Archive by Author

Education secretary, first lady to announce American Rescue Plan education grants

Education Secretary Miguel Cardona and First Lady Jill Biden on Wednesday will announce the final set of education grants under the American Rescue Plan (ARP), The Hill has learned.

Cardona and Biden will be joined by ARP Coordinator Gene Sperling and leadership from the Community College of Philadelphia, Coahoma Community College and Southwestern Michigan College to announce the 244 colleges and universities that will receive the grants.

“The institutions that serve our highest-need students were not only hit hard by the pandemic, but in many cases have also struggled with chronic underinvestment and funding inequities,” said Cardona in a statement.

The administration will disburse $198 million in Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF) grants, 90 percent of which will go to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), community colleges, rural institutions and institutions serving large populations of low-income students.

“This funding from the American Rescue Plan will help HBCUs, MSIs, community colleges, and other inclusive institutions better support their students, from investing in campus mental health, to providing financial relief, to meeting housing, transportation, and child care needs,” said Cardona. 

The Community College of Philadelphia, Coahoma Community College, and Southwestern Michigan College were chosen for the press conference with administration officials because of their efforts to reduce attendance costs for students.

According to the Department of Education, those institutions have reduced or eliminated tuition, eliminated outstanding balances and taken measures like reducing food costs through food pantries.

A majority of institutions covered under the grants announced Wednesday will be required to distribute roughly half the funds directly to students who require support to pay for basic needs like housing and food.

Coronavirus relief funds played a key role in increasing state higher education budgets even as enrollment and tuition revenue took a dive during the pandemic, according to a report by the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association.

The pandemic dip in enrollment aggravated a decade-long pattern of decreasing enrollment in higher education.

According to an analysis of the report by Inside Higher Ed, per-student revenue increased by 1.1 percent in fiscal 2021 with the influx of federal funds – without accounting for federal funds, total education revenue would have been down by 0.3 percent.

Wednesday’s allocation will be the last under the ARP, which disbursed more than $13 billion to MSIs, more than $10 billion to community colleges, over $2.6 billion to HBCUs and approximately $190 million to Tribal Colleges and Universities.

“When we invest in stronger supports for our students, we help remove barriers to their success so that they can stay on track with their studies, complete their degrees, and ultimately, build rewarding careers,” said Cardona.

Source: TEST FEED1

Inflation rate hit 9.1 percent annually in June

Inflation picked up speed in June after another surge in oil prices drove up costs throughout the economy, according to data released Wednesday by the Labor Department.

The consumer price index (CPI) rose 1.3 percent in June and 9.1 percent over the past 12 months. Economists expected monthly inflation to hit roughly 1 percent in June after prices rose 1 percent in May, and 8.8 percent annually after reaching 8.6 percent that month. Annual inflation reached the highest rate in June since November 1981.

While inflation has been rising steadily for more than a year, the war in Ukraine’s impact on global food, energy and commodity supplies has ramped up pressure on prices since the start of 2022.

Much of the June increase in inflation came from a 11.2 percent rise in gasoline costs and a 1 percent increase in food prices over the past month, according to Labor Department data. A 7.5 monthly increase in energy prices drove nearly half of the total monthly increase in the CPI, the Labor Department said.

Gasoline prices nationwide rose above $5 per gallon on average at the peak of June’s price climb, but fell off substantially in July.

The White House, which has struggled to tame inflation and public concern with it, played down the CPI report as outdated ahead of its Wednesday release.

Biden administration economic officials cited the July decline in gas prices and other signs of supply chain pressure easing throughout the economy as reason for optimism in a Tuesday memo to reporters. They also preemptively blamed the June inflation surge on Russian President Vladimir Putin and his nation’s quest to dominate Ukraine.

Even so, inflation without food and energy prices still rose 0.7 percent in June and 5.9 percent over the past 12 months, according to the Labor Department. The surge in core inflation far exceeded economists expectations and covered a large swath of the economy—including sectors largely unaffected by the war in Ukraine or sanctions imposed on Russia.

Prices for shelter, used cars and trucks, medical care, motor vehicle insurance, and new vehicles rose the most among non-food and energy items in June, the Labor Department reported. Only airline fares and hotel rates fell in June, though airline fares remain up 34.1 percent over the past year.

Updated at 9:10 a.m.

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden approval rating up 3 points from record low: poll

President Biden’s approval rating ticked up 3 percentage points, according to a new poll, after record-low job performance numbers last week 

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found that Biden’s approval ratings rose 39 percent, compared to the 36 percent last week, which Reuters noted was the lowest approval rating he has received since he took office.

A similar poll in May first recorded the 36 percent approval rating for Biden.  

The latest survey also found an increase of those within his party who approved the job he is doing as president. Democrats last week gave Biden a 69 percent approval rating, but that rose to 74 percent this week. 

Still, the poll found that 55 percent of all respondents do not approve of Biden’s job as president, and just 12 percent of Republicans give the president a thumbs-up. 

Biden received a boost last week when the monthly jobs report showed that the country had added a whopping 372,000 jobs during, beating out expectations that about 278,000 jobs would be added.

The president immediately celebrated the news, saying in a statement on Friday that “In the second quarter of this year, we created more jobs than in any quarter under any of my predecessors in the nearly 40 years before the pandemic.” 

“We have more Americans working in the private sector today than any day during Donald Trump’s Presidency — more people than any time in our history,” he added.

Recent polling has also offered some good news to Democrats who are bracing for a challenging environment in the November midterm elections.

A Politico-Morning Consult poll released on Wednesday found that Democrats held a 4-percentage-point lead over Republicans in a generic congressional ballot.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which was completed on Tuesday and conducted over two days, surveyed 1,004 adults, including 365 Republicans and 418 Democrats. The credibility interval is 4 percentage points.

Source: TEST FEED1

White House: Biden to 'minimize contact' on Middle East trip due to COVID variants

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters on Wednesday that President Biden would seek to “minimize” physical contact with other officials while on his trip to the Middle East, citing the rise of new COVID-19 variants.  

“The president takes a range of COVID precautions and additional ones when he travels,” Jean-Pierre told reporters aboard Air Force One. “We’re trying to minimize contact as much as possible where we can.”  

Her comments followed reports that the White House had informed Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s office that Biden would avoid shaking hands during the visit.  

Jean-Pierre denied that the decision to minimize Biden’s contact with other people on the foreign trip represented a change in policy, though the president has in recent days appeared at large gatherings in the U.S. where he has shaken hands with other people.  

When pressed on whether Biden was seeking to avoid being photographed shaking hands with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman while in Saudi Arabia, Jean-Pierre said that the decision was made on recommendation from Biden’s doctor and reiterated he would seek to “minimize contact as much as possible.”  

She noted that BA.4 and BA.5, which are subvariants of the COVID-19 omicron variant, currently make up the majority of cases in the U.S. White House health officials briefed reporters on the plan to combat BA.5 during a briefing on Tuesday, which focuses on access to vaccinations, COVID-19 treatments, masks and testing.  

The White House says it takes extra precautions around Biden to protect him from contracting COVID-19, including testing officials before they come in close contact with the president and requiring mask use in West Wing meetings. Jean-Pierre noted that Biden, who is vaccinated and boosted, tested negative before departing for the trip.  

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan also said that White House officials were looking to increase masking and reduce contact at this point in the pandemic.   

However, Biden has also resumed large events at the White House and on domestic trips. On a trip to Ohio last week, for instance, Biden spoke to a large crown inside a high school and spent about an hour taking selfies and interacting with guests. He attended the congressional picnic at the White House on Tuesday before departing for Israel, though the event was held outside, which health experts recommend to reduce the spread of the virus.

Source: TEST FEED1

Watch live: Biden delivers remarks upon arrival in Tel Aviv

President Biden is scheduled to deliver remarks upon his arrival in Tel Aviv, Israel, on Wednesday.

Biden’s trip to Israel is part of a wider trip to the Middle East, which will include meetings with Saudi Arabia’s leaders and attendance at the GCC+3 Summit.

The remarks will begin at 8:30 a.m. ET.

Watch the live video above.

Source: TEST FEED1

So much for states’ rights: Republicans target out-of-state abortions

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito probably hoped to get credit for softening the blow when, at the stroke of his virtual pen, he issued an opinion depriving every woman in the U.S. of the constitutional right to abortion. He repeatedly insisted in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that the decision overruling the court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade did nothing more than “return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives” in each state, some of which would presumably continue to recognize the right to terminate a pregnancy. Justice Brett Kavanaugh went further in his solo concurrence, maintaining that the “constitutional right to interstate travel” would enable women to “travel to another state to obtain an abortion.”

Red state Republicans have other ideas, as they eagerly plot to circumvent pro-choice legislation in blue or purple states. Modeled after Texas’s “bounty-hunter” law, a bill introduced in Missouri would authorize private citizens to recover $10,000 in damages from those – including friends, family members and doctors – who assist a Missouri resident in obtaining an abortion out of state.

In Texas, the “Freedom Caucus” has threatened employers with “criminal liability” if they proceed with plans to cover employees’ travel expenses for out-of-state abortions, invoking a 1925 statute making it a felony to “furnish the means for procuring an abortion knowing the purpose intended.”

That is only the beginning. As the Washington Post reported, anti-abortion organizations are working on model legislation that would stop women from obtaining out-of-state abortions. “Just because you jump across a state line doesn’t mean your home state doesn’t have jurisdiction,” said Peter Breen, senior counsel for the Thomas More Society. At a conference of the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, Okla. state Rep. Todd Russ  spoke in favor of preventing women from obtaining abortions across state lines. “If somebody was driving the getaway car in a bank robbery,” he cautioned, “it is a very, very serious crime.” Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life, put it more bluntly. “Look, if you travel out of state for an abortion, that abortionist can be held liable.”

The Dobbs decision may not, as Alito rationalized, simply allow “each State to regulate abortion as its citizens wish.” We may instead be headed toward years of interstate battles, in which the reddest states attempt to extend the reach of their extreme anti-abortion statutes beyond their borders, penalizing the exercise of reproductive choice even in states where women’s right to abortion is protected by law.

There is a troubling historical precedent for extending laws into unwilling states. In 1850, the southern states prevailed on the U.S. Congress to enact an enhanced Fugitive Slave Act, requiring the free states to return alleged fugitives to enslavers without the benefit of a jury trial, appeal or other essential features of due process. Worse, the Fugitive Slave Act dragooned free state citizens into assisting slave hunters on pain of fine or imprisonment if they refused or interfered.

In 1858, Abraham Lincoln famously observed that “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” Less well known is the passage that followed. “I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other.” That was an aspiration – Lincoln hoped to put slavery on the “course of ultimate extinction” – but it was also an admonition that slavery’s advocates would continue to “push it forward.”

Because of the notorious Dred Scott decision, Lincoln warned, “We shall lie down pleasantly dreaming that the people of Missouri are on the verge of making their State free; and we shall awake to the reality, instead, that the Supreme Court has made Illinois a slave State.”

Chief Justice Roger Taney’s Dred Scott opinion shamefully held that that the “African race” had “no rights which the white man was bound to respect” because, according to “the histories of the times,” they were “not in the contemplation of the framers of the Constitution.”

The Dobbs opinion uses the same originalist reasoning to conclude that women have no constitutional right to terminate pregnancies because it is not “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” Taney allowed that the individual states could confer rights “upon any class or description of persons,” just as Alito held that abortion rights are now to be determined state-by-state. Most ominously, however, Taney declared that Dred Scott’s status as an enslaved person was governed by the law of his home state, Missouri, even after he traveled to free-state Illinois. Will Missouri women now be subjected to its punitive laws if they dare to obtain abortions in Illinois?

Justice Kavanaugh thought the threat of fugitive abortion laws was real enough to address in a concurring opinion. Perhaps he is right that the constitutional right to travel will invalidate them, although no other justice in the Dobbs majority joined his concurrence. Meanwhile, it would take years of litigation to get a definitive ruling from the Supreme Court, while thousands of women and their helpmates are intimidated by the prospect of vigilante prosecutions.

My Northwestern colleague Andrew Koppelman has written in The Hill (and elsewhere) that the 13th Amendment’s abolition of “involuntary servitude” should also cover forced pregnancy. Until recently, few would have imagined that the law of slavery might apply to the abortion debate. In the post-Dobbs world, we cannot be so sure.

Steven Lubet is the Williams Memorial Professor at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law. He is the author of “Fugitive Justice: Runaways, Rescuers, and Slavery on Trial” and “The ‘Colored Hero’ of Harper’s Ferry: John Anthony Copeland and the War against Slavery.”

Source: TEST FEED1

​​Democrats hold 4-point advantage on generic congressional ballot: survey

Democrats hold a 4-percentage-point lead against Republicans on a generic congressional ballot, according to a new poll that comes amid low approval ratings for President Biden.

The Politico-Morning Consult poll released on Wednesday found that 46 percent of respondents would choose the Democrat when asked which candidate they would most likely vote for if the election for Congress in their district was held today, compared to 42 percent who said the Republican.

A separate 12 percent either said they had no opinion or did not know.

In a New York Times/Siena College poll released this week, 41 percent of respondents said their preference for the outcome of November elections was Democratic control of Congress versus 40 percent who said Republican control. Another 19 percent in that poll said they did not know or refused to answer the question. 

Those results, however, are within the margin of error, essentially meaning that respondents were tied over which party they would like to see control Congress.

The new polling offers a little optimism for Democrats, who are bracing for a challenging November election given rising inflation, the historical precedent that a sitting president’s party generally suffers losses in the midterms and Biden’s lagging approval ratings. 

The Politico-Morning Consult poll found that only 40 percent of respondents approved the job that Biden is doing as president and only 28 percent said he should run for president in 2024. 

The survey of 2,005 adults was conducted between July 8 and July 10. Its margin of error is 2 percentage points. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Pavlich: Americans not where Dems want them to be on abortion

It’s been just over two weeks since the United States Supreme Court ruled in  5-4 decision to return abortion laws to the states by overturning Roe v. Wade and striking down Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The ruling expanded democracy by allowing the people of all 50 states to determine, through their state representatives, what kind of abortion laws should be passed and enforced.

Since the draft opinion leaked in early May, Democrats on Capitol Hill have expressed their outrage. 

“I am angry. I am angry because an extremist United States Supreme Court thinks that they can impose their extremist views on all of the women of this country — and they are wrong. I am angry because we have reached the culmination of what Republicans have been fighting for, angling for, for decades now and we’re going to fight back,” a distraught Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) screamed on the steps of the Supreme Court. 

But Democrats didn’t always have this rabid, pro-abortion agenda. There’s been a radical shift away from “safe, legal and rare” to abortion on demand, at any time, for any reason. 

“I do not view abortion as a choice and a right. I think it’s always a tragedy,” then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) said in 2006. 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who hosted a hearing about post-Roe America this week on Capitol Hill, held a similar view — and advocated as a U.S. congressman that the case be overturned.

“I believe we should end abortion on demand, and at every opportunity I have translated this believe into votes in the House of Representatives. I am opposed to the use of federal funds to pay for elective abortions, and will continue to support amendments to prohibit the funding of elective abortions for federal employees and Medicaid recipients,” Durbin wrote as a U.S. congressman in 1989. “Also, notwithstanding the result in Webster, I continue to believe the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade should be reversed.”

Now that the Supreme Court has done what he once advocated for, Durbin has taken the opposite approach.

“Today’s decision eliminates a federally protected constitutional right that has been the law for nearly half a century. As a result, millions of Americans are waking up in a country where they have fewer rights than their parents and grandparents,” Durbin released in a statement — unironically about children growing up — in response to the Dobbs decision. “I will keep fighting to enshrine into law a woman’s right to make her own reproductive choices. We cannot let our children inherit a nation that is less free and more dangerous than the one their parents grew up in.”

Candidates running for office as Democrats never offer any form of restriction on abortion, even when pressed in media interviews. Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams is the latest example. 

“I think the challenge that we have is that we keep putting this in a political space. This is a medical decision. And the medical choices that should be made should be governed by what is best for that woman. And what is the best suggestion of an advice of their doctor,” Abrams said during a recent interview on “Fox News Sunday” after being asked if she supports abortion up to nine months of pregnancy.

But while Democrats have gone from moderate to the far left on the issue of abortion, Americans today are far closer to the Democrats of two decades ago. 

According to new Harvard-Harris polling taken after the final Dobbs decision in June, the vast majority of Americans — a whopping 72 percent — are in favor of 15-week abortion bans in states across the country. Busting another narrative, women favor this restriction more than men. Only 10 percent of respondents agreed with the current and mainstream Democratic position of no restrictions, including up until the birth of the child. 

And yet, the Biden administration continues to push an extremist, out-of-touch view on the issue — and is using taxpayer funds to do it.

“The Office of Personnel Management issued guidance affirming that paid sick leave can be taken to cover absences for travel to obtain reproductive health care,” the White House released last week. “Health and Human Services will take additional action to protect and expand access to abortion care, including access to medication that the FDA approved as safe and effective over twenty years ago. These actions will build on the steps the Secretary of HHS has already taken at the President’s direction following the decision to ensure that medication abortion is as widely accessible as possible.”

Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, who has no experience in the health care field, is walking right up to the line of legality on the issue. 

Outside of the Supreme Court and the homes of justices, you’ll find the tiny minority of activists Biden is trying to satisfy. They loudly demand abortion be provided with no restrictions and classified as “health care.” The rest of country finds unlimited abortion grotesque and widely supports bans on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. 

Pavlich is the editor for Townhall.com and a Fox News contributor. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Increase support for Ukraine, or NATO may have to fight

President Biden summed up the results of discussions concerning support for Ukraine at the late June NATO summit this way: “We are going to stick with Ukraine, and all of the Alliance is going to stick with Ukraine, as long as it takes, to make sure they are not defeated by Russia.” The U.S. and NATO didn’t seek this situation but we are in it. Nobody wants a war with Russia, but we are in too deep to get out now and must see this to the end.   

Russian propaganda aside, Ukraine did nothing to provoke Russia’s attack. This is nothing less than an attempt by Vladimir Putin, who evidently considers himself the reincarnation of Peter the Great, to recreate the Russian Empire.

With strong U.S. leadership, NATO is rejuvenated and doing a good job of providing Ukraine heavier and more modern weapons to defend against a more powerful Russian army. But after four months of war, the consequences are starting to spill over into the larger global community.  Rising prices at the gas pump, soaring inflation, and food shortages in some regions from a Russian blockade that prevents the export of Ukrainian crops, are causing pundits to suggest it’s time for Ukraine to seek a negotiated settlement — even if Ukraine had to cede a substantial part of the country to the invader.  

Others continue to speculate whether Western unity, which is key to helping Ukraine resist aggression, might begin to fracture. Gas is costing us more and our investments are not doing well, so let’s force the victim of naked aggression to call it quits. But as Biden has stated, it is up to the Ukrainians to decide their fate. 

In reality, Ukraine is fighting our war, too, because if Putin is successful in dominating or absorbing all of Ukraine into Russia — which still appears to be his goal — he then will turn on other former members of the defunct Soviet Union and Russia-dominated Warsaw Pact, some of whom are now members of NATO. Thousands of Ukrainians are dying while fighting for the same freedom and sovereignty that the American colonies sought in 1776. As Benjamin Franklin reportedly said then about the need for unity: “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”  

But, thus far, the U.S. and NATO have been self-deterred when deciding what type of support to provide Ukraine: Artillery yes, but not with ranges long enough to hit targets on Russian territory where Russian logistics bases have sanctuary. Old Russian fighters from former Warsaw Pact members are OK, but no modern fighters because Putin might consider this “escalatory.” But as Biden himself is fond of saying, “Come on.” The Ukrainians deserve our full support to prevent their defeat, no matter what it takes. 

And let’s end the slow dribbling of sanctions on Russia. Sanctions take time to work, and they are starting to have an impact on the Russian economy. But doling out another one or two after each outrageous Russian action just gives Russia time to adapt. If any Russian banks or major corporations that support the Russian military have not been sanctioned yet, let’s do it now.  Sanctions can impact the Russian army’s ability to obtain repair parts and force them to take older and less capable equipment out of storage. So, while Ukraine is getting a steady stream of modern equipment from the West, Russia is resorting to outdated equipment.  

Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster, a former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and superintendent of West Point, advised three American presidents on national security issues. He once responded to a question from a confused cadet who pointed out that most of the situations being discussed had several variables and there always seemed to be two or three sides to the issue. “How do you decide what decision to make?” Goodpaster replied, “I just ask myself what is best for my country.”  

In the Ukraine/Russia conflict, one must determine the one thing that either must or must not happen to establish a guidepost for making hard decisions. It’s a bad situation, to be sure, but here’s the bottom line: The one thing that must not happen is allowing Putin to come away as the perceived winner. If that happens, the rules-based global order that has kept the peace among the major powers since World War II will be mortally wounded. Europe will be destabilized for the indefinite future and NATO likely will be forced to defend one or more of its members. So, we need to do whatever is necessary to ensure that Putin has made a colossal mistake. 

This is a fight the U.S. and Europe cannot allow Ukraine to lose. The best chance to avoid direct NATO conflict with Russia is to stop being self-deterred by measuring every decision against whether or not Putin will consider it to be escalatory, and provide Ukraine with the capabilities it needs to defeat this Russian invasion. Putin can rattle his nuclear saber but no matter how bad his situation becomes at the conventional level, it won’t be improved by using nuclear weapons. 

Ultimately, NATO may have to fight — if not now to save Ukraine, then later to save itself.

John Fairlamb, Ph.D., is a retired Army colonel who served for 45 years as a commissioned officer and Department of the Army civilian in various Joint Service positions formulating and implementing national security strategies and policies. His doctorate is in comparative defense policy analysis.

Source: TEST FEED1