Orange County moves Warwick polling site due to excessive heat
Orange County's Board of Elections moved a polling site in Warwick June 24 due to the excessive heat.
Originally voters in two districts, 11 and 18, were supposed to vote at the St. Ignatius Church, 75 Main Street in the Village of Florida.
Fatal fire: Goshen community mourns loss of father, two sons in 'devastating' house fire
Due to extremely high temperatures and for the safety of voters and poll workers, that polling location was moved to the Florida Senior Center, 1 Cohen Drive in Florida.
Republican voters in the town are choosing a candidate for district 2 in the Orange County Legislature.
Mike Randall covers breaking news for the Times Herald-Record and the Poughkeepsie Journal. Reach him at mrandall@th-record.com.
This article originally appeared on Times Herald-Record: Orange County NY moves polling site due to excessive heat
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
22 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
The bombing of Iran may teach an unwelcome lesson on nuclear weapons
'The risks of Iran acquiring a small nuclear arsenal are now higher than they were before the events of last week,' said Robert J. Einhorn, an arms control expert who negotiated with Iran during the Obama administration. 'We can assume there are a number of hard-liners who are arguing that they should cross that nuclear threshold.' Advertisement Iran would face formidable hurdles to producing a bomb even if it made a concerted dash for one, Einhorn said, not least the knowledge that if the United States and Israel detect such a move, they will strike again. It is far from clear that Iran's leaders, isolated, weakened and in disarray, want to provoke him. Advertisement Yet the logic of proliferation looms large in a world where the nuclear-armed great powers -- the United States, Russia and China -- are viewed as increasingly unreliable and even predatory toward their neighbors. From the Persian Gulf and Central Europe to East Asia, analysts said, non-nuclear countries are watching Iran's plight and calculating lessons they should learn from it. 'Certainly, North Korea doesn't rue the day it acquired nuclear weapons,' said Christopher R. Hill, who led lengthy, ultimately unsuccessful, talks with Pyongyang in 2007 and 2008 to try to persuade it to dismantle its nuclear program. The lure of the bomb, Hill said, has become stronger for America's allies in the Middle East and Asia. Since World War II, they have sheltered under a U.S. security umbrella. But they now confront a president, in Trump, who views alliances as incompatible with his vision of 'America first.' 'I'd be very careful with the assumption that there is a U.S. nuclear umbrella,' said Hill, who served as ambassador to South Korea, Iraq, Poland, and Serbia under Democratic and Republican presidents. 'Countries like Japan and South Korea are wondering whether they can rely on the U.S.' Support for developing nuclear weapons has risen in South Korea, though its newly elected president, Lee Jae-myung, has vowed to improve relations with North Korea. In 2023, President Joe Biden signed a deal with Seoul to involve it more in nuclear planning with the United States, in part to head off a push by South Korean politicians and scientists to develop their own nuclear weapons capability. Advertisement In Japan, the public has long favored disarmament, a legacy of the U.S. atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. But it has begun debating whether to store nuclear weapons from the United States on its soil, as some members of NATO do. Shinzo Abe, a former prime minister, said that if Ukraine had kept some of its Soviet-era bombs, it might have avoided a Russian invasion. President Vladimir Putin's threats to use tactical nuclear weapons early in that conflict gave pause to the Biden administration about how aggressively to arm the Ukrainian military. It also deepened fears that other revisionist powers could use nuclear blackmail to intimidate their neighbors. The lesson of Ukraine could end up being, 'If you have nuclear weapons, keep them. If you don't have them yet, get them, especially if you lack a strong defender like the U.S. as your ally and if you have a beef with a big country that could plausibly lead to war,' wrote Bruce Riedel and Michael E. O'Hanlon, analysts at the Brookings Institution, a research group in Washington, in 2022. Saudi Arabia, an ally of the United States and archrival of Iran, has watched Tehran's nuclear ambitions with alarm. Experts say it would feel huge pressure to develop its own weapon if Iran ever obtained one. The United States has tried to reassure the Saudis by dangling assistance to a civil nuclear program, but those negotiations were interrupted by Israel's war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. And yet, for all the predictions of a regional arms race, it has yet to occur. Experts say that is a testament to the success of nonproliferation policies, as well as to the checkered history of countries that pursued weapons. Advertisement The Middle East is a messy landscape of dashed nuclear dreams. Iraq, Syria and Libya all had their programs dismantled by diplomacy, sanctions or military force. In the category of cautionary tales, Libya's is perhaps the most vivid: Moammar Gadhafi gave up his weapons of mass destruction in 2003. Eight years later, after a NATO-backed military operation toppled his government, he crawled out of a drainpipe to face a brutal death at the hands of his own people. Iran's strategy of aggressively enriching uranium, while stopping short of a bomb, did not ultimately protect it either. 'To the extent that people are looking at Iran as a test case, Trump has shown that its strategy is not a guarantee that you will prevent a military attack,' said Gary Samore, a professor at Brandeis University who worked on arms control negotiations in the Obama and Clinton administrations. Samore said it was too soon to say how the Israeli and American strikes on Iran would affect the calculus of other countries. 'How does this end?' he said. 'Does it end with a deal? Or is Iran left to pursue a nuclear weapon?' Experts on proliferation are, by nature, wary. But some are trying to find a silver lining in the events of the last week. Einhorn said that in delivering on his threat to bomb a nuclear-minded Iran, Trump had sent a reassuring message to U.S. allies facing their own nuclear insecurities. 'In Moscow, Pyongyang and Beijing,' Einhorn said, 'they've taken notice not just of the reach and capacity of the U.S. military, but the willingness of this president to use that capability.' Advertisement This article originally appeared in
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Newsom, Democrats reach $321 billion California budget deal
California leaders reached a tentative agreement Tuesday night on the state budget, which hinges on Gov. Gavin Newsom's demand that the Legislature pass a housing reform proposal. The eleventh-hour negotiations about the spending plan, which takes effect July 1, speak to the political challenge of overhauling longstanding environmental regulations to speed up housing construction in a state controlled by Democrats. The party has been loathe to do more than tweak the California Environmental Quality Act, or approve one-off exemptions, despite pressure from the governor and national criticism of a law that reform advocates say has hamstrung California's ability to build. The proposal is among a series of policies Newsom and Democratic lawmakers are expected to advance in the coming days as part of the $321.1 billion budget. The deal reflects the Legislature's resistance to the governor's proposed cuts to reduce a $12 billion budget deficit expected in the year ahead, citing uncertainty about the scope of the state's financial problems. 'We appreciate the strong partnership with the Legislature in reaching this budget agreement,' said Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for Newsom. 'The governor's signature is contingent on finalizing legislation to cut red tape and unleash housing and infrastructure development across the state — to build more, faster.' The consensus comes after weeks of conversations about how to offset the deficit, caused by overspending in California, and start to address even larger financial problems anticipated in the future, including from potential federal policy changes. The tentative deal largely relies on borrowing money, tapping into state reserves, and shifting funding around to close the shortfall. By reducing and delaying many of the governor's proposed cuts, the budget continues a practice at the state Capitol of sparing state programs from immediate pain while avoiding taking on California's long term budget woes. Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher (R-Yuba City) said the budget deal papers over the state's financial problems. 'We're in this situation because of overspending,' Gallagher said. 'We've made long term commitments to programs that Democrats have championed, and now, just like everybody warned, the money is not there to support them all, and they don't want to cut back their program that they helped expand.' The cuts lawmakers and the governor ultimately agreed to will reduce the expansion of state-sponsored healthcare to undocumented immigrants and reinstate asset limit tests for Medi-Cal enrollees. The final deal, however, achieves less savings for the state than Newsom originally proposed. The plan restores cost-of-living adjustments for childcare workers, which the governor wanted to nix, and rejects his call to cap overtime hours for in-home caregivers. Democrats in the Legislature successfully pushed to provide another $500 million in funding for Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention grants. The governor originally resisted giving more money to counties, which he has chastised for being unable to show results for the billions of dollars in state funding they have received to reduce homelessness. Assembly Budget Chair Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino) pushed back on the notion that the Legislature hasn't done 'real belt-tightening.' Lawmakers are trying to balance compassion and fiscal responsibility before making drastic cuts to safety net programs that Californians rely on, he said. 'That is the balance that we are trying to strike here with this budget of being responsible, of focusing on the work that we need to do regardless, but also understanding that there is a pretty high delta of uncertainty for a lot of reasons,' Gabriel said. The budget also preserves Newsom's plan to provide $750 million to expand the California Film and Television Tax Credit, a proposal supported by Hollywood film studios and unions representing workers in the industry. The tentative agreement is expected to serve as a precursor to more challenging financial discussions about additional reductions in the months ahead. California expects to lose federal funding from the Trump administration and state officials predict a potentially greater funding dilemma in 2026-27. Here are few key elements of the budget deal, detailed in summaries of the agreement and legislation: Described colloquially as a 'poison pill' inserted into the budget bill, the agreement between the Legislature and Newsom will only become law if legislators send the governor a version of a proposal initially introduced by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco). Wiener's bill is expected to lessen the number of building projects that would require a full environmental review under CEQA and make the process of developing environmental impact reports more efficient. Paired with another proposal that could exempt more urban housing developments from CEQA, the legislation could mark a significant change in state policy that makes it easier to build. Newsom is effectively forcing the Wiener proposal through by refusing to sign a budget deal without the CEQA exemptions. The proposal was still being drafted as of Tuesday evening. The governor declared lofty goals to build more housing on the 2018 gubernatorial campaign trail, but he has failed to spur enough construction to meet housing demand and make homes more affordable. New York Times columnist Ezra Klein effectively called out the inaction in California caused by the state's marquee environmental law and a lack of political will in his recent book ,'Abundance,' which increased pressure on the governor and other Democrats to reconsider their approach and push for more substantial fixes this year. The CEQA reform bill must be passed by Monday under the budget agreement, which omits a separate Newsom call to streamline the Delta tunnels project. Medi-Cal cost overruns are causing major problems for the California budget. The challenges stem from a higher-than-expected price tag for the expansion of state-sponsored healthcare to all income-eligible undocumented immigrants and medical care for other enrollees. Newsom's budget proposal in May suggested substantial trims to the health care program for people who are undocumented. His plan included freezing new enrollment as of Jan. 1, requiring all adults to pay $100 monthly premiums, eliminating long-term care benefits and cutting full dental coverage. The changes offered minor savings in the year ahead but could save billions of dollars in future years. Lawmakers ultimately agreed to require undocumented immigrant adults ages 19 to 59 to pay $30 monthly premiums beginning July 2027. They plan to adopt Newsom's enrollment cap but give people three months to reapply if their coverage lapses instead of immediately cutting off their eligibility. Democrats agreed to cut full dental coverage for adult immigrants who are undocumented, but delayed the change until July 1, 2026. State leaders agreed to reinstate much higher limits than the governor originally proposed on the assets Medi-Cal beneficiaries may possess and still get coverage. The new limits would be $130,000 for individuals and $195,00 for couples, compared to prior limits of a few thousand dollars. They also adopted Newsom's proposal to withdraw Medi-Cal benefits for specialty weight loss drugs. The negotiations resulted in less general fund spending than the Legislature proposed in a counter to Newsom's budget revision in May, dropping from $232 billion to an estimated $228 billion for 2025-26. Officials are using more money from California's cap-and-trade program, which sets limits on companies' greenhouse gas emissions and allows them to buy pollution credits from the state, including $1 billion next year. They are also using $300 million from climate change bonds instead of the general fund to pay for environmental programs. Lawmakers and the governor agreed to delay a $3.4 billion payment on a loan to cover Medi-Cal cost overruns and increase the loan by another $1 billion next year. The plan continues an agreement to take $7.1 billion from the state's rainy day fund to help cover the deficit and taps into another $6.5 billion from other cash reserves to balance the budget. California leaders for months have warned about the so-called Trump effect on the state budget. Financial analysts at UCLA predict that the state economy is expected to slow in the months ahead due to the effects of Trump's tariff policy and immigration raids on construction, hospitality, agriculture and other key sectors. Meanwhile, the state is warning that federal funding reductions to California could require lawmakers to adopt additional budget cuts in August or September, during a special session in the fall or early next year. State officials expect future deficit estimates to range from $17 to $24 billion annually, according to an Assembly summary of the budget deal. The final budget agreement is being publicly released in bits and pieces this week through a series of trailer bills that appear online at random hours. Lawmakers are expected to pass a main budget bill on Friday and approve additional legislation by Monday, before the July 1 deadline for the budget to go into effect. Some legislation, such as the CEQA housing exemptions, will not appear in print until the end of the week. Other decisions, such as reauthorizing California's cap-and-trade program, will be considered later in the year outside of the budget process.
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
Zohran Mamdani's Upset Is a Seismic Moment for the Left
This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME's politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox. The world's economic capital stands to have a democratic socialist at the helm. No. That is not some A.I. hallucination. That really happened Tuesday in New York City's mayoral primary. New York is still tallying the votes, for sure. But a 33-year-old state lawmaker who became an avatar for the political movement led by Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is leading in the race for Mayor of New York City. The significance of an apparent Zohran Mamdani victory over former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is a seismic moment that signals how much of an insurgent posture Democrats are in at the moment. As party leaders fret about whether Kamala Harris lost for being seen as too "woke" on various issues, the coastal deep-blue enclaves are completely disconnected from that conversation, and the party's dreadful standing on the national stage. 'Tonight is his night. He deserved it. He won,' Cuomo said of Mamdani's showing. The 67-year-old member of a New York political dynasty did not address if he, like incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, may run in November as an independent. For his part, Mamdani was not ready to spike the football in victory. The official winner is not likely to be declared until next week at the earliest, thanks to New York's ranked-choice voting system. Lower-performing candidates will be eliminated and their votes will be reallocated next Tuesday by the Board of Elections. Still, Cuomo all but conceded. Mamdani, who would be the first Muslim to lead New York, has cast himself as 'Donald Trump's worst nightmare' and a progressive champion poised to lead a deeply resourced grand experiment. With strong showings in Brooklyn and Manhattan, Mamdani seemed to be coasting easily toward a shocking rise to one of the most prominent jobs in U.S. politics. For many people—particularly those outside of America—there's the President, and then maybe the Speaker of the House. Sometimes, the Senate Majority Leader is in the pecking order. And then there's the Mayor of New York City. To be clear: few Establishment Democrats liked any of the viable options in the race heading into Tuesday. Mamdani's pro-Palestinian activism drew accusations of antisemitism. Cuomo was forced from the Governor's gig amid accusations from at least 11 women. (Cuomo has consistently denied the allegations but said he stepped down so the state could focus on governing rather than being consumed by a looming impeachment.) And Adams, the incumbent, is his own ethical mess. Still, someone has to lead New York. Should he prevail, Mamdani instantly becomes the ringleader of The Resistance. As the elected chief of the nation's largest city—with a budget of $115 billion and 300,000 employees—he would command a platform that has few peers. But it also would be a tough test case: can a democratic socialist effectively lead such a huge bureaucracy with even fewer peers? Much like the likes of Ocasio-Cortez, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton, Mamdani is about to become shorthand on Fox News and the MAGAverse for rightwing attacks. And with the self-proclaimed label of democratic socialist, he is about to be an anchor that other fellow Democrats will have to deal with. But he could also be a model for Democrats struggling to figure out how to chart a path in the second Trump era. If democratic socialists want to convince the electorate they are ready for the national stage, New York might be the best proving ground possible. Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter.
