Homeowners, businesses urged to apply for Bomb Cyclone disaster aid by Feb. 21
According to the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), low-interest federal disaster loans are now available to Washington residents and businesses affected by the Bomb Cyclone that occurred from Nov. 17 to 25.
The disaster declaration was issued following a request from Gov. Jay Inslee on Dec. 19.
The assistance is available to individuals and businesses in Chelan, King, Kitsap, Kittitas, Pierce, Snohomish, and Yakima counties.
Eligible applicants include businesses of all sizes, private nonprofit organizations, homeowners, and renters who suffered property damage or loss during the storm.
Businesses can apply for loans of up to $2 million to repair or replace real estate, machinery, equipment, inventory, and other assets.
Homeowners may be eligible for up to $500,000 to repair or replace damaged real estate, and renters can receive up to $100,000 for personal property losses.
Small businesses and nonprofit organizations may also qualify for Economic Injury Disaster Loans to cover working capital needs, even if they did not sustain physical property damage.
A unique feature of the SBA disaster loan program is the option to borrow up to 20% of verified physical damages for mitigation improvements.
These improvements aim to reduce future risks, such as installing sump pumps, weather stripping, or regrading landscapes for better drainage.
The SBA will soon open a Disaster Loan Outreach Center where representatives will assist applicants with the process and answer questions.
Applications can also be submitted online at SBA.gov/disaster, by phone at (800) 659-2955, or via email at disastercustomerservice@sba.gov.
Interest on these loans does not begin to accrue until 12 months after the first disbursement, with repayment beginning at the same time.
Applications for property damage must be submitted by Feb. 21, 2025, while applications for economic injury are due by Sept. 23, 2025.
The program has been funded through the American Relief Act of 2025, signed by President Biden on Dec. 21, 2024.
Applicants are encouraged to submit applications immediately to ensure priority processing.Sign in to access your portfolio
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Ending California's EPA power-grab will jump-start American auto and RV manufacturing
President Donald Trump and Republicans in the House and Senate on Thursday finally ended California's outsized authority to dictate national emissions standards for new cars, trucks, RVs and engines. This win is another step toward rebuilding American manufacturing strength. The EPA, under President Joe Biden, granted California exemption waivers to the Clean Air Act, handing California the keys to set their own extreme emissions regulations – including the requirement that nearly all vehicles sold in the state must be electric by 2035. Knowing that the people's representatives in Congress would reject their most extreme policies, the Biden administration had to rely on these workarounds to push their Green New Scam agenda. Biden's Clean Air Act waiver allowed other states to follow California's lead, creating a patchwork of misguided rules. More than a dozen states and D.C. follow California's standards, drastically changing the dynamics of America's critical auto and RV manufacturing industry without Congress having a say. In practice, this means California effectively set the standards for the automotive industry, and most Americans have been forced to live under a regulatory framework that none of our representatives ever voted on. This ends now. Rep. Yakym, R-Ind., along with House Republicans, took action to end this power grab, passing three disapproval resolutions under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal the EPA waivers. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., shepherded these three measures through the Senate, which today earned President Trump's signature. Republicans across the country knew there was no time to waste. Beginning this year, California's Advanced Clean Trucks regulations would have started requiring new heavy-duty vehicles, such as trucks and RVs, to be zero-emission. This regulation threatened the RV supply chain by limiting the availability of chassis for motor homes. Eleven states and D.C. adopted this mandate, which impacts 25% of the heavy-duty vehicle market in the United States, essentially making it the new national standard. The stakes couldn't be higher for the Hoosier State, especially Indiana's Second District, home to Rep. Yakym and the RV Capital of the World, where nearly 90% of America's RVs are built. This industry directly supports more than 60,000 Hoosier jobs, pays over $4.3 billion in wages, and generates a total economic output of $22 billion across the state. RV production is also critical to many other states which is why 13 Democrats joined Republicans in the bipartisan, commonsense vote against the Biden EPA's RV waiver. Reversing California's emissions power grab is essential to RV, automotive and engine manufacturing industries in the state of Indiana and across America. The Clean Air Act was never intended to effectively give one state the power to dictate emissions standards for entire industries across the country. Congress prohibited states from establishing separate vehicle and engine regulations except under "compelling and extraordinary conditions" that apply specifically to that state. We've seen this before. As a U.S. senator, Gov. Braun used the Congressional Review Act to stop Biden's vaccine mandate for private businesses, a fight that ended with the Supreme Court striking it down. The CRA exists for moments like this, an expedited option to rein in the executive branch, reverse unnecessary red tape and prohibit substantially similar EPA actions in the future. Hardworking Hoosiers shouldn't have to bear the weight of federal overreach. National rules should be set by the people's elected representatives, not by unelected regulators or one state's agenda. Ending this EPA-California backroom deal will protect American jobs, unlock our full manufacturing potential, and ensure the shift to electric vehicles is driven by innovation and consumer choice, not bureaucrats in Washington or Los Angeles. We applaud Republicans in the House and Senate and President Trump for taking a strong stand against the previous administration's Green New Deal overreach. The result will be stronger American manufacturing of cars, trucks, RVs and engines. Rep. Rudy Yakym, a Republican, represents Indiana's 2nd Congressional District.
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Forget tariffs — GOP proposals on student loans will crack the economy
While economists and the general public are preoccupied with the threat to U.S. economic growth stemming from Donald Trump's tariff policies, serious as that is, they may be overlooking another serious threat. This one comes from Trump's approach, abetted by Republicans in Congress, to the student loan crisis. It's not a trivial matter. Nearly 43 million Americans owe a combined $1.6 trillion in student debt, according to figures from the U.S. Department of Education. Efforts to relieve borrowers of this weight invariably proposed by Democrats have been stymied by conservatives on Capitol Hill and federal courts. Now things look worse. There's no longer any talk in Congress of student loan relief. It's been supplanted by partisan efforts to increase the burden, by raising the costs of student loans and closing off paths for struggling borrowers to manage their payments. 'Instead of helping the 5 million borrowers that have fallen into default and the millions more that are behind and now at risk of default later this year, this Administration appears set on inflicting massive economic harm on millions of Americans—a decision that will further drag down an already struggling economy,' Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director for the Student Borrower Protection Center, said recently. The damage wreaked by Trump policies on student loans is already showing up in economic statistics. According to a report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, about 9.7 million student loan borrowers have seen their credit scores plummet since late last year, when delinquencies and defaults on those loans began to be listed on credit reports. Many borrowers who enjoyed superprime credit scores (760 or higher on scales that typically top out at 850) could see their scores decline to subprime levels below 620. For those borrowers, the results could include 'reduced credit limits, higher interest rates for new loans, and overall lower credit access,' the N.Y. Fed reported. The credit score declines resulting from the resumption of college loan payments was a factor in a sharp increase in the rejection rate for mortgage refinancings, to nearly 42% in February from 26.7% a year earlier, to 14% on car loans from 1.5% a year earlier, and to 22% on credit card applications from 16.6% over the same period. The consequences could be even broader. Many landlords check credit scores to judge potential tenants, those with low scores might be turned away. Fewer mortgage refinancings, auto purchases, and less credit generally are all drags on the economy. It's true that payments on student loans resumed during the Biden administration. Payments were suspended on federal student loans and and interest rates temporarily set at 0% during the pandemic emergency, beginning March 13, 2020. The pause ended as of October 2023, but the Biden administration provided a one-year 'on-ramp' during which missed or delayed payments wouldn't show up in borrowers' credit reports. That ended early this year, triggering the credit score crash for borrowers in arrears or default. Biden's efforts to relieve the burden on millions of student borrowers were stymied by federal court rulings in lawsuits brought by conservative activists. More recently, the Trump administration has proceeded to tighten the screws on borrowers. On April 21, Education Secretary Linda McMahon announced that defaulted loans would be put in collection, subjecting the borrowers to having their wages garnished and their federal tax refunds and even Social Security benefits seized to make the payments. (Responding to a public uproar, the administration backed away from plans to take Social Security benefits from an estimated 450,000 defaulting borrowers aged 62 and older who are receiving Social Security.) 'American taxpayers will no longer be forced to serve as collateral for irresponsible student loan policies,' McMahon said. Pressure on households struggling to afford higher education will be intensified by provisions in the budget bill passed narrowly on May 22 by the GOP majority in the House. The measure, which is pending before the GOP-majority Senate, takes several whacks at student aid and consequently the accessibility of higher education. Among its provisions are these: — A change in the calculation of permissible student loans. Under current law, the figure is based on the cost of the program a student is attending. The proposal would peg loans to the median cost of all similar programs. That would leave students at higher-priced universities (such as private institutions) without the ability to access federal loans for the full cost of their education. As it happens, no system currently exists for determining the median prices. At the Department of Education's office that would make the calculation, almost all the employees have been fired. — The bill eliminates direct subsidized student loans for undergraduates, which don't accrue interest while the borrower is in school. — The bill raises the maximum in federal loans that a student can take out to $50,000, up from the current $31,000. But the current limit includes up to $23,000 in subsidized loans. Since those would no longer exist, the full amount would be in costlier unsubsidized loans. The Student Loan Protection Center calculates that the average borrower who takes out the maximum annual loan amount would pay nearly $2,900 more in interest over the current amount. — The GOP would eliminate the SAVE plan, which was implemented by the Biden administration but blocked by a federal appeals court ruling in a lawsuit brought by red states. The SAVE plan required enrollees to pay 5% of their discretionary income annually, with unpaid balances forgiven after 20 years (25 years for those with graduate loans). Those with original loans of $12,000 or less would have their balances forgiven after 10 years. Elimination of the plan would affect about 8 million student borrowers. — The GOP would scrap rules allowing borrowers to temporarily defer payments due to unemployment or economic hardship and limits. It also places new limits on forbearance — a temporary pause on loan payments — which states loans can't be in forbearance for more than 9 months during any 24-month period. For all that Republicans crow about removing the burden on taxpayers from the student loan crisis, the real beneficiary of these changes would be the private student loan industry, such as banks and private equity firms, which long have hankered after the opportunities created by student loans. With fewer options available from federal programs, student borrowers would increasingly be thrust into the welcoming arms of Wall Street. That's a problem for student borrowers, because the private lending industry has a wretched history, rife with deceptive practices. Private lenders were the subject of more than 40% of student loan-related complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau since 2011, even though they accounted for only 8% of outstanding loans. Private loans, moreover, lack some of the consumer protections traditionally provided by government loans, including deferrals, and typically carry higher interest rates. With their actions and proposals, McMahon and the GOP lawmakers have underscored the majestic hypocrisy of the student debt debate. Among the most common arguments against relief is that canceling existing debt would be unfair to all those who already paid off their loans. As I've explained in the past, this is the argument from pure selfishness and a formula for permanent governmental paralysis. In a healthy society government policy moves ahead by taking note of existing inequities and striving to address them. Following the implications of the 'I paid, why shouldn't you' camp to their natural conclusion means that we wouldn't have Social Security, Medicare or the Affordable Care Act today. Among the most common claims is that debt relief would disproportionately benefit wealthy families; in fact, low-income households would benefit the most, the Roosevelt Institute has shown. As I pointed out last year, among the Republicans who weighed in with tendentious lectures about meeting one's obligation to pay back a loan were members of Congress who had taken out loans of hundreds of thousands of dollars each from the pandemic-era Paycheck Protection Program — and had them completely forgiven. The GOP's lame defense was that the PPP loans were not expected to be repaid, if they were used to keep the borrowers' workers employed during the pandemic. Couple of problems with that: Days before Biden took office, the Small Business Administration deleted almost all the database red flags designating potentially questionable or fraudulent loans subject to further review. The red flags included signs that a recipient company had laid off workers or were ineligible to participate in the program. As many as 2.3 million loans, including 54,000 loans of more than $1 million each, thus may have received a free pass. Then there's the questionable ethics of elected officials taking massive advantage of a program they themselves enacted. They could have made themselves ineligible, but where's the fun in that? I observed separately that many congressional critics of loan relief had themselves received their college, graduate and professional educations as gifts from the taxpayers: They had attended public (i.e., taxpayer-supported) state universities, typically in an era when tuition for state residents was much lower than today, even accounting for inflation. Among those who were apparently educated on the taxpayers' dimes is Secretary McMahon, a North Carolina native who holds a degree from East Carolina University, a public institution supported by the taxpayers of North Carolina. I asked McMahon's office to reconcile her statement on student loans with her education at a public university, but received no reply. The threat to the economy is real and immediate. Households burdened with student debt tend to delay or forgo homeownership and face difficulties in starting a family or building up savings. Eradicating student debt, or even materially reducing its burden, would produce a significant economic stimulus. But who in the White House or on Capitol Hill is even listening?
Fast Company
3 hours ago
- Fast Company
For new grads looking for green jobs, corporate sustainability may be the only safe bet
In just the first week of his administration, Trump signed a flurry of executive orders prioritizing domestic oil and gas and (once again) withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Agreement for climate change mitigation. Since then, additional attacks on existing environmental policies have included the administration's cuts to sustainability research funding and its defunding and dismantling environmental agencies like NOAA and FEMA. Most recently, House Republicans voted to pass a budget reconciliation bill that will gut Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, the largest investment in climate change mitigation and adaptation in U.S. history. This comes at a time when young people really want to get involved and take action against climate change: A 2024 LinkedIn survey found that 61% of Gen Z workers say they want to get a green job within the next five years. But while sustainability fields like environmental justice, nonprofit work, climate policy, and climate research are under very significant threats right now, sustainability experts say that young people pursuing corporate sustainability jobs will likely have more luck. Why are corporate sustainability jobs better protected? Some major companies have dropped their sustainability goals: For example, Walmart says it will likely miss its 2025 and 2030 emissions reduction goals, and companies such as Kraft Heinz and Coca-Cola have dropped some sustainability goals. Banking giants such as Citigroup, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and Wells Fargo all dropped out of the United Nations-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance, which aims to reduce the carbon footprints of banks around the world. But according to PwC's 2025 State of Decarbonization report, only 16% of companies are reducing climate commitments, while 37% are strengthening them. Additionally, the number of companies making commitments continues to grow, with nine times the number of companies reporting targets compared with five years ago. In 2023, 93% of Russell 1000 Index companies published a sustainability report, displaying a public commitment to keeping sustainability goals. According to Steven Cohen, program director of Columbia University's master of science in sustainability management program, these commitments aren't just going to disappear. 'Investors are driving the sustainability field first, because they want to know about the environmental risks incurred by corporations,' he says. Additionally, 'even though the U.S. reporting requirements are being reduced, [requirements from the EU or states like California] are not being significantly reduced.' However, even without pressures from the EU and states like California that have stricter climate regulations compared with the rest of the country, Cohen says that public sentiment against climate change is enough to drive companies to stick to their goals. 'People know that the planet is getting hotter. They know that environmental damage is being done, and they want to figure out ways of maintaining the economy without destroying the planet,' he says. 'Lots of people are interested in it, so there's lots of employment.' Cohen says that since around 80% of the students in Columbia's sustainability management master's program go into the private sector, they are not particularly worried about factors like the Trump administration's repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act having an impact on their employment. 'The job market for graduates is holding up pretty nicely, I'd say,' he says. For those interested in entering the sustainability world after graduation, Cohen recommends developing 'any skills that will help you with management and understanding the impacts' of climate change. He particularly recommends learning how to measure the impacts of environmental pollution and remediation. 'Those are objective conditions, and we'll continue to be focusing on that.'
