Latest news with #DepartmentofGovernment
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump v Musk has got very messy very quickly, and TV's punchline writers will be the only winners
And so, in the end, it was the big, beautiful bill that prompted the big, beautiful bust-up almost everyone knew was coming. Ever since the Trump and Musk alliance was formed almost a year ago, megalomaniac watchers the world over have been asking when and how it would end. Now we have our answer; 137 days into Trump's presidency and with the of one of Musk's rocket launches. At times, it felt voyeuristic to watch, the kind of rubbernecking that takes place with the ugliest of celebrity breakups. It's a Brangelina inside the beltway, but with implications far beyond it. Because Musk was as close to the president as anyone outside his own family. He spent weekends living at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home, his mum attended parties there, his son wiped his bogies on the resolute desk. But like so many domestic disputes, it got very messy, very quickly. As always when Trump has something to say, he waits for the inevitable question. It came immediately after his meeting inside the Oval Office with German Chancellor Freidrich Merz. A journalist asked about Musk's criticism of his "big, beautiful" bill. Trump saw his opening. "I've always liked Elon. I'd rather have him criticise me than the bill," he said, quickly noting that he and Musk had a great relationship. "I don't know if we will anymore," he added. Less than half an hour later, a post on X by Musk made it very apparent that they would, indeed, no longer have a great relationship. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election," he wrote. It was a torpedo that unleashed an, at times, unhinged back and forth including an unfounded allegation from Musk about Trump being part of the "Epstein files". Just a week after Trump presented Musk with a golden key in a grand farewell, Musk was burning the house down. But this break up will affect everyone involved, not to mention the American public. Brand Trump will be damaged by the loss of Musk's endorsement and loyalty. Read more on Sky News: Republican politicians will be wary of angering Musk by voting for Trump's spending bill. The world's richest man has shown he is willing to put his money on the line in election races and the midterms are looming. The government's reliance on Musk's companies is also huge. Space X is the key player in space exploration and Musk has been providing invaluable advice to the White House on artificial intelligence and electric vehicles. What will now happen to the Department of Government efficiency? Meanwhile shares are down significantly at all of Musk's companies with Trump likely to seek vengeance. There could also be an investigation, now, into allegations that Musk's drug use while in government was out of control. There are so many unknowns and one certainty - there are no winners here, apart from the comedians who trade in jokes about this pair of impulsive billionaires.
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
University of Texas expert on the pope and politics as the papal conclave begins
AUSTIN (KXAN) — Catholics across the world — along with religious scholars and global leaders — are watching the Vatican, as cardinals gather to select a new leader of the Catholic Church. The conclave began Wednesday, where a group of 133 Cardinals secluded themselves to begin voting. Professor Eric McDaniel teaches in the Department of Government at the University of Texas at Austin and also researches how religion influences American politics. He talked to KXAN's Avery Travis and Will DuPree about the impact and influence of the next pope. Watch the video above to see the full conversation, or read a partial transcript of the conversation below. Some responses were edited for clarity. Avery Travis: What kind of moment does the Catholic Church find itself in right now, and how might that impact this conclave process and the selection of the next pope? Eric McDaniel: I think the Catholic Church finds itself in a time where it's trying to figure out where it stands in terms of global politics, as we're seeing a rise of religious nationalism, a rise of populism, a push back against institutions. Where does this institution find its place? But also, with the drastic change in culture and — what are the demands that are put on a global institution when you have drastic cultural changes, but also drastic changes in global politics? Will DuPree: And we really saw that come to a forefront during Pope Francis's tenure. I mean, he spoke publicly about issues like LGBTQ rights, immigration, climate change. What kind of expectation do you have about whether that would continue under a new pope? McDaniel: I think some of it will continue, but it may not be as intense because there was a good amount of pushback on it. One of the things that Pope Francis was pointed out for doing is speaking out quite a bit about the child abuse scandals and to what extent they will continue with that. So, I expect many of the things that he was pushing forward to continue, but some to be pulled back because they did ruffle several feathers. And speaking of where we fall within the global context, you have to be very careful. Travis: Even after his death, we know that Pope Francis will have an impact on who will be picking his successor. So, talk about the make-up of this voting body of Cardinals, and Pope Francis's influence on that, and then how that influences the next pope? McDaniel: Well, I think it's important to note that because the pope has nominated so many of these Cardinals that they are individuals he felt were in line with his vision and trying to continue the vision on. To what extent they will carbon copy it, I do not expect it to be so. But I do think his vision will be clearly there amongst the Cardinals that are seated. DuPree: We will be watching whether that white smoke will come up after a few votes, or maybe it drags on for several days — starting on Wednesday — so we might have to have you back to follow up on that. But we've got one more topic we want to address with you. Professor McDaniel, President Trump just announced at least last week that he would create a religious liberty commission, and that is chaired by Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. What's your understanding about how that will work? And share your thoughts about the role that Dan Patrick might be able to play in that? McDaniel: Well, religious liberty is a very big issue, and it's something that the Founding Fathers debated. We think about [Thomas] Jefferson and [James] Madison and the arguments they made, really, about the strict wall of separation of church and state, and that what Madison wanted in the Constitution was a little bit watered down, and we never really fully agreed upon what religious liberty is. And many religious groups — whether they be the dominant Christian groups, which has kind of been the dominant force – feels that they're being set upon, along with minority religions. So what religious liberty is, is something that's going to be highly, highly debated. And I think that Lt. Gov. Patrick has an idea of what he thinks of his religious liberty, and will try to have that be the focus of the investigations or how they try to push policies related to religious liberty going forward. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to KXAN Austin.
Boston Globe
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
After a year of turmoil, The Washington Post is taking note of its journalism again
'Great stories and great scoops are always good to remind people — both externally and internally — that it's all about the journalism at the end of the day,' Murray said. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The grunt work of reporting on the federal workforce Advertisement Dan Diamond, Hannah Natanson, Carolyn Y. Johnson and Lena H. Sun are among the reporters who have dug into specifics about Department of Government Efficiency-inspired cuts and what they've meant for medical research and services for Social Security recipients. Natanson, Rachel Siegel and Laura Meckler have explored the use of government data to go after undocumented immigrants. Adam Taylor and John Hudson have dug into proposed cuts at the State Department. Maria Sacchetti and Artur Galocha showed how half of the people the White House reported as immigration enforcement arrests were already behind bars. Jacob Bogage wrote about a Trump appointee asking the IRS to review an audit of conservative personality Mike Lindell. Advertisement It's grunt work, developing sources and stories that build upon other stories, many involving federal workers — the industry that the city is built upon. 'The Post has an historic obligation — it's right in our name, Washington — to write aggressively, truthfully, thoughtfully about the government and what's happening there,' Murray said. 'Obviously the Trump administration, whatever one thinks of them, has the most aggressive change program that we've seen in many administrations.' The work breaking stories has been noticeable, said Margaret Sullivan, a former media columnist at the Post who still writes, teaches at Columbia University and runs the Craig Newmark Center for Journalism Ethics and Security there. 'I've been happy to see that,' she said. 'The place has been through such a difficult time and it's not due to the journalists there. It's because of the ownership and management.' The Post hasn't yet earned its own Truth Social post about its reporting since President Donald Trump's return — the ultimate sign it has gotten under Trump's skin — but the White House labeled one of its stories about health funding 'fake news.' Tulsi Gabbard, national intelligence director, cited a Post story about Israel and Iran among her reasons to seek out internal leakers. The work has also calmed fears about whether owner Bezos' newfound friendliness with Trump would impact news coverage. Last fall, Bezos ordered a planned endorsement of Trump opponent Kamala Harris spiked, triggering an exodus of angry subscribers. He was a prominently visible guest at Trump's second inauguration and soon after said the Post's opinion pages should focus primarily on personal liberties and the free market. That change in direction led to the resignations of editorial page editor David Shipley and two long-time Post columnists, Ruth Marcus and Eugene Robinson. Advertisement Bezos' actions with the opinion section have hurt the Post's reputation when the country really needs it, and when its news coverage has been excellent, said Robert McCartney, a retired Post columnist. 'Their DOGE coverage has been really good, as good as anybody's,' he said. 'They have broken a lot of news. They have done a lot of important accountability reporting.' Journalists are taking advantage of new opportunities Between the turmoil and a sea of red ink resulting in layoffs, the Post suffered a significant talent defection at the end of last year. Journalists like Matea Gold, the respected managing editor, and reporters Josh Dawsey, Ashley Parker, Philip Rucker and Michael Scherer took new jobs. That exposed some thin skin; Murray, then only interim editor, briefly banned goodbye emails believing they were bad for morale, before the decision was reversed, the Guardian reported. The paper has banned its media writers from reporting stories about the newspaper. 'The reporters are doing good work, by and large,' said Richard Prince, a retired reporter and editor who spent 20 years at the Post in two stints. 'It's a shame there is all this turmoil that is coming from the top. It seems like they lost more talent than they gained.' At a time there are more journalists than jobs, the Post is still a desired destination. 'Many other people are stepping up and have had new opportunities and are showing their chops,' said Murray, who had the 'interim' removed from his title with no fanfare earlier this year. The Post is still in transition; Murray appointed some key deputies last week. It is still sorting out coverage areas that need more attention and those that don't. He promised more resources to follow technology, artificial intelligence and the markets. Advertisement The Post reportedly lost some 325,000 subscribers after the Harris non-endorsement and editorial policy change; the newspaper won't say whether it has recovered that number since through new or returned subscribers. The newspaper is more aggressively seeking new readers and says 100,000 more new subscribers signed up this year than did over the same period in 2024. It's spring; consider them all shoots popping up from the ground after a damaging winter. 'I would not quit the Post,' Sullivan said. 'If I were a regular reader, I would still find it very interesting and necessary.'
Yahoo
26-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
HHS layoffs undercut Trump's pledge to be ‘fertilization president'
President Trump has championed access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) and even dubbed himself the 'fertilization president' early in his second term. But Department of Government Efficiency-induced layoffs at the Department and Health and Human Services (HHS) have decimated maternal health and reproductive medicine programs, including teams that report on fertility outcomes of IVF clinics, as well as those that track maternal health and mortality data. Public health experts and reproductive health advocates say the cuts will have lasting consequences and make it more dangerous to be pregnant in the United States. They questioned how Trump's promises to expand IVF, as well as the White House's reported interest in boosting a lagging domestic birthrate, can be reconciled with the gutting of crucial tools that could help achieve those goals. The HHS suddenly laid off 10,000 people at the start of this month, a sweeping move that included about three-quarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) reproductive health division, former CDC employees told The Hill. Former fertility-focused agency employees who lost their jobs April 1 said they thought it was a mistake. 'Trump said he was the fertility president. How does cutting this program support the administration's position?' one former CDC employee said. 'We fully expected that the team would be brought back once there was awareness that it had been eliminated. But as time has gone on, apparently there's no intention of bringing anyone back,' said another. The CDC's six-person Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Surveillance team was eliminated, as was the 17-person team that worked on the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. The agency also lost teams studying contraception use. As a result, couples trying to conceive may not be able to get trustworthy information about IVF clinics or their chances for success. There are now fewer people monitoring pregnancy health outcomes or doing deep research on why some women die in childbirth. Sean Tipton, chief advocacy and policy officer at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, which represents fertility medicine providers, said the loss of those programs and staff will create a massive blind spot for women's health. 'I think the women and children of this country are going to be less healthy, going to die sooner, and I think it's going to take us longer to fully understand the ramifications of that,' Tipton said. 'It is a deep, dark, black hole with no solutions,' he added. 'It's hard to reconcile the statements of the self-proclaimed fertility president with the policy moves his administration has implemented.' The U.S. has one of the highest maternal mortality rates among high-income countries, with 18.6 deaths per 100,000 live births, according to the most recent data available from the CDC. Many health experts have called maternal mortality in the U.S. a 'crisis,' which disproportionally impacts Black and brown communities. Maternal mortality rates are particularly high for Black women, rising to 49.5 deaths per 100,000 deaths in 2022 and 50.3 the following year, CDC data show. That crisis will only worsen if there are fewer people working to make pregnancies safer, experts said. The CDC's National Center for Health Statistics is still releasing its annual maternal mortality report. But the report provides 'surface level' information on maternal deaths that is compiled from death certificate data and does not dive deeply into root causes. 'That's not looking at deaths among women who are pregnant or why,' one former CDC employee told The Hill. That work is up to members of the maternal mortality review committees who could all be laid off as part of proposed HHS budget cuts, a leaked version of the budget shows. An HHS official said the work of 'critical programs' from the CDC's Division of Reproductive Health will continue under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., 'alongside multiple agencies and programs to improve coordination of health resources for Americans.' But the official did not give details on how the specific functions of those programs would continue, especially when relevant experts have seemingly been fired. The CDC's ART Surveillance team was tasked with collecting and analyzing information on every IVF procedure performed in the country, including patient demographics and success rates. The team had operated under a congressional mandate since 1992. 'We had 12 projects in the works, which have all just stopped,' a former agency employee said. 'There's no one else doing them. There's no one else to do them.' Barbara Collura, the president and CEO of Resolve: The National Infertility Association, said the science of IVF is advancing rapidly and the data analyzed by the ART team is a major reason why. ART data helped make IVF safer, more efficient and more accessible, Collura said, which is exactly what the Trump administration purportedly wants to do. In February, Trump issued an executive order that pledged support for IVF and called for a report on how to make it more accessible and affordable; but there were no funding commitments or specific ideas presented. 'If I want to put forward policy recommendations on IVF, I want the best people surrounding me, giving me advice and info,' Collura said. 'You had them for decades, and now they are gone.' There are some nongovernmental efforts to collect and share IVF data. The Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology collects similar information about fertility clinics. But participation is voluntary, and advocates fear without the force of the federal government behind it, there will be fewer and fewer clinics reporting. The IVF industry is already facing increased scrutiny, especially in the wake of the Alabama Supreme Court decision last year that found frozen embryos are people. But advocates said they worry about growing distrust in the industry if the federal government is no longer tracking patient outcomes and providing some oversight. 'I don't think this [is] a time we want to have less oversight and regulation and data,' Collura said. 'If you're all in on [expanding] access, let's make sure you have great data.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
26-04-2025
- Health
- The Hill
HHS layoffs undercut Trump's pledge to be ‘fertilization president'
President Trump has championed access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) and even dubbed himself the 'fertilization president' early in his second term. But Department of Government Efficiency-induced layoffs at the Department and Health and Human Services (HHS) have decimated maternal health and reproductive medicine programs, including teams that report on fertility outcomes of IVF clinics, as well as those that track maternal health and mortality data. Public health experts and reproductive health advocates say the cuts will have lasting consequences and make it more dangerous to be pregnant in the United States. They questioned how Trump's promises to expand IVF, as well as the White House's reported interest in boosting a lagging domestic birthrate, can be reconciled with the gutting of crucial tools that could help achieve those goals. The HHS suddenly laid off 10,000 people at the start of this month, a sweeping move that included about three-quarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) reproductive health division, former CDC employees told The Hill. Former fertility-focused agency employees who lost their jobs April 1 said they thought it was a mistake. 'Trump said he was the fertility president. How does cutting this program support the administration's position?' one former CDC employee said. 'We fully expected that the team would be brought back once there was awareness that it had been eliminated. But as time has gone on, apparently there's no intention of bringing anyone back,' said another. The CDC's six-person Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Surveillance team was eliminated, as was the 17-person team that worked on the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. The agency also lost teams studying contraception use. As a result, couples trying to conceive may not be able to get trustworthy information about IVF clinics or their chances for success. There are now fewer people monitoring pregnancy health outcomes or doing deep research on why some women die in childbirth. Sean Tipton, chief advocacy and policy officer at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, which represents fertility medicine providers, said the loss of those programs and staff will create a massive blind spot for women's health. 'I think the women and children of this country are going to be less healthy, going to die sooner, and I think it's going to take us longer to fully understand the ramifications of that,' Tipton said. 'It is a deep, dark, black hole with no solutions,' he added. 'It's hard to reconcile the statements of the self-proclaimed fertility president with the policy moves his administration has implemented.' The U.S. has one of the highest maternal mortality rates among high-income countries, with 18.6 deaths per 100,000 live births, according to the most recent data available from the CDC. Many health experts have called maternal mortality in the U.S. a 'crisis,' which disproportionally impacts Black and brown communities. Maternal mortality rates are particularly high for Black women, rising to 49.5 deaths per 100,000 deaths in 2022 and 50.3 the following year, CDC data show. That crisis will only worsen if there are fewer people working to make pregnancies safer, experts said. The CDC's National Center for Health Statistics is still releasing its annual maternal mortality report. But the report provides 'surface level' information on maternal deaths that is compiled from death certificate data and does not dive deeply into root causes. 'That's not looking at deaths among women who are pregnant or why,' one former CDC employee told The Hill. That work is up to members of the maternal mortality review committees who could all be laid off as part of proposed HHS budget cuts, a leaked version of the budget shows. An HHS official said the work of 'critical programs' from the CDC's Division of Reproductive Health will continue under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., 'alongside multiple agencies and programs to improve coordination of health resources for Americans.' But the official did not give details on how the specific functions of those programs would continue, especially when relevant experts have seemingly been fired. The CDC's ART Surveillance team was tasked with collecting and analyzing information on every IVF procedure performed in the country, including patient demographics and success rates. The team had operated under a congressional mandate since 1992. 'We had 12 projects in the works, which have all just stopped,' a former agency employee said. 'There's no one else doing them. There's no one else to do them.' Barbara Collura, the president and CEO of Resolve: The National Infertility Association, said the science of IVF is advancing rapidly and the data analyzed by the ART team is a major reason why. ART data helped make IVF safer, more efficient and more accessible, Collura said, which is exactly what the Trump administration purportedly wants to do. In February, Trump issued an executive order that pledged support for IVF and called for a report on how to make it more accessible and affordable; but there were no funding commitments or specific ideas presented. 'If I want to put forward policy recommendations on IVF, I want the best people surrounding me, giving me advice and info,' Collura said. 'You had them for decades, and now they are gone.' There are some nongovernmental efforts to collect and share IVF data. The Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology collects similar information about fertility clinics. But participation is voluntary, and advocates fear without the force of the federal government behind it, there will be fewer and fewer clinics reporting. The IVF industry is already facing increased scrutiny, especially in the wake of the Alabama Supreme Court decision last year that found frozen embryos are people. But advocates said they worry about growing distrust in the industry if the federal government is no longer tracking patient outcomes and providing some oversight. 'I don't think this [is] a time we want to have less oversight and regulation and data,' Collura said. 'If you're all in on [expanding] access, let's make sure you have great data.'
