Democrat News

This post was originally published on this site

Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed slashing funding by 67% for a pioneering deal with Google to support struggling California newsrooms, citing financial pressures that have promoted wider budget cuts.

California newsrooms had expected to receive $30 million from the state as part of a deal brokered last year in which Google and the state would jointly contribute money over five years to support local newsrooms through a News Transformation Fund. The state Department of Finance confirmed Wednesday that California instead will pay out $10 million for the 2025-26 fiscal year.

“The sole reason for the reduction is more limited/fewer resources than projected in the January budget,” Department of Finance spokesperson H.D. Palmer said.

Newsom announced Wednesday that the state is facing an additional $12-billion budget shortfall next year. The revised $321.9-billion plan will also include a reduction in healthcare for low-income undocumented immigrants and a decrease in overtime hours for select government employees.

The deal was born of negotiations that began with a proposed funding bill written by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), which is known as the California Journalism Preservation Act. It would have required Google to pay into a fund annually that would have distributed millions to California news outlets based on the number of journalists they employ. The California News Publishers Assn., of which the Los Angeles Times is a member, backed the larger effort.

It was designed to aid newspapers that have seen their finances collapse in recent years, leaving fewer journalists to cover institutions and communities.

The proposal was modeled after a Canadian bill that has Google paying about $74 million per year. Google fought the bill, arguing its passage would force the company to remove California news from its platform, thus restricting access for Californians.

Instead, the state and Google agreed in August to provide nearly $250 million to newsrooms over five years, starting in 2025, with funding slated for two projects.

The second initiative was a $68-million pledge for Google to fund artificial intelligence in the form of a National AI Accelerator. The AI funding element of the deal drew sharp rebukes from Democratic lawmakers and journalists.

California had pledged $30 million in 2025 and $10 million for each of the next four years. Google agreed to an initial payment of $15 million in 2025 and $55 million in total into the journalism fund. Google also agreed to boost its own journalism programs with a separate $50-million grant.

Rebuild Local News President Steven Waldman said the $30-million pledge to support local news was “modest” but a “meaningful first step.”

“Cutting it by two-thirds moves California in the wrong direction at a time when local journalism is collapsing across the state,” Waldman said. “We urge the Legislature to hold an open, transparent hearing to assess the impact of this shortfall and explore ways to ensure funding matches the scale of the crisis.”

This post was originally published on this site

SACRAMENTO — One of the many traits that set California apart from other states is the way undocumented immigrants are woven into our communities.

Their economic impact is obvious, and the Golden State would be hard-pressed to keep our status as a world-competing financial power without their labor.

But most Californians know, and are OK with the reality, that at least some of our neighbors, our kids’ classmates, our co-workers, are without legal documents, or in blended-status families.

Gov. Gavin Newsom took a stand Wednesday for those undocumented Californians that seems to have gone largely unnoticed, but which probably will be a big fight in Congress and courts. In his bad news-filled budget presentation, Newsom committed to keeping state-funded health insurance for undocumented residents (with cuts, deep ones, which I’ll get to). Although some are disappointed by his rollbacks, many of which will hit citizens and noncitizens alike, standing by California’s expansion to cover all low income people is a statement of values.

“We’ve provided more support than any state in American history, and we’ll continue to provide more support than any state in American history,” he said.

Sticking with that promise is going to be tough, and likely costly.

This decision comes as Congress considers a Trump-led budget bill that would severely penalize states (there are 14 of them) that continue to provide health insurance to undocumented immigrants. California, of course, has the largest number of such folks on its Medi-Cal plan and would be the hardest hit if that penalty does indeed become the new law — to the tune of $27 billion over six years, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

To put that in perspective, the governor is now estimating a nearly $12-billion budget shortfall this year. That federal cut would add at least $3 billion a year to our costs once it hits.

That federal cut, Newsom said, was “not anticipated in this budget,” which means we are ignoring it for the time being.

Federal programs aren’t open to noncitizens, and no federal dollars are used to support California’s expansion of healthcare to undocumented people.

But Congress is threatening an approximately 10% cut in reimbursements to states that insure undocumented people via the Medicaid expansion that was part of the Affordable Care Act. That expansion allows millions of Americans to have access to healthcare.

Those expansion funds are working in ways that many don’t know about. For example, as Newsom pointed out, behavioral health teams doing outreach to homeless people are funded by Medicaid dollars.

In all, about one-third of Californians rely on Medi-Cal, including millions of children, so this threat to cut federal funds is not an empty one, especially in a lean year.

Katherine Hempstead, a senior policy advisor for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which advocates for universal healthcare, said that the bill being debated by Congress is so full of cuts to healthcare that arguing against the provision penalizing coverage for undocumented people may not be a priority for most Democrats — making it more likely that the cut will get through.

“I don’t know if this is going to be a do-or-die issue,” she said.

And indeed, the pressure by Republicans to kill off coverage entirely for undocumented folks was quick.

“Gov. Newsom has only partially repealed his disastrous policy,” Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) said in a statement. “ It needs to be reversed entirely, or Californians will continue to spend billions on coverage for illegal immigrants and our state will lose an even larger amount in federal Medicaid funding.”

Newsom has given economic reasons for sticking with the state’s coverage for all low-income residents, regardless of status. When people don’t have access to routine care, they end up in emergency rooms and that is extremely expensive. And also, Medicaid has to cover that emergency care, so taxpayers often end up spending more in the long run by skimping on upfront care.

“It’s definitely important to the people that get the coverage because they don’t really have an alternative,” Hempstead said.

But that care has been vastly more expensive than California expected, also to the tune of billions of dollars in unexpected costs, in part because so many people have signed up.

To the dismay of many, Newsom’s budget reflects both recent economic woes — a $16-billion revenue hit caused by what he’s dubbing the “Trump slump” — as well as the state vastly understimating the cost of covering those undocumented folks.

That shortfall may force cuts in the coverage that undocumented people qualify for if the Legislature goes along with Newsom’s plan, or even parts of it.

Most notably, it would cap enrollment for undocumented adults age 19 and over in 2026, effectively closing the program to new participants. That’s a huge hurt. His plan also calls for adding a $100 per month premium, and other cuts such as ending coverage for the extremely popular and expensive GLP-1 weight loss drugs for all participants.

“I don’t want to be in this position, but we are in this position,” Newsom said.

Amanda McAllister-Wallner, executive director of Health Access California, called those cuts “reckless and unconscionable” in a statement.

“This is a betrayal of the governor’s commitment to California immigrants, and an abandonment of his legacy, which brought California so close to universal healthcare,” she said.

I strongly believe in universal single-payer healthcare (basically opening up Medicare to everyone), so I don’t disagree with McAllister-Wallner’s point. In better days, I would hope to see enrollment reopen and benefits restored.

But also, we’re broke. This is going to be a year of painful choices for all involved.

Which makes Newsom’s, and California’s, commitment to keep insurance for undocumented people notable. The state could back down under this real federal pressure, could try to find a way to claw back the benefits we have already given.

But there’s a moral component to providing healthcare to our undocumented residents, who are such a valuable and vital part of our state.

Although the fiscal realities are ugly, it’s worth remembering that in providing the coverage, California is sticking with some of its most vulnerable residents, at a time when it would be easier to cut and run.

This post was originally published on this site

When a Los Angeles County judge resentenced Erik and Lyle Menendez on Tuesday, he offered the brothers a path to freedom for the first time since they were given life in prison for killing their parents with shotguns in 1989.

The latest development makes Lyle, 57, and Erik, 54, eligible for parole — but that is just one of three avenues that could enable them to walk free after 35 years behind bars.

In the coming months, several different judges, parole commissioners and even Gov. Gavin Newsom could still have a hand in the brothers’ fate.

When could they get parole?

Tuesday’s decision by L.A. County Superior Court Judge Michael Jesic modifies the brothers’ original sentence to 50 years to life. Under the state’s youthful offender law, both are immediately eligible for parole because the shootings happened before they turned 26.

A parole hearing probably will be scheduled before the end of the year, according to lawyers working with the Menendez defense team. At the hearing, a panel of commissioners could deem the brothers suitable for parole, but that decision is not final on its own. A 90-day review period would follow, and Newsom could block their release.

Nothing had been scheduled as of Wednesday. At a parole hearing, the brothers will have to take accountability for their crimes and argue to commissioners that they are unlikely to re-offend. In statements delivered in court on Tuesday, they appeared contrite and emotional when revisiting the murders.

“My actions were criminal, selfish, cruel and cowardly,” Erik Menendez said Tuesday. “I have no excuse, no justification for what I did. … I take full responsibility for my crimes.”

Lyle also said he made “no excuses” for felling his mother and father with shotgun blasts, and apologized to the nearly two dozen relatives who have spent years fighting for his release.

“I’m so sorry to each and every one of you,” Lyle told the court Tuesday. “I lied to you and forced you into a spotlight of public humiliation you never asked for.”

How else could they be released?

Before the resentencing process began, Erik and Lyle’s attorneys also filed an application for clemency with Newsom. If the governor grants clemency, their sentence would be commuted immediately and they could walk right out of the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego, where they’ve been housed for years.

A remote clemency hearing is scheduled for June 13, with the brothers set to appear virtually before the parole board. On that day, the board can make a recommendation to Newsom on their suitability for release — which could also forecast their fortunes at an eventual parole hearing.

There is no timeline for Newsom to act on the clemency application, and he is not required to respond to it. The governor has already announced a potential change to statewide parole processes in connection with the case.

The brothers also have a pending petition for a new trial. In the motion, defense attorney Mark Geragos pointed to additional evidence of sexual abuse committed by Jose Menendez, including a fresh allegation from a member of the boy band Menudo.

The brothers have long argued they carried out their crime for fear their parents would kill them to cover up years of sexual abuse committed by Jose.

What’s next for the district attorney?

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman thrust himself into the center of the Menendez case even before he was elected, attacking his predecessor’s decision to seek to have the brothers resentenced last year despite having no access to files on the case.

Hochman asserted that former Dist. Atty. George Gascón filed the petition only to save his failing reelection bid and promised to review the case after he was inaugurated.

In March, Hochman formally announced his opposition to their resentencing, saying the brothers still had not shown proper “insight” into their crimes by atoning for lies they told about their motives in the case and attempts to get witnesses to give fabricated testimony at their original trials.

Despite Jesic repeatedly warning prosecutors that those arguments weren’t legally appropriate for a resentencing hearing, Hochman’s team barreled ahead, ultimately ending in the most high-profile loss of Hochman’s early tenure as district attorney.

Hochman said Wednesday he still considered his opposition to their resentencing a success because it presented to the judge, parole board and governor — all of whom would have a say in the brothers’ fate — a “full record of the facts.”

Hochman maintained that he did not believe the brothers should be released and said prosecutors will “participate” in any future parole hearings.

Hochman could also potentially appeal Jesic’s ruling. The district attorney’s office did not immediately respond to an inquiry about that approach.

Times staff writers Richard Winton and Matthew Ormseth contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on this site

As President Trump parades through the Middle East this week, he will encounter a very different region than the one he experienced during his first term. True, the Israeli-Palestinian problem remains unresolved, as do the challenges emanating from Iran’s much-advanced nuclear program and the instability and dysfunction in Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Syria and Yemen.

But this old wine is now packaged in new bottles. Beyond the garish headlines of Trump’s plan to accept a Boeing 747 as a gift from Qatar, new trends are emerging that will redefine the region, posing additional challenges for U.S. policy.

Of all the changes in the Middle East since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel, perhaps the most striking is Israel’s emergence as a regional powerhouse. Aided by the administrations of Presidents Biden and Trump, and enabled by Arab regimes that do little to support Palestinians, Israel devastated Hamas and Hezbollah as military organizations, killing much of their senior leadership. With the support of the United States, Europe and friendly Arab states, it effectively countered two direct Iranian missile attacks on its territory.

Israel then delivered its own strike, reportedly destroying much of Iran’s ballistic missile production and air defenses. In short, Israel has achieved escalation dominance: the capacity to escalate (or not) as it sees fit, and to deter its adversaries from doing so. Israel has also redefined its concept of border security in Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank and Syria by acting unilaterally to preempt and prevent threats to its territory.

Converting Israel’s military power into political arrangements, even peace accords, would seem like a reasonable next step. But the right-wing government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems uninterested in such options and is unlikely to be induced to change its outlook. Moreover, securing new, lasting agreements also depends on whether there are leaders among the Palestinians and key Arab states ready to take up the challenge, with all the political risks it entails.

But the Arab world remains in serious disarray. At least five Arab states are dealing with profound internal challenges, leaving them in various degrees of dysfunction and state failure. Amid this power vacuum, two alternative power centers have emerged. The first are the states of the Persian Gulf, especially Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Relatively unscathed by the Arab Spring and blessed with sovereign wealth funds, oil and natural gas, these stable authoritarian powers, particularly Saudi Arabia, have begun to play an outsize role in the region.

The second category comprises non-Arab states. Israel, Turkey and Iran are the only states in the region with the capacity to project significant military power beyond their borders. While each has suffered periods of internal unrest, they currently enjoy domestic stability. Each also boasts tremendous economic potential and significant security, military and intelligence capabilities, including the capability to manufacture weapons domestically.

One (Israel) is America’s closest regional ally, another (Turkey) is a member of NATO and a newfound power broker in Syria, and the third (Iran) retains considerable influence despite Israel’s mauling of its proxies Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran’s nuclear program keeps it relevant, even central, to both Israeli and American policymaking.

All three non-Arab states engender a good deal of suspicion and mistrust among Arab regimes but are nonetheless seen as key players whom no one wants to offend. All three are at odds — with each frustrating the others’ regional objectives — and all three are here to stay. Their influence will most likely only grow in the years to come, given the fractiousness of the Arab world.

In the immediate aftermath of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack, it seemed that the Palestinian issue was once again front and center, not just in the Arab world, but internationally. Those who claimed it had lost its resonance could point to the outpouring of sympathy and support for Gazan civilians as Israel’s war against Hamas led to a humanitarian catastrophe.

Moreover, the United Nations passed resolutions calling for an end to the war, many around the world condemned the war and Israel, the International Court of Justice took up the question of whether Israel is committing genocide, and the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu (as well as for Hamas’ military commander, later found to have been killed).

Nonetheless, it has become stunningly clear that, far from pushing the Palestinian issue to the top of the international agenda, the Oct. 7 attack has actually diminished its salience and left Palestinians isolated and without good options. Continued U.S. support for Israel’s war against Hamas, despite the exponential rise of Palestinian deaths, has protected Israel from negative consequences; key Arab regimes have done next to nothing to impose costs and consequences on Israel and the U.S. as Palestinian civilian deaths mount. The international community appears too fragmented, distracted and self-interested to act in any concerted way in defense of Palestine.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian national movement remains divided and dysfunctional, giving Palestinians an unpalatable choice between Hamas and the aging president of the Palestinian National Authority, Mahmoud Abbas. The prospects for anything resembling a two-state solution have never looked bleaker.

How the Trump administration will process these developments remains to be seen. Clearly, it has adopted a pro-Israel view, with Trump musing about turning Gaza into a Riviera-style resort. He has deployed his special envoy to the Middle East to secure the return of hostages taken by Hamas but has yet to invest in any postwar plan for the beleaguered enclave. Indeed, he has left the strategy for Gaza to Israel, which in turn has resumed its military campaign there. Trump has also acquiesced to Israel’s pursuit of aggressive border defenses against both Lebanon and Syria, while enabling Israel’s annexationist policies in the West Bank.

Yet Trump is nothing if not unpredictable. In April, he announced new U.S. negotiations with Iran in the presence of Netanyahu, who himself has tried to persuade the president that the only solution to Iran’s nuclear program is military action. But if U.S.-Iranian negotiations do advance, or if Trump’s interest in Israeli-Saudi normalization intensifies, he may find himself drawn into the Middle East negotiating bazaar, dealing with the intricacies of day-after planning in Gaza and a political horizon for Palestinians.

These paths are already fomenting tension between Trump, who will not be visiting Israel on his Middle East trip, and a recalcitrant Netanyahu. But given Trump’s absolute control over his party, Netanyahu will have few options to appeal to Republicans if the White House proposes policies that he opposes. As most U.S. allies have already learned, if Trump wants something, he’s not averse to using pressure to get it.

Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is a former State Department Middle East analyst and negotiator in Republican and Democratic administrations and the author of “The End of Greatness: Why America Can’t Have (and Doesn’t Want) Another Great President.” Lauren Morganbesser is a junior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

This post was originally published on this site

Gov. Gavin Newsom is proposing to accelerate his administration’s plan to build a $20-billion water tunnel beneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta by short-cutting permitting for the project and limiting avenues for legal challenges.

Newsom urged the Legislature on Wednesday to adopt his plan to “fast-track” the tunnel, called the Delta Conveyance Project, as part of his revised May budget proposal.

“For too long, attempts to modernize our critical water infrastructure have stalled in endless red tape, burdened with unnecessary delay. We’re done with barriers,” Newsom said. “Our state needs to complete this project as soon as possible, so that we can better store and manage water to prepare for a hotter, drier future. Let’s get this built.”

The tunnel would create a second route to transport water to the state’s pumping facilities on the south side of the Delta, where supplies enter the aqueducts of the State Water Project and are delivered to 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland.

Supporters of the plan, including water agencies in Southern California and Silicon Valley, say the state needs to build new infrastructure in the Delta to protect the water supply in the face of climate change and earthquake risks.

Opponents, including agencies in the Delta and environmental advocates, say the project is an expensive boondoggle that would harm the environment and communities, and that the state should pursue other alternatives.

“It’s a top-down push for an unaffordable, unnecessary tunnel that fails to solve the state’s real water challenges,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the group Restore the Delta.

She said the governor “wants to bypass the legal and public processes because the project doesn’t pass the economic or environmental standards Californians expect.”

Newsom, who is set to serve through 2026 and then leave office, is pushing to lay the groundwork for the project.

Newsom said his proposal would: simplify permitting by eliminating certain deadlines from water rights permits; narrow legal review to avoid delays from legal challenges; confirm that the state has authority to issue bonds to pay for the project, which would be repaid by water agencies; and accelerate state efforts to acquire land for construction.

Announcing the proposal, the governor’s office said that “while the project has received some necessary permits, its path forward is burdened by complicated regulatory frameworks and bureaucratic delays.”

The State Water Resources Control Board is currently considering a petition by the Newsom administration to amend water rights permits so that flows could be diverted from new points on the Sacramento River where the intakes of the 45-mile tunnel would be built.

The governor’s latest proposal was praised by water agencies including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which is currently spending about $142 million on the preliminary planning.

MWD General Manager Deven Upadhyay called Newsom’s proposal a “bold step” toward protecting water supplies, saying the approach would support completion of the planning work, reduce “regulatory and legal uncertainties,” and allow the MWD board to make an informed decision about whether to make a long-term investment to help foot the bill for construction.

Jennifer Pierre, general manager of the State Water Contractors, said the governor’s approach makes sense to address costly delays and upgrade essential infrastructure that is “in dire need of modernization.”

Environmental and fishing groups, however, called Newsom’s proposal a reckless attempt to bypass the existing legal process and make it harder for opponents to challenge the project over what they contend would be harmful effects on the Delta region and the environment.

Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Assn., a group that represents fishing communities, called Newsom’s proposal “an attack on the salmon fishing industry and the state’s biggest rivers.”

Commercial salmon fishing has been canceled for three consecutive years because of a decline in the Chinook salmon population. Artis said building the tunnel would represent a “nail in the coffin of California’s once mighty salmon runs.”

This post was originally published on this site

Not all heroes wear capes.

Source: Kyiv Post

Combat medic Svitlana from the 128th Territorial Defense Brigade, currently deployed in the Zaporizhzhia area, saved her fellow soldiers from an attempted enemy encirclement. Spotting the threat, she grabbed a grenade launcher and, with a precise shot, eliminated a group of advancing Russian troops, according to a statement from Ukraine’s General Staff on Monday, May 12.

Svitlana who before the war was a highly experienced intensive care nurse at the Mechnikov Hospital in Dnipro, volunteered for Ukraine’s Territorial Defense Forces at the start of the 2022 full-scale invasion.

Although an experienced nurse and medic, she had received some weapons training, including training in the use of grenade launchers. But on military ranges, not going all Audie Murphy and taking an entire Russian attack force herself.

Details of her heroics, via NV

According to Ukraine’s General Staff, Russian inaders launched an attack using armored vehicles and airborne troops while Svitlana was stationed at a company stronghold. After the unit’s commander was incapacitated, she took charge, coordinating the defense via radio with instructions from the battalion commander, who was monitoring the fight through a video feed.

When it became clear that a Russian assault team had flanked the position and was preparing to encircle the defenders, Svitlana acted. Armed with a single-use grenade launcher, she maneuvered behind the enemy group and fired through the window of the house where they had taken cover, killing them all, the military said.

Her quick decision-making disrupted the enemy attack, preserved Ukrainian defensive positions, and allowed for a later troop rotation.

“I asked the guys to hold their ground and not retreat under any circumstances — if we gave up our positions, we wouldn’t survive,” she said. “So I took a grenade launcher and went to meet the Russian stormtroopers. They had gotten too close — just two houses away. I flanked them, stood up, and fired through the window. The entire enemy group was wiped out. The guys said, ‘You’re crazy.’ But what else could I do? Wait for them to kill us all?”

Indeed.

And this isn’t the first time she’s received a medal for valour, although she still seems embarrassed by the recognition. But she has her reasons.

Recently, the commander of the “”Dyke Pole” brigade awarded Svitlana the Cross of the Ground Forces.

“I even felt awkward – I already have two Golden Crosses of the first and second class, and many other awards. And there are people who’ve been nominated many times but still haven’t received one,” she adds.

Svitlana’s son, also a volunteer, was killed in fighting near Bakhmut. She made it her mission to save the lives of her fellow soldiers.

Ukrainians have sacrificed a lot. They’re never going to just surrender to these bastards.

Ukrainian nurse destroyed Russian unit with a single grenade launcher shot, saving her entire unit from encirclement.

A combat medic named Svitlana took command when her unit’s leader was unavailable during an intense Russian assault on the southern Zaporizhzhia front.

She was… pic.twitter.com/xeSqcXy9yu

— Euromaidan Press (@EuromaidanPress) May 12, 2025

A #Ukrainian combat medic destroyed a group of #Russians with a grenade launcher, saving a unit.

Svitlana, a combat nurse, volunteered at the start of the full-scale invasion.

Recently, during a powerful attack by #Russian occupiers, involving armored vehicles and paratroopers,… pic.twitter.com/sVugsYvmvl

— UkraineWorld (@ukraine_world) May 12, 2025

This post was originally published on this site

California is facing an additional $12-billion state budget shortfall next year, a deficit largely caused by overspending and that Gov. Gavin Newsom said was made worse by President Trump’s federal tariff policy.

“California is under assault,” Newsom said. “The United States of America, in many respects, is under assault because we have a president that’s been reckless.”

Newsom unveiled the forecast during a presentation Wednesday of his $321.9-billion revised spending plan that proposes walking back free healthcare for low-income undocumented immigrants, eliminating Medi-Cal benefits for expensive weight loss treatments and cutting back overtime hours for in-home supportive service workers, among dozens of other trims.

The new deficit comes in addition to $27.3 billion in fiscal remedies, including $16.1 billion in cuts and a $7.1-billion withdrawal from the state’s rainy day fund, that lawmakers and the governor already agreed to make in 2025-26.

The overall $39-billion shortfall marks the third year in a row that Newsom and lawmakers have been forced to reduce funding for state programs after dedicating more money than California has available to spend.

Newsom’s proposed cuts

Among the new cuts Newsom put on the table Wednesday is a call to cut back on his signature policy to provide free healthcare coverage to income-eligible undocumented immigrants.

Newsom is proposing freezing new Medi-Cal enrollment for undocumented adult immigrants as of Jan. 1 and requiring those over 18 to pay $100 monthly premiums to receive healthcare coverage through Medi-Cal.

The cost share will reduce the financial burden on the state and could lower the total number of people enrolled in the healthcare program if some immigrants cannot afford the new premiums. Freezing enrollment may prevent the price tag of the program from continuing to balloon after more people signed up for coverage than the state anticipated.

The changes offer minor savings of $116.5 million next year, with savings growing to $5.4 billion in 2028-29.

The governor is also following the federal government’s lead and cutting $85 million in benefits for Ozempic and other popular weight loss medications from all Medi-Cal coverage plans, while saving $333.3 million by eliminating long-term care benefits for some enrollees.

Newsom wants to cap overtime hours for in-home support service workers, according to his budget, to save $707.5 million next year.

The governor’s budget includes a controversial proposal to grab $1.3 billion in funding in 2025-26 from Proposition 35, a measure voters approved in November that dedicated the revenue from a tax on managed care organizations to primarily pay for increases to Medi-Cal provider rates. The decision is expected to draw pushback from a coalition of doctors, clinics, hospitals and other healthcare groups that supported the proposition, which nearly 68% of voters backed.

Under another cost-saving measure, the governor wants to shift $1.5 billion in funding for Cal Fire from the general fund. Instead, Newsom wants to provide that $1.5 billion from the greenhouse gas reduction fund paid for by proceeds of the state cap-and-trade program next year.

The governor’s budget proposes extending the cap-and-trade program — a first-of-its-kind initiative that sets limits on companies’ greenhouse gas emissions and allows them to buy additional credits at auction from the state, and he wants to dedicate at least $1 billion each year to high speed rail.

A spending deficit

The budget marks a continuation of years of overspending in California under the Newsom administration.

After predicting a lofty $100-billion surplus from federal COVID-19 stimulus funding and the resulting economic gains three years ago, Democrats have not reduced spending to match up with a return to normal after the pandemic.

Poor projections, the ballooning cost of Democratic policy promises and a reluctance to make long-term sweeping cuts have added to the deficit at a time when the governor regularly touts California’s place as the fourth largest economy in the world.

State revenues have exceeded expectations since April, but so has state spending.

Despite the shortfall, California has more money to spend than in the prior budget approved in June, and the governor and lawmakers still plan to take $7.1 billion from the state’s rainy day fund to cover the total 2025-26 deficit.

A “Trump Slump”

Though personal income tax and corporate tax receipts in the state came in $6.8 billion above projections through April, Newsom is predicting that overall revenues will be $16 billion lower than they could have been from January 2025 through June 2026 because of the economic impact of Trump’s tariffs.

The governor originally released the new information, which his team dubbed the “Trump Slump,” on the eve of the presentation of his revised 2025-26 state budget plan, seeking to blame the president for California’s expected revenue shortfall.

Trump in April implemented a series of tariffs on all imported goods, higher taxes on products from Mexico, Canada and China, and specific levies on products and materials such as autos and aluminum. The president has backed down from some of his tariffs, but Newsom alleges that the policies and economic uncertainty will lead to higher unemployment, inflation, lower GDP projections and less capital gains revenue for California.

California filed a lawsuit last month arguing that Trump lacks the authority to impose tariffs on his own. On Tuesday, the state said it will seek a preliminary injunction to freeze the tariffs in federal court.

This post was originally published on this site

Indian student Priya Saxena was cheered when she received her degrees on Saturday in Rapid City. Meanwhile, on the other side of the state at Dakota State, Kristi Noem was met with jeers from hundreds of protesters, people upset with the polarization of her honorary degree and her tactics as head of Homeland Security. Saxena was cheered as “Dr. Priya Saxena,” while Noem was heckled over her deportation record.

There’s a lesson in there somewhere.

Source: South Dakota Searchlight

An international student in western South Dakota overcame Kristi Noem’s attempt to stop her from graduating Saturday, while hundreds of people protested on the other side of the state where Noem received an honorary degree and delivered a commencement speech.

The international student is Priya Saxena, from India. She received two degrees from South Dakota Mines in Rapid City: a doctorate in chemical and biological engineering and a master’s degree in chemical engineering.

Noem’s U.S. Department of Homeland Security — which she has led since resigning as South Dakota governor in January — has been trying to deport Saxena since last month, asserting that Saxena’s permission to stay in the country should be revoked because she was convicted four years ago of failing to move over for flashing yellow lights, a misdemeanor. The action is part of a broader immigration crackdown by the Trump administration.

Saxena’s student visa is not scheduled to expire until 2027, and if allowed to stay in the country, she could apply for an extension to work in fields related to her degrees.

Saxena and her attorney, Jim Leach, of Rapid City, sued and won a temporary restraining order that assured Saxena’s graduation and will halt the government’s action against her until at least next week, when she has a hearing on her request for a court order to stop her deportation while the lawsuit proceeds. Saxena and her attorney have said in court filings that she has not committed a deportable offense, and have called the government’s actions “lawless.”

Note: there are some factual errors from this Tiktok, as they weren’t at the same ceremony, but at different ceremonies on the same day.

Kristi Noem tried to have Priya Saxena deported,but was unable to because there was no probable cause.Then Priya graduated and received her Doctorate at the same College where Kristi Noem was getting a honorary degree! Noem was booed and heckled as Priya received Cheers!👇 pic.twitter.com/QisoWGGe0X

— Suzie rizzio (@Suzierizzo1) May 12, 2025

This post was originally published on this site

At Wednesday’s House Homeland Security Committee hearing, Democratic New York Rep. Dan Goldman clashed with Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem over Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who did not get due process, which is afforded to everyone in the US according to the Constitution.

“Will you give Mr. Abrego-Garcia the due process that the Supreme Court and Judge Wilkinson have required you to give him?” Goldman asked Noem.

“Abrego-Garcia is an El Salvador resident who is in his home country,” Noem said, missing the entire point. “If he were to come back to this country, he would be immediately removed again.”

“How do you know?” Goldman asked.

“He has received and been treated appropriately, sir, and he is not in this country anymore,” Noem insisted.

“How can you say he’s been treated appropriately if the Supreme Court has ruled 9-0, 9-0 that he hasn’t been treated appropriately?” Goldman shot back. “Why is your opinion better and has more authority than the Supreme Court?”

“We had two judges, investigators, two judges, an immigration court that all said he was MS-13 and was removed from this country,” Noem lied.

“But you understand, that is you saying that,” Goldman said. “That is you saying that.”

“That is them saying that,” she said.

“No, no, no, no!” the New York Democrat said. “That is you making that determination. The court has considered all that. The judge has considered all that, Madam Secretary, and if you would be quiet because I’m reclaiming my time, you are not following this court order.”

“But let’s focus on the court order because this opinion also says that to facilitate, which the Supreme Court is requiring, is an active verb,” he continued. It requires that steps be taken. What steps have you taken to return Mr. Abrego-Garcia to allow him to get due process?”

“Abrego-Garcia is in his home country,” she insisted.

“What steps have you taken?” Goldman asked again. He explained, “I’m not advocating for him. I’m advocating for a court order, Madam Secretary.”

“The court order says that you must take steps to follow the court order,” he continued. “You are here under oath. What steps have you taken to return Mr. Abrego-Garcia pursuant to this court order?”

“It’s got to be extremely discouraging to be one of your constituents,” Noem said. “To see you fight for a terrorist like this and not fight for them is extremely alarming to me.”

“I’m fighting for due process,” Goldman said. “And that’s under the Constitution, and you should fight too for due process.”

The US Supreme Court ordered the government to “facilitate” the return of the wrongly deported Maryland man. If she just picks which parts of the Constitution she wants to follow, then she needs to step the fuck down. And Trump has been lying about the man, even to the point of posting a poorly photoshopped image of Abrego Garcia with a fake MS-13 tattoo.

This post was originally published on this site

The media is starting to acknowledge that Israel is systematically starving the people of Gaza. They’re still tiptoeing around the topic, but they’re starting to cover it, as we saw on Morning Joe today.

“Three Israeli military officials familiar with the conditions in Gaza tell the New York Times Palestinians in the territory face widespread starvation unless access to aid is restored within weeks. Israel has insisted on its blockade on Gaza, which has been in effect since early March, does not threaten civilians despite famine warnings from the U.N.,” Mika Brzezinski said.

“Joining us now, Doctor Aqsa Durrani. She’s a board member of Doctors Without Borders, and she just returned to the U.S. from an assignment in Gaza working at a field hospital. Can you tell us what you saw in that hospital?”

“What I saw children was the manifestation of these inhuman policies. Children who were starving and hungry already. And in the ICU where I worked, even early on in the siege, we had a one-year-old infant who had presented with burns resulting from an airstrike, and at that point, the cost of food was already prohibitive for vulnerable families,” Dr. Durrani said.

“So his nutritional status overwhelmed, you know, it led to an infection. and then he ended up succumbing to his injuries. He was killed by this. So already we are. seeing children who are impacted by this, by this starvation. We are also, I also had another four year old patient who was also admitted for burns after an airstrike, whose mother was begging me for more food. And I had to tell her, I had to look her in the eyes and say, I don’t have any. You know, we don’t have any additional food to give him.

“And this is unconscionable, given that there is food just miles away. You know, being blocked by the Israeli authorities. It’s systematic. It’s deliberate, and it’s cruel.”

She described people living on canned, processed food that they either stockpiled, or found in the rubble after bombing.

“Doctor Durrani, where is the food coming from that they’re getting at all, the people of Gaza, these children. you’re talking about, these families. If those humanitarian shipments aren’t making it in, what’s the source of their food?” Willie Geist asked.

“The sources of food that people have right now are are processed canned foods that you know, that they may have had from before. But all of that is dwindling. We are seeing that even our staff, even the doctors, you know, nurses. Everyone who’s working at the hospital are eating one meal per day. and they are — that those are the conditions that they’re they’re living in and providing care for their community,” Dussani said.

“Doctor, the New York Times is reporting that some Israeli military officials are concluding that Gaza is on the brink of starvation. You were there for a few months. How much did you see the situation deteriorate while you were there? And how close do you think Gaza is to people starving to death?” Katy Kay asked.

“I can tell you that we have already seen it is already too late. Every day that this continues. it is criminal. It is criminal. I have no other words,” she said.

“We have already seen that. Like I said, that children and women and men, that the the people are suffering from this inhumane siege. And what is so, you know, that makes us even more criminal is that their tiny bodies are being ravaged by airstrikes and then we can’t even manage to provide them with more food. We have already seen these impacts. We’ve already heard of deaths from malnutrition. We’ve already heard of deaths all across the strip.

“We are screening more and more children for malnutrition. So, you know, while while we wait for this classification, we are at each day is, it’s just too late.”