California Schools Risk DC Funding Cuts on Transgender Athlete Debate
Public school funding in California is at risk after the US Education Department found that the state is violating rules protecting female athletes from unfair competition and unsafe situations 'by allowing males in girls' sports and intimate spaces.'
The rules, known as Title IX, require schools to provide equal opportunities for girls, including in athletic activities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Skift
34 minutes ago
- Skift
State Department Asks Student Visa Applicants to Make Social Media Accounts Public
The new requirement comes after the Trump administration halted visa screenings for international students. The U.S. State Department said Wednesday that individuals applying for student visas would need to make all their social media accounts public for vetting. 'Every visa adjudication is a national security decision,' the State Department said in a post on X. 'All individuals applying for an F, M, or J nonimmigrant visa are requested to adjust the privacy settings on all of their social media accounts to 'public' to facilitate vetting necessary to establish their identity and admissibility to th
New York Times
35 minutes ago
- New York Times
Mamdani Wins Nadler's Endorsement as He Seeks to Unify Democrats
On the day after Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani emerged as the likely Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, Representative Jerrold Nadler endorsed him in November's general election, giving Mr. Mamdani a key measure of support from one of the city's most prominent Jewish leaders. Mr. Nadler, a Democrat, said Wednesday that Mr. Mamdani's victory was a 'seismic election for the Democratic Party that I can only compare to Barack Obama's in 2008.' 'Voters in New York City demanded change and, with Zohran's triumph, we have a direct repudiation of Donald Trump's politics of tax cuts and authoritarianism,' he said. During the primary, Mr. Nadler had endorsed another candidate, Scott Stringer, a former city comptroller who appeared on track to finish toward the bottom of the pack. On Wednesday, Mr. Nadler described Mr. Mamdani as 'someone who will be a partner with me in Washington to take on Donald Trump.' Mr. Mamdani is an outspoken critic of Israel's government and its war in Gaza, and was denounced by his main rival, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, and some Jewish voters over his stances. Mr. Mamdani, who would be the city's first Muslim mayor, has firmly rejected accusations of antisemitism and has responded to the criticism by saying that he would protect Jewish New Yorkers as mayor and would increase funding to address hate crimes. Mr. Nadler's endorsement could help him draw more Jewish voters into his coalition ahead of the general election, especially those on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, which Mr. Nadler has long represented in Congress. 'I've spoken to him today about his commitment to fighting antisemitism, and we'll work with all New Yorkers to fight against all bigotry and hate,' Mr. Nadler said of Mr. Mamdani. Mr. Mamdani welcomed the endorsement in a statement, saying the congressman had 'charted a course of principled progressivism for decades.' 'I'm grateful for his support as we build a broad coalition of all New Yorkers and eager to work in partnership over the months to come,' he said. On Wednesday, Mr. Mamdani was taking a flood of calls from Democratic leaders, and many who had supported other candidates or stayed out of the race expressed admiration for him. One leading New York City Democrat, Rodneyse Bichotte Hermelyn, the chairwoman of the Brooklyn Democratic Party who has supported both Mr. Cuomo and Mayor Eric Adams, also said that she planned to support Mr. Mamdani in the general election.
Forbes
35 minutes ago
- Forbes
TPC Finds The Senate's Tax Cut Mostly Favors High-Income Households
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 23: Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) speaks to reporters after leaving ... More the Senate Chambers in the U.S. Capitol. (Photo by) The tax provisions of the Senate Finance Committee's draft budget bill would cut household taxes by an average of about $2,600 in 2026, slightly less than the House-passed bill, according to a new Tax Policy Center analysis. About 83 percent of households would have their taxes cut, compared to what they'd pay if the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) expired as scheduled at the end of this year. However, like its House counterpart, the bill would target most of its benefits to higher-income households. The Senate Finance Committee bill makes scores of changes to the House version. In addition, it is likely to be revised before the chamber votes on the measure. Among the changes: Some increase in the cap on the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, which would provide additional benefits to high-income households. TPC's analysis does not include the bill's changes to Medicaid and Medicare. Who gets the benefits? The highest-income 20 percent of households—those making $217,000 or more— would receive about 57 percent of the benefit of the Senate tax cuts, while the top 5 percent, who make $460,000 and up, would get more than one-third. By contrast, the lowest-income 20 percent of households, who make about $35,000 or less, would get about 1.5 percent of the benefit and middle-income households would receive about 14 percent. On average, those low-income households would pay about $150 less than under current law, and their after-tax income would increase by less than 1 percent. Middle-income households would pay $1,750 less on average, about 2.2 percent of their after-tax income. High-income households would receive much more generous tax benefits. For example, the bill would reduce taxes for those making between about $460,000 and $1.1 million (the 95th to 99th income percentile) by about $18,000 or 3.8 percent of their after-tax income. As a share of after-tax income, that group would make out best. For example, the highest-income one percent of households would see their taxes cut by about $67,000 on average, or 3.1 percent of their after-tax income. TPC's analysis of the Senate Finance Committee' version of the OBBBA How the bills differ Among the biggest differences: Despite these and many smaller changes, both bills would extend the TCJA and include some version of Trump's campaign tax proposals. As a result, the distributional differences between the House and Senate Finance bills are modest. However, they are noticeable. Comparing the tax changes Overall, the Senate Finance bill would cut taxes by an average of $2,600 while the House bill would reduce them by about $2,900. Among lower-income households the differences are very small in 2026. Their average tax cut would be $150 in the Senate bill compared to $160 in the House version. Similarly, middle-income households would pay an average of $1,750 less under the Senate bill compared to $1,850 in the House version. The differences would be more noticeable for higher-income households. For example, the Senate bill would cut taxes by an average of about $18,000 for the $460,000 to $1.1 million income group while the House bill would reduce their tax bills by an average of nearly $21,000. Among the reasons: the absence of SALT relief and the lower deduction for pass-through businesses in the Senate bill. Similarly, the House bill would cut taxes for the top 0.1 percent, those making $5.2 million or more, by an average of $50,000 more than the Senate Finance bill. The other major difference between the two bills is that they are built on two very different budget baselines. The Senate bill cuts taxes by only about $440 billion over 10 years by assuming there is no cost to extending the TCJA. However, assuming the TCJA expires as scheduled and the Treasury must pay for any tax cuts beyond 2025, the Senate Finance bill would reduce revenues by $4.2 trillion over the same period. The House bill would cost $3.8 trillion. That and many of the substantive differences between the two bills must be resolved before the giant tax and spending measure reaches Trump's desk. That leaves a lot to do between now and the GOP's self-imposed deadline of July 4.
