Latest news with #866
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Sport
- Yahoo
Cardinals Announce Nolan Arenado News Before Dodgers Game
Cardinals Announce Nolan Arenado News Before Dodgers Game originally appeared on Athlon Sports. Sonny Gray and the St. Louis Cardinals blanked the Los Angeles Dodgers 5-0 on Friday night to open a three-game series at Busch Stadium. In fact, they put L.A. on the wrong side of MLB history dating back 10 years. Advertisement Nolan Arenado led the team with three of the Cardinals' seven hits while Gray worked around eight Dodgers hits in 6 1/3 scoreless innings. A few hours before Saturday's 2:15 p.m. ET first pitch, the Cardinals announced their starting lineup vs. Dodgers pitcher Yoshinobu Yamamoto, who carries a dazzling 2.39 ERA into the matchup. Arenado was notably absent from it despite his career success against Los Angeles. St. Louis Cardinals third baseman Nolan Arenado (28)Ron Chenoy-Imagn Images According to Sleeper's STL Cards account, "Arenado has played 154 games vs the Dodgers, posting an .866 OPS with 32 HR, 99 RBI, and 84 runs. One of their toughest matchups for years." Instead, he'll get a breather while Nolan Gorman, batting seventh in the order, fills his spot on Saturday. After seeing his name floated in trade speculation all offseason, the 34-year-old Arenado is batting a career-low .228 through his first 57 games in 2025. He has added seven home runs, 31 RBIs and 27 runs scored. Advertisement Entering Saturday, St. Louis sits in second place in the NL Central with a 35-28 record thanks to its remarkable May turnaround. Related: Braves Announce Trade With Orioles After Craig Kimbrel News Related: Mariners Make Logan Gilbert Announcement After Velocity Dip This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jun 7, 2025, where it first appeared.
New Straits Times
22-05-2025
- Business
- New Straits Times
Palm opens lower on weaker rival edible oils, crude oil
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian palm oil futures extended losses on Thursday for a second consecutive session, weighed down by rival edible oils and lower crude oil prices. The benchmark palm oil contract for August delivery on the Bursa Malaysia Derivatives Exchange slid RM49, or 1.26 per cent, to RM3,845 (US$903.86) a metric ton in early trade. Dalian's most-active soyoil contract fell 0.87 per cent, while its palm oil contract shed 1.21 per cent. Soyoil prices on the Chicago Board of Trade were down 3.29 per cent. Palm oil tracks price movements of rival edible oils, as they compete for a share of the global vegetable oils market. Oil prices eased as unexpected builds in US crude and fuel inventories raised demand concerns, while investors stayed cautious, focusing on renewed Iran-US nuclear talks. Weaker crude oil futures make palm a less attractive option for biodiesel feedstock. The ringgit, palm's currency of trade, strengthened 0.3 per cent against the dollar, making the commodity more expensive for buyers holding foreign currencies. Palm oil may test support at RM3,866 per metric ton, a break below which could open the way toward RM3,839, Reuters technical analyst Wang Tao said. Longer-dated US Treasury yields hit their highest in 18 months on Thursday, while Asian stocks and the dollar slipped as worries of a worsening fiscal outlook in the world's biggest economy weighed on investor sentiment.
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Real Danger of Trump's War on Low-Flow Showerheads
Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily. The First Amendment guarantees the public's right to petition the federal government to address wrongs. That fundamental constitutional right helped motivate Congress to secure a role for the public to participate in the federal rulemaking process by submitting written comments on proposed regulations. But now, the Trump administration is threatening to undermine the public comment process like no prior administration has in 80 years. In the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, Congress required agencies—with only narrow exceptions—to give notice to the public of proposed regulations and provide 'interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making through submission of written data, views, or arguments.' Since then, presidents of both parties have valued and promoted the public comment process. In 1981, President Ronald Reagan directed federal agencies to give 'full attention to public comments' to ensure that any 'factual conclusions upon which the rule is based have substantial support.' In 1993, President Bill Clinton's Executive Order 12,866—which remains in effect today—required agencies to afford a 'meaningful opportunity to comment' and specified that the period should usually last at least 60 days. And in 2011, President Barack Obama reaffirmed that 60-day comment periods were essential for the 'open exchange' of information and perspectives among experts, private stakeholders, and the general public. Public comments do more than satisfy the public's right to be heard by their government. The comment process is meant to inform agencies' decisions. As a 2024 report by the White House office that oversees regulatory analyses explains: 'Scientists and researchers may have access to data not otherwise available to agencies. Industries and advocacy groups may have important insights into a particular problem. And individuals may be able to draw on their lived experiences to offer valuable perspectives.' In other words, public comments can lead to more accountable agency decisionmaking, producing more effective and responsive rules. But that works only if agencies are open to receiving new data and alternative views. The Trump administration is increasingly making clear that it is not interested in hearing other viewpoints. The administration has repeatedly invoked questionable reasons to avoid public comments on regulatory proposals. In February, Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that any agency's actions on immigration and border control 'constitute a foreign affairs function … under the Administrative Procedure Act'—the unstated implication being to shoehorn a broad set of regulatory polices into a narrow statutory exemption to bypass public comment. Last week, President Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring that whenever an agency determines that an existing rule is 'facially unlawful,' it can repeal that rule 'without notice and comment'—a gross distortion of an exception meant to be reserved either for true emergencies or for the most uncontroversial regulatory moves. The same day, another executive order read like a royal proclamation, with Trump commanding an agency to repeal a particular water-efficiency rule and decreeing that 'notice and comment is unnecessary because I am ordering the repeal.' Even when the Trump administration has complied with the 80-year-old norm of providing public notice and comment, they have often afforded the bare minimum. In March, the Department of Health and Human Services proposed a major overhaul of Obamacare eligibility, restricting coverage for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program recipients, shortening the enrollment period, and complicating the verification process for low-income applicants. By its own calculations, this rule will cause hundreds of thousands of people to lose coverage and will result in net costs of hundreds of millions of dollars per year to state governments and consumers. The amount of time given to the public to comment on these massive changes: just 24 days. (By contrast, the prior 2023 proposed rule covering DACA recipients allowed 59 days of comment, more than twice the length.) Similarly, a rule withdrawing all governmentwide guidance on preparing environmental impact statements under the National Environmental Policy Act allowed written comments for just 31 days, without any public hearings. In fact, that rule was issued as an 'interim final' action, meaning public comments were taken only after the withdrawal already went into effect. (By comparison, the most recent amendments to those rules, finalized in 2024, involved a 60-day comment period, four virtual public meetings, and two Tribal consultations.) The administration's disinterest in hearing from the public seemingly applies only to those with new or different ideas. Federal agencies are all ears when it comes to narrowly defined input that aligns with preestablished White House priorities. Even as the Trump administration has sought to curtail public input on rules on health care, immigration, and environmental protections, agencies have announced multiple new channels for the public to share additional ideas for deregulation. Like-minded proponents of deregulation can share support for cutting existing rules through numerous new channels: a new digital form on the portal; an Office of Management and Budget call for ideas on 'any and all regulations' to rescind; a call for direct messages on X to DOGE; messages to individual agencies as they implement DOGE's 'deregulatory agenda'; or a forthcoming process aimed at removing so-called anti-competitive regulatory barriers. But this radical receptivity to public input is reserved only for comments that fully embrace the administration's deregulatory agenda. Divergent viewpoints need not apply. There's a clear reason why the Trump administration is scared of receiving public comments that challenge its predetermined regulatory preferences. Courts require agencies to respond to significant points raised by public comments, to consider all important aspects of the regulatory issue, and to reasonably explain their ultimate choices. Like ostriches sticking their heads in the sand, officials in this administration seem to hope that by limiting comment opportunities, they can avoid responding to inconvenient facts and arguments. Minimizing or bypassing public comments allows agencies to speed up their deregulatory efforts and to claim they were not aware of defects with their proposals. Agencies are likely banking on some judges either not noticing or not caring. That's not how our regulatory process is meant to work. Public comments are essential to producing effective and accountable agency actions. The Trump administration's misguided and likely illegal attempts to restrict public comment opportunities will be challenged in the courts. Meanwhile, it remains the right and the responsibility of any stakeholder, expert, or member of the public with relevant data or a different viewpoint to submit public comments when they can. If comment periods continue to shrink and the small squadron of traditional public participants in the regulatory process lack the time to submit robust comments on their own, one solution is to expand the roster of commenters. Academic researchers of all disciplines, interest groups big and small, and individuals with lived experience should all do what they can in the limited time provided by agencies to submit comments and help build out the public rulemaking records against which agency decisions will be weighed. In a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, the public cannot allow their vital role in the rulemaking process to be silenced.
Associated Press
29-01-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Landmark Bancorp, Inc. Announces Conference Call to Discuss Fourth Quarter 2024 Earnings
Manhattan, KS, Jan. 29, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Landmark Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: LARK) announced that it will release earnings for the fourth quarter of 2024 after the market closes on Tuesday, February 4, 2025. The Company will host a conference call to discuss these results on Wednesday, February 5, 2024 at 10:00 am (CT). Investors may listen to the Company's earnings call via telephone by dialing (833) 470-1428 and using access code 296482. Investors are encouraged to call the dial-in number at least 5 minutes prior to the scheduled start of the call. A replay of the earnings call will be available through February 12, 2025, by dialing (866) 813-9403 and using access code 817329. About Landmark Landmark Bancorp, Inc., the holding company for Landmark National Bank, is listed on the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol 'LARK.' Headquartered in Manhattan, Kansas, Landmark National Bank is a community banking organization dedicated to providing quality financial and banking services. Landmark National Bank has 29 locations in 23 communities across Kansas: Manhattan (2), Auburn, Dodge City (2), Fort Scott (2), Garden City, Great Bend (2), Hoisington, Iola, Junction City, LaCrosse, Lawrence (2), Lenexa, Louisburg, Mound City, Osage City, Osawatomie, Overland Park, Paola, Pittsburg, Prairie Village, Topeka (2), Wamego and Wellsville, Kansas. Visit for more information. Contact: Mark A. Herpich Chief Financial Officer (785) 565-2000
