Luján, Heinrich part of group reintroducing Radiation Exposure Compensation Act
A bipartisan attempt last year to renew the previous Radiation Exposure and Compensation Act — which applied only to parts of Arizona, Nevada and Utah — also would have extended the benefits to residents of New Mexico, Colorado, Idaho, Montana and Guam. The measure passed the U.S. Senate by a wide margin last year but was never voted on in the House; House Republican leaders cited concerns about the cost of the expansion.
The lack of action in the House allowed RECA to expire in June.
Advocates for New Mexico downwinders, exposed to radiation from the first-ever atomic bomb detonation in July 1945 during the Trinity Test, and former uranium miners slammed House leaders last year for not holding a vote to extend the law.
'It is unacceptable that so many who have gotten sick from radiation exposure have been denied compensation by Congress," Luján said in a statement.
"Despite having passed RECA legislation twice through the Senate with broad bipartisan support, and securing the support of the previous administration, I was disheartened that [House] Speaker [Mike] Johnson refused a vote on RECA to help victims," Luján added.
Along with Heinrich and Luján, both New Mexico Democrats, the bill was reintroduced by U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, U.S. Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Missouri, and Mark Kelly, D-Arizona.
'The time to reauthorize RECA is now," Hawley said in a statement. "The Senate has done this twice before and must do it again. For far too long, Missourians and others across America have suffered without compensation from their government. It is vital that we unite to pass this legislation now, and that the President sign it into law."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Could an outright ban on zero-hours contracts harm working mums?
Since the Labour government came into power in the summer of 2024, ministers have pledged to crackdown on 'exploitative' zero-hours contracts as part of changes to the employment bill. Under the new rules proposed, employers will have to offer workers a contract that guarantees a minimum number of hours every week – a change many see as a significant step forward for job security. More than one million people in the UK are working on a zero-hours contract basis, in areas ranging from hospitality and warehouses to the NHS. Women are disproportionately affected by the precarious nature of zero-hours work, which contributes to the gender pay gap. Read more: Why did shared parental leave fail in the UK? According to the Trades Union Congress, women are 34% more likely than men to be on such contracts, and they earn nearly £10 less an hour than men who aren't on them. However, some argue that an outright ban, without tackling the growing shortage of flexible jobs, won't truly level the playing field for women and working mothers. Chronic lack of flexible work In a push to pre-pandemic flexible working arrangements, almost half of all businesses across the UK now want staff back in the office on a full-time basis, a British Chambers of Commerce survey of more than 500 businesses found. At the same time, more than a million UK workers have quit their jobs in the past year because of a lack of flexibility. This U-turn is hitting mothers hard, with one in four forced to leave the workforce because it's impossible to work and care for children without adequate flexibility. 'An outright ban on zero‑hours contracts could indeed harm working mothers, but not for the reasons you'd expect,' says Elizabeth Willets, founder of the recruitment firm Investing in Women. 'The issue isn't that women choose precarious work. It's that our labour market offers so few truly flexible, professional-level roles – and zero‑hours contracts often become the only way to combine work and caregiving.' Women aren't taking on zero-hours roles by choice. For many, there is no quality flexible or part-time equivalent. According to the 2023 Flexible Jobs Index by Timewise, the number of jobs advertised as flexible has plateaued. Only 31% overtly offer it – which is a negligible change from 30% in 2022. 'It leaves women balancing insecurity against inflexibility as their only options,' says Willets. Women need enough to live and plan on That being said, there's a need to balance flexibility with financial stability. For those without guaranteed hours, it's hard to anticipate income and schedule childcare in advance, says Rachel Carell, founder and CEO of childcare organisation Koru Kids. 'We've worked with many working mums as freelancers doing things like marketing and design – but rarely on zero hours,' she says. 'I've heard again and again that flexibility is vital, but so is the ability to plan and earn enough to live on. Zero-hours contracts rarely offer that.' Read more: What to expect from a maternity discrimination employment tribunal About 80% of zero-hours contract workers want regular hours, with 75% reporting financial hardship due to insufficient hours. And, these contracts can sometimes limit flexibility too. According to TUC research, two-thirds (67%) of mothers on zero-hours contracts have difficulty managing work with childcare – and two-thirds have missed out on a planned family event because of needing to work. When Carell launched the business, most of the nannies were on zero-hours contracts. 'But we moved away from these contracts voluntarily, because we heard from Koru Kids nannies that they didn't provide the security the nannies needed. We worked with parents to design new contracts that still gave flexibility, but also offered predictable hours and income,' she explains. Finding a flexible middle ground Clearly, change is needed – but simply banning zero-hours contracts may not be the solution. What could be done to keep those who rely on flexibility in the workforce, without forcing them to sacrifice their income? 'Countries like New Zealand, Germany and Ireland have shown ways to regulate zero-hours use while preserving flexibility,' says Willets. In 2016, New Zealand banned the insecurity of zero-hours contracts, not the adaptability. Employers still get to increase hours when needed, but workers start from a guaranteed base, are compensated for standby time and can decline extra work without fear of losing future shifts. 'Short-term reforms could also include guaranteed minimum hours after six months, notice periods for shift changes and pension contributions from day one, regardless of earning thresholds,' adds Willets. 'In the long-term? The real fix lies in businesses offering genuine alternatives like quality job shares, part-time roles aligned with professional pay scales, term-time contracts that don't penalise women and flexible working from day one.' Offering quality part-time work in senior roles would no doubt help to narrow the gender pay gap, which widens at higher salary levels. Below salaries of £20,000, 22% of job adverts offer part-time work, but this almost halves to 12% at the £20k point. And, it reduces to just 6% amongst jobs paid more than £60,000 a year. Improving access to promotions for part-time workers is also key. Michelle Chikanda, who founded the leadership firm Legacy Never Dies to work around her 2-year old son, adds that a ban on zero-hours could lead to more permanent and consistent work being available, if the government aids businesses. 'A ban must be matched with tax incentives for businesses that reduce the cost of hiring certain groups of people, like working mothers, creating a sustainable solution for all parties,' she says. Ultimately, the goal should be to replace zero-hours contracts with stable, flexible roles that don't force women into choosing between work, stability and their families. 'That's how we build real equity,' says Willets. 'Not with one-size-fits-all reform, but with thoughtful change grounded in lived reality.' Read more: How to speak to your boss about miscarriage How to stay motivated during a long job hunt Does mental health first aid work?Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Here are the top House Democrats at risk from GOP redistricting
House Democrats in red states across the country are at risk as the redistricting arms race heats up. Texas Republicans' proposed redraw, a President Trump-backed plan that could net the party five more House seats, has led to other red states moving forward with their own redistricting plans. Florida, Indiana and Missouri are among the Republican-led states now weighing whether to redo their congressional maps — putting a number of Democratic incumbents at risk. Here are the House Democrats most likely to be targeted across the country: Greg Casar, Texas 35th Republicans already control 25 of the 38 congressional seats in Texas, but the proposed changes could give them a 30-8 edge by slashing Democratic-controlled seats in Houston, Dallas and Austin-San Antonio. One of the biggest proposed changes affects Rep. Greg Casar's (D-Texas) 35th Congressional District, which went to former Vice President Harris by 33 points in November. The map would create a new +10 Trump district outside of San Antonio, according to analysis from Cook Political Report. Casar has called the would-be destruction of his district 'illegal voter suppression of Black and Latino Central Texans.' Lloyd Doggett, Texas 37th The Austin base of Casar's current district would be pushed into the 37th Congressional District, now held by Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas). The changes could set up a potential primary matchup between Casar and Doggett, who has accused Trump of 'taking a hatchet to chop up Austin and our state with the sole objective of maintaining his one-man rule.' Julie Johnson, Texas 32nd The Texas plan would reshape the 32nd Congressional District, currently based in Dallas and held by Rep. Julie Johnson (D-Texas). By stretching the district into East Texas, it would become a +18 Trump seat, according to the Cook Political Report. Johnson has been among the voices heralding Texas state House Democrats for fleeing the state to break quorum and stall 'a rigged map.' Marc Veasey, Texas 33rd Rep. Marc Veasey's would see his 33rd Congressional District likely remain blue, but the longtime lawmaker would probably lose his hometown and political base in the redrawing. This could create a primary between Veasey and Johnson as the latter's seat is reshaped, analysis from the Texas Tribune suggests, if they both decide to try and stay in the House. Henry Cuellar, Texas 28th Rep. Henry Cuellar's (D-Texas) seat in Texas's 28th Congressional District would shift rightward, from a +7 Trump district to a +10 post. The Cook Political Report says that Cuellar could 'conceivably survive' the midterms, though he's currently grappling with an ongoing criminal casethat could complicate any reelection prospects. Cuellar and his wife were indicted by a federal grand jury in Houston last year on charges of participating in a bribery scheme. Vicente Gonzalez, Texas 34th Like Cuellar, Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas) would see his 34th Congressional District seat get even redder, according to the Cook Political Report. Gonzalez won reelection by just three points last year, so even a slight move toward the right could imperil reelection prospects. In a statement after the map's release, however, Gonzalez pointed to Trump's approval rating as he promised 'we will win again.' Al Green, Texas 9th Rep. Al Green's (D) seat in Texas's 9th Congressional District would merge with the empty blue seat vacated by the late Rep. Sylvester Turner (D), yielding a more conservative 9th district in the suburbs of east Houston. Al Green 'almost certainly wouldn't run' in the new 9th, the Cook Political Report forecasts, but he could run for the vacant 18th seat. Meanwhile, a special election is ongoing to fill the vacancy for Turner's former seat. Marcy Kaptur, Ohio 9th Ohio is the one state that's required to redistrict this year, after its 2022 maps failed to receive bipartisan support. Republicans boast a 10-5 majority in the current congressional delegation, and redistricting could mean a handful of Democrats see their districts get tougher. Rep. Mary Kaptur (D) in Ohio's 9th Congressional District is considered among the most vulnerable after winning a highly competitive race in 2024. Her district went to Trump by roughly 7 points last year, according to The Downballot. Emilia Sykes, Ohio 13th Like Kaptur, Rep. Emilia Sykes (D) in Ohio's 13th Congressional District won a tight race in 2024 and has been targeted by the GOP as a potential pickup opportunity. The district was effectively tied between Trump and Harris in November. 'It's no surprise that special interests in Washington and Columbus want to ignore the voters and rig the game,' Sykes campaign spokesman Justin Barasky told The Hill last month. Rep. Greg Landsman (D) in the 1st Congressional District around Cincinnati could also be impacted, according to the Columbus Dispatch, though anti-gerrymandering rules approved by voters in 2018 prevents redistricting from breaking up the city. Emanuel Cleaver, Missouri 5th Missouri's Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe has indicated he'll look at the possibility of redistricting in the state, where Republicans control six of eight districts. The Kansas City Star reported last month that Trump's political team had expressed interest in trying to gain another Show Me State seat, which would likely be Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver's 5th Congressional District in Kansas City. Cleaver, who has been in the seat for two decades, won reelection with 60 percent of the vote last fall, after line changes in 2022. He told St. Louis Public Radio that the push for mid-decade redistricting is 'very dangerous.' Frank Mrvan, Indiana 1st Republicans appear to be eyeing Indiana, where Democrats hold just two House seats, as another opening. Amid redistricting chatter, Vice President Vance met on Thursday with Gov. Mike Braun (R), who would need to call a special session of the state General Assembly to initiate redrawing. If Indiana were to redistrict, changes would likely squeeze the 1st Congressional District in the northwest, where Rep. Frank Mrvan (D) has already been named as a national GOP target for 2026. 'It is no surprise that some believe redistricting is the only option to cling to power when they know the American people are rejecting the damage done by the House Republican Majority,' Mrvan said in a statement. A redraw could also affect Mrvan's fellow Democrat, Rep. Andre Carson (D-Ind.), though the 7th Congressional District around Indianapolis may be somewhat safer, since breaking up blue voters in the area could make other Republican House districts more vulnerable. Republicans hold the other seven House seats in Indiana. Florida Democrats Florida's state House Speaker this week announced he'll form a redistricting committee after Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signaled the Sunshine State could follow Texas's lead. There are just 8 House Democrats to 20 Republicans in Florida, and multiple blue seats could be endangered if a redraw moves forward. Republicans are hoping to gain at least three seats in the Sunshine State, Punchbowl News reported this week. One of the potential South Florida targets is Rep. Jared Moskowitz, who won reelection in November by five points in a district that went to Harris by just two points. Fellow South Florida Reps. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Lois Frankel could also be vulnerable, along with South Florida. Rep. Kathy Castor (D) in the Tampa area and Rep. Darren Soto (D) outside of Orlando. All five of these Democrats won their 2024 races with less than 60 percent of the vote. Moskowitz and Soto are already on the GOP campaign arm's target list. 'It's called corruption when the only reason to redraw the maps is to hold onto power cause y'all are going to lose in '26,' Florida Democratic Party Chair Nikki Fried said on X. Other lawmakers Amid the Texas drama, chatter is percolating about redistricting possibilities in still more states. An analysis from Sabato's Crystal Ball forecasts there could be room for changes in North Carolina, where a new 2024 map netted the GOP three new seats, and in Kansas, which has just one blue seat — though it's all but guaranteed that Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (D) wouldn't call a special session to initiate talks. Republican Rep. Ralph Norman in South Carolina has suggested a redraw that could target longtime Rep. Jim Clyburn, the state's lone Democratic congressman, but the move is seen as unlikely given the already favorable 6-1 delegation split. With the exception of Ohio, it remains unclear which states will ultimately go through with redistricting, as Texas Democrats' dramatic quorum break stalls progress even in the Lone Star State. And even for those who do, it's not a guarantee that change could clear in time take effect before next fall's high-stakes midterms. Meanwhile, Democrats are looking to counter would-be GOP gains by weighing redistricting in blue strongholds, including California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has said he's moving forward with a plan to put redistricting before voters this fall, which would be triggered by what happens in Texas. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Epoch Times
an hour ago
- Epoch Times
Texas Seeks Arrest of Fleeing Democrats Amid Redistricting Showdown
A Republican attempt to redraw electoral boundaries in Texas has caused a dispute between the two major political parties with the state now calling on the FBI to rein in Democrats who fled the state in protest. More than 50 Democrats left the state in protest on Aug. 3, mostly to Illinois, New York, and Massachusetts, over plans to pass a redistricting vote that would favor Republicans.
