Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) today introduced the Bring the Space Shuttle Home Act, which would move the Space Shuttle Discovery from Virginia to its rightful home near NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston:
“Houston played a critical role throughout the life of the space shuttle program, but it is clear political favors trumped common sense and fairness when the Obama administration blocked the Space City from receiving the recognition it deserves,” said Sen. Cornyn. “I am proud to lead the effort to finally bring Discovery home to Houston, where future generations of Texans and Americans can come to learn about the city’s integral role in our nation’s space shuttle program.”
“Home to the Johnson Space Center and its famed Mission Control, Houston has an unparalleled reputation and history in the exploration of the new frontier,” said Sen. Cruz. “It is past time that the Space Center Houston Museum houses a space shuttle, given the unique relationship between the entire program and its support staff in Houston. Bringing the Discovery to its final home will offer hundreds of thousands of visitors each year the opportunity to engage with a living piece of NASA’s history and understand why Houston is known worldwide as ‘Space City.’”
“Since its very inception, NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston has been the epicenter for manned spaceflight, propelling Texas as the national leader in the U.S. space industry,” said Gov. Abbott. “The first word spoken from the moon was ‘Houston.’ To honor that legacy, it’s long overdue for a retired NASA Space Shuttle to rest at Houston’s Johnson Space Center so Texans can see, learn from, and enjoy it for generations. I thank Senator John Cornyn and Senator Ted Cruz for spearheading this effort to bring this historic Space Shuttle to Texas, the proud home and command center of NASA’s space operations.”
Background:
Mission Control at NASA’s Johnson Space Center led all of the space shuttle flights throughout the program’s history, and the astronauts who flew aboard the shuttles lived and trained in Houston. Four space shuttles were retired from NASA in 2010, and one of them was expected to go on display in the Space City.
Congress stated in the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 that the four space shuttles were to be given to states with a “historical relationship with either the launch, flight operations, or processing of the Space Shuttle orbiters or the retrieval of NASA-manned space vehicles, or significant contributions to human space flight.” Unfortunately, this directive was unlawfully ignored by the Obama administration, who played politics to keep Houston from getting one of the shuttles. Notably, the administration gave one of the four shuttles to New York City, which has not made any major contributions to the nation’s history of space exploration and is not home to a NASA center—unlike Houston.
The Space Shuttle Discovery is the only shuttle still owned by the federal government and able to be transferred to Houston. This legislation would authorize the movement of the Space Shuttle Discovery from the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum’s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Virginia to a nonprofit near the Johnson Space Center in Houston.
Source: United States Senator Peter Welch (D-Vermont)
Ballal is an Oscar-winning co-director of the documentary No Other Land
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and U.S. Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA-07) today led 29 of their bicameral colleagues in raising the alarm over escalating violence in the West Bank. In a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Lawmakers urge the Trump Administration to immediately reinstate sanctions against individuals who perpetrate violence that undermines regional stability and security in the West Bank. The bicameral letter comes in response to the violent assault of Palestinian filmmaker Hamdan Ballal, an Oscar-winning co-director of the documentary, No Other Land, which chronicles life for Palestinians under occupation in the West Bank.
“The assault on Mr. Ballal occurred against the backdrop of intensified Israeli military operations across the West Bank,” wrote the Lawmakers. “Given the gravity of this attack and its implications on the ability of Palestinian civilians to advocate for self-determination peacefully, the U.S. must put pressure on the Israeli government to hold perpetrators accountable.”
On March 24, 2025, Ballal was attacked by a group of Israeli settlers in the village of Susiya in the occupied West Bank. The account of the attack from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) differs greatly from witness reports, which also claim that the IDF did not intervene and instead handcuffed Ballal after he sustained serious injuries.
“Given Mr. Ballal’s platform, we are especially concerned that this violent attack and failure to hold his perpetrators accountable suppresses his freedom of speech and those who tell Palestinian stories,” continued the Lawmakers. “While it is important to dismantle militant cells in the West Bank that threaten the security of the Israeli people, we are concerned recent Israeli operations have disproportionately impacted Palestinian civilians.”
This assault occurred as tensions continue to rise in the occupied West Bank during intensified military operations by the IDF forces. Since January, operations have displaced more than 40,000 Palestinians.
In addition to Senator Welch, the letter was signed by Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).
In the House, the letter was signed by Representative Jayapal and Reps. Becca Balint (VT-At-Large), André Carson (D-IN-07), Greg Casar (D-TX-35), Joaquin Castro (D-TX-20), Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO-05), Steve Cohen (D-TN-09), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX-37), Maxwell Frost (D-FL-10), Jesús G. “Chuy” García (D-IL-04), Jonathan L. Jackson (D-IL-01), Sara Jacobs (D-CA-51), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson Jr. (D-GA-04), Seth Magaziner (D-RI-02), Betty McCollum (D-MN-04), James P. McGovern (D-MA-02), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC-AL), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY-14), Ilhan Omar (D-MN-05), Mark Pocan (D-WI-02), Delia C. Ramirez (D-IL-03), Jamie Raskin (D-MD-08), Janice Schakowsky (D-IL-09), Melanie A. Stansbury (D-NM-01), Paul Tonko (D-NY-20), Nydia M. Velázquez (D-NY-07), Maxine Waters (D-CA-43), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ-12).
The Lawmakers’ letter is supported by the American Friends of Combatants for Peace, CAIR Action, Center for Jewish Nonviolence, Church Women United in New York State, Christian-Jewish Allies for a Just Peace for Israel/Palestine, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), Friends Committee on National Legislation, Friends of Sabeel North America (FOSNA), IfNotNow Movement, J Street, Jahalin Solidarity, MARUF CT, Medglobal, Minnesota Peace Project, MPower Change Action Fund, Muslim Civic Coalition, Muslims United PAC, New Jewish Narrative, Oasis Legal Services, Partners for Progressive Israel, Peace Action, Peace, Justice, Sustainability NOW!, ReThinking Foreign Policy, RootsAction, Upte Members for Palestine, Voices for Justice in Palestine, WILPF, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, US Section (WILPF US), and Win Without War.
Read the full text of the letter.
First, it was many years in the making. Its curator, Professor Emerita Joanna Cannon of the Courtauld Institute of Art, had been working on it for a decade or so. Duccio, one of the exhibition’s featured artists and one of the greatest Italian painters of the middle ages, had a major show in Siena in 2003. Another featured artist, Ambrogio Lorenzetti, had a smaller exhibition in the same city in 2017.
Second, the National Gallery’s late medieval Italian paintings had not been seen for two years because of the refurbishment of the Sainsbury Wing. That is, except for a select few displayed in an excellent exhibition on Saint Francis of Assisi in 2023.
The National Gallery’s take on the most exciting 50 years of Siena’s artistic production makes the most of its ground floor gallery rooms, enabling conversations between objects and medium.
The exhibition is a remarkable achievement: a pleasure for the eye and commendable for its ability to make medieval religious art accessible.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
Britain’s love affair with Sienese painting is well documented from the late 19th century at least. But this exhibition focuses on much more than the celebrated four painters – Duccio, Simone Martini and Ambrogio Lorenzetti and his brother Pietro.
The wealth of Siena’s visual culture is represented with illuminated manuscripts; sculptures in marble, ivory, terracotta and walnut; reliquaries (containers for holy relics) and croziers (hooked staves) made from gold and enamel; and rugs and silks.
Panels with protagonists painted in bright reds, blues, pinks and greens with tiny brushstrokes using pigments mixed with egg on gilded backgrounds abound. But there are also frescoes, detached from their original mural setting, yet able to tell the story of their making and meaning.
Ambrogio Lorenzetti’s Annunciation (1344) is defined only by lines brushed on wet plaster using a red pigment (sinoper). This was a common initial step to set the composition, over which another layer of plaster would be applied again with contours painted but now filled with colour.
In another room, a beautifully modelled painted head of Jesus split into two, carved by Lando di Pietro (1338), is all that remains of a larger crucifix after bombing by allies in the second world war. It is the only known work of the sculptor. He was identified by the personal handwritten prayers concealed within the sculpture, which are displayed next to it.
The showstoppers
The curators have managed to do what could not be achieved in Siena in 2003: bring Duccio’s three triptychs into a single venue. The first two are shown just a few metres apart, to enable comparison and close viewing of all sides. Their painted backs and the geometric motifs behind their folding wings enable us to understand them as three-dimensional, portable objects.
The Crucifixion triptych, bought by Prince Albert in 1845 and lent to the exhibition by King Charles, is not too far from the pair, inviting comparison.
Duccio’s Healing of the Man Born Blind finds itself reunited with seven of its companions for the first time since 1777. This is the closest reconstruction we’ll ever get of the back predella (a box-like shelf with images that supported the main panels) of Siena cathedral’s enormous double-sided high altarpiece (known as the Maestà), which was carried in procession through the city streets in 1311.
Originally painted on a massive horizontal poplar plank, the individual episodes depicting Jesus’s ministry were sold on the art market in the 19th century and dispersed across two continents. A ninth panel which probably started the narrative has never been found, although you wouldn’t know it from this display.
Nothing can distract from close viewing – you’ll want to enjoy it for as long as you can stand. This privileged view is unusual in an exhibition and possibly comes close to that enjoyed by the clergy during processions or pilgrimages in Siena cathedral. A photo montage of the reconstructed altarpiece is tiny and displayed on the wall opposite the reconstructed predella, alongside the panels originally on the front predella.
The other showstopper is Pietro Lorenzetti’s altarpiece. It’s usually on the high altar of the church of Santa Maria della Pieve in Arezzo, but has been lent by the diocese and placed on a low plinth. This allows us to imagine just how immense Duccio’s Maestà must have been.
This altarpiece represents the most popular formula created in early 14th-century Siena. These were large polyptychs of five (or seven) vertical panels usually displaying the virgin and child in the centre, surrounded by saints relevant to the locality and patrons.
The Arezzo polyptych is approximately three metres in height and width, with three registers but has lost its predella, having been dismantled and relocated several times. The type was so popular that it, and the Sienese painters who created it, were in demand throughout Tuscany and beyond.
Each of the objects displayed in this exhibition merits a long look. Since there are over 100, my last reflection will be on another extraordinary reunion: a small gilded glass icon depicting once again the virgin, child and saints above the Annunciation (1347). Its double-sided reliquary frame still contains 17 relics.
It’s conceived as a miniature altarpiece, imitating the basic shape of the larger Sienese altarpieces on display. It also uses the same materials in addition to glass that has been gilded, incised and painted in red, blue and green.
Such precious materials and meticulous craft testify to the richness of Sienese art during the first half of the 14th century.
Louise Bourdua does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Aimee Grant, Senior Lecturer in Public Health and Wellcome Trust Career Development Fellow, Swansea University
For decades, a jigsaw puzzle piece has been used to symbolise autism across the world. It has been used for charity logos and awareness ribbons, and even tattooed on to the bodies of well-meaning parents.
But for many autistic adults, the puzzle piece isn’t just outdated – it’s offensive. Some consider it a hate symbol: a reminder of how autistic people have long been misunderstood, pathologised and excluded from conversations about their own lives.
The puzzle piece first appeared in 1963, when the UK’s National Autistic Society adopted a logo designed by a non-autistic parent of an autistic child. It featured not just a puzzle piece but the image of a crying child, meant to depict autism as a puzzling condition that caused suffering.
In 1999, the Autism Society of America introduced a ribbon covered in colourful puzzle pieces. This reinforced the idea that autism was something to be solved. The imagery gained even more prominence when the US-based organisation Autism Speaks, founded in 2005, adopted a blue puzzle piece as its logo.
One autistic advocate described the symbol as a “red flag” – a warning sign that the person or organisation using it may not fully respect or understand autistic people.
So why does the puzzle piece provoke such a strong reaction?
To many, the symbol suggests that autistic people are incomplete, a mystery or a problem in need of fixing. This fits with the medical model of autism, which focuses on deficits and aims to make autistic people behave more like non-autistic people, rather than letting them live authentically.
From deficit to difference
Because of these criticisms of the medical model, some autistic people subscribe to a social model of autism. This sees autism not as a problem to be fixed, but as a difference to be understood. According to this view, many of the challenges autistic people face stem not from autism itself, but from a lack of understanding and acceptance in society.
However, it can be difficult to put this social model of disability in practice in under-resourced healthcare systems.
It is closely tied to the “double empathy problem”. This is the idea that communication breakdowns between autistic and non-autistic people go both ways. In other words, if autistic people are “puzzling”, it’s often because the wider world hasn’t taken the time to understand them.
The neurodiversity movement goes one step further, arguing that neurological differences such as autism, ADHD and dyslexia are natural variations in the human population. Just as biodiversity is good for the environment, neurodiversity is arguably good for society.
In recent years, several major autism organisations have taken steps to distance themselves from the puzzle piece. The National Autistic Society dropped the symbol in the early 2000s, and the Autism Society of America followed suit in 2023. The academic journal Autism removed the puzzle piece from its cover in 2018, in recognition of its harmful connotations.
That said, the symbol is still frequently used, appearing in search engines and image databases.
Why many autistic adults hate the jigsaw puzzle piece symbol.
Research has found that puzzle piece imagery tends to evoke negative associations such as incompleteness and imperfection, whether it’s connected to autism or not. It’s no surprise, then, that many autistic people ask for something more positive, respectful and inclusive.
One popular alternative is the rainbow infinity symbol, first developed by autistic advocates in 2005. It represents the diversity of the neurodivergent community, including autistic people.
The gold infinity symbol, meanwhile, is used specifically to represent autism. The chemical symbol for gold is “Au”, the first two letters of autism.
The puzzle piece was created in the 1960s by non-autistic people to represent a condition they saw as tragic and mysterious. But today, autistic people are speaking for themselves. The overwhelming message is clear – the puzzle piece doesn’t represent us.
Aimee Grant receives funding from UKRI, the Wellcome Trust and the Morgan Advanced Studies Institute. She is a non-executive director of Disability Wales.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andie Riches, PhD Candidate, School of Psychology, Sport and Sensory Science, Anglia Ruskin University
In rowing, “catching a crab” is when an oar gets stuck in the water, stopping the boat’s momentum. Progress toward gender equality in the Oxford v Cambridge Boat Race has followed a similar rhythm, with periods of forward motion interrupted by moments of tension or pushback.
This year marks a decade since one period of forward motion, when the women began racing on the same course, on the same day as the men – moving from Henley-on-Thames to the Tideway in London. At the time, the change was heralded as a watershed moment, with some rather boldly and wrongly stating that the move ended what they dubbed one of “the last bastions of gender inequality in sport”.
The women’s race has become a firmly established part of the event. However, our ongoing research into the experiences of female boat race athletes over the last decade reveals that significant disparities persist.
As one athlete told us: “Racing on the Tideway was still relatively new when we started, and we were aware of the struggles the women’s team had faced to be recognised and taken seriously.”
But equality isn’t just about having a place in the race; it’s about having the same support, investment and opportunities as the men. As one rower put it: “We’ve moved forward, but we’re still playing catch-up.”
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
From Henley to the Tideway
For decades, female rowers were held back by institutional barriers such as unequal funding, media coverage and a lack of sponsorship. Before 2015, the women raced on a two-kilometre stretch at Henley-on-Thames, a separate course from the men’s four-mile route on the Championship Course on the Tideway in London. One rower reflected that racing at Henley felt “secondary”, lacking the same recognition as the men’s race.
The issue wasn’t the venue. It was the resource disparity, inadequate facilities and lack of media exposure. As one rower described, “We had no showers, no heating, and no space to stretch – just a cold shed. While the men had a better setup next door with basics like kettles and heating.” The lack of visibility at Henley reinforced the perception that the women’s race was secondary, diminishing their accomplishments.
Even after moving to the Tideway, however, female rowers have faced rough waters, not just from the river itself when the Cambridge women’s boat famously sank, but also from having to challenge public perception.
Consistent with broader research, our analysis of the media coverage during and after the 2015 women’s event revealed a consistent pattern of focusing on personal stories, emotional moments and the historic nature of the race. This storytelling often came at the expense of recognising the athletes’ performance and competitiveness.
A 2019 study found that women’s sports received just 3.2% of televised sports news coverage. While coverage has increased in recent years, disparities persist.
A 2024 Football Supporters’ Association survey found that only 31.8% of the fans felt there was sufficient mainstream media coverage of women’s football. That such calls remain necessary, even amid growing interest, highlights the continued marginalisation of women’s sport.
This external perception also appears to be evident within the internal environment of the boat clubs. One rower recalled: “It just felt almost like you inconvenienced them to use their space”, referring to the men’s crews.
This reflects a broader societal issue where women often feel they must justify their presence in spaces where they belong. Hence, the women’s crew not only face the physical challenge of the tideway’s choppy waters, but also an ongoing battle to prove their legitimacy.
In recent years, rowers challenged the deeply rooted tradition of “weigh-in” with the women’s crews opting not be weighed on the basis that it subjects athletes to a public display of their body weight. Some viewed this as a challenge to a longstanding tradition, while others felt its removal was a positive step for athlete welfare, mental health and body image.
Other issues also surfaced in 2021 when a former Oxford rower publicly criticised the university’s handling of her sexual assault allegation, arguing that the institution had failed to protect her. The university said at the time it was confident that in all cases it took considerable action to advise and support students who raise such concerns. Though not directly related to the Boat Race, such public cases have caused controversy and raised important questions about the environments in which these athletes train and compete.
Despite these setbacks, the women’s race has gained momentum. Sponsorship has grown, more people are watching, and for younger rowers, racing on the Tideway is now the norm. In 2015, the women’s Boat Race drew 4.8 million viewers – close to the 6.2 million who watched the men’s race. This highlighted the growing appeal of women’s rowing.
The race for gender equality in sport, like rowing, is a test of endurance. Short bursts of progress, like moving to the Tideway, are not enough. Lasting change takes continued effort.
The women’s Boat Race has come a long way, but the journey isn’t over. True equality will only be reached when women’s sport is valued on its own terms, rather than being compared to the men.
With each race, these women are not just competing for victory on the water but also helping to shape a more equal future for sport. The tide may be turning, but the finishing line in the race for equality is still ahead.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Donald Trump has partially walked back on his so-called “liberation day” tariffs on nearly all US imports after fears mounted that the move would result in a global recession and much higher borrowing costs for the US government.
On Wednesday, April 9, a mere 13 hours after his higher rate of “reciprocal tariffs” had come into effect, Trump announced they would be paused for 90 days.
“I thought that people were jumping a little bit out of line, they were getting yippy, you know … a little bit afraid,” Trump said to reporters outside the White House. Markets soared immediately upon hearing the news.
But at the same time, a volatile new stage in America’s trade war with China has emerged. The White House has excluded China from the pause and has hiked tariffs on all Chinese imports to 125%. This, Trump says, is because Beijing has shown “disrespect” to Washington and global markets.
Beijing, which has declared it will “fight to the end if the US side is bent on going down the wrong path”, was quick to respond. It has announced duties of 84% on American products and services, and has even floated the possibility of banning the import of Hollywood films.
What China’s response has shown is that it is no longer the same country as it was in 2017, when Trump managed to obtain some trade concessions from it by imposing tariffs. Beijing seems more willing to strike back at Washington, as well as showing signs of being more proactive in its response to American measures.
The impact of China’s response has not yet been fully realised, but tariffs have already raised the spectre of increased prices in the US. Many of the clothing and consumer electronics that Americans buy are shipped from China. It’s possible that far from boosting Trump’s popularity, these tariffs may eventually end up reversing it.
At a fundraising dinner in Washington, less than a day before he shelved plans to hike tariffs on US trading partners, Trump insisted: “I know what the hell I’m doing.” But his subsequent loss of face in pausing tariffs for other countries may mean he has no option but to double down on a tit-for-tat trade war with China.
China is his administration’s go-to villain, and any delay or reversal in responding to Chinese retaliation will be a humiliation to Trump’s strongman image. This suggests a tumultuous period ahead for relations between China and the US.
Expect more hostility
The tariffs will probably have a mobilising effect on the Chinese population. A 2022 survey on public opinion in China found that people born after 1990 are more likely to hold an unfavourable view of the US compared with previous generations. The survey concluded that Trump’s actions during his first term were much more to blame than propaganda.
Beijing has also traditionally invoked the history of the “unequal treaties” forced upon its ailing Qing dynasty in the late 19th century as a means to mobilise its population against western policies. This has been aided by how the economic demands made by Trump to China are, in the mind of the Chinese leadership, reminiscent of the demands made by the western powers of that period.
Fears of again falling prey to foreign powers play a significant role in Beijing’s policies, encapsulated by what is known as China’s “never again mentality”. This mentality could be used as a means to unify the Chinese population against an outside enemy, in a way similar to how many US politicians have attempted to cast China as a foe.
Beijing appears to be banking on the Chinese population’s supposed ability to withstand greater hardships than western consumers as being able to give it a key advantage over Washington. However, with China’s prosperity being a comparatively recent development, this ability will be put to the test.
Trump’s tariffs against traditional American allies will also play into Beijing’s hands on the international stage. Tokyo has discussed reducing its holdings of American treasuries, while simultaneously bolstering trade ties with China. These moves would have been unthinkable even a year ago – Japan has long been a key US ally and a regional rival of China.
Equally unthinkable is the possibility that the EU will follow a similar path. Spain’s prime minister, Pedro Sanchez, has called on Brussels to review its relationship with China. Moves aimed at sidelining China may end up isolating the US instead.
And, perhaps most concerningly, the tariffs may also undermine America’s ability to prevent a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. One of the key factors deterring an invasion was the threat of a 100% tariff on Chinese goods. With Trump’s tariffs on China already exceeding this, Beijing has less incentive to not go after Taipei.
What liberation day has shown us is that the Chinese-American relationship has entered a stage of protracted competition, a phase that Beijing has been preparing for over the past decade. Faced with a choice between humiliation on the international stage or economic disaster at home, it would appear neither side is willing to back down.
Tom Harper does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow
The US has decided – again – to upend the global trading system. With the latest raft of tariffs just beginning to kick in, and after a week in which markets worldwide fell precipitously, the Trump administration announced that it would be suspending high tariffs on nearly 60 countries for 90 days.
The announcement is only a partial reprieve. High tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China, as well as on global imports of steel, aluminium and automotives, remain, as does a 10% baseline tariff on all imports. US tariffs remain the highest they have been since the Great Depression, at levels unprecedented since the modern trade system was created after the second world war.
Before the pause, the UK was already in line for the 10% rate – which some commentators described as a Brexit benefit when compared to the EU’s prospective 20%.
While markets soared on the news of the pause, the damage is was already done. The subsequent rally is recouping some, but not all, losses incurred due to the tariffs already.
Businesses that had preparedfor tariffs by bulk-buying imported components ahead of time will have made cuts elsewhere to pay for it. They will not easily be able to reverse course.
The implications for the UK of the latest developments are mixed. All the tariffs imposed on direct UK exports to the US (chiefly steel, automotives and aircrafts, pharmaceuticals and medical equipment) remain in place.
While the US represents the second-largest market for UK goods, the majority of UK exports are in services (like banking and insurance), which the tariffs do not target. If tariffs were to hit direct UK-US goods trade only, the UK would likely be able to weather the shock.
Unfortunately, that’s not how trade works in the 21st century. Instead, two-thirds of trade takes place in what are known as “global value chains”. These are complex networks through which companies move the component parts of products between their own facilities around the world and those of their subcontractors.
Many UK businesses supply components that are incorporated by companies overseas into finished goods ultimately destined for the US. When the US imposes tariffs on those goods, UK manufacturers suffer too – even if direct UK exports to the US remain unchanged.
Global value chains will also reorient in response to trade barriers, as already took place in Asia during Trump’s first term. If businesses reroute their supply chains to avoid the tariff markets, the UK (which is not imposing retaliatory tariffs) could become a “sacrifice zone” (a place where cheaply made, poor-quality or environmentally harmful items are dumped or disposed of, “sacrificing” the wellbeing of local people) for excess supply, undercutting domestic producers.
Yet choosing not to retaliate is key to the UK’s diplomatic strategy. It hopes to stay close to the US in the hope of preferential treatment.
The UK’s pursuit of a US trade deal has been politically sensitive since the previous Trump administration. JessicaGirvan/Shutterstock
So far, that strategy is yet to bear fruit. The UK hopes to avoid the tariffs through a US trade deal, an objective that the countries have pursued since the UK left the European Union.
The US has repeatedly sought access to the UK agrifood market, a demand that has always been refused due to political opposition to importing American beef and chicken.
The sticky Brexit issue
Brexit adds to this complexity, as the Windsor framework requires food products sold in Northern Ireland to conform to European Union standards. The more standards in the rest of the UK diverge from those of the EU (as they would have to do to secure a US trade deal), the more onerous the checks in the Irish Sea would become.
Keir Starmer’s government has also sought to renegotiate parts of the agreement with the EU, seeking tighter economic ties that will require closer regulatory alignment. Pursuing deregulation to meet US trade demands, however, makes that unlikely.
The tariffs compound this dilemma. If the higher rates return after 90 days, Northern Irish exports to the US will face a lower rate than those from the Republic of Ireland. But US imports to Northern Ireland will be hit with EU tariffs while imports to the rest of the UK will remain tariff-free.
That will create some opportunities. Businesses might choose to operate in Northern Ireland to access a lower tariff rate on their US exports while also producing goods for the EU market.
But it also creates risks. With three different tariff regimes in Britain, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, goods flowing across both the Irish Sea and the Irish land border could require additional checks. This would risk the very thing the Windsor Framework was meant to avoid.
Given these risks, a 90-day reprieve is a window of opportunity. But with US government policy that can change on a dime (or a post), the UK risks being caught between the rival powers of the US and EU – and trampled in the crossfire.
Maha Rafi Atal is a volunteer organizer with the US Democratic Party.
Measles is one of the most challenging diseases to control. It requires a sustained uptake of well over 90% of two doses of a measles-containing vaccine such as MMR. But since the COVID pandemic, there has been a decline in uptake of routine vaccines in many countries including the US, Canada and Europe, resulting in outbreaks of the disease.
For instance, despite eliminating measles in 2000, the US experienced an outbreak in April 2025. In Texas, the centre of this outbreak, 57 people were hospitalised and two unvaccinated school-aged children died.
Canada has also exerienced its largest measles outbreak in 14 years, while last year, England experienced an outbreak of almost 3,000 confirmed cases and one death.
Before the measles vaccine was introduced in the UK in 1968, virtually every child caught the highly infectious disease and hundreds of thousands of cases were reported each year. In a peak year, there were over 100 measles-related deaths.
Twenty years after the introduction of a measles-only-vaccine, it was replaced with the combination vaccine MMR which also gives protection against mumps and rubella. The aim of this vaccine is to eliminate all three infections. There has been varying success in achieving this aim.
Rubella – also known as German measles – is a very mild infection, but can be devastating if caught in the early stages of pregnancy. Fortunately, it is now a rare condition in the UK thanks to MMR.
In rare cases, mumps can cause complications such as meningitis and hearing loss – but it too is now much less common than pre-MMR vaccine.
Measles can be fatal and is highly contagious, so it’s much more difficult to control than most other infections. It has a high rate of complications, including pneumonia and inflammation of the brain.
One vaccine dose gives about 95% protection against infection. But, because measles is so contagious, 95% uptake of two doses is needed to prevent outbreaks. Achieving such high uptake in all communities – and importantly, sustaining this high uptake once reached – is challenging.
Vaccine hesitancy
In 1998, research published in the medical journal The Lancet implied a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. This received intense media coverage and, not surprisingly, many parents decided not to have their children vaccinated.
Currently in England, vaccine uptake rates are too low. Only 89% of two-year-old children have had their first dose of MMR vaccine, and 83.9% have had two doses by the age of five. This means large numbers of unvaccinated children: more than 10% of children in each year group remain unprotected.
Vaccine uptake varies widely around the country. In some parts of London, as many as half the children starting school at five years of age have not had the two doses of vaccine needed for best protection.
Not only are current vaccine uptakes too low to prevent outbreaks of measles, but many years of less-than-optimal vaccine uptake – including among young adults who weren’t vaccinated as infants because of the autism scare – has resulted in a large number of unprotected people. The impact of COVID also resulted in many young children missing their vaccines.
Many factors affect whether people are vaccinated or not, including how, where and when vaccination services are provided, as well as behavioural and social factors. For example, vaccine hesitancy, defined by the World Health Organization as a “delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination despite availability of vaccination services”, is frequently blamed for people not getting vaccinated. Research suggests that vaccine hesitancy has increased since the COVID pandemic – even for vaccines such as MMR that have led to the near-eradication of some infectious diseases.
In England, surveys are conducted regularly to investigate the views of parents of young children regarding vaccination. The most recent survey, conducted in 2023, showed that 84% of parents reported they considered vaccines to be safe – a [reduction from the previous year].
These findings are reflected in other studies. Since COVID, some parents have reported that the pandemic has affected their views, either making them keener to have their children vaccinated or increasing their concerns about vaccination.
Given the intense scrutiny and widespread discussion about vaccination that took place during the pandemic, this is not surprising. Unfortunately, due to pressures on general practice and other health services – resulting in a 40% reduction in the number of health visitors in England since 2015 – these trusted sources of advice about vaccination have become less easily available. In this context, people may turn to other sources of less reliable information, such as social media.
Although there is no robust evidence to show that health misinformation would stop a parent who was going to have their child vaccinated from doing so, it can be influential for people with existing concerns.
Accessing services
A large study using vaccination records of over ¾ million children born between 2000 and 2020 found that children born in the UK’s most deprived areas were less likely to receive the MMR vaccine. Parents also report having difficulty making or attending appointments as a barrier to vaccination.
Addressing these obstacles requires a multi-pronged approach, ensuring parents are sent vaccination reminders and are able to attend appointments at suitable times and locations. This may mean holding vaccination clinics at places other than the general practice and at weekends and evenings.
Work should be done with local communities to establish what works best for them to improve access to immunisation. Opportunistic immunisation is also important: when attending health services for another reason, unvaccinated children could be offered vaccines on the spot.
Urgent action is needed to improve vaccine uptake – and it requires sustained commitment and increased funding.
Helen Bedford receives funding from National Institute for Health and Care Research.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By William E. Donald, Associate Professor of Sustainable Careers and Human Resource Management, University of Southampton
If you have a long-term health condition or you’re a disabled person in the UK, you might be able to claim a benefit called personal independence payment (Pip). As the name suggests, Pip is designed to help with the additional costs of disability – regardless of employment status.
But the government recently announced changes to the payment, which will make it harder for people to access support.
As a disabled person, I know that it costs more to live with disability or illness. It has been calculated that disabled households need an extra £1,010 per month to maintain the same standard of living as non-disabled households. This gap arises from things like transport costs (because of inaccessible public transport), the need for expensive mobility aids, and water, electric and gas costs at home.
The World Health Organization recommends a minimum indoor temperature of 18°C for healthy people and 20°C for those with chronic conditions. Yet, with soaring energy prices, many disabled people are forced to choose between heating their homes and other disability-related necessities.
Despite these realities, the maximum annual Pip payment is £9,747.40, well below the additional £12,120 that disabled households typically need annually. Only those qualifying for the highest level of support receive this amount. Most get considerably less.
So, what is the government’s justification for tightening eligibility? Together with changes to universal credit, it claims it will save £5 billion a year by the end of 2030 and get more people, including sick and disabled people, into work. But will it?
Government figures from March 2024 show that 24% of people in the UK aged 16 to 64 are disabled. Within this group, the employment rate is 54.2%. For comparison, non-disabled adults of working age have an employment rate of 82%. Even when disabled people are employed, the disability pay gap is 12.7%. This gap reaches 27.9% for autistic workers and 26.9% for those with epilepsy.
The same figures also show that 42.6% of disabled people are economically inactive. This is sometimes portrayed as people who are capable of working but choose not to. But this does not align with the facts.
The latest figures on Pip claims show that last year the rate of fraud was so low that the Department for Work and Pensions recorded it as 0%.
Anyone like me, who has experienced the lengthy and complicated Pip application process, will find these figures unsurprising. Cutting access to Pip will not push this group into employment but will plunge them deeper into financial hardship.
The Resolution Foundation think tank estimates that up to 1.2 million disabled people could lose between £4,200 and £6,300 per year by 2029-30 due to these changes.
The government is particularly focused on claimants with mental health conditions, especially younger people. As such, it is crucial to acknowledge the dire state of mental health services in the UK.
Patients are waiting far longer for mental health treatment than for physical healthcare. chayanuphol/Shutterstock
Eight times as many people wait more than 18 months for mental health treatment compared to physical healthcare.
This crisis is compounded by broader challenges facing young people, who were disproportionately affected by COVID lockdowns. Three in four university students and recent graduates reported lower levels of wellbeing in September 2021 compared to pre-pandemic levels. These same young people face a competitive labour market, alongside soaring rent, energy and food costs.
Noble goal but a harmful method
Nevertheless, supporting disabled people and the long-term sick to access employment is a worthy goal. Government figures suggest 5.6% of disabled people are unemployed. Many of these people want to work. This is also true of many in the economically inactive group who simply cannot.
But we have to be realistic. Previous government schemes resulted in fewer than one in five people getting work. This highlights the systemic barriers that disabled people face in work beyond their agency. The new approach raises concerns that people might be pressured into unsuitable jobs simply to reduce unemployment figures.
Even when disabled people find employment, they continue to face discrimination and workplace biases. The legal system places the burden on individuals to challenge unfair treatment and the disability wage gap just exacerbates inequalities.
While remote work has been a game-changer for many disabled workers, the previous government pressured its own workforce of civil servants back into offices. Many business leaders continue to advocate for the same.
Cutting Pip will not necessarily reduce the welfare bill. But it will drive more disabled people into poverty. Those with savings will exhaust them, ultimately qualifying for even more means-tested government assistance.
Others will be priced out of work entirely. Many may end up needing more support from public services like the NHS, as their mental and physical health deteriorates. This means the claim of saving £5 billion a year is also likely flawed.
So, what needs to change? Here are five ideas.
Reverse Pip cuts and restrictive eligibility criteria. The government must listen to disability charities and ensure that financial support reflects the true cost of living with a disability.
Hold employers accountable. Systemic barriers such as bias in the recruitment process must be removed, the disability pay gap addressed and remote work established as a long-term option.
Increase disabled representation in decision-making. Disabled people must have a seat at the table in government and industry to ensure policies reflect real experiences.
Integrate healthcare and social care. Linked to this, ensure essential utilities such as water, gas and electricity are always affordable for disabled and elderly people – perhaps via a government-backed special tariff.
Pay carers fairly. Carer’s allowance is £83.30 per week for a minimum of 35 hours of care, just £2.38 per hour. This just exacerbates financial insecurity for disabled households.
If these failures are not addressed, the consequences will be catastrophic. The government’s approach is making life harder, not easier, for disabled people. It is time for real action, not rhetoric and infantilising talk of “pocket money”. Disabled people deserve better. We all do.
William E. Donald does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Reprepsentative Kathy Castor (FL14)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Reps. Kathy Castor (FL-14) and Dave Min (CA-47) introduced the Employee Limits ON Profiteering Act (ELON Profiteering Act) that would prevent special government employees like Elon Musk from receiving any federal contracts, grants and awards, similar to prohibitions for most government workers.
“Elon Musk should not profit off his official position as he gains unlimited access to the inner workings of the U.S. government,” said Castor. “Conflict of interest laws should apply to him just as they apply to all government employees. Musk has built a vast business empire with the help of extensive government contracts, and he should not be able to use his position as the head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency to boost the bottom line of his companies. He should not be allowed to profit through special access and information gained as a special government employee. Special government employees – like all public servants –should put the taxpayer’s interests before their personal interests.”
Castor continued, “We need ethical guardrails to ensure that there are no blurred lines between private profit and public power. Since Republicans in the U.S. House, Senate, and White House refuse to hold Musk accountable, I have introduced the ELON Profiteering Act with Rep. Min to prevent certain current and future special government employees from profiting off of unchecked conflicts of interest.”
“No one is above the law, and no one should be using the federal government for their personal gain,” said Rep. Min. “Elon Musk, an unelected and unvetted billionaire, is using the government to enrich himself and his companies, all while gutting federal programs that millions of Americans rely on like Social Security and Medicaid. I’m proud to join Rep. Castor to demand more oversight.”
Full text of the legislation can be viewed here.
To date, Elon Musk has profited from:
Most federal employees are generally prohibited from receiving grants or contracts with the government. This government policy helps avoid any conflict of interest that might arise between the personal or direct business interests of an individual and their duties as a government employee. Congress created the “special government employee” position to allow experts, professionals, and other knowledgeable Americans to serve our country in a limited capacity, but it appears that Musk has exploited his position and intends to profit from it.
The prohibition in this legislation would extend to the special government employees’ spouses and children, as well as to any organization where the employee serves as an officer, director, trustee, general partner or employee.
This legislation is endorsed by Project on Government Oversight (POGO), Public Citizen and State Democracy Defenders.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Kelly (R-PA)
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) voted in favor of theSafeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, legislation that would uphold and strengthen current law by permitting only U.S. citizens to vote in federal elections. The bill passed the U.S. House on Thursday and now advances to the U.S. Senate.
“This legislation makes it clear: only American citizens are allowed to vote in American elections, plain and simple. This is a cornerstone of our democracy,” said Rep. Kelly. “In recent years, Democrat-led cities have allowed non-citizens to vote in municipal elections. American citizens — and only American citizens — should decide American elections.”
BACKGROUND
The SAVE Act requires states to obtain proof of citizenship – in person – before registering an individual to vote in an election.
Requires states to remove non-citizens from existing voter rolls, while giving them necessary tools to do so.
This legislation passed the House in a bipartisan vote (221 – 198) during the 118th Congress before being blocked by Senate Democrats.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Brian Babin (R-TX)
House Republicans Pass the SAVE Act to Secure America’s Elections
Washington, April 10, 2025
Washington, D.C. – Today, Congressman Brian Babin, D.D.S. (TX-36) voted in favor of H.R. 22, the SAVE Act. This legislation ensures that only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections.
“The fact that we even need this legislation proves just how far Democrats have gone in opening our elections to abuse,” said Congressman Babin. “House Republicans are taking a stand to restore trust, secure our elections, and stop foreign interference. Meanwhile, Democrats are resorting to outright lies. The SAVE Act protects every legal vote and safeguards our elections against fraud. Opposing it is a vote against common sense. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue—it’s not about red or blue, but red, white, and blue.”
The SAVE Act:
Protects the ballot box by ensuring only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections.
Restores integrity by implementing simple safeguards to prevent non-citizen voting.
Codifies President Trump’s executive action to secure voter registration.
Offers multiple ways to verify identity, ensuring every American can cast their vote.
House Republicans and President Trump are leading the charge to make our elections secure, fair, and free from foreign interference. The passage of the SAVE Act is a major step toward restoring confidence in our democratic process.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (7th District of Washington)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Representatives Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), Adriano Espaillat (NY-13), and Jimmy Panetta (CA-20) today introduced the Working for Immigrant Safety and Empowerment (WISE) Act to protect immigrant survivors of domestic violence, human trafficking, and gender-based violence. The bill would ensure that immigrants have access to protections intended by the bipartisan Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), the Trafficking Victim Protection Act (TVPA), and other federal and state laws. The bill would also move to ensure survivors pursuing relief are not detained or deported before their applications are fully adjudicated.
“The Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign has sowed immeasurable fear in immigrant communities, driving survivors of crime to hide in fear of deportation. That simply cannot be the case,” said Jayapal. “Immigrant women are significantly more likely to suffer domestic violence, nearly three times the national average. Especially in the current environment, it is critical that we take steps to ensure that survivors of domestic violence, human trafficking, and gender-based violence are protected. The WISE Act would improve protections for immigrant witnesses and victims of crimes and foster safe communities — the opposite of what Trump is pushing.”
“Our immigrant communities are under attack by the Trump administration, and immigrant women faced with domestic violence make up one of the most vulnerable populations. These women should not feel forced to stay in violent, life-threatening intimate partner relationships because of their tenuous immigration status,” said Schakowsky. “I am proud to co-lead the WISE Act to help ensure that all victims of domestic violence, regardless of immigration status, have access to the public resources and support they need to escape abuse.”
“Immigrant families are facing tremendous challenges in light of the Trump administration, and we are working to combat these dangerous anti-American policies daily. Immigrant victims of domestic violence, trafficking, and gender-based assaults are particularly vulnerable and deserve protections regardless of their immigration status,” said Espaillat. “Immigrant survivors are less likely to report a crime in fear of detention and deportation, especially in this political climate, which makes them even more vulnerable to such abuse and exploitation. These crimes are dehumanizing and reprehensible, and we must do all that it takes to ensure protections are in place and victims feel empowered to seek assistance. I am proud to join my colleagues, once again, to introduce legislation this Congress to reaffirm our commitment to victims of violence when they need our help the most.”
“Our criminal justice system works when victims and witnesses have the will and confidence to come forward and testify to hold criminals accountable,” said Panetta. “In addition to being scared of retribution by criminals, there also are times when undocumented individuals are fearful of deportation due to their cooperation with law enforcement. That is why U and T visas are critical to putting away bad guys and giving people faith in our criminal justice system. I’m proud to be a part of the reintroduction of the WISE Act, which includes my Immigrant Witness and Victim Protection Act to strengthen safeguards and expand the availability of U and T visas. By ensuring that victims and witnesses have access to the protections of our government in their cooperation with law enforcement, we can hold criminals accountable and strengthen trust in our justice system.”
This bill introduction comes after President Donald Trump, in a proclamation for National Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month, blamed sexual violence on undocumented immigrants. However, studies have found zero evidence to support a link between undocumented immigrants and a rise in crime rates.
Immigrant women and children are particularly vulnerable to domestic violence, and the rate of abuse against immigrant women is nearly 49 percent, three times the national average. While domestic violence is a consistently underreported issue, immigrant survivors are significantly less likely to report these crimes due to fear of deportation.
The WISE Act would strengthen protections for immigrant survivors by:
Eliminating arbitrary caps on the U Visa and Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS).
Expanding qualifying crimes for the U Visa to include hate crimes, child abuse, and elder abuse as well as grant protections for abused children, stepchildren, spouses, and parents of immigrant survivors.
Granting work authorization to survivors while their applications are pending.
Prohibiting detention and deportation of immigrant survivors while their cases are pending.
Limiting the use or disclosure of information pertaining to a pending immigrant survivor’s VAWA, T, U, or SIJ applications.
Restricting immigration enforcement at certain protected areas including any domestic violence shelter, rape crisis center, supervised visitation center, family justice center, or victim services providers, among other locations.
Ensuring survivors have the support necessary to thrive and reduce reliance on abusers by providing access to certain assistance, including Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Services Block Grant (SSBG), and Medicaid.
The legislation is sponsored by Yassamin Ansari (AZ-03), Becca Balint (VT-At Large), Nanette Barragán (CA-44), Salud Carbajal (CA-24), Greg Casar (TX-35), Sean Casten (IL-06), Joaquin Castro (TX-20), Judy Chu (CA-28), Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04), Dan Goldman (NY-10), Val Hoyle (OR-04), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (GA-04), Ro Khanna (CA-17), Sam Liccardo (CA-16), James P. McGovern (MA-02), Grace Meng (NY-06), Gwen Moore (WI-04), Kelly Morrison (MN-03), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), Ilhan Omar (MN-05), Delia Ramirez (IL-03), Mary Gay Scanlon (PA-05), Lateefah Simon (CA-12), Adam Smith (WA-09), Melanie Stansbury (NM-01), Shri Thanedar (MI-13), Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), Nydia M. Velázquez (NY-07), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL-25), and Nikema Williams (GA-05).
The WISE Act is also endorsed by Alianza Nacional de Campesinas; Asian Pacific Institute on Gender-Based Violence; ASISTA Immigration Assistance; Bend the Arc: Jewish Action; Center for Gender & Refugee Studies; Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law; Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP); Church World Service; Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA); Coalition on Human Needs; End SIJS Backlog Coalition; Esperanza United; Esperanza United; Freedom Network USA; Just Detention International; Just Solutions ; Justice for Migrant Women; Justice in Motion; Kids in Need of Defense; Legal Momentum, The Women’s Legal Defense and Education Fund; Make the Road States; Naila Amin Foundation; National Alliance to End Sexual Violence; National Council of Jewish Women; National Immigrant Justice Center; National Immigration Law Center; National LGBTQ Institute on Intimate Partner Violence; National Network To End Domestic Violence; National Partnership for New Americans.org ; National Resource Center on Domestic Violence; Oxfam America; Refugees International ; Sisters of Mercy Justice Team; Tahirih Justice Center; The Advocates for Human Rights; Ujima, The National Center on Violence Against Women in the Black Community; VALOR; We Are All America; Women’s Refugee Commission; Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights; Al Otro Lado; Asian Resources, Inc.; Ayuda; California Partnership to End Domestic Violence; Center for Domestic Peace; Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault; Daya Inc.; DC Coalition Against Domestic Violence; Domestic Abuse Center; Domestic Violence Project | Urban Justice Center; East Bay Sanctuary Covenant; Equality California; Estrella del Paso; Gray’s Trauma-Informed Care Services Corp; Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environments; Her Justice; IL Coalition Against Domestic Violence; Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights; Immigrant Children Advocates’ Relief Effort (ICARE); Immigrant Defenders Law Center (ImmDef); Immigration Center for Women and Children; Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault; Jane Doe Inc.; Just Neighbors; Los Angeles LGBT Center; Louisiana Foundation Against Sexual Assault; Maitri; Make the Road Connecticut ; Make the Road Nevada ; Make the Road New Jersey ; Make the Road New York ; Make the Road Pennsylvania ; Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence; Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault; National Organization for Women-Nassau County chapter; National Organization for Women-New York State; Nebraska Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence; Nevada Coalition to End Domestic and Sexual Violence; Northern Manhattan Improvement Corporation (NMIC); Northwest Workers’ Justice Project; Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence (OAESV); Ohio Domestic Violence Network; Pennsylvania Immigrant and Refugee Women’s Network; Raksha, Inc; Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence; Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network; Sanctuary for Families; Silver State Equality; Survivor Justice Center (formerly known as Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice); The Immigration Project; The Women’s Law Center of Maryland, Inc.; Utah Domestic Violence Coalition; Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence; Violence Free Minnesota; Virginia Sexual & Domestic Violence Action Alliance; Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence; Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault; Womankind; Workers Center of Central New York and; ZeroV.
If you or a loved one are experiencing domestic violence, help is available at 800-799-7233 or by texting START to 88788.
Issues: Immigration, Public Safety & Criminal Justice
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Diana DeGette (First District of Colorado)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Diana DeGette (CO-01) released the following statement after House Republicans passed H. Con. Res. 14, the FY2025 Budget Resolution.
“House Republicans just passed a bill that sets the stage for cuts to Medicaid and food stamps so that they can fund huge tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and corporations.
“The budget resolution put forth by Republicans in Congress directs my committee, the Energy and Commerce Committee, to find $880 billion in ‘savings’. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported that it would be impossible to cut that much without touching Medicaid. Not to mention, their budget calls for at least $230 billion in cuts that threaten nutrition assistance during a period of fast-rising food prices, and it also repeals clean energy investments included in the Inflation Reduction Act.
“In my district alone, over 161,000 of my constituents who rely on Medicaid could lose their health care. And more than 123,000 of my constituents who rely on food stamps to feed their families could lose this critical lifeline.
“This bill is nothing more than a rushed, sloppy response to Donald Trump’s demands to pass his ‘one, big, beautiful bill’—a win he desperately needs because he has nothing else to show for his leadership.
“As Trump and Elon Musk continue to slash and burn their way through our government, I refuse to support his agenda and call on my Republican colleagues to stop bending the knee to Trump and Elon and get serious about helping the American people.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Julia Brownley (D-CA)
Washington, DC – Today, Congresswoman Julia Brownley (D-CA) issued the following statement on her vote against the House Republican budget resolution (H.Con.Res.14).
“My Republican colleagues should be ashamed for advancing such a self-serving budget that continues to prioritize the interests of billionaires and big corporations over hard-working American families. This budget is not a serious plan for our nation’s future nor a responsible framework for government spending. It is a reckless giveaway to the ultra-wealthy that guts vital programs that millions of Americans rely on to survive.
“Rather than providing relief to struggling families, Republicans are handing out an average tax cut of over $300,000 to the wealthiest one percent – all while pushing the costs of these tax breaks onto everyone else and plunging millions of Americans into financial hardship. This budget isn’t just fiscally irresponsible – it is an economic disaster.
“So-called ‘fiscal conservatives’ would add $7 trillion to the national debt to pay for these tax breaks for the rich, while mortgaging our children’s future and raising costs for everyday Americans. This is an outright betrayal of working families and future generations.
“And how do Republicans justify this scheme? By defunding Medicaid. By defunding food programs that feed 15 million children. By gutting the VA. And by cutting funding for public schools and special education programs.
“The Republican budget is an all-out attack on the very people who keep this country running – working families, seniors, veterans, and children. While Americans face record-high inflation and rising costs, Republicans have done nothing – absolutely nothing – to ease the pain or address the escalating economic crisis. In fact, they are actively making things worse by blindly backing Trump’s disastrous tariffs and dragging our economy toward a recession.
“This budget is the largest tax hike on working Americans in 50 years and will cost the average household $3,800 a year.
“That is why I voted no. House Democrats are working for the American people, and I will continue fighting to protect the interests of hard-working families across this country.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Paul A Gosar DDS (AZ-04)
Washington, D.C. — Congressman Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S. (AZ-09), issued the following statement after voting in favor of H.R. 22, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE Act), legislation co-sponsored by Congressman Gosar that would amend current law to require states to obtain in-person proof of United States citizenship when registering an individual to vote in a federal election:
“American elections should be for American citizens only. Sadly, 13 million illegal aliens were welcomed into our country by Joe Biden in the past four years. Several states allow these lawbreakers to obtain a driver’s license, opening the door to opportunities to illegally register to vote in federal elections.
I find it both laughable and preposterous that the same people who, for the past four years, forced you to carry a vaccine passport to dine in a restaurant, hold a job, or get on a flight are the same people now opposing commonsense legislation requiring individuals to show proof of American citizenship to vote in elections.
It’s not racist, it’s common sense: prove your citizenship, or you can’t vote. In fact, an overwhelming majority of Americans agree with me. A recent poll conducted by Pew shows that 90% of Americans say it is very or somewhat important to stop non-citizens from voting. The fact is, with millions of illegal aliens now in our country, voters are right to be concerned about the integrity of elections.
By ensuring only United States citizens vote in federal elections, H.R. 22 is a crucial step towards safeguarding our elections. This commonsense bill offers more than six ways to verify identity, and it would codify President Trump’s recent executive action to secure our voter registration process,” concluded Congressman Gosar.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Paul A Gosar DDS (AZ-04)
WASHINGTON D.C. – Representative Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S (AZ-09) issued the following statements after voting in favor of H.R. H.R. 1526, the No Rogue Rulings Act, legislation limiting the ability of woke, activist federal district court judges to block President Trump’s agenda:
“Unable to win at the ballot box, Democrats have turned to liberal, woke activist judges to block or stall President Trump’s America First agenda. Why? Because Donald Trump, by opening the blinds to let some light in, is exposing all the waste and corruption in the federal government one agency at a time. Now the radical left is fighting tooth and nail to protect the bloated and corrupt federal bureaucracies that act as the ATMs fueling their sinister progressive agenda.
Democrats are losing their minds, pitching fits and litigating every Trump administration policy to slow the America First agenda. These unelected rogue judges, many of whom are Democratic political donors or supporters, are siding with radical Democrats in Congress to subvert our democracy and nullify the will of the people who elected President Trump to reform the government, rein in the runaway federal bureaucracy and streamline government operations to better serve the American people.
The framers of the Constitution intended to establish a system of checks and balances that would prevent any one branch from usurping authority from the others. However, when unelected activist federal judges exceed their mandate by interpreting laws through political lenses, they are infringing upon the prerogatives of President Trump and are retarding his authority to govern.
Activist federal judges should not be the arbiter of policy issues that were designed by the Founders to be addressed through the legislative or executive branches. Rather than continuing the recent practice of issuing nationwide universal rulings, The No Rogue Rulings Act stops rogue federal judges from stalling President Trump’s agenda by requiring that the rulings be narrowly tailored,” stated Rep. Paul Gosar.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Greg Steube (FL-17)
April 10, 2025 | Press ReleasesLegislation Protects the Independence of Our Nation’s Nonprofit Organizations WASHINGTON — U.S. Representative Greg Steube (R-Fla.) today introduced the Safeguarding Charity Act to clarify that tax-exempt organizations should not be treated as recipients of federal financial assistance. The legislation protects tax-exempt organizations from a perilous line of litigation in federal courts that could subject every church, nonprofit, and private school in America to burdensome federal regulations.“Radical judges do not have the authority to twist federal law and force religious institutions to choose between their convictions and compliance,” said Rep. Steube. “The Safeguarding Charity Actreaffirms that tax-exempt status does not mean an organization is receiving federal financial assistance. This bill is about protecting churches, religious schools, and charities from federal overreach. I’m grateful to Senator Lankford for his leadership on this important effort in the Senate.”U.S. Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) introduced companion legislation in the U.S. Senate.“Tax-exempt organizations should not live in fear of federal control every day because courts want to redefine the meaning of tax-exempt status. Tax-exempt status is not the same as receiving federal funding, and it should not be used as political leverage against the nonprofits that feed, clothe, house, and counsel those in need in Oklahoma and across the nation,” said Senator Lankford. “We should be focused on enabling the work of these organizations—not burdening them with unnecessary and costly federal requirements.”Supporting organizations include: Alliance Defending Freedom, Philanthropy Roundtable, Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, Agudath Israel of America, Seventh-day Adventist Church, American Association of Christian Schools,Association for Biblical Higher Education, Association of Christian Schools International, Family Research Council, Citygate Network, Christian Employers Alliance, and National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference.Alliance Defending Freedom“Charities and other nonprofits provide invaluable services to their communities. In part to recognize their critical work, nonprofits are tax-exempt so that they can devote scarce resources to serving those in need. Until recently, no one really thought that their tax-exempt status was the sort of “federal financial assistance” that triggered the application of several burdensome federal statutes and regulations. But some courts have embraced this unfounded view, and Congress needs to set things straight. Let’s be clear: a nonprofit’s tax-exempt status should not be considered government funding and thus should not trigger multiple burdensome federal laws under which charities and other nonprofits could lose their tax-exempt status. ADF commends Sen. Lankford and Rep. Steube for introducing the Safeguarding Charity Act to protect nonprofits from these financially crushing burdens so that nonprofits can continue to serve their communities free from unfair and unexpected government overreach.” – Greg Baylor, ADF Senior Counsel Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission“The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) strongly supports the Safeguarding Charity Act, which provides essential clarification that tax-exempt status is not equivalent to receiving federal financial assistance. Recent court decisions have wrongly conflated these two ideas, endangering vital religious liberty protections and subjecting churches and faith-based nonprofits to harmful, undue federal regulations. The ERLC urges Congress to uphold this longstanding precedent and protect religious organizations’ freedom to operate in accordance with their faith, free from government interference.” – Brent Leatherwood, ERLC President.Association of Christian Schools International“ACSI commends Senator Lankford and Congressman Steube for their leadership in introducing the Safeguarding Charity Act. This legislation is critical to set the record straight: an organization’s non-profit status is not the receipt of federal financial assistance. It never has been. It is not now. Politically motivated lawsuits based on this false premise must stop, or else all non-profits will be at risk. We urge every member of Congress to support the Safeguarding Charity Act.” – P. George Tryfiates, VP for Public Policy and Legal Affairs at the Association of Chrisitan Schools International.Agudath Israel of America“Agudath Israel of America is pleased to support the ‘Safeguarding Charity Act (SCA),’ introduced by Senator James Lankford (R-OK) and Representative Greg Steube (R-FL). This legislation is vitally important to nonprofits across the country, including synagogues, religious schools and charities within the Jewish community. It will enshrine into law that which has generally been understood that ‘tax-exempt status’ does not constitute ‘federal financial assistance.’” – Rabbi Abba Cohen, VP for Government Affairs of Agudath Israel of America Read full bill text here.
The following text contains opinion that is not, or not necessarily, that of MIL-OSI –
Chairwoman McClain’s Statement on the House Passage of the SAVE Act Requiring Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration
Washington, April 10, 2025
WASHINGTON—Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed Representative Chip Roy’s (R-Texas) Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which mandates in-person proof of U.S. citizenship when individuals register to vote in federal elections.
House Republican Chairwoman Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) released the following statement upon the bill’s passage:
“The Democrats have continued their newest fearmongering campaign and misled the American people. Rep. Chip Roy’s bill, the SAVE Act, protects the vote of every American—including women. House Republicans simply want to keep illegal immigrants out of and restore trust in our election system,” Chairwoman McClain said.
A ny.gov website belongs to an official New York State government organization.
Secure ny.gov websites use HTTPS
A lock icon or https:// means you’ve safely connected to a ny.gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
April 10, 2025
Albany, NY
“This morning, Congressional Republicans passed a budget resolution to line the pockets of the rich at the expense of everyday Americans. Backed by all seven New York Republicans, this budget slashes funding for affordable housing, threatens access to health care and nutrition benefits, and throws out environmental protections for our most vulnerable communities — all while cutting taxes for the ultra-wealthy. At a time when Trump’s reckless tariffs threaten to hike the costs of everything from baby food to minivans, this budget will make day-to-day life even more expensive for middle class families. Trump and his allies in Congress are hellbent on standing in the way of a better, more affordable New York — these sky-high prices and dangerous cuts are on their hands.”
You are leaving the official State of New York website.
The State of New York does not imply approval of the listed destinations, warrant the accuracy of any information set out in those destinations, or endorse any opinions expressed therein. External web sites operate at the direction of their respective owners who should be contacted directly with questions regarding the content of these sites.
SACRAMENTO – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the grand jury indictment of five suspects for selling tobacco without a license and committing tax fraud that cost the state of California over $24 million in lost tax revenue. On March 14, 2025, the Sacramento County criminal grand jury indicted the five suspects with 118-counts of conspiracy, selling tobacco as an unlicensed distributor, filing false tax returns, money laundering, and a white-collar enhancement.
“From the investigation to prosecution, my office is dedicated to seeing these five defendants pay for their crimes against the people of California,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Schemes that defraud the government of millions in taxpayer money will not be tolerated. Today’s announcement should serve as a reminder: If you break the law and engage in fraud and theft, my office will hold you accountable.”
“Tobacco taxes provide funding for medical research, childhood development, and tobacco-prevention programs for kids. They also pay for many other critical services that Californians rely on,” said California Department of Tax and Fee Administration Director Trista Gonzalez. “That’s why we will continue to work with DOJ and our other state colleagues to fight against tax evasion.”
From January 2017 to April 2024, the suspects allegedly engaged in the importation of untaxed tobacco products into California using shell entities, subsequently selling these products to customers in the state while evading the tobacco excise tax. This operation involved a series of coordinated actions aimed at misusing personal and regulatory information, hiding the source of funds used for purchasing untaxed tobacco, concealing the arrival of tobacco shipments in California, misleading customers about compliance, and avoiding obligations related to California’s tobacco excise tax.
Additionally, the five suspects perpetuated their scheme by submitting false monthly excise tax returns to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration or, in some cases, neglecting to file these returns altogether. As a result of their actions, the state of California suffered over $24 million in lost tax revenue, significantly compromising the integrity of its tobacco regulatory system. This case was investigated by the California Department of Justice (DOJ), and the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. It is being prosecuted by DOJ.
It is important to note that a criminal complaint contains charges that are only allegations against a person. Every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
A copy of the unsealed indictment can be found here.
The Justice Department filed a proposed statement of interest today in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to make clear that federal law protects the equal right of all Americans to make and enforce contracts regardless of their race.
According to the allegations in the case, the 2024 ¡Lánzate!/Take Off! Travel Award Program was an annual program in which college and graduate students could receive free Southwest Airlines flight vouchers, but only Hispanic students were eligible to apply. The American Alliance for Equal Rights sued Southwest alleging that by denying that opportunity to all other students on the basis of their race or ethnicity, Southwest’s program facially discriminated against non-Hispanic students in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The Department’s proposed statement of interest affirms its continuing commitment to eradicating racially exclusionary practices across the government and in the private sector.
“Every person in the United States should have equal and nondiscriminatory rights to make and enforce contracts, and race should never be a consideration,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Department of Justice is working to end discrimination using all of the tools at our disposal.”
“Discrimination of any kind will not be tolerated in our community,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Chad Meacham for the Northern District of Texas. “Our office will continue to enforce federal anti-discrimination laws to address racial discrimination affecting our residents.”
WILLIAM CONNELLY, FUTURE SOCIETE GENERALE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, STARTING MAY 2026
Press release Paris, 10 April 2025
During its session on 10 April 2025, the Societe Generale Board of Directors selected William Connelly for the Chairmanship as of the General Meeting which will be held on 27 May 2026, subject to his renewal as a Director by the General Meeting on 20 May 2025. He will succeed Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, who has been Chairman since 2015, and will have completed his third term.
This decision is the result of a selection process led by the Nomination and Corporate Governance Committee at the end of 2023 with the assistance of an independent consultant.
William Connelly has been a member of Societe Generale’s Board of Directors since 2017. He has chaired the Risk Committee since 2019 and is a member of the Nomination and Corporate Governance Committee, positions he will hold until the 2026 General Meeting.
Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, Chairman of the Board of Directors, stated: “The choice of William Connelly as my successor confirms Societe Generale’s commitment to the highest standards of governance, both in terms of method and substance. It ensures the independence of the role as well as its continuity, while bringing the highest level of expertise in the international banking and financial sector, along with experience in managing large companies, particularly in the technology sector.”
Biography William Connelly is a company director. In addition to his mandate as an independent director of Societe Generale since 2017, he currently is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Amadeus IT Group and the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Aegon until the second half of 2025. He also served as an independent director of Singular Bank from February 2019 to April 2023.
William Connelly began his career in 1980 at Chase Manhattan Bank, where he worked for 10 years, before joining Baring Brothers from 1990 to 1995. He then held various executive positions within ING Group NV from 1995 until he became a member of The Management Board, where he was responsible for Wholesale Banking from 2011 to 2016. He was also the CEO of ING Real Estate from 2009 to 2015. He has gained extensive experience in financial services, particularly in corporate finance, financial markets, real estate, and lending.
William Connelly is a French citizen. He graduated with a degree in Economics from Georgetown University.
Societe Generale Societe Generale is a top tier European Bank with around 119,000 employees serving more than 26 million clients in 62 countries across the world. We have been supporting the development of our economies for 160 years, providing our corporate, institutional, and individual clients with a wide array of value-added advisory and financial solutions. Our long-lasting and trusted relationships with the clients, our cutting-edge expertise, our unique innovation, our ESG capabilities and leading franchises are part of our DNA and serve our most essential objective – to deliver sustainable value creation for all our stakeholders.
The Group runs three complementary sets of businesses, embedding ESG offerings for all its clients:
French Retail, Private Banking and Insurance, with leading retail bank SG and insurance franchise, premium private banking services, and the leading digital bank BoursoBank.
Global Banking and Investor Solutions, a top tier wholesale bank offering tailored-made solutions with distinctive global leadership in equity derivatives, structured finance and ESG.
Mobility, International Retail Banking and Financial Services, comprising well-established universal banks (in Czech Republic, Romania and several African countries), Ayvens (the new ALD I LeasePlan brand), a global player in sustainable mobility, as well as specialized financing activities.
Committed to building together with its clients a better and sustainable future, Societe Generale aims to be a leading partner in the environmental transition and sustainability overall. The Group is included in the principal socially responsible investment indices: DJSI (Europe), FTSE4Good (Global and Europe), Bloomberg Gender-Equality Index, Refinitiv Diversity and Inclusion Index, Euronext Vigeo (Europe and Eurozone), STOXX Global ESG Leaders indexes, and the MSCI Low Carbon Leaders Index (World and Europe).
In case of doubt regarding the authenticity of this press release, please go to the end of the Group News page on societegenerale.com website where official Press Releases sent by Societe Generale can be certified using blockchain technology. A link will allow you to check the document’s legitimacy directly on the web page.
The World Health Organization (WHO) issues warning on health service disruptions reported in 70% of its surveyed country offices as a result of sudden suspensions and reductions in official development assistance (ODA) for health.
The findings, based on rapid WHO assessment of the fast-evolving situation, raise concern for potentially deeper and prolonged effects on health systems and services across the world, especially in vulnerable and fragile settings. This requires urgent action and international response.
The new rapid stock take conducted in March–April 2025 with 108 WHO country offices, primarily in low- and lower-middle-income countries, shows that many countries are working to increase or reallocate funding from domestic and alternative external sources to address gaps. However, up to 24% of WHO Country Office responses suggest budget cuts are already translating into increased out-of-pocket payments. The poor and vulnerable likely risk bearing the additional brunt of these impacts.
“These results paint a worrying picture about the impact of the sudden and unplanned cuts to aid on the health of millions of people,” said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “Although these cuts are a shock, they are also driving an accelerated transition away from aid dependency to a more sustainable self-reliance, based on domestic resources. Many countries are asking for WHO’s support, and WHO is working with them to identify and tailor the most effective measures.”
The stock take reports provide an early snapshot and insights from WHO country offices that work closely with ministries of health, providing regular support on health systems policies and planning. The stock take aimed at identifying the urgent support countries need to avoid catastrophic impacts on the health of the populations and to guide monitoring of the rapidly evolving situation.
Key findings from the stock take show the following.
The suspensions and reductions in ODA are disrupting all health system functions, with the most frequently reported impacts being on health emergency preparedness and response (70%), public health surveillance (66%), service provision (58%), humanitarian aid (56%), and the health and care workforce (54%).
Health services are being disrupted across the board in at least one third of the responding countries, with high levels of disruptions reported in outbreak detection and response, malaria, HIV, tuberculosis, sexually transmitted infections, family planning, and maternal and child health services.
The nature and scale of service disruptions are comparable to those observed during the peak periods of the COVID-19 pandemic in some settings.
Critical shortages in the availability of medicines and health products are leaving one third of responding countries without commodities for major service areas.
The pause in ODA has led to job losses for health and care workers in over half of responding countries, and significant disruptions to trainings.
Information systems are particularly impacted as key health data collection is disrupted. Over 40% of countries experienced disruptions to key information systems, including collaborative surveillance and emergency systems, health management information systems, disease-specific reporting systems, lab information systems, and household/population surveys.
Eighty-one of the 108 WHO country offices have expressed the need for support across a broad range of health areas, including innovative funding and resource mobilization, targeted technical assistance and support.
Given the rapidly evolving context, WHO will be monitoring the situation over time and will engage the global health community, including partners and donor agencies, to inform urgent response plans to mitigate deepening country impacts and enable greater sustainability.
Note to editors:
These findings represent a snapshot of the health systems and health services situation in the context of a rapidly evolving situation. Senior WHO country office staff were surveyed over the period of 7 March to 2 April 2025 to provide inputs and observations on the impact of ODA suspensions and reductions through a structured survey. WHO country offices in low- and lower-middle-income countries across all six WHO regions were included in this survey. They do not reflect the official views of the governments in the countries, territories and areas. WHO has a global presence in 150+ locations putting central focus on countries and populations, working to protect and improve the health of everyone, everywhere. More information.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Adam Smith (9th District of Washington)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Smith (D- Wash.) released the following statement regarding the passage of H.R. 22, The SAVE Act.
“I voted no on the bill that disenfranchises millions of Americans, also known as the “SAVE” Act.
“The right to vote in free and fair elections is one of the most important foundations of our democracy.
“The SAVE Act takes us backwards by stripping voting away from millions of Americans who should be able to vote, from overseas servicemembers to married women who changed their names. If this policy becomes law, it will disenfranchise over a million women in Washington State, disenfranchise servicemembers deployed overseas, and could cost Washingtonians over $361 million just to register to vote.
“I am committed to safeguarding the fundamental right to vote. Congress has a responsibility to protect this constitutional right, and we must do more to ensure all Americans have their voices heard at the ballot box.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Johnson (LA-04)
WASHINGTON — Speaker Johnson released the following statement after the House adopted the budget resolution.
“Today’s final adoption of the budget resolution reflects both chambers’ collective commitment to enacting President Trump’s full agenda as quickly as possible to fulfill our promises to the American people.
“By clearing this critical hurdle, House committees can now work in tandem with Senate committees to swiftly prepare their respective parts of the reconciliation bill, keeping us on track for markups during the next work period.
“This process will require close consultation with the White House to ensure that the final bill reflects our shared priorities, resulting in a product that can pass both chambers and be signed into law by President Trump. It is essential that every member of our conference remains engaged and stays laser-focused on delivering one big, beautiful bill to the President’s desk.
“We will not waver in our commitment to delivering a bill that reduces spending, secures the border, keeps taxes low for families and job creators, restores American energy dominance, reestablishes peace through strength, and makes government work better for all Americans.
“With the debt limit deadline approaching, border security resources dwindling, markets in flux, and the looming threat of the largest tax increase on working families, we are racing against the clock. The American people are counting on us, and failure is not an option.”
EVANSVILLE, Ind., April 10, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — First Federal Savings Bank, a member bank of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis (FHLBank Indianapolis), awarded Habitat for Humanity $27,500 in grant funds through the Community Multiplier – Member Match Program.
A press conference and check presentation ceremony were hosted on Wednesday, April 9 at 3:30 PM CST at First Federal Savings Bank’s corporate headquarters located at 5001 Davis Lant Drive Evansville, IN 47715.
The $27,500 grant will support Habitat for Humanity’s educational assistance programs for current and prospective homeowners.
“We are proud to partner with Habitat for Humanity in support of their educational assistance programs for current and prospective homeowners,” said Courtney Schmitt, VP, Marketing Manager at First Federal Savings Bank. “Homeownership is a cornerstone of financial stability, and by investing in these programs, we are helping individuals and families build stronger, more secure futures. This partnership reflects our ongoing commitment to empowering communities through financial education and support.”
Beth Folz, Executive Director of Habitat for Humanity of Evansville stated “We were excited to hear from First Federal Savings Bank that we had been selected to receive this wonderful grant from the Community Multiplier program. We are thrilled for the future Habitat homeowners who will be impacted by the financial education programs that we can offer due to this tremendous support.”
The Community Multiplier – Member Match program is FHLBank Indianapolis’ newest program offering, designed to support targeted affordable housing initiatives that fall outside of FHLBank Indianapolis’ other grant programs. Community Multiplier offers grants between $25,000 and $125,000 for non-profit organizations headquartered in Indiana or Michigan who partner with an FHLBank Indianapolis member financial institution on targeted affordable housing initiatives. With a 10% matching funds commitment from the member financial institution, FHLBank Indianapolis is providing grants between $25,000 and $125,000. The program opened March 27, 2025 with a $5 million allocation and is available until October 1, 2025, or until funds are exhausted.
About First Federal Savings Bank Member FDIC Equal Housing Lender
First Federal Savings Bank was established on Evansville, Indiana’s Westside in 1904. A community bank offering eight locations in Posey, Vanderburgh, Warrick, and Henderson County. First Federal Savings Bank is also proud to offer Home Building Savings Bank locations in Daviess and Pike County.
Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis: Building Partnerships. Serving Communities.
FHLBank Indianapolis is a regional bank included in the Federal Home Loan Bank System. FHLBanks are government-sponsored enterprises created by Congress to ensure access to low-cost funding for their member financial institutions, with particular attention paid to providing solutions that support the housing and small business needs of members’ customers. FHLBanks are privately capitalized and funded and receive no Congressional appropriations. FHLBank Indianapolis is owned by its Indiana and Michigan financial institution members, including commercial banks, credit unions, insurance companies, savings institutions and community development financial institutions. For more information about FHLBank Indianapolis, visit www.fhlbi.com and follow the Bank on LinkedIn and X (formerly known as Twitter) at @FHLBankIndy.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis (NY-11)
(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis (NY-11), along with Congressman Thomas Kean (NJ-07), Congressman Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05), and Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10), introduced the American-Hellenic-Israeli Eastern Mediterranean Counterterrorism and Maritime Security Partnership Act of 2025. This bipartisan bill establishes a security-focused ‘3+1’ framework among the United States, Israel, Greece, and the Republic of Cyprus to enhance counterterrorism and maritime security in the Eastern Mediterranean.
To enhance security in the Eastern Mediterranean, the bill establishes two cooperative bodies: a parliamentary group and an executive-level group that includes the U.S., Israel, Greece, and Cyprus. Additionally, the bill introduces two security training programs: CERBERUS, which focuses on counterterrorism training at the Cyprus Center for Land, Open-seas, and Port Security, and TRIREME, which provides maritime security training at the Greek Souda Naval Base.
“I am proud to join my colleagues in introducing this bipartisan legislation, ” said Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis. “Enhancing cooperation in counterterrorism and maritime security between the United States, Greece, Israel, and Cyprus is vital, and we must continue to strengthen this partnership.”
“The strategic partnership among the United States, Israel, Greece, and the Republic of Cyprus is a cornerstone of regional stability and international security in the Eastern Mediterranean. This bipartisan effort enhances our collective ability to combat terrorism and further advances America’s long-term interests in defense, strategic cooperation, and the safeguarding of shared democratic values,” said Congressman Tom Kean.
“I am proud to join my colleagues in introducing this important piece of bipartisan legislation that seeks to strengthen cooperation with our democratic allies in the Eastern Mediterranean and promote regional security. In an increasingly complex global landscape, this bill reinforces our counterterrorism efforts and ensures that the United States and its allies are better equipped to detect emerging threats and respond swiftly in defense of our shared democratic values,” said Congressman Dan Goldman.
“The American Hellenic Institute has been a longtime advocate of the importance of the “3+1” partnership between Greece, the Republic of Cyprus, Israel, and the United States. “3+1” is a powerful regional cooperation structure that should be utilized to the fullest extent to protect America’s interests, secure its international commerce, and to provide peace, stability, and safety in an area of great geopolitical importance. By initiating this new bill, AHI and congressional leaders on this issue aim to see the “3+1” partnership grow to the next level, especially in terms of security cooperation. AHI will continue its work in Washington, D.C. to push forward the passage of this critical next step,” said the American Hellenic Institute (AHI).
This bill removes restrictions on defense articles and security assistance to the Republic of Cyprus and mandates the development of comprehensive strategies for counterterrorism and maritime security cooperation. It allocates funds for facilities and equipment at the Cyprus Center for Land, Open-Seas, and Port Security, the Greek Souda Naval Base, and all training programs. Additionally, this bill increases IMET funding for all three partner nations.
Almaty (Agenzia Fides) – “First saints, then missionaries,” Saint Giuseppe Allamano, founder of the Congregations of the Consolata Missionaries and Missionary Sisters, used to say. And that is the first gift we should ask for every day, says Sister Irena Candida De Alberto Solomone, originally from Africa, who, for three years, has been proclaiming the Gospel with four other sisters in the outskirts of Almaty, Kazakhstan’s most populous city.Kazakhstan, a crossroads of peoples and cultures in the heart of Asia, is a young country, as young as its Catholic community. A small flock (only 1% of the 19 million inhabitants are Catholic) that coexists peacefully with other faith communities (more than 70% of the population is Muslim, and 26% is Orthodox Christian).The current parish in Kazakhstan “is a parish composed primarily of the descendants of immigrants from Europe. But gradually, people born here are also asking to become part of the community”.Sister Irena is originally from Mozambique, where her vocation matured, as she tells Fides: “It is difficult to explain exactly how my vocation was born. Since childhood, when I attended catechism classes and, above all, prepared for the sacrament of Confirmation, I understood that Jesus is a person to be loved. With Confirmation, one becomes an active part of the Church, and every baptized person must assume responsibility. That is why, immediately after my Confirmation, I became a catechist in my parish.”At the time, Irena was 16 years old and had realized that “the Church is the place where one can fully live one’s faith. Like the other girls, I went to school, played basketball, and practiced dancing. But I felt a growing desire to give my life to God. After high school, at the age of 19, I decided to join the Consolata Missionary Sisters. In 1993, at the age of 24, I became a nun.”During these years, Irena also made the decision to go as a missionary “far from home, outside of Mozambique.”The Congregation of the Consolata Missionary Sisters provides for a period of several years before receiving the mandate: “My first destination was Italy, then I received the mandate and was initially destined for the United States of America. I lived there for 17 years.” In 2017, her destination changed: Asia. Sister Irena lived in Afghanistan for several years, then in 2022 she moved to the steppes of Kazakhstan: “I did not expect this. The Congregation’s project is to expand the missions, that is, to spread the Gospel where Christ is not yet known, where the Church is not yet developed.”But what does it mean to proclaim the Gospel in a country where the vast majority of the population belongs to another religion? For Sister Irena, it is “a precious opportunity,” because the charism of the Consolata Missionary Sisters is precisely to “reach those places and people where the Church’s presence is lacking, where there is a need to hear the Good News.””The best attitude,” adds the missionary sister, “is to have an open heart and an open mind. Since arriving here, we have realized that we have to be a bit like children. That means we have to start our lives a little bit anew: from studying the local language to exploring the places and culture of this country. This already leads us to the encounter with the Kazakh people. A people made up of many ethnic groups, but all with open hearts and open minds.” All activities “must take place on the church grounds. But they allow us to keep our facilities open. And that is a blessing in itself.”The community of sisters to which Irena belongs is also multi-ethnic, like the context in which the sisters are called to live their missionary vocation: Sister Irena lives with Sister Claudia from Colombia, Sister Dorota from Poland, and Sister Argentina from Mozambique. They are accompanied by two priests, Father Simon from Poland and Father Ladislaus from Korea.There are a total of seven villages around the city of Almaty where the Consolata Missionary Sisters work. And in Almaty, according to Sister Irena, “the government organizes many interfaith meetings. Father Simon often participates in these events so that we can maintain peaceful relations with everyone.”The Diocese of Almaty covers a total area of 711,600 km² and has 11 parishes. Of the 7,350,240 inhabitants, 42,000 are Catholics (0.6% of the total population). In the village of Janashari, “we have a playground and a facility that can accommodate about 20 people.” And even this playground, where people of other religions come together, becomes a place of encounter and dialogue for us.””And today,” adds the missionary sister, “we have some seminarians who will soon be ordained deacons.” And the veneration of saints or the Virgin Mary “has also begun to spread. That is beautiful, and we are only at the beginning.” (F.B.) (Agenzia Fides, 10/4/2025)
Share:
U.S. ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON DC 20585
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 10, 2025
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects recent developments in global trade policy and oil production to contribute to lower global demand growth for petroleum products through 2026, which contributes to significantly lower oil prices than previously forecast.
In its April Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), EIA points out significant uncertainties in energy supply, demand, and prices.
The STEO is based on current market conditions, and in the first week of April, numerous developments affected the global market—especially oil markets. On April 2, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order announcing a minimum 10% tariff on imports from all countries, which also included higher tariffs on some countries. On April 4, China responded by imposing 34% tariffs on imports from the United States. Amid the tariff announcements, OPEC+ members announced on April 3 that some countries will start oil production increases in May that were originally set for July.
These announcements caused the Brent crude oil spot price to fall by 12% on April 2 to $68 per barrel on April 4. EIA completed its forecasts on April 7, so the April STEO includes some of the recent changes in the energy market, but the agency expects continued volatility as market participants respond to further developments.
U.S. energy market indicators
2024
2025
2026
Brent crude oil spot price (dollars per barrel)
$81
$68
$61
Retail gasoline price (dollars per gallon)
$3.30
$3.10
$3.10
U.S. crude oil production (million barrels per day)
13.2
13.5
13.6
Natural gas price at Henry Hub (dollars per million British thermal units)
$2.20
$4.30
$4.60
U.S. liquefied natural gas gross exports (billion cubic feet per day)
12
15
16
Shares of U.S. electricity generation
Natural gas
42%
40%
40%
Coal
16%
16%
15%
Renewables
23%
25%
27%
Nuclear
19%
19%
19%
U.S. GDP (percentage change)
2.8%
2.0%
2.0%
U.S. CO2 emissions (billion metric tons)
4.8
4.8
4.7
Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Short-Term Energy Outlook, April 2025 Note: Values in this table are rounded and may not match values in other tables in the STEO.
Some key highlights from the April STEO include:
Global oil supply, demand, and prices: EIA expects continued growth in U.S. and global oil production as OPEC+ accelerates its previously announced production increases and the United States exempts energy from its recently announced tariffs. EIA expects global oil inventories to increase starting in the middle of 2025, but market uncertainty could lead to lower economic growth, which could lead to less growth in demand for petroleum products than EIA had previously forecast. The combination of growing supply and lower demand leads EIA to expect the Brent crude oil price to average less than $70 per barrel in 2025 and fall to an average of just over $60 per barrel in 2026. Those prices are about 10% lower than the March STEO forecast and reflect more uncertainty around global oil demand growth as well the potential for additional supply from OPEC+ in the coming months.
Other uncertainties in EIA’s oil price forecasts include existing sanctions on Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, which also could affect oil prices.
Gasoline prices: EIA forecasts the U.S. retail price for regular-grade gasoline to average about $3.10 per gallon this summer, mostly because of expected lower crude oil prices. If the forecast holds, this price would be the lowest inflation-adjusted summer average gasoline price since 2020.
U.S. propane markets: Among energy products, EIA expects China’s retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods will have the largest effect on propane because China is typically a major importer of U.S. propane. Some propane previously exported to China will likely find new destinations, but EIA expects that reduced propane export demand will cause propane inventories on the U.S. Gulf Coast to rise and put downward pressure on the Mt. Belvieu propane spot price.
Natural gas demand: EIA expects U.S. natural gas demand to grow by 4% in 2025, averaging just over 115 billion cubic feet per day. This increase is led by a 18% increase in exports and a 9% increase in residential and commercial consumption for space heating. The increase in natural gas exports is driven primarily by growth in liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports as two new LNG export facilities—Plaquemines Phase 1 and Golden Pass LNG—ramp up operations.
Although China announced on April 7 that it would no longer import U.S. LNG, EIA expects that ample global demand for LNG and flexible destination clauses in U.S. LNG contracts mean U.S. LNG exports will be largely unaffected by recent trade policy developments.
Natural gas inventories and prices: U.S working natural gas inventories ended the withdrawal season 6% below the five-year average because cold weather in January and February resulted in more natural gas than average being withdrawn from storage. EIA continues to expect higher natural gas prices this year, with the Henry Hub price averaging about $4.30 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) in 2025, up $2.10 per MMBtu from 2024. EIA expects the annual average price to increase in 2026 to about $4.60 per MMBtu.
Trade policy assumptions: The U.S. macroeconomic outlook used in the STEO is based on S&P Global’s macroeconomic model. Although that model was released in mid-March and does not completely reflect the trade policies announced the first week of April, its assumptions are partly in line with what the President announced on April 2. S&P Global’s forecast assumes an increasing universal tariff that will reach 10% by the end of 2025 and a higher rate on U.S. imports from China. We use Oxford Economics for our global GDP forecast, which was also completed in mid-March, prior to the most recent tariff announcements.
The full April 2025 Short-Term Energy Outlook is available on the EIA website.
The product described in this press release was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA’s data, analysis, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the U.S. government. The views in the product and this press release therefore should not be construed as representing those of the U.S. Department of Energy or other federal agencies.
EIA Program Contact: Tim Hess, STEO@eia.gov EIA Press Contact: Chris Higginbotham, EIAMedia@eia.gov
