Latest news with #TheDepartment
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
US Travel Ban: Trump plans new restrictions on 36 more countries in expanded crackdown
The Trump administration is considering new travel restrictions on 36 countries, according to a classified State Department cable. If implemented, this would more than double the number of nations whose citizens face full or partial entry bans into the United States. Affected countries include key U.S. partners in Africa and the Caribbean. The directive was sent out over the weekend in a diplomatic memo signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. It instructs U.S. diplomats to give listed countries until 8 a.m. Wednesday to submit initial action plans to meet stringent new security and identity verification requirements. Targeted nations: Africa dominates the list The memo identifies a wide range of countries now under review. Twenty-five are in Africa, including Egypt, Ethiopia, Djibouti, and Nigeria. The Caribbean nations of Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, and Saint Lucia are also named. Others include Bhutan, Syria, Tonga, and Vanuatu. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Play this game for 3 minutes, if you own a mouse Undo If these countries do not meet U.S. benchmarks within 60 days, they could face bans similar to those enacted earlier this month under Trump's executive order. What the memo says: Overstays, fraud, and non-cooperation The internal cable raises several concerns. According to the memo, 'The Department has identified 36 countries of concern that might be recommended for full or partial suspension of entry if they do not meet established benchmarks and requirements within 60 days.' Live Events Some nations reportedly lack a 'competent or cooperative central government authority' to issue reliable identity documents. Others are flagged for 'widespread government fraud,' failing to accept deported citizens, or high numbers of visa overstays . The memo also cites problematic citizenship-for-investment programmes and 'antisemitic and anti-American activity in the United States' by nationals of some countries. A wider pattern: Travel bans as a political tool This expansion follows Trump's June 4 proclamation, which banned entry from 12 countries including Afghanistan, Iran, and Somalia, and restricted seven others. During his first term, Trump imposed a controversial travel ban on several Muslim-majority countries. That policy was eventually upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018 after legal challenges. Now in his second term, Trump has revived and expanded his earlier agenda. 'This administration continues to single out African and Caribbean countries in a way that is deeply troubling,' said a Democratic congressional aide. Critics from civil rights groups and Democratic lawmakers argue that the new list shows a discriminatory trend, disproportionately targeting countries in the Global South. They say it echoes earlier bans rooted in xenophobia. While the White House has not officially commented on the proposed expansion, the president has stated on multiple occasions that he intends to make the ban 'bigger than before.' The State Department, when asked by Reuters and The Washington Post, declined to discuss the memo, stating only that it regularly 'reevaluates policies to ensure Americans are safe and foreign nationals abide by the law.' What comes next: Countdown to compliance Nations on the list must now act quickly. They've been given 60 days to meet U.S. demands. An initial response is due within days. Failure to comply could trigger a travel ban that bars their citizens from U.S. entry altogether, reshaping not only diplomatic ties but also the lives of thousands who travel to the U.S. for education, work, and family. This move would also likely ignite legal battles in U.S. courts and intensify global criticism of America's immigration posture under Trump's leadership. List of countries facing possible US travel ban Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Dominica, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Malawi, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, São Tomé and Príncipe, Senegal, South Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Boston Globe
07-04-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Linda McMahon says the Ed Department has failed students. Is it true? Here's what the data show.
The department has its problems — and has been strikingly ineffective over the last decade — but even conservative critics grant that some of its roles have had value, including testing, data collection, and research. Advertisement Other researchers argue its value goes much further, including by directing money to schools with needy students; by providing technical support and grants for innovation; and by offering a 'bully pulpit' to lead national education trends. Here's what to know: Has achievement declined? It's not true that scores have consistently languished under the Education Department. Until about 2015, scores and other achievement measures mostly rose. The federal government's longest-running nationally representative student assessment began in the 1970s and showed student achievement gradually but consistently rising until the 2010s. College enrollment rates followed a similar trend, and high school graduation rates have risen even more consistently, including through the pandemic. 'People don't know we've improved so much,' said Tulane education professor Douglas Harris. Related : Data and research The Department's work with the most widespread approval is research and data collection, including the Advertisement McMahon cited the NAEP to show the department has failed, noted Harris. 'They're using the evidence that the department itself is creating against the department,' Harris said. Republicans have pushed other policies backed by Related : But Frederick Hess, the chairman of the American Enterprise Institute's Conservative Education Reform Network, argued that while the data collection is critical, only a small portion of education research is helpful. 'The vast sea of it [is] shot through with ideology, incoherent or indefensible methodologies, and agendas dressed in the garb of science,' Hess said. Much of the research Hess criticizes is not directly federally funded, but he argued it's indirectly supported by other IES grants. Federal funding Hess also questioned the value of Title I and IDEA, federal funds for low-income students and students with disabilities, which some conservatives want to involved. 'While the dollars are certainly helpful, they may be more negative than not,' Hess said. 'We built a 60-year-old oversight apparatus that is incredibly clunky and intrusive.' The money is also quite limited — a few percent of Massachusetts spending — and there is even a Related : Advertisement 'We know that money matters for education,' said Matt Kraft, an education professor at Brown University who served on President Biden's Council of Economic Advisors. 'How much worse would things have been during the great recession or during the pandemic if we hadn't had federal dollars flowing?' Kraft also praised more targeted federal investments like competitive grant programs, which have helped address teacher shortages, an area he studies. The bully pulpit Multiple experts raised the 'bully pulpit,' the federal government's ability to drive the conversation, as a key positive contribution. Harris, of Tulane, pointed to 'A Nation at Risk,' a landmark report on education commissioned under President Ronald Reagan. 'That really triggered the standards and accountability movement,' Harris said. requiring more math classes, increasing coursework completed by Black students and their future earnings. Sandy Kress, a key architect of No Child Left Behind as an adviser to President George W. Bush, said the federal government's role in pushing for positive change predates the Education Department's 1979 formation. During the Civil Rights Era, Title I and school desegregation efforts also pushed state and local governments to focus on Black and low-income students, with positive effects. Advertisement 'I'm not trying to say it evened things up, but it certainly brought greater fairness, greater equity to the use of resources,' Kress said. School accountability Probably the most controversial federal role is Kress's life's work — school accountability. The 2001 No Child Left Behind Act required states to regularly test all students and hold schools and districts accountable for outcomes. No Child Left Behind seems to have driven significant The expansive testing system the bill helped create proved very unpopular, as parents and educators raised concerns over what they saw as an inundation of testing, and the accountability requirements were watered down under Obama, with Republican Senator Lamar Alexander leading the charge. 'If the goal is to reduce the federal role, that already happened,' said Mike Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute. 'Give credit to Barack Obama and Lamar Alexander.' Civil rights and special education oversight The federal Office for Civil Rights was one of the hardest-hit parts of the department in 'We must do much better to improve special education in this country,' said Robin Lake, director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education. 'But it's really, really important that the rights of students who participate in those programs are protected, and the feds play a really important role in that.' Petrilli agreed that 'it's important to have an agency that can respond to complaints,' although he said both parties have 'weaponized' the civil rights arm for culture war battles. Advertisement What doesn't work? All the experts agreed the department has problems and has been ineffective in halting achievement declines over the last decade. 'There's no doubt that test score declines ... are a real blinking red emergency light,' Kraft said. 'It would be misguided to assume, however, that these challenges and declines are directly attributable to an inefficient or ineffective Department of Education.' Kress just hoped the last decade's trajectory is not permanent. 'Was 2013 the peak of achievement in American history?' he wondered. 'That's a pretty sorry thing to think about.' Christopher Huffaker can be reached at
