Estrada seeks creation of Disaster Resilience Department, Disaster Food Bank system
Under Senate Bill No. 791, Estrada proposes the establishment of the DDR as the primary government agency responsible for leading disaster risk reduction, response, and recovery efforts.
The department would have a high level of authority to coordinate, monitor, and implement disaster-related programs across concerned agencies.
The proposed department is envisioned to address current fragmentation in government responses to natural and biological hazards, including typhoons, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, pandemics, and other climate-related threats.
'Given how natural disasters can seriously affect our country's economic progress, it's important for the government to put in place long-term strategies and practical solutions to manage risks and help communities become less vulnerable,' Estrada said in a statement.
Estrada also filed Senate Bill No. 2860, or the Disaster Food Bank and Stockpile Act, which seeks to establish a nationwide system of strategically located food and relief stockpiles. These stockpiles would be stored in calamity-proof, secure warehouses managed jointly by the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD).
The local warehouses would hold essential items such as non-perishable food, potable water, medical supplies, first-aid kits, tents, communication devices, and backup power sources. The bill mandates that these supplies have a minimum shelf life of two years and be sufficient to support local communities for at least three weeks. A first-in, first-out inventory system would also be required to prevent spoilage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
2 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Plot twist: Republicans just got families more money
Abby McCloskey, Tribune News Service Washington is a funny place. I don't think President Donald Trump was thinking about former President Joe Biden with his One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). But it certainly seems to poke fun at Biden's BBB (Build Back Better) plan in name — and exceed it in some of its family priorities. The Democrats' BBB was all about supporting working families with child care, paid leave and an expanded Child Tax Credit — but it never made it past the Democratic-held Senate. Somehow it was Republicans who ended up taking ground on these working family policies in their behemoth reconciliation package. How's that for a political scramble? The OBBBA will impact families in myriad ways — but while Medicaid cuts, Trump Accounts and the expanded Child Tax Credit have all gotten attention, two working family provisions have flown under the radar. The first is child care — specifically, tax incentives to get employers to include it as part of their compensation packages. The law expands the employer-provided child care credit (45F) in size and scope. The law increases the maximum annual credit from $150,000 to $500,000, raises the percentage of qualifying expenses to 40%, and allows small businesses to access a credit up to $600,000 at 50% of qualified expenses. The credit is intended to persuade companies to build or operate child care facilities or to contract with an existing child care provider to secure slots for employees' children. Critics are sceptical that this will impact child care in a meaningful way. They argue that the take-up of this tax credit has been relatively small in the past. It can end up rewarding large companies that are already offering such support. And even with a partial offset, child care is a huge expense and most companies simply don't have the margin to subsidize it. This is a critique I also have lobbed, preferring for the money to go directly to parents. A 2022 GAO study supports these concerns, finding that only 200 companies filed for the credit in 2016 (the most recent data available) for a total of less than $20 million in benefits. But supporters say the credit has been underused because the offset has not been large enough and that the significant OBBBA expansion will help, especially for small businesses. Time will tell. The tax-and-spending law also expands direct child care support for families. The law increased the maximum annual amount for dependent care flexible spending accounts (an employer-sponsored account similar to a health care FSA). Parents can use these funds to pay for daycare for children under 13 with pretax dollars, but the cap had not been raised since 1986. The new law raises it from $5,000 to $7,500. For me, the big win in the OBBBA is that it expands the Child and Dependent Tax Credit — not to be confused with the Child Tax Credit. (The CTC is a general payment to family, while the CDCTC is used against child care expenses specifically.) The expansion of the CDCTC allows it to cover up to 50% of eligible child care costs, and the cap is now indexed to inflation. This tax credit was created nearly 50 years ago, with an average claimed credit of$206 (or $1,166 in today's dollars). Inflation and the relative cost of child care have eaten away at the size of that credit, which has not been expanded since 2001 except for a pandemic-related boost. I've long argued that the CDCTC should be thought of as a school-choice programme for early childhood care. Just like states are starting to give parents public vouchers to use towards the cost of a K-12 school of parents' choice, a CDCTC payment could help to offset the cost of a parent's choice for an early childhood care provider, be it to help pay for a nanny or centre-based care or faith-based Mom's Day Out programme, whether full-time, part-time, or something in between. There are still ways the credit can be improved, such as being made larger and refundable, distributed in a timelier manner, and paired with reform to child care regulation. In wilder moments, I've proposed that the entirety of the CTC be converted into the CDCTC to be used as a $10,000 educational voucher given every year for the first five years of a child's life. (For families not requiring child care in the early years, these funds could apply to homeschool materials, tutoring, private primary and secondary school, or college.) But the expansion is a step in the right direction — thanks in large part to the bipartisan leadership of senators Katie Britt, Republican of Alabama, and Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia. But wait, there's more. The OBBBA made permanent a temporary credit for paid leave passed by a Republican Congress in 2017. This credit partially offsets costs to companies that provide paid family and medical leave (45S) and allows it to be applied against insurance premiums. There's no question that greater access to paid leave would result in improved health and economic outcomes for parents and children, especially with regard to childbirth.
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Record number of US Democrats vote to block offensive weapons transfers to Israel
Two resolutions brought to the Senate floor late on Wednesday evening in Washington to block the transfer of "offensive" weapons from the US to Israel failed to advance, after more than three-quarters of the chamber shot them down. But for the very first time, a majority of the Democrats and two Independent allies supported the resolutions to block the sale of $675m in bombs and guidance kits, as well as the shipment of 20,000 assault rifles. There are a total of 45 Democrats in the Senate - plus two Independents aligned with them. The tally came to 73 to 24 on the first vote, and 70 to 27 on the second. There are 100 members in the Senate. All Republicans voted against the resolutions. Both were brought forward by Independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who also pushed for a similar vote back in April. At the time, he only managed to get 15 Democrats on board. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters 'The United States has provided more than $22b for Israel's military operations since this war began," Sanders told the chamber ahead of the vote, citing the figure calculated by the Costs of War project at Brown University. "If you want to obey the law, vote for these resolutions," he said, pointing to the US Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act, which stipulate that parties involved in human rights abuses cannot receive US weapons. "Enough is enough. Americans want this to end. They do not want to be complicit in an unfolding famine and deadly civilian massacres." Washington, he indicated, is far behind its allies in moving toward a resolution in the region. 'France and Canada have said that they will recognise a Palestinian state. The United Kingdom has said it will do so as well if Israel does not immediately end this war and surge humanitarian aid," Sanders said on the Senate floor. "And at the UN last month, 149 countries voted for a ceasefire resolution condemning the use of starvation as a weapon of war and demanding an end to Israel's blockade on humanitarian aid.' Unlikely allies Each US state is represented by two senators. In the cases of Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Vermont, all of their senators voted to back at least one resolution: to prohibit the sale of automatic assault rifles. "These weapons would likely have been allocated to police forces under the control of Itamar Ben-Gvir," Georgia's youngest and first-ever Jewish senator, Jon Ossoff, said in a statement, referring to Israel's far-right national security minister who was condemned by the Biden administration. Former Gaza contractor says Israeli soldiers were ready to shoot starving children Read More » Ossoff did not, however, vote to block the sale of taxpayer-funded 1,000-pound bombs to Israel. "Despite my opposition to Prime Minister Netanyahu's conduct of the war in Gaza, I believe the United States must continue to support the Israeli people who face the persistent threat of rocket and missile attack and have been subjected to intense aerial bombardment from Iran, Lebanon, and Yemen," he said. "Israel's capacity to strike those who would launch missiles and rockets at Israeli civilians depends upon the deterrence provided by the Israeli Air Force." The most notable vote of support for both resolutions came from Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, who has not previously backed any such actions, and has been a longtime pro-Israel voice. Her decision appeared to have made way for other less-inclined Democrats to join in. "It is clear that the Government of Israel has not conducted its military operations in Gaza with the necessary care required by international humanitarian law," Shaheen said in a statement. "It is also clear that the Government of Israel has failed to allow adequate humanitarian assistance into Gaza, resulting in unbelievable suffering." On Thursday, the official account for Senate Republicans on X issued only this: "President Trump is correct. The only thing standing in the way of peace is Hamas, which started this war and still refuses to surrender or release the remaining hostages." Hamas has said there can be no ceasefire without the entry of sustained, adequate aid via international and trusted entities like the United Nations, and it has also said it would commit to a deal that includes a permanent end to the war, not a temporary truce. Last week, both the US and Israel abruptly withdrew their negotiating teams from Doha, Qatar, with President Donald Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff suggesting the consideration of "alternative options" for Gaza. It was unclear if he meant a pivot away from diplomacy. Israel has killed over 60,000 Palestinians since 7 October 2023. Most are women and children. Shifting view of Israel A shift in attitudes in the US is palpable, given that the largest turnout for a Democratic mayoral primary in New York City history last month was largely due to a first-time candidate who was vocal in his support for Palestinian rights. "The tide is turning. The American people do not want to spend billions to starve children in Gaza," Sanders said after the votes were tallied on Wednesday. "The Democrats are moving forward on this issue, and I look forward to Republican support in the near future." Nationwide polling has also captured this shift. In a dramatic 10 percentage point drop since a poll from September 2024, only 32 percent of Americans said they support Israel's war on Gaza, Gallup polling results released earlier this week showed. As of July 2025, 60 percent of Americans said they disapprove of Israel's military actions, and 52 percent said they see Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a negative light. The numbers were mainly driven by Democrats and Independents, Gallup said. Among Democrats distinctly, only eight percent of respondents said they approved of Israel's military action. Among Independents, that figure rose to 25 percent. Most Americans do not support Israel's war on Gaza, polling shows Read More » Among Republicans, 71 percent of respondents said they approved of what Israel was doing in Gaza. But that's not the full story. Among Trump's most loyal, outspoken, and influential supporters inside and outside of Congress, there has been a rise in aggressive questioning of why the US bankrolls a foreign country to the tune of billions of dollars each year, when that amount could be used for initiatives at home. Earlier this month, hardline America First Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene voted alongside progressive Democrats Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar to strip Israel of $500m in US funding, hours after it bombed the Holy Family Catholic Church in Gaza. The amendment they voted for failed to pass. "Here in America, we're $37 trillion in debt. My amendment will ensure an America First department of defence, and that is exactly what we need," Greene said. On Thursday, she took that position further in a remarkable statement for its deviation from standard Republican policy. "Yesterday, I spoke to a Christian pastor from Gaza. There are children starving," Greene wrote on X. "Are innocent Israeli lives more valuable than innocent Palestinian and Christian lives? And why should America continue funding this?" she added. "None of this is antisemitic and I, along with millions of Americans, refuse that manipulative label." She is not alone. Last month, ahead of US air strikes on Iran, Greene's former colleague in the House of Representatives, Matt Gaetz, questioned the Trump administration's motives vis-a-vis Israel. "This war isn't about Iran's nuclear weapons for Israel, it is about one thing: regime change... Does America really want to be Israel's dance partner to this siren song?" he asked on his new TV programme on the One America Network. Tucker Carlson, a former Fox News pundit who voted for Trump, has featured a string of guests on his independent online show questioning the US-Israel relationship and why pro-Israel lobbying groups are allowed to have so much influence on US elections.
Filipino Times
8 hours ago
- Filipino Times
Lacson renews push for Anti-Political Dynasty Act
Senator Panfilo Lacson is seeking to break the stronghold of political dynasties through a renewed push for the passage of the Anti-Political Dynasty Act, in line with the 1987 Constitution's provision on equal access to public service. In a radio interview, Lacson said Senate Bill No. 35 or the 'Anti-Political Dynasty Act of 2025″ aims to ban the spouse or any relative within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity of an incumbent official seeking reelection from running in the same city or province during the same election period. 'This proposed measure seeks to strike a balance between the two competing fundamental principles of the electorate's sovereignty and political dynasty. This is in consonance with the constitutional precept that laws should be interpreted not in the letter that killeth but to the spirit that giveth life,' he said. The measure also bars individuals with political dynasty ties, whether legitimate, illegitimate, full or half-blood, from simultaneously running for office in the same locality, even if neither is an incumbent. Lacson stressed the urgency of passing an enabling law, saying the continued dominance of political families undermines democracy. 'Influential clans and families that are well-entrenched in the political arena have made positions in government their virtual playgrounds, resulting in the proliferation of small monarchies all over the country. This makes a mockery of what should otherwise be a level-playing field in politics and espouse political inequities,' the senator added. He noted that despite several attempts to pass similar measures since the 8th Congress, no anti-dynasty law has made it through Congress. Lacson recently accepted the chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Electoral Reforms and People's Participation, a post offered by Senate President Francis Escudero through Minority Leader Vicente 'Tito' Sotto III.
