UIC faculty hold rally to protest federal cuts, freezes
CHICAGO — Faculty from the University of Illinois Chicago held a rally Wednesday against federal cuts and freezes.
Those that participated said if proposed cuts and freezes go through with regard to federal grants, not only will faculty and staff jobs be on the line, but student opportunities and vital programs that impact Chicago will be on the chopping block.
Those working and doing research at UIC say they depend on funding from multiple agencies within the Department of Health and Human services to train the next generation of clinicians.
They're researching topics that include life-saving treatments for cancer, Alzheimer's, diabetes and how AI can be incorporated into health. They say the money that funds these projects could soon run out.
The rally was part of a national one, with similar protests taking place in Boston, Atlanta and St Louis.
More News, Weather and Headlines at wgntv.com
The White House said last month it was pausing federal grants and loans as the Republican administration began an across-the-board ideological review.
The freeze could affect trillions of dollars and cause widespread disruption in health care research, education programs and other initiatives. Even grants that have been awarded but not spent are supposed to be halted.
'The use of Federal resources to advance Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies is a waste of taxpayer dollars that does not improve the day-to-day lives of those we serve,' said a memo from Matthew Vaeth, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget.
Democrats and independent organizations said the move was illegal because Congress had already authorized the funding.
The Associated Press contributed to this report
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sending money to family in foreign countries may be taxed more
Jun. 9—Families hoping to send money to loved ones in other countries may be hit with additional fees from a tax and spending bill proposed by the Trump administration that would slap a 3.5% tax on remittances sent by anyone who is not a U.S. citizen. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" passed through the House in May and is now being debated by the Senate. The budget bill has several proposed tax changes, which include taxing money sent from an estimated 40 million non-US citizens — including green card holders, temporary workers and undocumented immigrants — to family and friends in other countries. The bill had a 5% tax but was reduced to 3.5%. The bill is another way the Trump administration is hoping to dissuade immigrants, both documented and undocumented, from coming into the country and moving money out of the U.S. economy. Republicans believe the bill would increase the average take-home pay of U.S. citizens, while Democrats believe the bill and increased taxes are "a transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich," said Daniel Garcia, spokesperson for the Democratic Party of New Mexico. What is a remittance? Remittances refer to sending money from one person to another and is typically done between family members from one country to another. A person living and working in the U.S. would send money to family members typically living in a developing country, where this money is a source of income that contributes to the country's gross domestic product (GDP). Payments are typically sent using an electronic payment service or a money transfer app. Banks, credit unions and money transfer services charge a fee for processing remittances, and fees average 10%, according to the International Monetary Fund. Cryptocurrency exchanges are not as heavily regulated and can be a way to avoid additional taxes and surcharges. "Taxing remittances would amount to a form of double taxation, since migrants already pay taxes in the country where they work," Esteban Moctezuma Barragán, Mexican Ambassador, wrote in a statement. "Imposing a tax on these transfers would disproportionately affect those with the least, without accounting for their ability to pay," Barragán added. However, some believe the 3.5% tax fee would give financial support to public services and is the most "pro-worker, pro-family and pro-American legislation we've seen in decades," said Amy Barela, chairwoman of the Republican Party of New Mexico. "Let's be clear, this measure is not about targeting individuals," she wrote in a statement to the Journal. "It's about ensuring the 3.5% fee, although modest, would also have a very meaningful impact in helping offset costs associated with public services, border security, and community infrastructure — relieving some of the financial pressure on hardworking New Mexicans who continue to bear the burden of an imbalanced system." Crucial source of revenue Mexico is the second-largest receiver of personally wired money behind India, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In 2024, Latin America received $160.9 billion, with the U.S. accounting for 96.6% of all remittances to Mexico. They also make up 20-30% of GDP in countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti and Honduras. "Remittance is a very important source of revenue in our government," said Patricia Pinzón, consul of Mexico. "This would affect Mexican families and the economy in general, but I would say the basic needs of Mexican families is the most worrying thing." However, "whatever happens in one economy will affect the other," said Pinzón. "Our economies are so interrelated that everything that happens here has a consequence in Mexico," she said. "Mexicans will not stop sending money; they'll just look for alternative ways to send it." Mexican migrant workers sent 16.7% of their labor income back to their families, and more than 80% of the income remains in the U.S. economy. The average amount of remittance sent to Mexico is roughly $350 every one to two months, which "could seem like nothing for the U.S., but it's money that a whole family lives on and covers their basics in Mexico," Pinzón said.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says more troops will be deployed. Where do things stand with California protests?
Protests in Los Angeles continued to escalate late Monday, after the first contingent of National Guard troops, deployed by President Donald Trump, arrived to the city on Sunday. Late Monday news broke that Trump planned to deploy additional National Guard members to quell violent protests. Images out of L.A. showed scenes of chaos — Waymo self-driving cars lit on fire as masked protesters waved Mexican flags. At least five cars were set ablaze, according to a CBS News report. The Google-owned taxi service said they don't believe protesters intentionally targeted their vehicles but paused its service in the areas where it faced disruption. The LAPD announced they made 50 arrests during the demonstrations over the weekend. As Fox News' Bill Melugin reported, the charges included attempted murder with a Molotov cocktail, and assault with a deadly weapon on an officer. 'Five officers and five LAPD horses have sustained minor injuries, and crowds were using hand held radios to communicate law enforcement movements to each other,' Melugin reported. There was a brief reprieve in the violence early Monday, although city residents continued navigating street and freeway closures amid protests. Among the demonstrators was an interfaith group that sung hymns in front of the police, as CNN showed Monday morning. ICE agents stood behind LAPD officers. Trump announced Saturday night he would deploy 2,000 National Guardsmen to Southern California to protect federal buildings and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers who were carrying out raids on migrants in the country illegally. On Monday, the Trump administration moved to also send 700 Marines to quell the protests. The troops were scheduled to arrive over the next 24 hours. 'You watch the same clips I did: cars burning, people rioting, we stopped it,' Trump said, speaking at the White House. 'If we didn't do the job, that place would be burning down just like the houses,' he added, referring to the wildfires in Los Angeles in January. 'I feel we had no choice ... We did the right thing.' While Trump says he felt his administration didn't have a choice and 'did the right thing,' California Democrats argue the president escalated the situation. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who opposed the deployment of National Guard troops, criticized Trump for sending soldiers to California in a post on X. 'U.S. Marines have served honorably across multiple wars in defense of democracy,' Newsom said. 'They shouldn't be deployed on American soil facing their own countrymen to fulfill the deranged fantasy of a dictatorial President,' he said. 'This is un-American.' Hours later, in a separate post, Newsom said he 'was just informed Trump is deploying another 2,000 Guard troops to L.A.' He claimed the first set of National Guard members Trump sent to California didn't receive food or water and only roughly 300 of them are actively deployed while the rest await their next orders in federal buildings. 'This is Reckless. Pointless. And Disrespectful to our troops,' Newsom added. Newsom urged the Trump White House to rescind the National Guard deployment on Sunday. By Monday, his administration had filed a lawsuit against the federal government. Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced they sued the Trump administration for sending the National Guard without the governor's authorization or request during a press conference Monday. 'Donald Trump is creating fear and terror by failing to adhere to the U.S. Constitution and overstepping his authority. This is a manufactured crisis to allow him to take over a state militia, damaging the very foundation of our republic,' said Newsom. 'Every governor, red or blue, should reject this outrageous overreach,' the governor added. According to Bonta, this marks California's 24th lawsuit against the Trump White House over the past four months. Newsom urged Californians to protest peacefully. During Monday's press conference, Bonta also cautioned violent demonstrators against breaking the law to avoid arrests. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass claimed the ICE raids last week and the military presence in the city sparked increased violence over the weekend. 'If you dial back time and go to Friday, if immigration raids had not happened here, we would not have had the disorder that went on last night,' Bass said on CNN's 'The Situation Room.' 'If they see ICE, they go out, and they protest, and so it's just a recipe for pandemonium that is completely unnecessary. Nothing was happening here. Los Angeles was peaceful before Friday.' Vice President J.D. Vance told the governor to do his job. 'That's all we're asking,' he added. Trump patted himself on the back for deploying the National Guard in a post on Truth Social. 'We made a great decision in sending the National Guard to deal with the violent, instigated riots in California,' he said. 'If we had not done so, Los Angeles would have been completely obliterated.' He criticized Newsom and Bass for not accepting the federal government's help nor expressing any gratitude for it. 'Instead, they choose to lie to the People of California and America by saying that we weren't needed, and that these are 'peaceful protests,'' he wrote.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Illinois woman with terminal illness fights for legal right to die
The Brief Debra Robertson, a Lombard woman with terminal cancer, has been advocating for the right to die with dignity. The Illinois General Assembly failed to legalize medical aid in dying during its spring session. Supporters say the bill would provide terminal patients with end-of-life options, while skeptics argue it could allow doctors to violate their oath to "do no harm." LOMBARD, Ill. - Lombard resident Debra Robertson has been fighting for the right to die on her own terms for the last three years. She's been advocating for a bill that was considered but ultimately not passed by state lawmakers, to allow her the option to stop her suffering. The backstory Robertson said she understands why that might be controversial, but she has one request: don't call it suicide. "I get very upset when people talk about this being assisted suicide," Robertson told FOX 32 Chicago. "I'm already dying. I want to die with dignity and I wanna die the way I wanna die." Robertson was diagnosed with an aggressive rare form of cancer in 2022, called neuro-endocrine carcinoma. She was given six months to live. "I think I was just in denial for a while because I couldn't believe that's where I was at, because the doctor said I was gonna die," she said. Three years and four debilitating rounds of treatment later, Robertson said she's out of options and fears she will suffer if not given the option to die via medication. "I know that my death is going to be painful based on the type of cancer I have," she said. Robertson said she's already expressed her wishes to her two children and grandchildren, and they've come to accept her decision. "At first they struggled because they said, 'Granny are you gonna die now? Are you gonna die today?'" Robertson said. "And I said no and I explain to them about what medical aid in dying is and what it means to me and other people, and now they're very supportive of it. They have some sort of a peace." Big picture view Illinois would become the 11th state in the nation to legalize medical aid in dying if the legislation passes. Last month it stalled in the Senate, after some Democrats joined all Republicans in opposition. The sponsor, State Rep. Robyn Gabel (D-Evanston), said the debate was passionate, and lawmakers simply ran out of time. "These complex pieces of legislation need time to make sure we get them right," Gabel said. Under the bill, a patient would need to be diagnosed with a terminal illness and given six months or less to live. They must be evaluated for mental health concerns and get verbal and written approval from two physicians, five days apart. And doctors who prescribe would be immune from any prosecution, unless they coerce a patient, in which case, they would face felony charges. Gabel said the bill is simply about giving terminal patients end-of-life options. "Just because you ask for the medicine doesn't mean you have to take it – 38% don't take it. What they tell me is it gives them peace of mind knowing they can," Gabel said. Downstate Republican Rep. Bill Hauter is also a physician. He said the medical community is split, but believes the bill would allow doctors to violate their Hippocratic oaths that state "first do no harm." "Medicine is a field of healing, taking care of patients and comforting them and trying to solve their issues and not to partake in the act of suicide," Hauter said. Gabel said she believes lawmakers will have the votes to pass the bill next year. Robertson realizes she might not be around to see it, but said she hopes to pave the way for others that are suffering. "I'm dying and I don't have any control over it. The only thing I could have control over is how I die if this was passed," she said. A representative from the Illinois State Medical Association said the organization took an official position to support the bill, but that they "remain a house divided," with physicians advocating passionately on both sides of the issue.
