Massachusetts launches public survey on graduation requirements
The state is launching a public survey for students, parents, and educators alike to detail how they define a graduate in the Bay State. They're also holding listening sessions around the state, with one coming up in Holyoke on Thursday and a virtual session on Tuesday at 6 p.m.
Education Department pausing plan to garnish Social Security checks over defaulted loans
'The listening sessions in Taunton, Worcester and Somerville provided deeply meaningful feedback, and I thank all of the parents, educators and community members who joined. We are working to bring the definition of what it means to graduate from high school to new heights, and additional public feedback is only going to strengthen these efforts. I encourage everyone to fill out the survey and look forward to engaging with more residents at the remaining listening sessions,' said Secretary of Education Dr. Patrick Tutwiler.
For more information on those listening sessions or to complete the survey by June 30th at Mass.gov/K12GradCouncil.
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
Los Angeles Times
8 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Social Security turns 90 this week. Republicans are trying to keep it from reaching 100
Franklin Delano Roosevelt had a clear mind about the value of Social Security on Aug. 14, 1935, the day he signed it into law. 'The civilization of the past hundred years, with its startling industrial changes, has tended more and more to make life insecure,' he said in the Oval Office. 'We can never insure 100 per cent of the population against 100 per cent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against ... poverty-ridden old age.' He called it a 'cornerstone in a structure which is being built but is by no means complete.' FDR envisioned further programs to bring relief to the needy and healthcare for all Americans. Some of that happened during the following nine decades, but the structure is still incomplete. And now, as Social Security observes the 90th anniversary of that day, the program faces a crisis. If there are doubts about whether Social Security will survive long enough to observe its centennial, those have less to do with its fiscal challenges, the solutions of which are certainly within the economic reach of the richest nation on Earth. They have more to do with partisan politics, specifically the culmination of a decades-long GOP project to dismantle the most successful, and the most popular, government assistance program in American history. From a distance, the raids on the program's customer service infrastructure and the security of its data mounted by Elon Musk's DOGE earlier this year looked somewhat random. Fueled by abject ignorance about how the program worked and what its data meant, DOGE set in place plans to cut the program's staff by 7,000, or 12 percent, and to close dozens of field offices serving Social Security applicants and beneficiaries. This at a time when the Social Security case load is higher than ever and staffing had already approached a 50-year low. This might have been billed as an effort to impose 'efficiency' on the system. But 'a more accurate description,' writes Monique Morrissey of the labor-oriented Economic Policy Institute, 'is sabotage.' That has been conservatives' long-term plan — make interactions with Social Security more involved, more difficult and more time-consuming in order to make it seem ever less relevant to average Americans' lives. Once that happened, the public would be softened up to accept a privatized retirement system. Get the inefficient government off the backs of the people, the idea goes, so Wall Street can saddle up. George W. Bush's privatization plan, indeed, was conceived and promoted by Wall Street bankers, who thirsted for access to the trillions of dollars passing through the system's hands. This was never much of a secret, but it simmered beneath the surface. But Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, speaking at a July 30 event sponsored by Breitbart News, said the quiet part out loud. Referring to a private savings account program enacted as part of the GOP budget reconciliation bill Trump signed July 4, Bessent said, 'In a way, it is a back door for privatizing Social Security.' The private accounts are to be jump-started with $1,000 deposits for children born this year through 2028, to be invested in stock index mutual funds; families can add up to $5,000 annually in after-tax income, with withdrawals beginning when the child reaches 18, though in some cases incurring a stiff penalty. I asked the Treasury Department for a clarification of Bessent's remark, but didn't receive a reply. Bessent, however, did try to walk the statement back via a post on X in which he stated that the Trump accounts are 'an additive benefit for future generations, which will supplement the sanctity of Social Security's guaranteed payments.' Sorry, Mr. Secretary, no sale. You're the one who talked about 'privatizing Social Security' at the Breitbart event. You're stuck with it. Plainly, an 'additive' benefit would have nothing to do with Social Security. How it would 'supplement the sanctity' of Social Security benefits isn't apparent from Bessent's statement, or the law. Still, we can parse out the implications based on the long history of conservative attacks on the program. In 1983, the libertarian Cato Journal published a paper by Stuart Butler and Peter Germanis, two policy analysts at the right-wing Heritage Foundation, titled 'Achieving a 'Leninist' Strategy—i.e., for privatizing Social Security. From Lenin they drew the idea of mobilizing the working class to undermine existing capitalist structures. Cato's 'Leninist' strategy paper explicitly advocated encouraging workers to opt out of Social Security by promising them a payroll tax reduction if they put the money in a private account. IRAs, the authors asserted, would acclimate Americans to entrusting their retirements to a privatized system. They advocated an increase in the maximum annual contribution and its tax deductibility. 'The public would gradually become more familiar with the private option,' they wrote. 'If that did happen, it would be far easier than it is now to adopt the private plan as their principal source of old-age insurance and retirement income.' In other words, it would provide a backdoor for privatizing Social Security. (Germanis has since emerged as a cogent critic of conservative economics. Butler served at Heritage until 2014 and is currently a scholar in residence at the Brookings Institution; he told me in March that he still believes in parallel systems of private retirement savings as we have today, but as 'add on' savings rather than a substitute for Social Security.) Cato, a think tank co-founded by Charles Koch, has never relinquished its quest to privatize Social Security; the notion still occupies pride of place on the institution's web page devoted to the program. In 2005, when I attended a two-day conference on the topic at Cato's Washington headquarters, Michael D. Tanner, then the chair of Cato's Social Security task force, explained that Cato wasn't concerned so much with the system's fiscal and economic issues as with its politics. Its goal, he stated frankly, was to unmake FDR's New Deal. 'This is about whether we redefine a relationship between individuals and government that we've had since 1935,' he told me. 'We say that what was done was wrong then, and it's wrong now. Our position is that people need to be responsible for their own lives.' Yet forcing dramatic change on a program so widely trusted and appreciated is a heavy lift. That's why Republicans have tried to downplay their intentions. Back in 2019, for instance, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) talked about the need to hold discussions about Social Security's future 'behind closed doors.' Secrecy was essential, Ernst said, 'so we're not being scrutinized by this group or the other, and just have an open and honest conversation about what are some of the ideas that we have for maintaining Social Security in the future.' As I observed at the time, that was a giveaway: The only time politicians take actions behind closed doors is when they know the results will be massively unpopular. Raising taxes on the rich to pay for Social Security benefits? That discussion can be held in the open, because the option is decisively favored in opinion polls. Cut benefits? That needs to be done in secret, because Americans overwhelmingly oppose it. Curiously, Trump and his fellow Republicans seem to think that attacking Social Security is an electoral winner. Possibly they've lost sight of the program's importance to the average American. Among Social Security beneficiaries age 65 and older, 39% of men and 44% of women receive half their income or more from Social Security. In the same cohort, 12% of men and 15% of women rely on Social Security for 90% or more of their income. Notwithstanding that reality, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently asserted that delays in sending out Social Security checks or bank deposits would be no big deal. 'Let's say Social Security didn't send out their checks this month,' Lutnick said. 'My mother-in-law, who's 94 — she wouldn't call and complain.... She'd think something got messed up, and she'll get it next month.' He claimed that only 'fraudsters' would complain. I had a different take. Mine was that even a 24-hour delay in benefit payments would have a cataclysmic fallout for the Republican Party. It would be front-page news coast to coast. There would be nowhere for them to hide. While bringing misery to millions of Americans, a delay — which would be unprecedented since the first checks went out in 1940 — would be a gift for Democrats, if they knew how to use it. Where will we go from here? The current administration has already done damage to this critically-important program. An acting commissioner Trump installed briefly interfered with the enrollment process for infants born in Maine—an important procedure to ensure that government benefits continue to flow to their families—because the state's governor had pushed back against Trump in public. In July, the newly-appointed Social Security commissioner, Frank Bisignano, allowed a false and flagrantly political email to go out to beneficiaries and to be posted on the program's website implying that the budget reconciliation bill relieved most seniors of federal income taxes on their benefits. It did nothing of the kind. To the extent that Social Security may face a fiscal reckoning in the next decade, the most effective fix is well-understood by those familiar with the program's structure. It's removing the income cap on the payroll tax, which tops out this year at $176,100 in wage income. Up to that point, wages are taxed at 12.4%, split evenly between workers and their employers. Above the ceiling, the tax is zero. Remove the cap, and make capital gains, dividends and interest income subject to the tax, and Social Security will remain fully solvent into the foreseeable future. Trump and his fellow Republicans don't seem to understand how most Americans view Social Security: as an 'entitlement,' not because they think they're getting something for nothing, but because they know they've paid for it all their working lives. As much as the system's foes would like it to go away, as long as the rest of us remain vigilant against efforts to 'redefine a relationship between individuals and government' established in 1935, we will be able to celebrate its 100th anniversary 10 years from now, in 2035.
Buzz Feed
12 hours ago
- Buzz Feed
21 Veterans Share Honest Thoughts About Donald Trump
Recently, we asked active and reserve US military members and veterans to share what they honestly think about Donald Trump and his administration, and they didn't hold back. Amid jeopardizing America's relationships with long-standing allies, Veteran Affairs layoffs, and — among many other things — deploying troops to intimidate the American people, here's how veterans are reacting: "Trump lacks any integrity and is the first president in my lifetime to blatantly use the military as political pawns. I served for 21 years, and I never thought I'd see the day that a president would politicize soldiers while speaking to them as he did at Fort Bragg. It's reprehensible and sad that our military has come to this. For those service members who are okay with this, you need to realize that Trump is breaking down your trust with the American public by egging soldiers on to cheer at a clear political message. This won't bode well for the stature of the services. Senior officers better get off their asses and do something before it's too late!" —smartcentipede134 "As a Vietnam veteran, I am appalled at what our country is becoming under Trump and the Republicans who are condoning all of his actions." "Trump is keeping promises he made during his campaign. I don't like everything about him, but he is 200% better than Biden or Kamala! I served as a combat medic in the US Army 9th Infantry Division, and he has my support 100%." "I'm a retired Navy veteran who's served 21 years for my country. I've been retired since 1993 and have voted for both Republican and Democratic presidents. I honestly have to say that Trump is the worst president elected in my lifetime. He was disrespectful to the late Senator John McCain by making comments about him being captured and spending time as a prisoner of war. But at least McCain served his country. Trump makes everything about himself; he's an adulterer and a convicted felon. What other president found it necessary to use the military to celebrate his birthday, spending millions of taxpayer dollars to do so? Trump could be the only candidate on the ballot, but he will never garner my vote." —grumpytrash952 "I retired after 30 years of service. Trump is the exact type of fascist dictator I spent my entire career fighting. Like all other fascist dictators, he only cares for himself. This will end violently." "I am a Vietnam veteran and was in the US Navy from 1964 to 1968. Trump is doing just as I'd hoped. The outlaw Dems are hindering him, but he is a fighter. Trump is not going to touch Social Security, Veterans Affairs, or healthcare. My wife and I are trying to survive solely on my Social Security. DJT, keep on keeping on. God bless and good luck." "Retired Air Force here. If I were active duty, I'd retire or resign immediately, because I wouldn't be able to support Trump's actions and his attempts to create false conditions to declare martial law so he can rule us. He's a coward and a bully. If Congress won't stop him, then the courts must. Otherwise, we must get ready for a potential civil war." "I am a veteran of two branches of military service with honorable discharges from both. I served during the Gulf War and the War on Terror after 9/11, and I grew up in a household with a US Marine Corps aviator. My dad retired after over 20 years of service, and as much as I miss him, I'm glad he passed before he could witness the embarrassment of the person who currently holds the office of President of the United States. Dad always preached that you don't have to respect the man, but you must respect the office." "But Trump has insulted the military and our veterans, and he continues to trample our Constitution. I was taught that my oath of office was to uphold the Constitution, and I seem to remember something about refusing orders that were morally questionable or violated our oath. I'm not embarrassed by my service, but I'm embarrassed by our president."—beaunamy15 "I am a veteran who has voted for Trump in all three elections. I believe that voting for him this last time was one of the biggest mistakes of my life. Seeing how cowardly he acts toward our enemies makes me sick. He is turning our best allies against us while trying to befriend the dictators we swore to prevent from prospering. Trump is single-handedly trying to crash the American economy and make life harder for everyone except for the 1%. He expects the American people to bend the knee as if he were a king. I fear for the direction our country is headed." "I am a USAF Cold War and Vietnam-era veteran and registered Republican. I was appalled by the ensuing damage Trump did to our country internally and internationally during his first term, which he ended with an attempted insurrection. The next four years were spent correcting much of the damage, only to have it totally destroyed in less than six months by Trump and his inept administration. Although I'm not totally convinced it will happen, my hope is that our congress and courts of law will have the fortitude to shut Trump and his administration down." "In 1971, my draft number was 85, and I joined the Navy at the end of the Vietnam War. I retired in 1994 during the first Gulf War, and I was a registered Republican until Trump came on the scene. He lacks the knowledge, ability, and heart to be Commander in Chief. He dodged the draft five times, called military members 'suckers and losers,' is a 34-time convicted felon, was divorced four times, and the list goes on and on. He has NO place in politics, and he is the WORST president ever. This isn't over, but we don't know how it will end. Let's pray the Constitution survives." "I have served 22 years for my country. This clown that was elected to represent us all is, by far, the most corrupt president to date. He thinks he can do anything and disrespect anyone; he has done nothing to unite this country for the better. Additionally, the Supreme Court is a joke and just as corrupt as Trump. I served to protect and defend and follow lawful orders, not a dictator." —superlatte284 "I'm a 21-year retired SFC war veteran. Trump is doing a fine job so far. All of these idiots using the hyperbole that Trump is the 'worst president ever' need to get a clue. He's not perfect, but he is 1,000 times better than the clown we had before him. Many of you KNEW Biden was compromised in more ways than one and said nothing. NOTHING. So, sit back and enjoy the next four years of Trump, because you were too cowardly to speak up against Biden." "I am a six-year Navy veteran and a three-year Army veteran who was honorably discharged under medical conditions at 100% disability, and I thank God that President Trump is in office. It is about damn time we have someone in office who knows business and isn't afraid to stand up for AMERICA FIRST! We have been on the shitty end of the stick long enough, paying the rest of the world's bills for squabbles between countries, and I'm glad that Trump put a stop to it and the wasteful spending of the Democratic party." "As a 20-year retired Army veteran, I've served under numerous leaders and have supported generals, Secretaries of Defense, and Chiefs of Staff. Leadership matters, and this administration has made it clear that reckless governance weakens institutions. I once encouraged young people to consider military service. Now, I can no longer offer that advice in good conscience. This turbulent area will pass, but not soon enough." "As an Air Force veteran, I am insulted by those who don't understand how Trump is disobeying the Constitution. Any ex and current military member who doesn't feel the same should be ashamed of themselves. Biden wasn't a great president, but he was a good one who dug us out of a deep hole that the previous Trump administration put us in. To deny what Biden did is to deny reality; Biden wasn't corrupt like Trump. Any president who openly states they are unsure if they have to uphold the Constitution should be immediately impeached. It is also shameful that the other two branches of government don't seem to have the morals or decency to stand up to Trump. If America survives, history will surely look at this period as a far darker time than during the Civil War." —Anonymous "I'm a 24-year veteran and a three-tour combat veteran. I am struggling to understand veterans who like him. This behavior is not okay in any form. People actually believe the stuff Trump and his administration say, and it makes me embarrassed and angry. I will definitely fight against the MAGA community if it comes to it. My country and its three WORKING forms of government NEED TO WORK CORRECTLY!" "I'm an 80-year-old combat veteran of the Marine Corps, and I find the current administration incompetent, shameful, and dangerous. Trump and his enablers would benefit from devoting more time to self-reflection, self-improvement, and self-discipline. Instead, it seems to me that with their power-hungry appetites, they favor self-aggrandisement, money-grubbing, and boot-licking." "As a former active duty, combat arms platoon leader during the 1970s, I learned leadership principles from the world's finest leaders. The first lesson I learned and practiced every day was to take care of your people. We were taught that you are responsible for your people's well-being, which included giving them realistic training, adequate shelter, food, health, and pay and promotions. Trump doesn't give a damn about taking care of anybody but himself." "I'm a Cold War veteran who served for four years on active duty when the Soviet Union was a real threat. Now, the biggest threat to my country is the current administration in DC. I never did think that there would be troops deployed against our fellow Americans just because the president gets offended when someone calls him out on his lies. Every single day, there's a new lie fed to the MAGA cult. It's absolutely disgusting and disgraceful. Service members swear an oath to the Constitution, not to a person. We are obligated to disobey orders that are illegal. We need military leadership to stand up and call him out for his actions." —John, 55, Connecticut "The convicted felon residing in the White House is a true danger to all of democracy. I served 10 years in the Army and am proud to have served. I worked closely with other NATO soldiers and know what they admired the United States for. I look around now and wonder what happened. Felon Trump and his asslicking, self-serving sycophants have created an image of our country that embarrasses and frightens me as a father and grandfather." If you're an active duty or reserve US military member or a veteran, what are your thoughts on Trump's presidency so far? Let us know in the comments, or you can anonymously voice your thoughts using the form below.
Axios
14 hours ago
- Axios
Trump's BLS nominee suggests suspending jobs report
President Trump's nominee to head the Bureau of Labor Statistics, E.J. Antoni, suggested the possibility of suspending the bureau's flagship monthly jobs report. Why it matters: It's one of the world's most fundamental pieces of data, crucial for investors to understand the health of the U.S. economy. Catch up quick: Antoni made the suggestion in an interview with Fox News Digital on August 4 in response to concerns over the report's accuracy. What they're saying:"How on Earth are businesses supposed to plan — or how is the Fed supposed to conduct monetary policy — when they don't know how many jobs are being added or lost in our economy? It's a serious problem that needs to be fixed immediately," Antoni told Fox. The other side: Economists were quick to slam Antoni's suggestion. "That would (be) a serious mistake in my estimation. It would only fuel critiques of a politicization of job market data and likely result in volatility across asset classes," RSM US chief economist Joe Brusuelas tells Axios. "One gets the sense that comments like that will cause US Senators to question his wisdom, qualifications and suitability for the job." The intrigue: The jobs report isn't the only major government program facing Antoni's scrutiny. In a 2024 interview he called Social Security a "Ponzi scheme" that would eventually collapse. "Eventually, you need to sunset the program," he said, while emphasizing that there is still money to pay for folks who are already retired. But for people retiring decades from now, "the program is not going to be viable." As the Urban Institute points out, Social Security isn't a Ponzi scheme — it's not based on a lie, and the pool of contributors will never run dry. By the numbers: Markets mostly looked past Antoni's suggestion on the jobs data, staying broadly higher in early afternoon trading on the back of an earlier report indicating inflation was not heating up quite as badly as feared.
