Forest Service research survives in House spending bill
The proposal by the Republican-led House Appropriations Committee is part of an $8.5 billion annual spending plan for the Forest Service that largely ignores the administration's most far-reaching proposals.
Total spending for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 would be $16.8 million less than this year's level. Spending not directly tied to fire suppression would total $3.6 billion, or about $107 million less than this year. The measure is scheduled for a subcommittee markup Tuesday.
Advertisement
The research budget would total $302 million, of which $34 million would be reserved for forest inventory and analysis — the data-collecting operation that the administration hadn't looked to scale back.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
29 minutes ago
- Forbes
U.S. Firms In China Committed To Market Amid Headwinds
U.S. President Donald Trump holds up a chart while speaking during a 'Make America Wealthy Again' ... More trade announcement event in the Rose Garden at the White House on April 2. Touting the event as 'Liberation Day', Trump is expected to announce additional tariffs targeting goods imported to the U.S. (Photo by) More than 80% of American companies doing business in China were profitable last year and remain committed to doing business there despite rising concerns about Washington-Beijing relations and tariffs, according to a new survey by a top U.S.-China business group. 'While most U.S. companies are holding off on new investments in the near term, they remain committed to pursuing opportunities in China over the long term,' according to an annual membership survey from the U.S.-China Business Council released on Wednesday. 'Over 80% of respondents say they invest in China to serve the domestic market, while nearly all report they cannot remain globally competitive without their China operations,' the council said. In spite of headwinds, 82% of companies reported profits in 2024, the council said. The Washington, D.C.-headquartered council represents more than 270 American companies doing business in China including multinationals such GM, Fedex, McDonald's, Harley-Davidson and Starbucks. The survey was conducted between March and May 2025, and drew from a pool of 130 members companies. Overall U.S.-China relations continue to rank among companies' top concerns, along with tariffs, which jumped from eighth to second place amid recently renewed trade friction, the council said. Eighty-eight percent of respondents are affected by U.S.-China relations, compared with 79% last year, and 68% have been impacted by tariffs, the council said. Among other challenges, U.S. companies doing business in China are losing market share there as the country intensifies its rollout of industrial policies and subsidies designed to help domestic firms, the council said. 'Chinese industrial policies are boosting local competitors as American companies continue to lose market share in China,' the council said. Chinese overcapacity, once mostly confined to industrial sectors, 'has begun to impact wider swaths of the economy, including health care and consumer goods. Insufficient domestic demand and overcapacity remain the top constraints on profitability.' Back at home, U.S. export controls and investment restrictions vis-à-vis China have also had a negative effect on business there for about 40% of respondents, the council said. Many of those businesses are 'experiencing lost sales, severed customer relationships, and reputational damage in China to the intensifying perception that U.S. firms are unreliable suppliers,' the council said. 'Fewer than half (of survey participants) are optimistic about the future, reflecting concerns about over tariffs, deflation, and policy uncertainty,' the council said. Click here for the full report.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
President Trump calls for Commanders to go back to old nickname, threatens to block D.C. stadium deal if they don't
President Donald Trump is using the bully pulpit again in the NFL, this time to get a franchise to revert to its former nickname that was changed after decades of controversy. Trump made multiple long posts on Truth Social on Sunday calling for the Washington Commanders to switch back to their old "Washington Redskins" team name. He even threatened to block the Commanders' impending move back to D.C. and their new stadium if they fail to do so. Trump also called for MLB's Cleveland Guardians to go back to their former "Indians" nickname. While not mentioning Trump by name, Guardians president Chris Antonetti made it clear the team isn't interested in going back Sunday. 'I understand there are very different perspectives on the decision we made a few years ago, but it's a decision we made and we've gotten the opportunity to build the brand as the Guardians over the last four years and we're excited about the future that's in front of us,' he said, via The Athletic. The Commanders have not addressed Trump's post. The Guardians officially changed their team name ahead of the 2022 season, shortly after they stopped using the 'Chief Wahoo' logo, which many saw as racist and offensive toward Native Americans. The Commanders retired their old 'Redskins' nickname in 2020. They went by the Washington Football Team briefly before landing on the Commanders. Their old nickname, which had been in use since 1933, was widely seen as an offensive slur and drew plenty of criticism in its final years of use. 'For obvious reasons,' Commanders owner Josh Harris said in August, that can't return. 'I think [Commanders] is now embraced by our team, by our culture, by our coaching staff,' he said earlier this year, via ESPN. 'So we're going with that.' Though it's unclear if the threat of blocking their stadium deal, real or not, will sway the Commanders, both Harris and Antonetti seem very content with their franchises' new names. As for the validity of Trump's stadium threat, the Associated Press wrote: The Commanders and the District of Columbia government announced a deal earlier this year to build a new home for the football team at the site the old RFK Stadium, the place the franchise called home for more than three decades. Trump's ability to hold up the deal remains to be seen. President Joe Biden signed a bill in January that transferred the land from the federal government to the District of Columbia. The provision was part of a short-term spending bill passed by Congress in December. While D.C. residents elect a mayor, a city council and commissioners to run day-to-day operations, Congress maintains control of the city's budget.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Former NPR CEO says journalism and federal funding was 'recipe for disaster'
Former NPR CEO Vivian Schiller said on MSNBC that losing federal funding could be a good opportunity for the outlet to "reset" its governance structure.
