Brazil House Speaker Signals Opposition to New Lula Fiscal Plan
By and Giovanna Bellotti Azevedo
Save
The leader of Brazil's lower house of Congress signaled that lawmakers may strike down a proposal from President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to raise taxes, casting doubt on the government's latest plan to help meet its fiscal goals.
'The mood in the lower house is not favorable to raising taxes with the aim of increasing revenue to solve our fiscal problems,' Speaker Hugo Motta said in a social media post after meeting with congressional leaders Thursday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
E&E News
26 minutes ago
- E&E News
Senate axes regulation-slashing measure from megabill
A major deregulatory proposal that Republican hardliners had hoped to include in their party-line megabill was cut in the Senate. Absent from a new section of the GOP budget reconciliation bill released Thursday is language from the 'Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act,' which would have given Congress final approval over certain agency rules and would have expanded Congress' ability to undo rules already in place. Initial versions of the House reconciliation bill included parts of the 'REINS Act.' But House leadership slashed it at the eleventh hour, replacing it instead with a blanket appropriation for the White House's Office of Management and Budget to conduct deregulatory actions. Advertisement The Senate Judiciary Committee's portion of the megabill, released Thursday night, included no mention of 'REINS Act,' and also excluded the funding the House wanted for the budget office.
Politico
35 minutes ago
- Politico
The post-Roe fight over data privacy
Hey everyone! I hope you are all having a lovely Pride Month. Thanks for reading Women Rule. We'll be on hiatus next week and back in your inbox on June 27. Reach out and say hello: klong@ and ecordover@ This week I had a chat with Rep. Sara Jacobs on her reintroduction of the My Body, My Data Act. The post-Roe era has elevated a new data privacy fight, as concerns grow over how reproductive and sexual health data is collected and disclosed. But the issue has been front of mind for Rep. Sara Jacobs for years, even prior to the Dobbs decision. The California Democrat reintroduced the My Body, My Data Act on Thursday, which aims to increase protections for those who use apps and sites that collect reproductive and sexual health data, such as period tracking apps. Jacobs points to certain instances where reproductive health data, which is not protected under HIPAA, has been used to investigate and prosecute users in states with strict abortion laws. Jacobs describes the push to protect reproductive and sexual health data as 'the abortion fight of the 21st century.' The bill, which was introduced in 2022 and then reintroduced the following year, would provide consumer protections for users who disclose their reproductive and sexual health data on apps and websites. This includes limiting the data that can be collected to only that which is necessary to provide a certain product or service, and bolstering transparency from companies on how that data is collected, retained and shared. Sens. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) sponsored the bill's Senate counterpart. The legislation was introduced twice before, first in 2022 and again the following year, but made little headway. And with a Republican-controlled Congress, the bill's reintroduction will likely result in a similar fate. Women Rule spoke with Jacobs on the reintroduction of the bill, which comes on the heels of the three-year anniversary of the Dobbs decision. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. I first wanted to talk a little bit about the bill. I think especially in a post-Roe world, there's growing concern over government tracking on period apps and other apps and sites related to reproductive and sexual health. I first introduced this bill because right after the opposite decision came down when Roe v. Wade was overturned, I started getting all these messages from friends and peers wondering what they should do about their period tracking apps, and I also use a period tracking app, and we started looking into it and there's basically no protections for this kind of reproductive and sexual health data. It's not covered under HIPAA, and so we're already seeing people try to use this data to go after people who are getting abortions and those helping them in states that have criminalized abortion. We know that they want to go after this data, and so I think it's incredibly important that we as Congress do something to protect this very sensitive data. Actually, there was a poll two years ago that showed that 2 in 3 Americans, including 54 percent of Republicans, support Congress making it illegal for apps and search engines to sell their reproductive health data. Why is it important for this bill to pass now? Well, in 2017, even before the overturning of Roe v. Wade, Mississippi police used Google search history to go after someone and alleged that she had an abortion. In 2022, the police used Facebook messages in Nebraska as part of an investigation into an abortion illegal under state law. More recently, a data broker sold cell phone and geolocation data to an anti-abortion political group that then used that information to dispense misinformation about reproductive health to people who had visited 600 abortion clinics in 48 states. And more Americans are turning to online clinics for medication abortions. Young people increasingly use the internet, live online, we are googling questions about medicine, we are using Ubers to get places, right? And all of this data can be misused, and we know the lengths that police and prosecutors will go to to try and intimidate or prosecute people for having abortions. With a Republican controlled Congress, it seems unlikely that the bill will pass, but have you received any support from across the aisle? Unfortunately, while I work in a bipartisan way with a lot of Republicans on data privacy, when it comes to this kind of data, they have been unwilling to engage even though they claim to support data privacy. We're coming up on the three-year anniversary of Roe v. Wade being overturned, and you've mentioned a few examples. Could you talk about how the Dobbs decision has impacted those who use these reproductive and self sexual health tracking apps and sites? Look, especially in states that have criminalized abortion — something like 1 in 3 women live in a state that has criminalized abortion in some way — there is an incredible amount of fear that even if they have a natural miscarriage they could be prosecuted because they Googled something once or that this kind of information can be used against [them] and weaponized against people. I think as we're seeing more and more states and as we know that at the end of the day this Republican Party wants a federal abortion ban, it's more important than ever that we protect people's data. Is there anything in particular about the My Body My Data Act that you would like to highlight? This is the abortion fight of the 21st century, right? Because it's about access and it's about how they're enforcing these really horrible laws. Americans are now becoming more aware of how their data is being used and stored, in part because of DOGE and what Elon Musk is doing. And we know that women are often trying to find the apps and services that claim to safeguard their data, but each individual person shouldn't have to try and figure this out on their own, and it shouldn't be up to companies to do the right thing. This is the exact kind of thing you need the government for, to protect very sensitive health data. And young people intrinsically understand this issue from both sides of the aisle. But part of what's hard is that so many of my colleagues do not understand this. There's just a bit of a mismatch between Congress and the American people on this issue. POLITICO Special Report How Kamala Harris Is Processing the LA Unrest by Melanie Mason for POLITICO: 'Harris has been choosy about when to weigh in publicly on politics since leaving Washington. So her statement on social media this week denouncing President Donald Trump's activation of the National Guard as a 'dangerous escalation' instantly lent itself to frenzied tea leaves reading. … For Harris, it was a natural issue to speak up on for several reasons, according to one of the people familiar with her thinking and granted anonymity to speak freely. First, she's coming at this as a lifelong Californian who came up in law enforcement and has made the rule of law a driving theme of her career. She also empathizes with the protesters, after growing up steeped in the civil rights protests of her childhood and campus anti-apartheid movement of the 1980s.' Trump's DOJ Indicted a Democratic Congresswoman. The Case Could Fall Apart. by Ankush Khardori for POLITICO: 'The decision to proceed with an indictment following the initial charges against the New Jersey Democrat comes at a politically volatile moment — following President Donald Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard and the Marines in response to protests in Los Angeles, and in the midst of ongoing wrangling over the scope and legality of the administration's deportation effort. In recent weeks, that effort has generated heartrending images from courthouse arrests and more admissions of mistaken deportations from the Justice Department. Meanwhile, the administration is moving to deport hundreds of thousands of people who entered the country legally under the last administration.' Phil Murphy Skated to the NJ Governor's Mansion. Mikie Sherrill Might Not Have it So Easy. by Matt Friedman and Madison Fernandez for POLITICO: 'Rep. Mikie Sherrill was the vanguard of the anti-Trump backlash in 2018. Just months after the political unknown declared her Democratic candidacy for Congress and began raising money at a fast clip, the 24-year Republican incumbent bowed out rather than face the first competitive general election of his career. Sherrill easily won what had long been a safe Republican district in a blue wave election that flipped the House. Now, Sherrill stands as Democrats' bulwark against a red tide after winning the party nomination for New Jersey governor Tuesday night.' Number of the Week More on that here. MUST READS Doctors Report the First Pregnancy Using a New AI Procedure by Alice Park for Time Magazine: 'Doctors at Columbia University Fertility Center have reported what they are calling the first pregnancy using a new AI system, in a couple that had been trying to start a family for nearly two decades. The pregnancy was possible due to an advance developed by the Columbia team, led by Dr. Zev Williams, director of the center, to address azoospermia, or a lack of detectable sperm in the ejaculate. Male factors account for about 40 percent of infertility in the U.S., and azoospermia is responsible for about 10 percent of those cases. Until recently, there was little doctors could do to address the lack of sperm needed to fertilize an egg, other than using donor sperm.' Domestic Abusers Could Have Easier Path to Getting Gun Rights Back Under Trump Proposal by Jennifer Gerson for The 19th: 'The Trump administration is proposing a change to how people convicted of crimes can have their gun rights restored, raising concerns over what this means for victims of domestic violence. The Democratic Women's Caucus and the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force of the U.S. House of Representatives sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Robert Hinchman, senior counsel at the Department of Justice (DOJ), criticizing an interim final rule that would move the responsibility for determining if someone gets their gun rights back from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to the Office of the Attorney General. While the ATF is part of the DOJ, the letter says the proposal would create 'an apparent lack of an objective, holistic process for making' these decisions.' Senate Democrats File Bill to Prevent Ban on Transgender Military Service by Luis Martinez for ABC News: 'The 'Fit to Serve Act' would prohibit the Defense Department from banning transgender service members from serving in the military. If passed, the law would prevent the DOD from denying access to healthcare on the basis of gender identity, and it would also prohibit the military from forcing service members to serve in their sex assigned at birth. It would also make it illegal for the military to discriminate against service members on the basis of gender identity.' QUOTE OF THE WEEK Read more here. on the move Fortune journalist Emma Hinchliffe was promoted to editor of the Most Powerful Women Daily newsletter at the publication, leading editorial for the 28-year-old franchise. Martina McLennan is now director of policy communications for economic and health policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center. She previously was communications director for Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.). (h/t POLITICO Influence) Cara Duckworth is now SVP of comms at USTelecom – The Broadband Association. She previously was chief corporate comms officer at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (h/t POLITICO Playbook)
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Republicans and Democrats Respond to Israel's Strikes on Iran
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Republicans and Democrats in Congress shared their views about Israel's strikes on Iran and how they think the U.S. should respond to a situation that threatens to engulf the Middle East in a major war. Israel said it had begun Operation Rising Lion to preemptively stop a planned Iranian attack and to halt Tehran's ambitions to develop a nuclear bomb, and that its attacks could go on for days. Iran says its nuclear program is for civil energy. Iran has lost a significant number of its senior military leadership in the strikes, and its nuclear facilities have been damaged. Its air defenses and surface-to-air missile systems have taken a substantial hit. U.S. President Donald Trump said he was warned in advance of the strikes, and urged Iran to make a nuclear deal with him or it would face more—and worse—attacks by Israel. The U.S. said it was not involved in the strikes. American lawmakers have responded to the strikes. Here's what many of them had to say, according to their public statements. People look over damage to buildings in Nobonyad Square following Israeli airstrikes on June 13, 2025 in Tehran, Iran. People look over damage to buildings in Nobonyad Square following Israeli airstrikes on June 13, 2025 in Tehran, Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican: "The Iranian government has been directly and indirectly attacking Israel and the US for decades. It's an open secret that Iran is producing nuclear weapons-grade uranium, and it's not hard to guess that those nuclear weapons would be pointed at Israel. Iran invited this attack." Senator Jacky Rosen, a Democrat from Nevada: "Iran must never be allowed to obtain or develop a nuclear weapon. A nuclear Iran is a threat to Israel, the United States, and the entire world, and the recently-released International Atomic Energy Agency report made clear this was closer than ever. "The Iranian regime and its proxies have been very public about their commitment to the destruction of Israel and Jewish communities around the world. We should take them at their world. "Israel acted in self-defense against an attack from Iran, and the U.S. must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment." Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican: "Israel doesn't need U.S. taxpayers' money for defense if it already has enough to start offensive wars. I vote not to fund this war of aggression." Senator Pete Welch, a Vermont Democrat: "Israel's attack risks a regional war and thwarts the Trump nuclear negotiations that were underway with Iran. Another war in the Middle East involving the United States would be catastrophic for our country." Senator John Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican and Senate Majority Whip: "Israel rightly took unilateral action to defend itself against Iran—an increasingly aggressive enemy. Iran must dismantle its nuclear program. The U.S. will continue to work closely with our allies to address threats in the region and to protect the American people." Rep. Darren Soto, a Florida Democrat: "Israel has a right to defend itself against Iran's rogue nuclear weapons program. Iran's continued threats are also a danger to US personnel and other countries in the region. "The Administration must take steps to keep US civilians, diplomats and military there safe from the growing conflict, and support Israel's right to defend itself." People gather for a protest against Israel's wave of strikes on Iran in central Tehran on June 13, 2025. People gather for a protest against Israel's wave of strikes on Iran in central Tehran on June 13, 2025. ATTA KENARE/AFP via Getty Images Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and Senate Budget Committee Chairman: "In a contest for their very survival, hats off to Israel for one of the most impressive military strikes and covert operations in Israeli history—which is saying something. "I very much appreciate President Trump's strong statement in support of this Israeli operation and his urging for the Iranian Regime to make a deal to abandon their nuclear enrichment program to avoid further bloodshed. "I hope and pray the ayatollah and his henchmen who are still alive will heed President Trump's counsel. If not, America—the greatest power for good on Earth—should be all-in to help Israel finish the job. Well done to one of America's greatest allies, Israel." Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, to CNN: "I was very surprised that Israel launched this strike three days before the U.S. was to have a diplomatic discussion with Iran about their nuclear program. That discussion might have gone well, might have gone bad, but to launch a military attack before a diplomatic discussion, I was surprised and disappointed in that. "But I'm not a Knesset member. I'm not a member of the Israeli government or the Iranian government. I'm a U.S. senator, and I'm going to do everything I can to keep the United States from getting involved in another war in the Middle East. That's my sole focus right now [...] "The president and the team, by every indication I have, the administration's team, was really begging the prime minister not to do this until the diplomatic discussions were done. Again, diplomacy may not work. Discussions may not lead to a productive outcome. But why torch diplomacy before it's been allowed to succeed?" People and first-responders gather outside a building that was hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran on June 13, 2025. People and first-responders gather outside a building that was hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran on June 13, 2025. MEGHDAD MADADI/TASNIM NEWS/AFP via Getty Images Senator Dan Sullivan, an Alaska Republican: "The U.S. stands unequivocally with Israel. We must help Israel, and the hundreds of thousands of Americans there right now, defend themselves when Iran retaliates. "The Iranian regime is the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism and has the blood of thousands of American service members on its hands. Our strong ally, Israel, is defending its very existence by stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. "Iran has had more than a decade to give up its nuclear weapons ambitions. The Trump administration has gone the extra distance by pursuing a diplomatic solution. Iran's response: cheating and hiding its nuclear weapons program; sprinting toward a bomb; and trying to assassinate senior American officials, including President Trump. "The bold actions that Israel is taking today are not only necessary for the peace and security of the Middle East, but for the United States and the rest of the world." Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Michigan Democrat: "The Israeli government bombing Iran is a dangerous escalation that could lead to regional war. War Criminal Netanyahu will do anything to maintain his grip on power. We cannot let him drag our country into a war with Iran. Our government must stop funding and supporting this rogue genocidal regime. [...] The president cannot circumvent congressional war powers and unilaterally send U.S. troops to war with Iran. This is a violation of Article I of the Constitution which requires congressional approval to declare war. The American people do not want another endless war in the Middle East that will cost lives and tear their families apart." Rep. Haley Stevens, a Michigan Democrat: "Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and eliminating a growing nuclear program makes both the region and the world safer. I am praying for Israel and for peace." Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican: "The American people overwhelming oppose our endless wars, and they voted that way when they voted for Donald Trump in 2024. I urge President Trump to stay the course, keep putting America first, and to not join in any war between other countries. Every American should hope and pray for peace." Senator Adam Schiff, a California Democrat: "Iran is a malicious actor and a state sponsor of terrorism that must never be allowed to possess a nuclear most immediate risk at the present is that of retaliation, miscalculation, and escalation, which could spiral into a regional conflict or all out war. "After the terrible trauma of the Hamas attacks of October 7th and the war in Gaza that has followed, the last thing the world needs is a wider war. My heart goes out to the people of Israel, now facing dangers from every direction. I support Israel's right to defend itself against any imminent threat, including that emanating from Iran. "It is vital that the Administration now focus on helping Israel defend itself, protect Americans who seek safety, and prevent a broader conflict so that diplomacy can resume. It is impossible to bring about an end to conflict through endless conflict."
