UMass Amherst hosts hearing on governor's $62B budget for education
Amherst Cinema announces 2025 'Science on Screen' season
The Joint Committee on Ways and Means Fiscal Year 2026 Budget Hearing will take a look at education and local aid plans that are laid out in Governor Healey's $62 billion budget proposal. The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation states that the plan increases spending over the Fiscal Year 2025 GAA by $4.3 billion and over the administration's estimated spending level of $60.256 billion by $1.8 billion.
Those portions of the budget are now subject to big changes as the Trump administration is working to dismantle to Department of Education.
The meeting will take place Monday morning at 11:00 at UMass Amherst in person at the UMass Commons Auditorium and virtually. Representatives from the Amherst/Pelham Regional School district will be there to advocate for regional public schools.
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Ana Navarro Calls Out Melania Trump's ‘Performative' Letter To Putin
Ana Navarro of 'The View' is accusing first lady Melania Trump of hypocrisy, and she has a long list of receipts to back it up. On Aug.15, President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in an attempt to negotiate a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine — a goal that ultimately went unmet. During the meeting, Trump reportedly handed Putin a letter from Melania Trump urging him to protect children and future generations worldwide, saying, 'It is time.' Related: The letter, which was obtained by Fox News, was reposted by Navarro on Instagram on Tuesday — but not before the political commentator added her own unflinching critique of Melania Trump's message. 'I just can't with the performative, hypocrisy from these people,' Navarro captioned her video, right before reading the first lady's words claiming that Putin could usher in peace with merely 'a stroke of the pen.' In the video, Navarro juxtaposed Melania Trump's appeal for global peace with the Trump administration's treatment of immigrant families in the U.S., especially children. She pointed to the fear among immigrant children, many of whom are U.S. citizens, who live in constant anxiety over 'their parents being dragged through the streets of America.' Among Navarro's list of examples were the school children in Los Angeles, California, who were detained by ICE. Earlier this month, the government agency mistakenly detained a disabled youth outside of his L.A. school. 'Trump and his minions have literally destroyed U.S. aid that could feed starving children, instead of distributing it,' Navarro continued in her caption. 'They are destroying and separating families. They are taking safety nets away from poor American children and giving tax-breaks to the ultra wealthy.' Related: While Navarro acknowledged the importance of advocating for Ukrainian children, she urged the first lady to turn her attention closer to home — namely, to the policies enacted by her own husband. She wrote that Trump should 'spare' her the gestures towards influencing Putin, and suggested that she 'stands a better chance of influencing Trump.' Related: 'There are children in America crying, suffering, going to bed in fear,' Navarro said, 'returning to homes that are abandoned and empty, not knowing where their next meal is coming from because of what her husband is doing.' Related... Ana Navarro Urges One Of Trump's Kennedy Center Honor Nominees To Reject His Award Michael B. Jordan Makes Ana Navarro Swoon With Just A Single Sound On 'The View' Ana Navarro Shares Her Thoughts On Meghan Markle Controversy
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
People Are Calling Trump's Latest Truth Social Rant "Outrageous" After He Slammed American Museums For Discussing "How Bad Slavery Was"
It's been 159 years since slavery was legally abolished in the U.S, and yet, in 2025, discussing the history of slavery has seemingly become too "woke" for the MAGA crowd. During a recent CNN panel discussion, MAGA-supporting celebrity Jillian Michaels shocked her colleagues after she argued that slavery shouldn't be blamed on "just one race," — meaning white Americans. CNN / Twitter: @Acyn Related: Well, President Donald Trump recently took to Truth Social to argue a similar point, criticizing American museums that discuss "how bad slavery was," calling them "woke" and "out of control." He wrote that he's instructed his attorneys to "go through the museums" and make changes to reflect "success" and "brightness." Here's the full post. Related: The now-viral post has been seen by over 10.2 million people and received thousands of comments criticizing Trump for his rhetoric. One person called Trump "out of his damn mind," and advocated for the history of slavery to be taught "again and again." Related: Another person described Trump's post as "pro slavery rhetoric." While this person called the president "fragile" for feeling attacked by teaching slavery. Representative Jim McGovern advised Trump to "spend more time in a museum." Related: And Gov. Gavin Newsom accused Trump of trying to "erase" slavery... And finally, this person asked: "Why do the same people who want to erase the history of slavery insist on preserving the Confederate flag and generals?" What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below. Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Also in In the News:
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American
When President Donald Trump first declared a crime emergency in the nation's capital and sent hundreds of federal law enforcement agents to patrol its streets, this district resident had a hard time taking it too seriously. The initial images of bored Drug Enforcement Administration agents strolling past perplexed joggers on the National Mall were more clownish than carceral. Local street resistance to the occupation was limited to a drunk guy throwing a sandwich at a federal agent. But inevitably, as this operation has dragged on, things have taken a darker turn. The sandwich-thrower was overcharged and rearrested in a needless, publicized show of force. Masked federal agents have set up an unconstitutional checkpoint, violently arrested at least one delivery driver, and filmed themselves tearing down a banner protesting their presence in the city. Each day, more and more National Guard members pour into the capital. The conversation about Trump's declared crime emergency has understandably, albeit unhelpfully, provoked a lot of discourse about how safe D.C. is, whether a federalized local police department will make it safer, whether federal agents are being deployed in the right places and going after the right crimes, and on and on. This incessant crime conversation has distracted from just how un-American Trump's show of force in the nation's capital is. Uniformed troops and masked federal agents doing routine law enforcement at the command of the president is just not how we do things in the United States. The entire point of the U.S. Constitution is to prevent the federal government from becoming a despotism, and one of the primary ways it does this is by limiting how many men with guns it has at its disposal. This is why the Constitution places strict constraints on maintaining a standing army. It's why there are only three crimes mentioned in the Constitution, none of which would plausibly require federal agents to patrol U Street. It's why questions of what to criminalize and who to prosecute were largely left up to the states. The Third Amendment is mostly treated as an anachronistic joke today. In fact, it is a load-bearing part of the Constitution that makes clear that the military and the police are different things and that Americans should not have to tolerate the presence of armed agents of the states as a routine part of daily life. Obviously we've deviated considerably from this ideal since the founding generation. The federal criminal code is now extensive. The feds' wars on drugs, terror, and immigration have grown the number of militarized federal agents doing law enforcement activities. Federal money has subsidized a similar trend of militarization of state and local police forces. Reason has been decrying this trend for decades. In his book Rise of the Warrior Cop, Radley Balko writes about how the trend of increased police militarization has eroded the "Symbolic Third Amendment" and the free society it protects. It's darkly ironic then that, after decades of politicians of both parties in D.C. gifting the federal government vast powers to police the rest of the country, a militarized federal police force is now being deployed on the streets of America's capital against its residents. This is why arguments about whether federal agents could be more effectively deployed in less visible, higher crime areas of the city are completely beside the point. The federal government acting as a beat cop is inimical to our constitutional design, regardless of how effective its efforts are. That D.C. is a federal district might seem to complicate this point. In fact, it reinforces it. Despite being a constitutionally peculiar special district, a lot of effort has been put into giving D.C. a local police force that does not practically function as an arm of the federal government. Even in the seat of federal power, it's understood that a force of federal agents policing everyday life is not something ordinary citizens should have to put up with. That Trump has the power to federalize the D.C. police or deploy the D.C. National Guard doesn't stop his actions from being authoritarian and offensive to the spirit of the Constitution, even if it doesn't violate the letter of it. It's also cold comfort that Trump's declared crime emergency is clearly mostly a performative act to rile up the libs and not a serious effort at combating crime. While the president is staging the performance, it's disconcerting that he's opted to cast himself as the villain in the play. Moreover, the longer federal agents are deployed on D.C. streets, the greater the odds that more serious abuses do happen. It's true that D.C. today is not as locked down as it has been in recent years. The police-enforced curfews during the George Floyd protests or the security cordons that sprang up after the January 6 riots were a lot more visible and heavy-handed. Excessive as those police actions were (particularly the latter), they were at least being done as an emergency response to widespread breakdowns in public order. Trump is rolling out the feds in D.C. to do routine law enforcement. That's un-American. The post Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American appeared first on Solve the daily Crossword
