagined that this could happen,” Somerville said in an interview on Fox News on Sunday.
Somerville said the campers in her care were put on military trucks and evacuated, and that all were safe.
The disaster unfolded rapidly on Friday morning as heavier-than-forecast rain drove river waters rapidly to as high as 29 feet (9 meters).
A day after the disaster struck, the summer camp was a scene of devastation. Inside one cabin, mud lines indicating how high the water had risen were at least six feet (1.83 m) from the floor. Bed frames, mattresses and personal belongings caked with mud were scattered inside. Some buildings had broken windows, one had a missing wall.
The death toll from catastrophic floods in Texas reached at least 69 on Sunday, including at least 21 children, as the search for girls missing from a summer camp entered a third day.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott, speaking at a press conference on Sunday afternoon, said the death toll in Kerr county, the epicenter of the flooding, had reached 59, while another 10 had died elsewhere in Texas and 41 remained missing.
Among the most devastating impacts of the flooding occurred at Camp Mystic summer camp, a nearly century-old Christian girls camp, where 11 girls and a counselor are still missing.
“It was nothing short of horrific to see what those young children went through,” said Abbott, who said he toured the area on Saturday and pledged to continue efforts to locate the missing.
The flooding occurred after the nearby Guadalupe River broke its banks after torrential rain fell in the central Texas area on Friday, the U.S. Independence Day holiday. Larry Leitha, the Kerr County Sheriff in Texas Hill Country, said earlier that 21 children have died in the flooding.
Officials speaking at the press conference on Sunday afternoon said the destruction killed three people in Burnet County, one in Tom Green county, five in Travis county and one in Williamson county.
Officials said on Saturday that more than 850 people had been rescued, including some clinging to trees, after a sudden storm dumped up to 15 inches (38 cm) of rain across the region, about 85 miles (140 km) northwest of San Antonio.
“Everyone in the community is hurting,” Leitha told reporters.
The National Weather Service issued flood warnings and advisories for central Texas that were to last until 4:15 p.m. local time (2115 GMT) as rains fell, potentially complicating rescue efforts.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency was activated on Sunday and is deploying resources to first responders in Texas after President Donald Trump issued a major disaster declaration, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.
U.S. Coast Guard helicopters and planes are helping the search and rescue efforts, the department said.
Trump has previously outlined plans to scale back the federal government’s role in responding to natural disasters, leaving states to shoulder more of the burden themselves.
Some experts questioned whether cuts to the federal workforce by the Trump administration, including to the agency that oversees the National Weather Service, led to a failure by officials to accurately predict the severity of the floods and issue appropriate warnings ahead of the storm.
Trump’s administration has overseen thousands of job cuts from the National Weather Service’s parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, leaving many weather offices understaffed, former NOAA director Rick Spinrad said.
Spinrad said he did not know if those staff cuts factored into the lack of advance warning for the extreme Texas flooding, but that they would inevitably degrade the agency’s ability to deliver accurate and timely forecasts.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who oversees NOAA, said a “moderate” flood watch issued on Thursday by the National Weather Service had not accurately predicted the extreme rainfall and said the Trump administration was working to upgrade the system.
Joaquin Castro, a Democratic U.S. congressman from Texas, told CNN’s “State of the Union” program that fewer personnel at the weather service could be dangerous.
“When you have flash flooding, there’s a risk that if you don’t have the personnel … to do that analysis, do the predictions in the best way, it could lead to tragedy,” Castro said.
‘COMPLETE DEVASTATION’
Camp Mystic had 700 girls in residence at the time of the flooding.
Katharine Somerville, a counselor on the Cypress Lake side of Camp Mystic, on higher ground than the Guadalupe River side, said her 13-year-old campers were scared as their cabins sustained damage and lost power in the middle of the night.
“Our cabins at the tippity top of hills were completely flooded with water. I mean, y’all have seen the complete devastation, we never even imagined that this could happen,” Somerville said in an interview on Fox News on Sunday.
Somerville said the campers in her care were put on military trucks and evacuated, and that all were safe.
The disaster unfolded rapidly on Friday morning as heavier-than-forecast rain drove river waters rapidly to as high as 29 feet (9 meters).
A day after the disaster struck, the summer camp was a scene of devastation. Inside one cabin, mud lines indicating how high the water had risen were at least six feet (1.83 m) from the floor. Bed frames, mattresses and personal belongings caked with mud were scattered inside. Some buildings had broken windows, one had a missing wall.
Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) thanked President Donald Trump for his formal approval of Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s request for a federal emergency disaster declaration due to devastating flooding in Kerrville and surrounding areas.
Sen. Cruz said, “The flooding we are seeing in Central Texas is absolutely devastating. Heidi and I send our heartfelt condolences to all those who have been directly impacted by this natural disaster. We thank President Trump for quickly approving Governor Abbott’s disaster declaration, and Secretary Noem for being on the ground and sending additional personnel to support Texans.
We urge everyone to heed the warnings from local officials and stay out of harm’s way. We are immensely grateful to the first responders—both in Texas and from across the country—who are risking their own safety to rescue those in need. As Texans, we must remain united in spirit and grit, and support our neighbors as we always do best.”
Sen. Cornyn said, “The Kerrville community has endured unimaginable devastation, and I thank President Trump for swiftly approving this disaster declaration to ensure every available resource is being utilized in rescue and recovery efforts. Being a Texan doesn’t just describe where you’re from, it describes who your family is, and even in the darkest times, Texans come together to serve one another in a powerful way. As a lifelong Texan and a father of two, my heart breaks for the families who have lost loved ones in this tragedy, and I encourage all Texans and Americans to pray for our state and for the safe return of those who are still missing.”
BACKGROUND
Sens. Cruz and Cornyn sent a letter earlier today to Pres. Trump urging the administration to continue surging all available federal resources to Kerr County to assist with ongoing rescue and recovery efforts.
Click here to read the full letter.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (8th District of Illinois)
CHICAGO, IL – Just daysafter their attempt to conduct oversight at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in the South Loopof Chicago was denied, Congressmen Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) and Jonathan Jackson (D-IL) havesent a letterto Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem demanding immediate access to the facility and full transparency around recent detentions and conditions inside.
“We were denied the ability to perform congressional oversight – as is our duty as members of the United States House of Representatives,” the lawmakers wrote. “During the visit to this facility, the ICE officer who refused to identify himself called the Chicago Police Department to evict us for ‘trespassing.’”
The visit by Congressmen Krishnamoorthi and Jackson came afterdisturbing reports that on June 4, ICE officials detained at least 10 individuals after sending them text messages instructing them to appear at the facility for a “routine appointment.”
“It is unclear exactly how many people were taken, where they were taken to, and if they were given access to counsel,” the lawmakers wrote of the incident. “We were denied those answers.”
The congressmen emphasized the urgency of their request amid a broader immigration crackdown. Last week,President Donald Trump announcedhe was instructing ICE to target Democratic cities, including Chicago, as part of the “single largest mass deportation program in history.”
“The President’s politically motivated actions are deeply troubling, particularly for communities like ours in Illinois that have already seen intensified enforcement activity in recent weeks,” Congressmen Krishnamoorthi and Jackson wrote.
The letter concludes with an urgent call to action by Congressmen Krishnamoorthi and Jackson: “Given the serious and potentially illegal nature of the activity in these reports, we request that the Department of Homeland Security allow Members of Congress to access the South Loop facility for the purpose of investigating their activity further. Please issue a response by Friday, June 27.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (8th District of Illinois)
WASHINGTON – Today, during a House Oversight Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services hearing, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) sharply criticized the Trump administration’s decision to eliminate the dedicated LGBTQ+ youth crisis hotline within the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline. In a powerful line of questioning, Congressman Krishnamoorthi warned that removing this lifesaving service, under the banner of eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, was not just misguided; it was cruel.
Early today, Congressman Krishnamoorthi also led a bipartisan letter callingon Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to reverse the decision to discontinue specialized services for LGBTQ+ youth within the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline.
“In the name of expunging DEI, the Trump administration is not only rewriting history, it is actively putting lives at risk,” Congressman Krishnamoorthi said. “There is no more tragic example than the decision to end the LGBTQ+ crisis hotline, which has fielded over 1.3 million calls, texts, and chats since becoming fully operational.”
Citing data from the Trump-era Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Congressman noted that LGBTQ+ youth face suicide risks at rates four times higher than their peers.
When questioned, Republican witnesses claimed to be unaware of both the CDC’s findings and bipartisan support for the hotline.
Congressman Krishnamoorthi also referenced a 2018 statement from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch highlighting the vulnerability of LGBTQ+ youth, as well as a May 2025 bipartisan letter from Republican Representatives Mike Lawler and Young Kim urging the Trump administration to preserve the LGBTQ+ lifeline.
“You don’t dispute that my Republican colleagues said this, do you?” he asked one witness.
“I’m not aware of anything to do with the suicide hotline,” the witness replied.
“And that’s the problem,” the congressman responded. “A lack of awareness. The fact that we are expunging an LGBTQ+ youth suicide hotline in the name of expunging DEI is precisely why this crusade is so dangerous.”
While also addressing Medicaid and SNAP cuts elsewhere in the hearing, Congressman Krishnamoorthi emphasized that eliminating support programs for vulnerable populations, especially under the false pretense of advancing “equality for everybody,” only makes life harder for working families and marginalized communities.
Congressman Krishnamoorthi’s question line is available in full here.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (8th District of Illinois)
WASHINGTON – Today, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL), a senior member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, sent aletterto President Trump urging him to reverse reported plans to restrict the flow of classified information to Congress following the June 21, 2025, U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The letter follows reports that the Administration intends to withhold intelligence after a leak related to Operation Midnight Hammer, which targeted sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. In the days since the strikes, conflicting accounts have emerged about their effectiveness—raising serious questions about how much Iran’s nuclear program was disrupted and whether President Trump and his Administration misled the public about the operation’s impact.
“As a Member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I strongly believe that leaks of classified information must be investigated to hold those responsible accountable,” Congressman Krishnamoorthi wrote. “Congressional intelligence committees also have an obligation to conduct congressional oversight regarding any and all intelligence and intelligence-related activities, and U.S. law clearly states that ‘The President shall ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currently informed of the intelligence activities of the United States, including any significant anticipated intelligence activity.’”
Congressman Krishnamoorthi warned that limiting the flow of classified information to Congress would violate that legal requirement. “Your Administration’s plans to limit sharing sensitive information with Congress, as recent reports detail, would not comply with the law to keep the congressional intelligence committees ‘fully and currently informed,’” he continued.
The letter also highlights conflicting accounts about the effectiveness of the strikes. “These conflicting reports are deeply alarming and require further evaluation from the intelligence community,” it states.
“While mindful that intelligence gathering and operation analysis is still ongoing, it is critical that Congress has full and immediate access to all information necessary to conduct oversight,” Krishnamoorthi wrote. “I expect that your Administration will adhere to its legal obligations and ensure that Congress, particularly the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, is provided with timely, comprehensive, and unfiltered access to intelligence assessments and operational analyses.”
Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
Approval Comes After Cornyn-Led Letter to POTUS Urging More Federal Resources
U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) today thanked President Donald Trump for his formal approval of Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s request for a federal emergency disaster declaration due to devastating flooding in Kerrville and surrounding areas:
“The Kerrville community has endured unimaginable devastation, and I thank President Trump for swiftly approving this disaster declaration to ensure every available resource is being utilized in rescue and recovery efforts,” said Sen. Cornyn. “Being a Texan doesn’t just describe where you’re from, it describes who your family is, and even in the darkest times, Texans come together to serve one another in a powerful way. As a lifelong Texan and a father of two, my heart breaks for the families who have lost loved ones in this tragedy, and I encourage all Texans and Americans to pray for our state and for the safe return of those who are still missing.”
“The flooding we are seeing in Central Texas is absolutely devastating,” said Sen. Cruz. “Heidi and I send our heartfelt condolences to all those who have been directly impacted by this natural disaster. We thank President Trump for quickly approving Governor Abbott’s disaster declaration, and Secretary Noem for being on the ground and sending additional personnel to support Texans. We urge everyone to heed the warnings from local officials and stay out of harm’s way. We are immensely grateful to the first responders—both in Texas and from across the country—who are risking their own safety to rescue those in need. As Texans, we must remain united in spirit and grit, and support our neighbors as we always do best.”
Sens. Cornyn and Cruz sent a letter earlier today to Pres. Trump urging the administration to continue surging all available federal resources to Kerr County to assist with ongoing rescue and recovery efforts. Read the full letter here.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Alger, Associate Professor / Senior Lecturer in Global Environmental Politics, The University of Melbourne
Deep-sea mining promises critical minerals for the energy transition without the problems of mining on land. It also promises to bring wealth to developing nations. But the evidence suggests these promises are false, and mining would harm the environment.
The practice involves scooping up rock-like nodules from vast areas of the sea floor. These potato-sized lumps contain metals and minerals such as zinc, manganese, molybdenum, nickel and rare earth elements.
Technology to mine the deep sea exists, but commercial mining of the deep sea is not happening anywhere in the world. That could soon change. Nations are meeting this month in Kingston, Jamaica, to agree to a mining code. Such a code would make way for mining to begin within the next few years.
On Thursday, Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO, released research into the environmental impacts of deep-sea mining. It aims to promote better environmental management of deep-sea mining, should it proceed.
We have previously challenged the rationale for deep-sea mining, drawing on our expertise in international politics and environmental management. We argue mining the deep sea is harmful and the economic benefits have been overstated. What’s more, the metals and minerals to be mined are not scarce.
The best course of action is a ban on international seabed mining, building on the coalition for a moratorium.
The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.
Managing and monitoring environmental harm
Recent advances in technology have made deep-sea mining more feasible. But removing the nodules – which also requires pumping water around – has been shown to damage the seabed and endanger marine life.
CSIRO has developed the first environmental management and monitoring frameworks to protect deep sea ecosystems from mining. It aims to provide “trusted, science-based tools to evaluate the environmental risks and viability of deep-sea mining”.
Scientists from Griffith University, Museums Victoria, the University of the Sunshine Coast, and Earth Sciences New Zealand were also involved in the work.
The Metals Company Australia, a local subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining exploration company, commissioned the research. It involved analysing data from test mining the company carried out in the Pacific Ocean in 2022.
In a media briefing this week, CSIRO Senior Principal Research Scientist Piers Dunstan said the mining activity substantially affected the sea floor. Some marine life, especially that attached to the nodules, had very little hope of recovery. He said if mining were to go ahead, monitoring would be crucial.
We are sceptical that ecological impacts can be managed even with this new framework. Little is known about life in these deep-water ecosystems. But research shows nodule mining would cause extensive habitat loss and damage.
Do we really need to open the ocean frontier to mining? We argue the answer is no, on three counts.
How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)
1. Minerals are not scarce
The minerals required for the energy transition are abundant on land. Known global terrestrial reserves of cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum and nickel are enough to meet current production levels for decades – even with growing demand.
There is no compelling reason to extract deep-sea minerals, given the economics of both deep-sea and land-based mining. Deep-sea mining is speculative and inevitably too expensive given such remote, deep operations.
Claims about mineral scarcity are being used to justify attempting to legitimise a new extractive frontier in the deep sea. Opportunistic investors can make money through speculation and attracting government subsidies.
But deep-sea mining will not necessarily displace, replace or change mining on land. Land-based mining contracts span decades and the companies involved will not abandon ongoing or planned projects. Their activities will continue, even if deep-sea mining begins.
Deep-sea mining also faces many of the same challenges as mining on land, while introducing new problems. The social problems that arise during transport, processing and distribution remain the same.
3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the international seabed is the common heritage of humankind. This means the proceeds of deep-sea mining should be distributed fairly among all countries.
Deep-sea mining commercial partnerships between developing countries in the Global South and firms from the North have yet to pay off for the former. There is little indication this pattern will change.
For example, when Canadian company Nautilus went bankrupt in 2019, it saddled Papua New Guinea with millions in debt from a failed domestic deep-sea mining venture.
The Metals Company has partnerships with Nauru and Tonga but the latest deal with the US creates uncertainty about whether their agreements will be honoured.
European investors took control of Blue Minerals Jamaica, originally a Jamaican-owned company, shortly after orchestrating its start up. Any profits would therefore go offshore.
Given the threat of environmental harm, the evidence suggests deep-sea mining is not worth the risk.
Justin Alger receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
D.G. Webster receives funding from the National Science Foundation in the United States and various internal funding sources at Dartmouth University.
Jessica Green receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Kate J Neville receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Stacy D VanDeveer and Susan M Park do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Alger, Associate Professor / Senior Lecturer in Global Environmental Politics, The University of Melbourne
Deep-sea mining promises critical minerals for the energy transition without the problems of mining on land. It also promises to bring wealth to developing nations. But the evidence suggests these promises are false, and mining would harm the environment.
The practice involves scooping up rock-like nodules from vast areas of the sea floor. These potato-sized lumps contain metals and minerals such as zinc, manganese, molybdenum, nickel and rare earth elements.
Technology to mine the deep sea exists, but commercial mining of the deep sea is not happening anywhere in the world. That could soon change. Nations are meeting this month in Kingston, Jamaica, to agree to a mining code. Such a code would make way for mining to begin within the next few years.
On Thursday, Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO, released research into the environmental impacts of deep-sea mining. It aims to promote better environmental management of deep-sea mining, should it proceed.
We have previously challenged the rationale for deep-sea mining, drawing on our expertise in international politics and environmental management. We argue mining the deep sea is harmful and the economic benefits have been overstated. What’s more, the metals and minerals to be mined are not scarce.
The best course of action is a ban on international seabed mining, building on the coalition for a moratorium.
The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.
Managing and monitoring environmental harm
Recent advances in technology have made deep-sea mining more feasible. But removing the nodules – which also requires pumping water around – has been shown to damage the seabed and endanger marine life.
CSIRO has developed the first environmental management and monitoring frameworks to protect deep sea ecosystems from mining. It aims to provide “trusted, science-based tools to evaluate the environmental risks and viability of deep-sea mining”.
Scientists from Griffith University, Museums Victoria, the University of the Sunshine Coast, and Earth Sciences New Zealand were also involved in the work.
The Metals Company Australia, a local subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining exploration company, commissioned the research. It involved analysing data from test mining the company carried out in the Pacific Ocean in 2022.
In a media briefing this week, CSIRO Senior Principal Research Scientist Piers Dunstan said the mining activity substantially affected the sea floor. Some marine life, especially that attached to the nodules, had very little hope of recovery. He said if mining were to go ahead, monitoring would be crucial.
We are sceptical that ecological impacts can be managed even with this new framework. Little is known about life in these deep-water ecosystems. But research shows nodule mining would cause extensive habitat loss and damage.
Do we really need to open the ocean frontier to mining? We argue the answer is no, on three counts.
How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)
1. Minerals are not scarce
The minerals required for the energy transition are abundant on land. Known global terrestrial reserves of cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum and nickel are enough to meet current production levels for decades – even with growing demand.
There is no compelling reason to extract deep-sea minerals, given the economics of both deep-sea and land-based mining. Deep-sea mining is speculative and inevitably too expensive given such remote, deep operations.
Claims about mineral scarcity are being used to justify attempting to legitimise a new extractive frontier in the deep sea. Opportunistic investors can make money through speculation and attracting government subsidies.
But deep-sea mining will not necessarily displace, replace or change mining on land. Land-based mining contracts span decades and the companies involved will not abandon ongoing or planned projects. Their activities will continue, even if deep-sea mining begins.
Deep-sea mining also faces many of the same challenges as mining on land, while introducing new problems. The social problems that arise during transport, processing and distribution remain the same.
3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the international seabed is the common heritage of humankind. This means the proceeds of deep-sea mining should be distributed fairly among all countries.
Deep-sea mining commercial partnerships between developing countries in the Global South and firms from the North have yet to pay off for the former. There is little indication this pattern will change.
For example, when Canadian company Nautilus went bankrupt in 2019, it saddled Papua New Guinea with millions in debt from a failed domestic deep-sea mining venture.
The Metals Company has partnerships with Nauru and Tonga but the latest deal with the US creates uncertainty about whether their agreements will be honoured.
European investors took control of Blue Minerals Jamaica, originally a Jamaican-owned company, shortly after orchestrating its start up. Any profits would therefore go offshore.
Given the threat of environmental harm, the evidence suggests deep-sea mining is not worth the risk.
Justin Alger receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
D.G. Webster receives funding from the National Science Foundation in the United States and various internal funding sources at Dartmouth University.
Jessica Green receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Kate J Neville receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Stacy D VanDeveer and Susan M Park do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Today, President Donald J. Trump officially signed The One Big Beautiful Bill into law — a once-in-a-generation piece of legislation that makes good on his campaign promises and puts America First.
Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Lauren S. Hughes, State Policy Director, Farley Health Policy Center; Associate Professor of Family Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
As researchers studying rural health and health policy, we anticipate that these reductions in Medicaid spending, along with changes to the Affordable Care Act, will disproportionately affect the 66 million people living in rural America – nearly 1 in 5 Americans.
People who live in rural areas are more likely to have health insurance through Medicaid and are at greater risk of losing that coverage. We expect that the changes brought about by this new law will lead to a rise in unpaid care that hospitals will have to provide. As a result, small, local hospitals will have to make tough decisions that include changing or eliminating services, laying off staff and delaying the purchase of new equipment. Many rural hospitals will have to reduce their services or possibly close their doors altogether.
Hits to rural health
The budget legislation’s biggest effect on rural America comes from changes to the Medicaid program, which represent the largest federal rollback of health insurance coverage in the U.S. to date.
First, the legislation changes how states can finance their share of the Medicaid program by restricting where funds states use to support their Medicaid programs can come from. This bill limits how states can tax and charge fees to hospitals, managed care organizations and other health care providers, and how they can use such taxes and fees in the future to pay higher rates to providers under Medicaid. These limitations will reduce payments to rural hospitals that depend upon Medicaid to keep their doors open.
Rural hospitals play a crucial role in health care access.
Second, by 2027, states must institute work requirements that demand most Medicaid enrollees work 80 hours per month or be in school at least half time. Arkansas’ brief experiment with work requirements in 2018 demonstrates that rather than boost employment, the policy increases bureaucracy, hindering access to health care benefits for eligible people. States will also now be required to verify Medicaid eligibility every six months versus annually. That change also increases the risk people will lose coverage due to extra red tape.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that work requirements instituted through this legislative package will result in nearly 5 million people losing Medicaid coverage. This will decrease the number of paying patients at rural hospitals and increase the unpaid care hospitals must provide, further damaging their ability to stay open.
Additionally, the bill changes how people qualify for the premium tax credits within the Affordable Care Act Marketplace. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this change, along with other changes to the ACA such as fewer and shorter enrollment periods and additional requirements for documenting income, will reduce the number of people insured through the ACA Marketplace by about 3 million by 2034. Premium tax credits were expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, helping millions of Americans obtain coverage who previously struggled to do so. This bill lets these expanded tax credits expire, which with may result in an additional 4.2 million people becoming uninsured.
An insufficient stop-gap
Senators from both sides of the aisle have voiced concerns about the legislative package’s potential effects on the financial stability of rural hospitals and frontier hospitals, which are facilities located in remote areas with fewer than six people per square mile. As a result, the Senate voted to set aside $50 billion over the next five years for a newly created Rural Health Transformation Program.
These funds are to be allocated in two ways. Half will be directly distributed equally to states that submit an application that includes a rural health transformation plan detailing how rural hospitals will improve the delivery and quality of health care. The remainder will be distributed to states in varying amounts through a process that is currently unknown.
While additional funding to support rural health facilities is welcome, how it is distributed and how much is available will be critical. Estimates suggest that rural areas will see a reduction of $155 billion in federal spending over 10 years, with much of that concentrated in 12 states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act and have large proportions of rural residents.
That means $50 billion is not enough to offset cuts to Medicaid and other programs that will reduce funds flowing to rural health facilities.
Rural and frontier hospitals have long faced hardship because of their aging infrastructure, older and sicker patient populations, geographic isolation and greater financial and regulatory burdens. Since 2010, 153 rural hospitals have closed their doors permanently or ceased providing inpatient services. This trend is particularly acute in states that have chosen not to expand Medicaid via the Affordable Care Act, many of which have larger percentages of their residents living in rural areas.
Currently more than half of rural hospitals no longer deliver babies. Rural facilities serve fewer patients than those in more densely populated areas. They also have high fixed costs, and because they serve a high percentage of Medicaid patients, they rely on payments from Medicaid, which tends to pay lower rates than commercial insurance. Because of these pressures, these units will continue to close, forcing women to travel farther to give birth, to deliver before going full term and to deliver outside of traditional hospital settings.
And because hospitals in rural areas serve relatively small populations, they lack negotiating power to obtain fair and adequate payment from private health insurers and affordable equipment and supplies from medical companies. Recruiting and retaining needed physicians and other health care workers is expensive, and acquiring capital to renovate, expand or build new facilities is increasingly out of reach.
Finally, given that rural residents are more likely to have Medicaid than their urban counterparts, the legislation’s cuts to Medicaid will disproportionately reduce the rate at which rural providers and health facilities are paid by Medicaid for services they offer. With many rural hospitals already teetering on closure, this will place already financially fragile hospitals on an accelerated path toward demise.
Far-reaching effects
Rural hospitals are not just sources of local health care. They are also vital economic engines.
Hospital closures result in the loss of local access to health care, causing residents to choose between traveling longer distances to see a doctor or forgoing the services they need.
But hospitals in these regions are also major employers that often pay some of the highest wages in their communities. Their closure can drive a decline in the local tax base, limiting funding available for services such as roads and public schools and making it more difficult to attract and retain businesses that small towns depend on. Declines in rural health care undermine local economies.
Furthermore, the country as a whole relies on rural America for the production of food, fuel and other natural resources. In our view, further weakening rural hospitals may affect not just local economies but the health of the whole U.S. economy.
Lauren S. Hughes has received funding for rural health projects from the Sunflower Foundation, The Colorado Health Foundation, the University of Colorado School of Medicine Rural Program Office, the Caring for Colorado Foundation, and the Zoma Foundation. She currently serves as chair of the Rural Health Redesign Center Organization Board of Directors and is a member of the Rural Primary Care Advisory Council with the Weitzman Institute.
Kevin J. Bennett receives funding from the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, the Health Resources and Services Administration and the state of South Carolina. He is currently on the Board of Trustees of the National Rural Health Association as immediate past president.
FEMA will partner with Texas state and local authorities to provide resources and assist in recovery efforts
WASHINGTON – Today, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has been activated in Texas following President Trump’s Major Disaster Declaration.
Beginning on the evening of July 3, heavy storms across the state of Texas produced rainfall totals between 5 to 15 inches and over 18 inches in some isolated areas, leading to significant flooding, especially in Kerr County located in the Texas Hill Country.
“Thank you, President Trump. We are currently deploying federal emergency management resources to Texas first responders, and will work closely with state and local authorities to ensure the people of Texas get the support they need as search efforts continue and recovery begins,” said Secretary Kristi Noem.“Pray for the victims, the families, and our first responders. God bless Texas.”
The Department of Homeland Security will ensure that state and local authorities have the resources they need to lead a swift and effective response amid this tragic disaster. Secretary Noem was on the ground with Governor Abbott and local leaders on Saturday and will continue to work to make sure Texas has the resources needed to respond and recover.
In addition, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) is working around the clock, including overnight, on search and rescue operations. Today, USCG continues to fly two helicopters in the Llano, Texas area and is assisting with two helicopters and three C-144 airplanes equipped with thermal cameras to find more survivors. 850 people have been rescued.
Individuals who sustained losses in the designated areas should first file claims with their insurance providers and then apply for assistance by registering online at www.DisasterAssistance.gov, by calling 1-800-621-3362 or by using the FEMA App. If you use a relay service, such as video relay service (VRS), captioned telephone service or others, provide FEMA the number for that service.
People shop for food in Brooklyn in 2023 at a store that makes sure that its customers know it accepts SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps and EBT. Spencer Platt/Getty Images
In my research on the history of food stamps, I’ve found that the program was meant to be widely available to most low-income people. The SNAP changes break that tradition in two ways.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 3 million people are likely to be dropped from the program and lose their benefits. This decline will occur in part because more people will face time limits if they don’t meet work requirements. Even those who meet the requirements may lose benefits because of difficulty submitting the necessary documents.
Inspired by the plight of unemployed coal miners whom John F. Kennedy met in Appalachia when he campaigned for the presidency in 1960, the early food stamps program was not limited to single parents with children, older people and people with disabilities, like many other safety net programs were at the time. It was supposed to help low-income people afford more and better food, regardless of their circumstances.
From the start, the states administered the program and covered some of its administrative costs and the federal government paid for the benefits in full. This arrangement encouraged states to enroll everyone who needed help without fearing the budgetary consequences.
Who could qualify and how much help they could get were set by uniform national standards, so that even the residents of the poorest states would be able to afford a budget-conscious but nutritionally adequate diet.
The federal government’s responsibility for the cost of benefits also allowed spending to automatically grow during economic downturns, when more people need assistance. These federal dollars helped families, retailers and local economies weather tough times.
The changes to the SNAP program included in the legislative package that Congress approved by narrow margins and Trump signed into law, however, will make it harder for the program to serve its original goals.
Restricting benefits
Since the early 1970s, most so-called able-bodied adults who were not caring for a child or an adult with disabilities had to meet a work requirement to get food stamps. Welfare reform legislation in 1996 made that requirement stricter for such adults between the ages of 18 and 50 by imposing a three-month time limit if they didn’t log 20 hours or more of employment or another approved activity, such as verified volunteering.
Budget legislation passed in 2023 expanded this rule to adults up to age 54. The 2025 law will further expand the time limit to adults up to age 64 and parents of children age 14 or over.
States can currently get permission from the federal government to waive work requirements in areas with insufficient jobs or unemployment above the national average. This flexibility to waive work requirements will now be significantly limited and available only where at least 1 in 10 workers are unemployed.
Concerned senators secured an exemption from the work requirements for most Native Americans and Native Alaskans, who are more likely to live in areas with limited job opportunities.
The new changes to SNAP policies will also deny benefits to many immigrants with authorization to be in the U.S., such as people granted political asylum or official refugee status. Immigrants without authorization to reside in the U.S. will continue to be ineligible for SNAP benefits.
Tracking ‘error rates’
Critics of food stamps have long argued that states lack incentives to carefully administer the program because the federal government is on the hook for the cost of benefits.
In the 1970s, as the number of Americans on the food stamp rolls soared, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program, developed a system for assessing if states were accurately determining whether applicants were eligible for benefits and how much they could get.
A state’s “payment error rate” estimates the share of benefits paid out that were more or less than an applicant was actually eligible for. The error rate was not then and is not today a measure of fraud. Typically, it just indicates the share of families who get a higher – or lower – amount of benefits than they are eligible for because of mistakes or confusion on the part of the applicant or the case worker who handles the application.
States responded by increasing their red tape. For example, they asked applicants to submit more documentation and made them go through more bureaucratic hoops, like having more frequent in-person interviews, to get – and continue receiving – SNAP benefits.
These demands hit low-wage workers hardest because their applications were more prone to mistakes. Low-income workers often don’t have consistent work hours and their pay can vary from week to week and month to month. The number of families getting benefits fell steeply.
The USDA tried to reverse this decline by offering states options to simplify the process for applying for and continuing to get SNAP benefits over the course of the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Enrollment grew steadily.
Despite this requirement, the national average error rate jumped from 7.4% before the pandemic, to a record high of 11.7% in 2023. Rates rose as states struggled with a surge of people applying for benefits, a shortage of staff in state welfare agencies and procedural changes.
The big legislative package will increase states’ expenses in two ways.
It will reduce the federal government’s responsibility for half of the cost of administering the program to 25% beginning in the 2027 fiscal year.
And some states will have to pay a share of benefit costs for the first time in the program’s history, depending on their payment error rates. Beginning in the 2028 fiscal year, states with an error rate between 6-8% would be responsible for 5% of the cost of benefits. Those with an error rate between 8-10% would have to pay 10%, and states with an error rate over 10% would have to pay 15%. The federal government would continue to pay all benefits in states with error rates below 6%.
Republicans argue the changes will give states more “skin in the game” and ensure better administration of the program.
While the national payment error rate fell from 11.68% in the 2023 fiscal year to 10.93% a year later, 42 states still had rates in excess of 6% in 2024. Twenty states plus the District of Columbia had rates of 10% or higher.
At nearly 25%, Alaska has the highest payment error rate in the country. But Alaska won’t be in trouble right away. To ease passage in the Senate, where the vote of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, was in doubt, a provision was added to the bill allowing several states with the highest error rates to avoid cost sharing for up to two years after it begins.
About 600,000 individuals and families will lose an average of $100 a month in benefits because of a change in the way utility costs are treated. The law also prevents future administrations from increasing benefits beyond the cost of living, as the Biden Administration did.
States cannot cut benefits below the national standards set in federal law.
But the shift of costs to financially strapped states will force them to make tough choices. They will either have to cut back spending on other programs, increase taxes, discourage people from getting SNAP benefits or drop the program altogether.
The changes will, in the end, make it even harder for Americans who can’t afford the bare necessities to get enough nutritious food to feed their families.
Tracy Roof does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
People shop for food in Brooklyn in 2023 at a store that makes sure that its customers know it accepts SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps and EBT. Spencer Platt/Getty Images
In my research on the history of food stamps, I’ve found that the program was meant to be widely available to most low-income people. The SNAP changes break that tradition in two ways.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 3 million people are likely to be dropped from the program and lose their benefits. This decline will occur in part because more people will face time limits if they don’t meet work requirements. Even those who meet the requirements may lose benefits because of difficulty submitting the necessary documents.
Inspired by the plight of unemployed coal miners whom John F. Kennedy met in Appalachia when he campaigned for the presidency in 1960, the early food stamps program was not limited to single parents with children, older people and people with disabilities, like many other safety net programs were at the time. It was supposed to help low-income people afford more and better food, regardless of their circumstances.
From the start, the states administered the program and covered some of its administrative costs and the federal government paid for the benefits in full. This arrangement encouraged states to enroll everyone who needed help without fearing the budgetary consequences.
Who could qualify and how much help they could get were set by uniform national standards, so that even the residents of the poorest states would be able to afford a budget-conscious but nutritionally adequate diet.
The federal government’s responsibility for the cost of benefits also allowed spending to automatically grow during economic downturns, when more people need assistance. These federal dollars helped families, retailers and local economies weather tough times.
The changes to the SNAP program included in the legislative package that Congress approved by narrow margins and Trump signed into law, however, will make it harder for the program to serve its original goals.
Restricting benefits
Since the early 1970s, most so-called able-bodied adults who were not caring for a child or an adult with disabilities had to meet a work requirement to get food stamps. Welfare reform legislation in 1996 made that requirement stricter for such adults between the ages of 18 and 50 by imposing a three-month time limit if they didn’t log 20 hours or more of employment or another approved activity, such as verified volunteering.
Budget legislation passed in 2023 expanded this rule to adults up to age 54. The 2025 law will further expand the time limit to adults up to age 64 and parents of children age 14 or over.
States can currently get permission from the federal government to waive work requirements in areas with insufficient jobs or unemployment above the national average. This flexibility to waive work requirements will now be significantly limited and available only where at least 1 in 10 workers are unemployed.
Concerned senators secured an exemption from the work requirements for most Native Americans and Native Alaskans, who are more likely to live in areas with limited job opportunities.
The new changes to SNAP policies will also deny benefits to many immigrants with authorization to be in the U.S., such as people granted political asylum or official refugee status. Immigrants without authorization to reside in the U.S. will continue to be ineligible for SNAP benefits.
Tracking ‘error rates’
Critics of food stamps have long argued that states lack incentives to carefully administer the program because the federal government is on the hook for the cost of benefits.
In the 1970s, as the number of Americans on the food stamp rolls soared, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program, developed a system for assessing if states were accurately determining whether applicants were eligible for benefits and how much they could get.
A state’s “payment error rate” estimates the share of benefits paid out that were more or less than an applicant was actually eligible for. The error rate was not then and is not today a measure of fraud. Typically, it just indicates the share of families who get a higher – or lower – amount of benefits than they are eligible for because of mistakes or confusion on the part of the applicant or the case worker who handles the application.
States responded by increasing their red tape. For example, they asked applicants to submit more documentation and made them go through more bureaucratic hoops, like having more frequent in-person interviews, to get – and continue receiving – SNAP benefits.
These demands hit low-wage workers hardest because their applications were more prone to mistakes. Low-income workers often don’t have consistent work hours and their pay can vary from week to week and month to month. The number of families getting benefits fell steeply.
The USDA tried to reverse this decline by offering states options to simplify the process for applying for and continuing to get SNAP benefits over the course of the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Enrollment grew steadily.
Despite this requirement, the national average error rate jumped from 7.4% before the pandemic, to a record high of 11.7% in 2023. Rates rose as states struggled with a surge of people applying for benefits, a shortage of staff in state welfare agencies and procedural changes.
The big legislative package will increase states’ expenses in two ways.
It will reduce the federal government’s responsibility for half of the cost of administering the program to 25% beginning in the 2027 fiscal year.
And some states will have to pay a share of benefit costs for the first time in the program’s history, depending on their payment error rates. Beginning in the 2028 fiscal year, states with an error rate between 6-8% would be responsible for 5% of the cost of benefits. Those with an error rate between 8-10% would have to pay 10%, and states with an error rate over 10% would have to pay 15%. The federal government would continue to pay all benefits in states with error rates below 6%.
Republicans argue the changes will give states more “skin in the game” and ensure better administration of the program.
While the national payment error rate fell from 11.68% in the 2023 fiscal year to 10.93% a year later, 42 states still had rates in excess of 6% in 2024. Twenty states plus the District of Columbia had rates of 10% or higher.
At nearly 25%, Alaska has the highest payment error rate in the country. But Alaska won’t be in trouble right away. To ease passage in the Senate, where the vote of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, was in doubt, a provision was added to the bill allowing several states with the highest error rates to avoid cost sharing for up to two years after it begins.
About 600,000 individuals and families will lose an average of $100 a month in benefits because of a change in the way utility costs are treated. The law also prevents future administrations from increasing benefits beyond the cost of living, as the Biden Administration did.
States cannot cut benefits below the national standards set in federal law.
But the shift of costs to financially strapped states will force them to make tough choices. They will either have to cut back spending on other programs, increase taxes, discourage people from getting SNAP benefits or drop the program altogether.
The changes will, in the end, make it even harder for Americans who can’t afford the bare necessities to get enough nutritious food to feed their families.
Tracy Roof does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
