ReportWire

Tag: Government programs

  • Breaking impasse, Tennessee lawmakers adjourn tumultuous session spurred by school shooting

    Breaking impasse, Tennessee lawmakers adjourn tumultuous session spurred by school shooting

    [ad_1]

    NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Tennessee lawmakers on Tuesday abruptly ended a special session initially touted to improve public safety in the wake of a deadly elementary school shooting, but it quickly unraveled into chaos over the past week as the GOP-dominant Statehouse refused to take up gun control measures and instead spent most of the time ensnared in political infighting.

    In a particularly heated moment, Republican House Speaker Cameron Sexton and Democratic Rep. Justin Pearson appeared to have a brief physical interaction where both accused each other of shoving moments after the House adjourned.

    Ultimately, lawmakers could only agree to pass four bills, which in part encourage but don’t require using safe gun storage devices; require an annual human trafficking report; add the governor’s existing order on background checks into state law; and increase funding for mental health and K-12 and higher education safety initiatives. Only a few gun control measures fell within the session’s narrow parameters, and those were rejected without debate.

    Tuesday’s dustup was captured on video by reporters, showing Sexton departing as Pearson approached the speaker’s dais holding a sign calling for gun control. The two made contact as Sexton stepped to avoid a photographer; meanwhile, other legislative members, staffers and security guards rushed to the front of the floor.

    Yelling erupted from both lawmakers on the floor and protesters in the gallery above as House Republicans quickly left the chamber. Democratic Rep. Justin Jones, who had been holding a sign on the other side of Pearson as Sexton walked by, later grabbed the speaker’s gavel and banged it, yelling, “This house is out of order.”

    Pearson and Jones were expelled by the Republican supermajority earlier this year. Both were reappointed, then reelected, and remain critical of Sexton’s leadership.

    Sexton said a security guard put his hand on his back and knocked Sexton forward, prompting the speaker to move to step past the photographer. Then, Sexton said Pearson “comes in and pops me,” bumping his shoulder. Sexton said he did not throw his shoulder into Pearson.

    Pearson told reporters that it was an “act of aggression, an act of violence against me” by Sexton, saying he was not being aggressive with Sexton or pushing him.

    Republican leaders countered that Pearson and others took attention away from the special session’s purpose and lacked maturity.

    Tuesday’s tense standoff marked the latest turn in a session Republican Gov. Bill Lee initially organized in response to a shooter opening fire at The Covenant School in Nashville, killing three young children and three adults. Lee had hoped to convince fellow Republicans to pass legislation to limit dangerous people from accessing guns, but the proposal never gained enough support. Some Republicans said they didn’t think a session was even needed and tried to adjourn from the outset last Monday.

    Lee attempted to tout the session as a positive step for hesitant lawmakers.

    “We made progress in public safety, and we elevated a conversation about public safety that will continue into the future,” Lee told reporters. “And that’s important.”

    As the special session neared, Lee largely stopped mentioning his “extreme risk protection order” proposal and instead stressed that lawmakers would work to improve public safety and mental health services.

    Yet in little more than a week, lawmakers advanced just a few bills and struggled to break through an icy stalemate between the House and Senate. Even as Lee worked with warring legislative leaders, both sides took turns blaming others for the inaction.

    Further adding to public outrage: Republican leaders limited public access to the Capitol building and increased the presence of law enforcement.

    In the House, Republicans banned the public from holding signs during floor and committee proceedings, but a Tennessee judge has since blocked that rule from being implemented. In one hearing, a House subcommittee chairman had troopers kick the public out of the room after deeming the crowd too unruly. That included grieving parents closely connected to the school shooting, who cried after the decision.

    Sexton also silenced Rep. Jones for the remainder of Monday’s session after ruling his comments were out of order under new stricter decorum rules.

    Lawmakers wound up agreeing on minor changes to existing state programs. These add more money to advertise a state program offering free gun safes and codify the governor’s executive order that set a 72-hour period for reporting new criminal activity to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.

    Lawmakers also approved $30 million for higher education safety grants for public and private colleges and universities; $50 million for grants to community mental health agencies; $12.1 million for retention bonuses for behavioral health state employees; $10 million more for K-12 school safety grants; $4 million for the mental health safety net; and $3 million for behavioral health scholarships.

    Republican Senate Speaker Randy McNally told reporters the session was a success. But he said he believed more work would be done when lawmakers return for their regular session in January.

    House Majority Leader William Lamberth conceded that public safety had only improved a “little bit but not enough” because of the session, pointing to the wide variety of bills passed by the House, but not the Senate.

    “There’s much more work that we have to do,” he told reporters.

    After lawmakers adjourned, Pearson and other Democratic lawmakers consoled a sobbing Sarah Shoop Neumann, a member of a group of Covenant School parents who had pushed for gun control and other changes for months. Pearson also led a prayer with Neumann and other Covenant parents.

    “It’s difficult to find the words to say for such a time as this, that we held a special session following the extraordinary tragedy of a mass shooting that took place at The Covenant School, and yet we took no meaningful action,” said Neumann, whose son attends the Nashville school and survived the March shooting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • See which drugs President Biden is targeting first for Medicare price-lowering talks

    See which drugs President Biden is targeting first for Medicare price-lowering talks

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Biden administration is targeting the blood thinner Eliquis, diabetes treatment Jardiance and eight other medications for Medicare’s first-ever drug price negotiations as it seeks to lower medical costs for Americans.

    The administration on Tuesday released a list of the 10 drugs for which prices will be negotiated directly with the manufacturer. The move is expected to cut costs for many patients, but it faces litigation from drugmakers and heavy criticism from Republican lawmakers, and it will be years before consumers notice any savings.

    The effort is a centerpiece of President Joe Biden’s reelection pitch as the Democrat seeks to show Americans he’s deserving of a second term because of the work he’s doing to lower costs for them while the country is struggling with inflation. But like the drug negotiations, many of Biden’s biggest policy moves take time to roll out, and his challenge is to persuade the public to be patient.

    “For many Americans, the cost of one drug is the difference between life and death, dignity and dependence, hope and fear,” Biden said in a statement. “That is why we will continue the fight to lower healthcare costs — and we will not stop until we finish the job.”

    Biden plans to deliver a speech on health care costs from the White House later Tuesday. He’ll be joined by Vice President Kamala Harris.

    The drugs on the list announced Tuesday accounted for more than $50 billion in Medicare prescription drug costs between June 1, 2022, and May 31, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS.

    That includes more than $16 billion on Eliquis. The drug from Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb treats blood clots in the legs and lungs and reduces the risk of stroke in people with an irregular heartbeat called atrial fibrillation.

    Senior administration officials said Tuesday that the 10 drugs selected for negotiation are among the most costly to the Medicare program. They said 8.2 million people with Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage take them.

    The diabetes treatments Jardiance from Eli Lilly and Co. and Boehringer Ingelheim and Januvia from Merck made the list. It also included Amgen’s autoimmune disease treatment Enbrel and Entresto from Novartis, which is used to treat heart failure.

    Other drugs on the list include AstraZeneca’s diabetes and heart failure treatment Farxiga and three drugs from Johnson & Johnson: the blood thinner Xarelto, the blood cancer treatment Imbruvica and it’s biggest seller, Stelara, an IV treatment for psoriasis and other inflammatory disorders.

    The list also includes several versions of Novo Nordisk’s Fiasp, a fast-acting insulin taken around meals.

    The Inflation Reduction Act already caps Medicare patient out-of-pocket costs for insulin at $35 a month. An administration official said Tuesday that upper limit will hold but there could be further changes in those costs.

    The announcement Tuesday is another significant step toward taming drug pricing under the Inflation Reduction Act, which was signed by Biden last year. The law also calls for a $2,000 annual cap on how much people with Medicare have to pay out of pocket for drugs starting in 2025.

    For drugs on the list released Tuesday, the government aims to negotiate the lowest maximum fair price. That could help some patients who have coverage but still face big bills like coinsurance payments when they get a prescription.

    About 9% of Medicare beneficiaries age 65 and older said in 2021 that they did not fill a prescription or skipped a drug dose due to cost, according to research by the Commonwealth Fund, which studies health care issues.

    Currently, pharmacy benefit managers that run Medicare prescription plans negotiate rebates off a drug’s price. Those rebates sometimes help reduce premiums customers pay for coverage. But they may not directly change what a patient spends at the pharmacy counter.

    The new drug price negotiations aim “to basically make drugs more affordable while also still allowing for profits to be made,” said Gretchen Jacobson, who researches Medicare issues at Commonwealth.

    The federal government will benefit most from any lowered drug prices, noted Larry Levitt, an executive vice president for health policy at KFF, another non-profit that studies health care. But he said that if Medicare spends less on prescription drugs, then premiums for everyone with its drug coverage also should fall.

    Drug companies that refuse to be a part of the new negotiation process will be heavily taxed.

    The pharmaceutical industry has been gearing up for months to fight these rules. The lobbying group Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America said Tuesday that the drug list announcement stemmed from “a rushed process focused on short-term political gain rather than what is best for patients.”

    “Many of the medicines selected for price setting already have significant rebates and discounts due to the robust private market negotiation that occurs in the Part D program today,” PhRMA CEO Stephen J. Ubl said in a statement.

    PhRMA representatives also have said pharmacy benefit managers can still restrict access to drugs with negotiated prices by moving the drugs to a tier of their formulary — a list of covered drugs — that would require higher out-of-pocket payments. Pharmacy benefit managers also could require patients to try other drugs first or seek approval before a prescription can be covered.

    PhRMA and several drugmakers have filed lawsuits over the administration’s plan.

    Republican lawmakers also have blasted the Biden administration, saying companies might pull back on introducing new drugs that could be subjected to future haggling. They’ve also questioned whether the government knows enough to suggest prices for drugs.

    CMS plans to meet this fall with drugmakers that have a drug on its list, and government officials say they also plan to hold patient-focused listening sessions. By February 2024, the government will make its first offer on a maximum fair price and then give drugmakers time to respond.

    Any negotiated prices won’t take hold until 2026.

    CMS aims to add 15 more drugs to its negotiation list for 2027 and another 15 for 2028. It then plans to add up to 20 more for each year after that.

    ___

    Murphy reported from Indianapolis.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Conservatives are on a mission to dismantle the US government and replace it with Trump’s vision

    Conservatives are on a mission to dismantle the US government and replace it with Trump’s vision

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — With more than a year to go before the 2024 election, a constellation of conservative organizations is preparing for a possible second White House term for Donald Trump, recruiting thousands of Americans to come to Washington on a mission to dismantle the federal government and replace it with a vision closer to his own.

    Led by the long-established Heritage Foundation think tank and fueled by former Trump administration officials, the far-reaching effort is essentially a government-in-waiting for the former president’s second term — or any candidate who aligns with their ideals and can defeat President Joe Biden in 2024.

    With a nearly 1,000-page “Project 2025” handbook and an “army” of Americans, the idea is to have the civic infrastructure in place on Day One to commandeer, reshape and do away with what Republicans deride as the “deep state” bureaucracy, in part by firing as many as 50,000 federal workers.

    “We need to flood the zone with conservatives,” said Paul Dans, director of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project and a former Trump administration official who speaks with historical flourish about the undertaking.

    “This is a clarion call to come to Washington,” he said. “People need to lay down their tools, and step aside from their professional life and say, ‘This is my lifetime moment to serve.’”

    The unprecedented effort is being orchestrated with dozens of right-flank organizations, many new to Washington, and represents a changed approach from conservatives, who traditionally have sought to limit the federal government by cutting federal taxes and slashing federal spending.

    Instead, Trump-era conservatives want to gut the “administrative state” from within, by ousting federal employees they believe are standing in the way of the president’s agenda and replacing them with like-minded officials more eager to fulfill a new executive’s approach to governing.

    The goal is to avoid the pitfalls of Trump’s first years in office, when the Republican president’s team was ill-prepared, his Cabinet nominees had trouble winning Senate confirmation and policies were met with resistance — by lawmakers, government workers and even Trump’s own appointees who refused to bend or break protocol, or in some cases violate laws, to achieve his goals.

    While many of the Project 2025 proposals are inspired by Trump, they are being echoed by GOP rivals Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramaswamy and are gaining prominence among other Republicans.

    And if Trump wins a second term, the work from the Heritage coalition ensures the president will have the personnel to carry forward his unfinished White House business.

    “The president Day One will be a wrecking ball for the administrative state,” said Russ Vought, a former Trump administration official involved in the effort who is now president at the conservative Center for Renewing America.

    Much of the new president’s agenda would be accomplished by reinstating what’s called Schedule F — a Trump-era executive order that would reclassify tens of thousands of the 2 million federal employees as essentially at-will workers who could more easily be fired.

    Biden had rescinded the executive order upon taking office in 2021, but Trump — and other presidential hopefuls — now vow to reinstate it.

    “It frightens me,” said Mary Guy, a professor of public administration at the University of Colorado, who warns the idea would bring a return to a political spoils system.

    Experts argue Schedule F would create chaos in the civil service, which was overhauled during President Jimmy Carter’s administration in an attempt to ensure a professional workforce and end political bias dating from 19th century patronage.

    As it now stands, just 4,000 members of the federal workforce are considered political appointees who typically change with each administration. But Schedule F could put tens of thousands of career professional jobs at risk.

    “We have a democracy that is at risk of suicide. Schedule F is just one more bullet in the gun,” Guy said.

    The ideas contained in Heritage’s coffee table-ready book are both ambitious and parochial, a mix of longstanding conservative policies and stark, head-turning proposals that gained prominence in the Trump era.

    There’s a “top to bottom overhaul” of the Department of Justice, particularly curbing its independence and ending FBI efforts to combat the spread of misinformation. It calls for stepped-up prosecution of anyone providing or distributing abortion pills by mail.

    There are proposals to have the Pentagon “abolish” its recent diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, what the project calls the “woke” agenda, and reinstate service members discharged for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine.

    Chapter by chapter, the pages offer a how-to manual for the next president, similar to one Heritage produced 50 years ago, ahead of the Ronald Reagan administration. Authored by some of today’s most prominent thinkers in the conservative movement, it’s often sprinkled with apocalyptic language.

    A chapter written by Trump’s former acting deputy secretary of Homeland Security calls for bolstering the number of political appointees, and redeploying office personnel with law enforcement ability into the field “to maximize law enforcement capacity.”

    At the White House, the book suggests the new administration should “reexamine” the tradition of providing work space for the press corps and ensure the White House counsel is “deeply committed” to the president’s agenda.

    Conservatives have long held a grim view of federal government offices, complaining they are stacked with liberals intent on halting Republican agendas.

    But Doreen Greenwald, national president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said most federal workers live in the states and are your neighbors, family and friends. “Federal employees are not the enemy,” she said.

    While presidents typically rely on Congress to put policies into place, the Heritage project leans into what legal scholars refer to as a unitary view of executive power that suggests the president has broad authority to act alone.

    To push past senators who try to block presidential Cabinet nominees, Project 2025 proposes installing top allies in acting administrative roles, as was done during the Trump administration to bypass the Senate confirmation process.

    John McEntee, another former Trump official advising the effort, said the next administration can “play hardball a little more than we did with Congress.”

    In fact, Congress would see its role diminished — for example, with a proposal to eliminate congressional notification on certain foreign arms sales.

    Philip Wallach, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who studies the separation of powers and was not part of the Heritage project, said there’s a certain amount of “fantasizing” about the president’s capabilities.

    “Some of these visions, they do start to just bleed into some kind of authoritarian fantasies where the president won the election, so he’s in charge, so everyone has to do what he says — and that’s just not the system the government we live under,” he said.

    At the Heritage office, Dans has a faded photo on his wall of an earlier era in Washington, with the White House situated almost alone in the city, dirt streets in all directions.

    It’s an image of what conservatives have long desired, a smaller federal government.

    The Heritage coalition is taking its recruitment efforts on the road, crisscrossing America to fill the federal jobs. They staffed the Iowa State Fair this month and signed up hundreds of people, and they’re building out a database of potential employees, inviting them to be trained in government operations.

    “It’s counterintuitive,” Dans acknowledged — the idea of joining government to shrink it — but he said that’s the lesson learned from the Trump days about what’s needed to “regain control.”

    ___

    Follow the AP’s coverage of the 2024 election at https://apnews.com/hub/election-2024.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden targets diabetes drug Jardiance, blood thinner Eliquis and 8 others for Medicare price talks

    Biden targets diabetes drug Jardiance, blood thinner Eliquis and 8 others for Medicare price talks

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The blood thinner Eliquis and popular diabetes treatments including Jardiance are among the first drugs that will be targeted for price negotiations in an effort to cut Medicare costs.

    President Joe Biden’s administration on Tuesday released a list of 10 drugs for which the federal government will take a first-ever step: negotiating drug prices directly with the manufacturer.

    The move is expected to cut costs for some patients but faces litigation from the drugmakers and heavy criticism from Republican lawmakers. It’s also a centerpiece of the Democratic president’s reelection pitch as he seeks a second term in office by touting his work to lower costs for Americans at a time when the country has struggled with inflation.

    The diabetes treatments Jardiance from Eli Lilly and Co. and Merck’s Januvia made the list, along with Amgen’s autoimmune disease treatment Enbrel. Other drugs include Entresto from Novartis, which is used to treat heart failure.

    “For many Americans, the cost of one drug is the difference between life and death, dignity and dependence, hope and fear,” Biden said in a statement. “That is why we will continue the fight to lower healthcare costs — and we will not stop until we finish the job.”

    Biden plans to deliver a speech on health care costs from the White House later Tuesday. He’ll be joined by Vice President Kamala Harris.

    The drugs on the list announced Tuesday accounted for more than $50 billion in Medicare prescription drug costs between June 1, 2022, and May 31, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS.

    Medicare spent about $10 billion in 2020 on Eliquis, according to AARP research. The drug treats blood clots in the legs and lungs and reduces the risk of stroke in people with an irregular heartbeat called atrial fibrillation.

    The announcement is a significant step under the Inflation Reduction Act, which was signed by Biden last year. The law requires the federal government for the first time to start negotiating directly with companies about the prices they charge for some of Medicare’s most expensive drugs.

    More than 52 million people who either are 65 or older or have certain severe disabilities or illnesses get prescription drug coverage through Medicare’s Part D program, according to CMS.

    About 9% of Medicare beneficiaries age 65 and older said in 2021 that they did not fill a prescription or skipped a drug dose due to cost, according to research by the Commonwealth Fund, which studies health care issues.

    The agency aims to negotiate the lowest maximum fair price for drugs on the list released Tuesday. That could help some patients who have coverage but still face big bills like high deductible payments when they get a prescription.

    Currently, pharmacy benefit managers that run Medicare prescription plans negotiate rebates off a drug’s price. Those rebates sometimes help reduce premiums customers pay for coverage. But they may not change what a patient spends at the pharmacy counter.

    The new drug price negotiations aim “to basically make drugs more affordable while also still allowing for profits to be made,” said Gretchen Jacobson, who researches Medicare issues at Commonwealth.

    Drug companies that refuse to be a part of the new negotiation process will be heavily taxed.

    The pharmaceutical industry has been gearing up for months to fight these rules. Already, the plan faces several lawsuits, including complaints filed by drugmakers Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb and a key lobbying group, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA.

    PhRMA said in a federal court complaint filed earlier this year that the act forces drugmakers to agree to a “government-dictated price” under the threat of a heavy tax and gives too much price-setting authority to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    PhRMA representatives also have said pharmacy benefit managers can still restrict access to drugs with negotiated prices by moving the drugs to a tier of their formulary — a list of covered drugs — that would require higher out-of-pocket payments. Pharmacy benefit managers also could require patients to try other drugs first or seek approval before a prescription can be covered.

    Republican lawmakers also have blasted the Biden administration for its plan, saying companies might pull back on introducing new drugs that could be subjected to future haggling. They’ve also questioned whether the government knows enough to suggest prices for drugs.

    CMS will start its negotiations on drugs for which it spends the most money. The drugs also must be ones that don’t have generic competitors and are approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

    CMS plans to meet this fall with drugmakers that have a drug on its list, and government officials say they also plan to hold patient-focused listening sessions. By February 2024, the government will make its first offer on a maximum fair price and then give drugmakers time to respond.

    Any negotiated prices won’t take hold until 2026. More drugs could be added to the program in the coming years.

    ___

    Murphy reported from Indianapolis.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Broadband subsidy program that millions use will expire next year if Congress doesn’t act

    Broadband subsidy program that millions use will expire next year if Congress doesn’t act

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — One of the features that President Joe Biden cited in his plan to bring internet to every home and business in the United States by 2030 was affordability. But an important federal program established to keep broadband costs down for low-income households is set to expire next year.

    The Affordable Connectivity Program has not reached everyone who is eligible. According to an Associated Press analysis of enrollment and census data, less than than 40% of eligible households have utilized the program, which provides monthly subsidies of $30, and in some cases, up to $75, to help pay for internet connections.

    Still, the program has been a lifeline for Kimberlyn Barton-Reyes, who is paraplegic and visually impaired. Barton-Reyes did not have to wait for an in-person appointment when a seizure-alert system disconnected from her electric wheelchair in November. The company that services her chair assessed the problem remotely, ordered the parts she needed and got the chair fixed quickly.

    “Most people are like ‘Internet is not a basic need,’” said Barton-Reyes, who lives in Austin, Texas. “It absolutely is for me.”

    Barton-Reyes relies on Social Security disability insurance for her income while she takes part in a vocational program for adults who are newly blind. She is able to pay for her internet connection with an assist from the Affordable Connectivity Program. Barton-Reyes, who said an autoimmune issue damaged her vision, is working to get other eligible Austin residents signed up, too.

    But the program’s future is uncertain. Its primary source of funding, a $14.2 billion allocation, is projected to run out by the middle of 2024. That could end access to affordable broadband for millions of people and hinder the Biden administration’s push to bring connectivity to the people who need it most.

    “ACP is the best tool we’ve ever had to help people afford broadband,“ said Drew Garner, broadband policy advisor for Common Sense Media.

    Advocacy groups are pushing Congress to extend the program.

    “It’s a successful program in many ways, but with a lot of untapped potential because there’s still a long way to go to really make this universal to all people that are eligible for ACP,” said Hernan Galperin, a University of Southern California professor who has researched the program.

    Enrollment in approximately 30 states lags behind the national average. Louisiana and Ohio have enrolled more than half of all eligible households.

    “There’s probably nowhere in the state, no matter how populated the location is, where someone is not receiving a benefit from the ACP program,” said Veneeth Iyengar, executive director of Louisiana’s broadband program.

    Ryan Collins, the broadband program manager of the Buckeye Hills Regional Council in Appalachian Ohio, said the ACP provides crucial assistance.

    “If it were a matter of affording groceries or affording the internet, they chose groceries and so they would cancel their subscription,” Collins said.

    The program emerged from a pandemic-era benefit and began with some 9 million households nationally. Participation has increased every month since, and today it serves approximately 20.4 million households.

    “If the funding drops, all of that momentum will be lost,” said Khotan Harmon, senior program officer for the city of Austin.

    Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the program has already proved itself.

    “The Affordable Connectivity Program, the popularity of it, I think, is the kind of thing that will create the political-level support necessary for Congress to see that this is, at the end of the day, an appropriate utilization of resources,” Vilsack said on a recent media call announcing new grants to bolster rural broadband.

    Advocates say letting the program expire could damage the already tenuous relationship between consumers and internet service providers just as the nation embarks on an ambitious plan to expand access nationally.

    “That will have longer-term breakdowns in our effort to close the digital divide if people are not believing the programs that we’re offering them will be around for a while,” said Joe Kane, director of broadband policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.

    Biden announced plans in June to distribute $42.5 billion to ensure broadband access for every U.S. home and business. But internet service providers that bid on state contracts will want to be sure they have customers.

    “So not only will the ACP ending make it harder for individuals to afford service, it will make it less likely that ISPs build them the service to begin with,” Garner said.

    Lawmakers from both parties, as well as the White House, support the program. Affordable internet was listed as a priority in an Aug. 10 letter from Biden’s budget director, Shalanda Young, to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

    Participation also straddles the political divide.

    As of the end of June, approximately 9.3 million households in Democratic districts and about 9.1 million households in Republican districts receive the monthly benefit, according to AP’s analysis.

    Before receiving ACP benefits, New Hampshire-based mother Joanne Soares and her three school-age children had to use her phone to access the internet. Soares, who is deaf, said the home internet connection she can now afford lets her reliably access a video-based interpreting service needed to communicate over the phone.

    “I need to have an internet to be able to connect with others,” Soares said. “Without the internet, how am I supposed to make any calls?”

    ——

    Harjai is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Broadband subsidy program that millions use will expire next year if Congress doesn’t act

    Broadband subsidy program that millions use will expire next year if Congress doesn’t act

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — One of the features that President Joe Biden cited in his plan to bring internet to every home and business in the United States by 2030 was affordability. But an important federal program established to keep broadband costs down for low-income households is set to expire next year.

    The Affordable Connectivity Program has not reached everyone who is eligible. According to an Associated Press analysis of enrollment and census data, less than than 40% of eligible households have utilized the program, which provides monthly subsidies of $30, and in some cases, up to $75, to help pay for internet connections.

    Still, the program has been a lifeline for Kimberlyn Barton-Reyes, who is paraplegic and visually impaired. Barton-Reyes did not have to wait for an in-person appointment when a seizure-alert system disconnected from her electric wheelchair in November. The company that services her chair assessed the problem remotely, ordered the parts she needed and got the chair fixed quickly.

    “Most people are like ‘Internet is not a basic need,’” said Barton-Reyes, who lives in Austin, Texas. “It absolutely is for me.”

    Barton-Reyes relies on Social Security disability insurance for her income while she takes part in a vocational program for adults who are newly blind. She is able to pay for her internet connection with an assist from the Affordable Connectivity Program. Barton-Reyes, who said an autoimmune issue damaged her vision, is working to get other eligible Austin residents signed up, too.

    But the program’s future is uncertain. Its primary source of funding, a $14.2 billion allocation, is projected to run out by the middle of 2024. That could end access to affordable broadband for millions of people and hinder the Biden administration’s push to bring connectivity to the people who need it most.

    “ACP is the best tool we’ve ever had to help people afford broadband,“ said Drew Garner, broadband policy advisor for Common Sense Media.

    Advocacy groups are pushing Congress to extend the program.

    “It’s a successful program in many ways, but with a lot of untapped potential because there’s still a long way to go to really make this universal to all people that are eligible for ACP,” said Hernan Galperin, a University of Southern California professor who has researched the program.

    Enrollment in approximately 30 states lags behind the national average. Louisiana and Ohio have enrolled more than half of all eligible households.

    “There’s probably nowhere in the state, no matter how populated the location is, where someone is not receiving a benefit from the ACP program,” said Veneeth Iyengar, executive director of Louisiana’s broadband program.

    Ryan Collins, the broadband program manager of the Buckeye Hills Regional Council in Appalachian Ohio, said the ACP provides crucial assistance.

    “If it were a matter of affording groceries or affording the internet, they chose groceries and so they would cancel their subscription,” Collins said.

    The program emerged from a pandemic-era benefit and began with some 9 million households nationally. Participation has increased every month since, and today it serves approximately 20.4 million households.

    “If the funding drops, all of that momentum will be lost,” said Khotan Harmon, senior program officer for the city of Austin.

    Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the program has already proved itself.

    “The Affordable Connectivity Program, the popularity of it, I think, is the kind of thing that will create the political-level support necessary for Congress to see that this is, at the end of the day, an appropriate utilization of resources,” Vilsack said on a recent media call announcing new grants to bolster rural broadband.

    Advocates say letting the program expire could damage the already tenuous relationship between consumers and internet service providers just as the nation embarks on an ambitious plan to expand access nationally.

    “That will have longer-term breakdowns in our effort to close the digital divide if people are not believing the programs that we’re offering them will be around for a while,” said Joe Kane, director of broadband policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.

    Biden announced plans in June to distribute $42.5 billion to ensure broadband access for every U.S. home and business. But internet service providers that bid on state contracts will want to be sure they have customers.

    “So not only will the ACP ending make it harder for individuals to afford service, it will make it less likely that ISPs build them the service to begin with,” Garner said.

    Lawmakers from both parties, as well as the White House, support the program. Affordable internet was listed as a priority in an Aug. 10 letter from Biden’s budget director, Shalanda Young, to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

    Participation also straddles the political divide.

    As of the end of June, approximately 9.3 million households in Democratic districts and about 9.1 million households in Republican districts receive the monthly benefit, according to AP’s analysis.

    Before receiving ACP benefits, New Hampshire-based mother Joanne Soares and her three school-age children had to use her phone to access the internet. Soares, who is deaf, said the home internet connection she can now afford lets her reliably access a video-based interpreting service needed to communicate over the phone.

    “I need to have an internet to be able to connect with others,” Soares said. “Without the internet, how am I supposed to make any calls?”

    ——

    Harjai is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Broadband subsidy program that millions use will expire next year if Congress doesn’t act

    Broadband subsidy program that millions use will expire next year if Congress doesn’t act

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — One of the features that President Joe Biden cited in his plan to bring internet to every home and business in the United States by 2030 was affordability. But an important federal program established to keep broadband costs down for low-income households is set to expire next year.

    The Affordable Connectivity Program has not reached everyone who is eligible. According to an Associated Press analysis of enrollment and census data, less than than 40% of eligible households have utilized the program, which provides monthly subsidies of $30, and in some cases, up to $75, to help pay for internet connections.

    Still, the program has been a lifeline for Kimberlyn Barton-Reyes, who is paraplegic and visually impaired. Barton-Reyes did not have to wait for an in-person appointment when a seizure-alert system disconnected from her electric wheelchair in November. The company that services her chair assessed the problem remotely, ordered the parts she needed and got the chair fixed quickly.

    “Most people are like ‘Internet is not a basic need,’” said Barton-Reyes, who lives in Austin, Texas. “It absolutely is for me.”

    Barton-Reyes relies on Social Security disability insurance for her income while she takes part in a vocational program for adults who are newly blind. She is able to pay for her internet connection with an assist from the Affordable Connectivity Program. Barton-Reyes, who said an autoimmune issue damaged her vision, is working to get other eligible Austin residents signed up, too.

    But the program’s future is uncertain. Its primary source of funding, a $14.2 billion allocation, is projected to run out by the middle of 2024. That could end access to affordable broadband for millions of people and hinder the Biden administration’s push to bring connectivity to the people who need it most.

    “ACP is the best tool we’ve ever had to help people afford broadband,“ said Drew Garner, broadband policy advisor for Common Sense Media.

    Advocacy groups are pushing Congress to extend the program.

    “It’s a successful program in many ways, but with a lot of untapped potential because there’s still a long way to go to really make this universal to all people that are eligible for ACP,” said Hernan Galperin, a University of Southern California professor who has researched the program.

    Enrollment in approximately 30 states lags behind the national average. Louisiana and Ohio have enrolled more than half of all eligible households.

    “There’s probably nowhere in the state, no matter how populated the location is, where someone is not receiving a benefit from the ACP program,” said Veneeth Iyengar, executive director of Louisiana’s broadband program.

    Ryan Collins, the broadband program manager of the Buckeye Hills Regional Council in Appalachian Ohio, said the ACP provides crucial assistance.

    “If it were a matter of affording groceries or affording the internet, they chose groceries and so they would cancel their subscription,” Collins said.

    The program emerged from a pandemic-era benefit and began with some 9 million households nationally. Participation has increased every month since, and today it serves approximately 20.4 million households.

    “If the funding drops, all of that momentum will be lost,” said Khotan Harmon, senior program officer for the city of Austin.

    Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the program has already proved itself.

    “The Affordable Connectivity Program, the popularity of it, I think, is the kind of thing that will create the political-level support necessary for Congress to see that this is, at the end of the day, an appropriate utilization of resources,” Vilsack said on a recent media call announcing new grants to bolster rural broadband.

    Advocates say letting the program expire could damage the already tenuous relationship between consumers and internet service providers just as the nation embarks on an ambitious plan to expand access nationally.

    “That will have longer-term breakdowns in our effort to close the digital divide if people are not believing the programs that we’re offering them will be around for a while,” said Joe Kane, director of broadband policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.

    Biden announced plans in June to distribute $42.5 billion to ensure broadband access for every U.S. home and business. But internet service providers that bid on state contracts will want to be sure they have customers.

    “So not only will the ACP ending make it harder for individuals to afford service, it will make it less likely that ISPs build them the service to begin with,” Garner said.

    Lawmakers from both parties, as well as the White House, support the program. Affordable internet was listed as a priority in an Aug. 10 letter from Biden’s budget director, Shalanda Young, to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

    Participation also straddles the political divide.

    As of the end of June, approximately 9.3 million households in Democratic districts and about 9.1 million households in Republican districts receive the monthly benefit, according to AP’s analysis.

    Before receiving ACP benefits, New Hampshire-based mother Joanne Soares and her three school-age children had to use her phone to access the internet. Soares, who is deaf, said the home internet connection she can now afford lets her reliably access a video-based interpreting service needed to communicate over the phone.

    “I need to have an internet to be able to connect with others,” Soares said. “Without the internet, how am I supposed to make any calls?”

    ——

    Harjai is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

    ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

    [ad_1]

    An ambitious but failed attempt by Russia to return to the moon after nearly half a century has exposed the massive challenges faced by Moscow’s once-proud space program.

    The destruction of the robotic Luna-25 probe, which crashed onto the surface of the moon over the weekend, reflects the endemic problems that have dogged the Russian space industry since the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. Those include the loss of key technologies in the post-Soviet industrial meltdown, the bruising impact of recent Western sanctions, a huge brain drain and widespread corruption.

    Yuri Borisov, the head of the state-controlled space corporation Roscosmos, attributed the failure to the lack of expertise due to the long break in lunar research that followed the last Soviet mission to the moon in 1976.

    “The priceless experience that our predecessors earned in the 1960-70s was effectively lost,” Borisov said. “The link between generations has been cut.”

    While the USSR lost the race to the United States to land humans on the moon, the Soviet lunar program had more than a dozen successful pioneering robotic missions, some of which featured lunar rovers and brought soil samples back to Earth. The proud Soviet space history includes launching the first satellite in space in 1957 and the first human in space in 1961.

    Mikhail Marov, a 90-year-old scientist who played a prominent role in planning the earlier lunar missions and worked on the Luna-25 project, was hospitalized after its failure.

    “It was very hard. It’s the work of all my life,” Marov said in remarks carried by Russian media. “For me, it was the last chance to see the revival of our lunar program.”

    Borisov said the spacecraft’s thruster fired for 127 seconds instead of the planned 84 seconds, causing it to crash, and a government commission will investigate the glitch.

    Natan Eismont, a leading researcher with the Moscow-based Institute for Space Research, told the state RIA Novosti agency said that signs of equipment problems had appeared even before the crash, but space officials still gave the go for landing.

    Vitaly Egorov, a popular Russian space blogger, noted that Roscosmos may have neglected the warnings in a rush to be the first to land on the lunar south pole ahead of an Indian spacecraft that has been orbiting the moon ahead of a planned landing.

    “It looks like things weren’t going according to plan, but they decided not to change the schedule to prevent the Indians from coming first,” he said.

    The lunar south pole is of particular interest to scientists, who believe the permanently shadowed polar craters may contain frozen water in the rocks that future explorers could transform into air and rocket fuel.

    A major factor exacerbating Russia’s space woes that could have played a role in the Luna-25 failure has been the Western sanctions on Moscow over its war in Ukraine. Those penalties have blocked imports of microchips and other key Western components and restricted scientific exchanges.

    While working on the Luna-25 project, Roscosmos partnered with the European Space Agency that was to provide a camera to facilitate the landing. The ESA halted the partnership soon after the February 2022 invasion and requested Roscosmos to remove its camera from the spacecraft.

    Years earlier, Russia hoped to buy the main navigation device for the lunar mission from Airbus, but couldn’t due to restrictions blocking the technology transfer. In the end, it developed its own equipment that delayed the project and weighed twice as much, reducing the scientific payload for the spacecraft that weighed 1,750 kilograms (over 3,800 pounds).

    Many industry experts note that even before the latest Western sanctions, the use of substandard components led to the collapse of an ambitious mission to send a probe to Mars’ moon Phobos in 2011. The spacecraft’s thrusters failed to send it on a path toward Mars and it burned in the Earth’s atmosphere — a problem that investigators attributed to using cheap commercial microchips that were unfit for the harsh conditions in space.

    Some observers speculated that using the cheap components could have stemmed from a scheme to embezzle government funds, rather than importing the specialized equipment for the Phobos-Grunt spacecraft, which was designed by the NPO Lavochkin, the same company that developed Luna-25.

    NPO Lavochkin designed fighter planes during World War II and was the main developer of Soviet robotic missions to the moon, Venus and Mars. Several top Lavochkin managers have been arrested on charges of abusing their office in recent years.

    Following the Phobos failure, space officials talked about conducting a thorough revision of the lunar spacecraft design to avoid using similar substandard components. It’s unclear whether such work ever happened.

    Russian state television had hailed Luna-25 as the country’s triumphant entry into a new moon race, but since the crash, the broadcasters have tried to play down the loss of the spacecraft. Some argued the mission wasn’t a complete failure because it sent back pictures of the lunar surface from orbit and other data.

    Borisov tried to stay optimistic, arguing it achieved some important results.

    He insisted that taking part in lunar research “not only means prestige or achieving geopolitical goals, it is necessary to ensure defense capability and technological sovereignty.”

    “I hope that the next missions … will be successful,” Borisov said, adding that Roscosmos will intensify work on future moon missions, the next of which is planned for 2027.

    “Under no circumstances we should interrupt our lunar program. It would be an utterly wrong decision,” he said.

    Amid the finger-pointing, some argued the failure could cost Borisov his job. Others predicted he probably would avoid the dismissal, noting President Vladimir Putin’s record of avoiding quick ousters of officials in response to incidents.

    Borisov, who previously served as a deputy prime minister in charge of arms industries, became Roscosmos chief a year ago, succeeding Dmitry Rogozin, who was widely blamed for some earlier space mishaps. Rogozin, who has joined the fighting in Ukraine as a volunteer, has not commented on the failed Luna-25 mission.

    Under Rogozin, Roscosmos suffered a series of failed satellite launches. Combined with the growing role of private companies like Elon Musk’s SpaceX, those failures have cost Russia its once-sizable niche in the lucrative global space launch market.

    Rogozin was widely criticized for failing to root out endemic graft, including funds embezzled during the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome in Russia’s Far East, which was used to launch the latest moon mission.

    Some commentators said the Luna-25 crash dented Russian prestige and raised new doubts about its technological prowess following military blunders in Ukraine.

    “The consequences of the Luna-25 catastrophe are enormous,” pro-Kremlin political analyst Sergei Markov said.

    “It raises doubts about Russia’s claims of a great power status in the eyes of the global community. Many would decide that Russia can’t fulfill its ambitions either in Ukraine or on the moon because it lives not by its modest current capability but rather fantasies about its great past,” he said. “People as well as countries want to side with the strong who win, not the weak who keep making excuses about their defeats.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

    ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

    [ad_1]

    An ambitious but failed attempt by Russia to return to the moon after nearly half a century has exposed the massive challenges faced by Moscow’s once-proud space program.

    The destruction of the robotic Luna-25 probe, which crashed onto the surface of the moon over the weekend, reflects the endemic problems that have dogged the Russian space industry since the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. Those include the loss of key technologies in the post-Soviet industrial meltdown, the bruising impact of recent Western sanctions, a huge brain drain and widespread corruption.

    Yuri Borisov, the head of the state-controlled space corporation Roscosmos, attributed the failure to the lack of expertise due to the long break in lunar research that followed the last Soviet mission to the moon in 1976.

    “The priceless experience that our predecessors earned in the 1960-70s was effectively lost,” Borisov said. “The link between generations has been cut.”

    While the USSR lost the race to the United States to land humans on the moon, the Soviet lunar program had more than a dozen successful pioneering robotic missions, some of which featured lunar rovers and brought soil samples back to Earth. The proud Soviet space history includes launching the first satellite in space in 1957 and the first human in space in 1961.

    Mikhail Marov, a 90-year-old scientist who played a prominent role in planning the earlier lunar missions and worked on the Luna-25 project, was hospitalized after its failure.

    “It was very hard. It’s the work of all my life,” Marov said in remarks carried by Russian media. “For me, it was the last chance to see the revival of our lunar program.”

    Borisov said the spacecraft’s thruster fired for 127 seconds instead of the planned 84 seconds, causing it to crash, and a government commission will investigate the glitch.

    Natan Eismont, a leading researcher with the Moscow-based Institute for Space Research, told the state RIA Novosti agency said that signs of equipment problems had appeared even before the crash, but space officials still gave the go for landing.

    Vitaly Egorov, a popular Russian space blogger, noted that Roscosmos may have neglected the warnings in a rush to be the first to land on the lunar south pole ahead of an Indian spacecraft that has been orbiting the moon ahead of a planned landing.

    “It looks like things weren’t going according to plan, but they decided not to change the schedule to prevent the Indians from coming first,” he said.

    The lunar south pole is of particular interest to scientists, who believe the permanently shadowed polar craters may contain frozen water in the rocks that future explorers could transform into air and rocket fuel.

    A major factor exacerbating Russia’s space woes that could have played a role in the Luna-25 failure has been the Western sanctions on Moscow over its war in Ukraine. Those penalties have blocked imports of microchips and other key Western components and restricted scientific exchanges.

    While working on the Luna-25 project, Roscosmos partnered with the European Space Agency that was to provide a camera to facilitate the landing. The ESA halted the partnership soon after the February 2022 invasion and requested Roscosmos to remove its camera from the spacecraft.

    Years earlier, Russia hoped to buy the main navigation device for the lunar mission from Airbus, but couldn’t due to restrictions blocking the technology transfer. In the end, it developed its own equipment that delayed the project and weighed twice as much, reducing the scientific payload for the spacecraft that weighed 1,750 kilograms (over 3,800 pounds).

    Many industry experts note that even before the latest Western sanctions, the use of substandard components led to the collapse of an ambitious mission to send a probe to Mars’ moon Phobos in 2011. The spacecraft’s thrusters failed to send it on a path toward Mars and it burned in the Earth’s atmosphere — a problem that investigators attributed to using cheap commercial microchips that were unfit for the harsh conditions in space.

    Some observers speculated that using the cheap components could have stemmed from a scheme to embezzle government funds, rather than importing the specialized equipment for the Phobos-Grunt spacecraft, which was designed by the NPO Lavochkin, the same company that developed Luna-25.

    NPO Lavochkin designed fighter planes during World War II and was the main developer of Soviet robotic missions to the moon, Venus and Mars. Several top Lavochkin managers have been arrested on charges of abusing their office in recent years.

    Following the Phobos failure, space officials talked about conducting a thorough revision of the lunar spacecraft design to avoid using similar substandard components. It’s unclear whether such work ever happened.

    Russian state television had hailed Luna-25 as the country’s triumphant entry into a new moon race, but since the crash, the broadcasters have tried to play down the loss of the spacecraft. Some argued the mission wasn’t a complete failure because it sent back pictures of the lunar surface from orbit and other data.

    Borisov tried to stay optimistic, arguing it achieved some important results.

    He insisted that taking part in lunar research “not only means prestige or achieving geopolitical goals, it is necessary to ensure defense capability and technological sovereignty.”

    “I hope that the next missions … will be successful,” Borisov said, adding that Roscosmos will intensify work on future moon missions, the next of which is planned for 2027.

    “Under no circumstances we should interrupt our lunar program. It would be an utterly wrong decision,” he said.

    Amid the finger-pointing, some argued the failure could cost Borisov his job. Others predicted he probably would avoid the dismissal, noting President Vladimir Putin’s record of avoiding quick ousters of officials in response to incidents.

    Borisov, who previously served as a deputy prime minister in charge of arms industries, became Roscosmos chief a year ago, succeeding Dmitry Rogozin, who was widely blamed for some earlier space mishaps. Rogozin, who has joined the fighting in Ukraine as a volunteer, has not commented on the failed Luna-25 mission.

    Under Rogozin, Roscosmos suffered a series of failed satellite launches. Combined with the growing role of private companies like Elon Musk’s SpaceX, those failures have cost Russia its once-sizable niche in the lucrative global space launch market.

    Rogozin was widely criticized for failing to root out endemic graft, including funds embezzled during the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome in Russia’s Far East, which was used to launch the latest moon mission.

    Some commentators said the Luna-25 crash dented Russian prestige and raised new doubts about its technological prowess following military blunders in Ukraine.

    “The consequences of the Luna-25 catastrophe are enormous,” pro-Kremlin political analyst Sergei Markov said.

    “It raises doubts about Russia’s claims of a great power status in the eyes of the global community. Many would decide that Russia can’t fulfill its ambitions either in Ukraine or on the moon because it lives not by its modest current capability but rather fantasies about its great past,” he said. “People as well as countries want to side with the strong who win, not the weak who keep making excuses about their defeats.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Liz Weston: Create a care plan for older parents (or yourself)

    Liz Weston: Create a care plan for older parents (or yourself)

    [ad_1]

    At some point, most older people will need help getting through the day. Someone turning 65 today has a 70% chance of eventually requiring assistance with basic living activities, such as bathing, dressing and using the toilet, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    That’s the grim reality. Even grimmer is that Medicare typically doesn’t pay for such help. Plus, families often don’t try to figure out how to provide this care until there is a health crisis, which can lead to unnecessary stress, conflicts and escalating costs, says certified financial planner and physician Carolyn McClanahan of Life Planning Partners in Jacksonville, Florida.

    Making a care plan well in advance allows families to get organized, locate appropriate resources and figure out ways to pay for care before a crisis hits.

    “A care plan is thinking through the logistics of what you’re going to need as you age, so that when the poop hits the fan with aging, then you are prepared,” McClanahan says.

    DEAL WITH DENIAL FIRST

    The biggest barrier can be our own wishful thinking, says Katy Butler, author of the books “The Art of Dying Well” and “Knocking on Heaven’s Door.” We want to picture a perfectly healthy life followed, if absolutely necessary, by a quick and painless death.

    The reality may be quite different, and that can be awful to contemplate, Butler acknowledges.

    One way to cope is to plan for temporary rather than permanent disability. For example, what kind of help might you or your loved one need after a hip or knee replacement? How well is the home set up for recovery? Who would help with household tasks? Contemplating a two- or three-month disability with an eventual return to health is less daunting, but involves much of the same planning as a more lasting decline, says Butler, who lives in Mill Valley, California.

    “I think that really would help people visualize without terrifying them,” Butler says.

    THINK ABOUT WHERE YOU’LL GET CARE

    Many people want to remain in their current homes as they age, something called “aging in place.” That typically means relying on family members for care, or using paid workers, or both.

    If family members will be tapped, discuss the logistics, including whether and how much they will be paid. If home health aides will be hired, consider who will supervise the process.

    Costs can mount quickly. Nationally, a full-time home health aide costs an average of $5,148 a month, according to long-term care insurer Genworth. (You can use Genworth’s cost of care calculator to estimate costs in your area.)

    EXPLORE WAYS TO COVER COSTS

    Are there savings that can be tapped? Does the older person have long-term care insurance or can they get a reverse mortgage? Will other family members chip in? Does the older person qualify for government help, such as veterans benefits, Medicaid or state programs? Benefitscheckup.org, a site run by the nonprofit National Council on Aging, can help you search for resources that help people age in place. Families may want to consult an elder law attorney for personalized advice. (You can get a referral from the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys at www.naela.org.)

    Also consider whether the current home is “aging friendly,” McClanahan says. An occupational therapist can suggest adaptations that could allow the older person to remain in the home if they’re disabled. Some changes might be simple, such as removing throw rugs that could cause falls, while others — like widening doorways or constructing a walk-in shower — might be part of a larger remodel. The sooner you get this evaluation, the more time you will have to plan and pay for it, McClanahan says.

    “I recommend everybody do this when they hit their 50s if they’re planning on staying in their home,” she says.

    CONSIDER THE COMMUNITY

    Even if the home supports aging in place, the neighborhood might not, Butler says. Consider how the older person will socialize, get groceries and make it to health appointments if they can no longer drive.

    An independent living or senior living facility could provide more amenities, but these typically don’t provide long-term care, Butler says. Is the older person OK with moving again later, or should they start with an assisted living or continuing care facility that can provide more help?

    Once you have a plan, write down the details and consider sharing it with family members or other people who may be involved, McClanahan suggests. Revisit the document periodically as circumstances change.

    “Aging planning is not a one and done thing. It’s an ongoing process,” she says.

    __________________________

    This column was provided to The Associated Press by the personal finance website NerdWallet. Liz Weston is a columnist at NerdWallet, a certified financial planner and author of “Your Credit Score.” Email: lweston@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @lizweston.

    RELATED LINK:

    NerdWallet: What If You Can’t Afford Long-Term Care?

    https://bit.ly/nerdwallet-afford-long-term-care

    METHODOLOGY

    Genworth Cost of Care Survey

    From June through November 2021, CareScout, a Genworth company, contacted 67,742 providers by phone to complete 14,698 surveys of nursing homes, assisted living facilities, adult day health facilities and home care providers. Potential respondents were selected randomly from the CareScout nationwide database of providers in each category of long-term care services. Survey respondents represent all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden administration announces more new funding for rural broadband infrastructure

    Biden administration announces more new funding for rural broadband infrastructure

    [ad_1]

    The Biden administration on Monday continued its push toward internet-for-all by 2030, announcing about $667 million in new grants and loans to build more broadband infrastructure in the rural U.S.

    “With this investment, we’re getting funding to communities in every corner of the country because we believe that no kid should have to sit in the back of a mama’s car in a McDonald’s parking lot in order to do homework,” said Mitch Landrieu, the White House’s infrastructure coordinator, in a call with reporters.

    The 37 new recipients represent the fourth round of funding under the program, dubbed ReConnect by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Another 37 projects received $771.4 million in grants and loans announced in April and June.

    The money flowing through federal broadband programs, including what was announced Monday and the $42.5 billion infrastructure program detailed earlier this summer, will lead to a new variation on “the electrification of rural America,” Landrieu said, repeating a common Biden administration refrain.

    The largest award went to the Ponderosa Telephone Co. in California, which received more than $42 million to deploy fiber networks in Fresno County. In total, more than 1,200 people, 12 farms and 26 other businesses will benefit from that effort alone, according to USDA.

    The telephone cooperatives, counties and telecommunications companies that won the new awards are based in 22 states and the Marshall Islands.

    At least half of the households in areas receiving the new funding lack access to internet speeds of 100 megabits per second download and 20 Mbps upload — what the federal government considers “underserved” in broadband terminology. The recipients’ mandate is to build networks that raise those levels to at least 100 Mbps upload and 100 Mbps download speeds for every household, business and farm in their service areas.

    Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the investments could bring new economic opportunities to farmers, allow people without close access to medical care to see specialist doctors through telemedicine and increase academic offerings, including Advanced Placement courses in high schools.

    “The fact that this administration understands and appreciates the need for continued investment in rural America to create more opportunity is something that I’m really excited about,” Vilsack said on the media call.

    ___

    Harjai, who reported from Los Angeles, is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • More hearings begin soon for Summit’s proposed CO2 pipeline. Where does the project stand?

    More hearings begin soon for Summit’s proposed CO2 pipeline. Where does the project stand?

    [ad_1]

    BISMARCK, N.D. — Public utility regulators in Iowa will begin a hearing Tuesday on a proposed carbon dioxide pipeline for transporting emissions of the climate-warming greenhouse gas for storage underground that has been met by resistant landowners who fear the taking of their land and dangers of a pipeline rupture.

    Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed $5.5 billion, 2,000-mile pipeline network would carry CO2 from 34 ethanol plants in five states to North Dakota for storage deep underground — a project involving carbon capture technology, which has attracted both interest and scrutiny in the U.S.

    North Dakota regulators earlier this month denied a siting permit for Summit’s proposed route in the state, citing myriad issues they say Summit didn’t appropriately address, such as cultural resource impacts, geologic instability and landowner concerns. On Friday, Summit petitioned regulators to reconsider.

    Other similar projects are proposed around the country, including ones by Navigator CO2 Ventures and Wolf Carbon Solutions, which would also have routes in Iowa.

    Here is what to know about Summit’s project as more proceedings begin.

    WHAT IS CARBON CAPTURE?

    Carbon capture entails the gathering and removal of planet-warming CO2 emissions from industrial plants to be pumped deep underground for permanent storage.

    Supporters view the technology as a combatant of climate change. But opponents say carbon capture and storage isn’t proven at scale and could require huge investments at the expense of cheaper alternatives such as solar and wind power, all at a time when there is an urgent need to phase out all fossil fuels.

    Carbon capture also is viewed by opponents as a way for fossil fuel companies to claim they are addressing climate change without actually having to significantly change their ways.

    “I think there’s a recognition even in the fossil fuel industry that, whether you like it or not and agree or not, (climate change) is a reality you’re going to deal with from a regulatory standpoint, and you’d better get out in front of it or you’re going to get left behind,” said Derrick Braaten, a Bismarck-based attorney involved in issues related to Summit’s project.

    New federal tax incentives have made carbon capture a lucrative enterprise. The technology has the support of the Biden administration, with billions of dollars approved by Congress for various carbon capture efforts.

    High-profile supporters of Summit’s project include North Dakota Republican Gov. Doug Burgum, a presidential candidate who has hailed the state’s underground CO2 storage ability as a “geologic jackpot,” and oil magnate Harold Hamm, whose company last year announced a $250 million commitment to Summit’s project.

    “Carbon capture and storage is going to be more and more important every day as we go forward in America,” Hamm has said.

    WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE FIVE STATES?

    The Iowa Utilities Board begins its public evidentiary hearing Tuesday in Fort Dodge, a hearing “anticipated to last several weeks,” according to a news release. The board’s final decision on Summit’s permit request will come sometime after the hearing.

    Minnesota’s Public Utilities Commission has a hearing set for Aug. 31 in which the panel “will make decisions about the scope of environmental review” regarding Summit’s permit application for its pipeline in two counties, said Charley Bruce, an energy facilities planner with the commission.

    A Summit attorney recently indicated to Minnesota that North Dakota regulators’ decision to deny a permit will not affect the company’s plans, including for other proposed routes in southern Minnesota.

    The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission is set to begin its evidentiary hearing for the project on Sept. 11 and expects to make a final decision by Nov. 15.

    Nebraska has no state-level regulatory authority for CO2 pipelines. Summit is working with counties individually in Nebraska.

    Counties don’t approve or deny a route, but can institute ordinances’ setbacks for land-use purposes that can dictate where a pipeline may go, and can enter into road haul agreements and road crossing permits, said Omaha-based attorney Brian Jorde. He represents more than 1,000 landowners opposed to CO2 pipeline projects in four states.

    Summit hasn’t hit “an insurmountable legal obstacle” in North Dakota regulators’ denial “because they literally said ‘try again,’” Braaten said.

    “If they get over themselves I think that they could do it and get approved, but I think they certainly shot themselves in the foot and they’re making it much harder in those other states because they’re going to come in with those commissioners there looking at them with a certain level of skepticism because you literally just got denied a permit in North Dakota,” he said.

    WHY ARE LANDOWNERS OPPOSED?

    Landowners have raised concerns about the pipeline breaking, as well as eminent domain, or the taking of private land for the project, with compensation.

    Eminent domain laws vary state by state, said Jorde, who represents hundreds of people Summit has sued in South Dakota to take their land for its pipeline.

    “When you have the power of eminent domain like a hammer over a landowner’s head, you can intimidate them into doing things they wouldn’t otherwise do, which is sign easements, which Summit then turns around and says, ‘Look at all these “voluntary” easements we have. Look at all the “support” we have,’ which is completely false,” Jorde said.

    Summit has submitted eminent domain requests to the Iowa board. A Summit spokesperson did not specifically address the company’s intentions related to eminent domain when asked by the AP.

    “Our team remains incredibly encouraged that Iowa landowners have signed voluntary easement agreements accounting for nearly 75% of the proposed pipeline route,” spokesperson Sabrina Ahmed Zenor said in an email. “This overwhelming level of support is a clear reflection that they believe like we do that our project will ensure the long-term viability of the ethanol industry, strengthen the agricultural marketplace for farmers, and generate tens of millions of dollars in new revenue for local communities across the Midwest.”

    WHAT ABOUT UNDERGROUND STORAGE?

    Summit submitted a draft application for underground storage to a three-member state panel which Burgum chairs and includes the attorney general. The timeline for a hearing and decision by the panel is unclear.

    Last year, Summit and Minnkota Power Cooperative agreed to “co-develop” CO2 storage facilities in central North Dakota. Their agreement gives Summit access to Minnkota’s storage site and sets a framework for jointly developing more CO2 storage nearby.

    Minnkota is pursuing Project Tundra, a project to install carbon capture technology at a coal-fired power plant.

    Braaten views Summit’s Minnkota partnership as a backup plan, to “piggyback on a sure thing,” he said.

    A North Dakota landowners group is suing over the state’s process for allowing CO2 and gas storage on private land, and land survey laws.

    Braaten said the lawsuit, which would affect the permitting of a Summit storage site in North Dakota, is not directed at Summit but is tied to longtime legal battles related to landowner rights.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • More hearings begin soon for Summit’s proposed CO2 pipeline. Where does the project stand?

    More hearings begin soon for Summit’s proposed CO2 pipeline. Where does the project stand?

    [ad_1]

    BISMARCK, N.D. — Public utility regulators in Iowa will begin a hearing Tuesday on a proposed carbon dioxide pipeline for transporting emissions of the climate-warming greenhouse gas for storage underground that has been met by resistant landowners who fear the taking of their land and dangers of a pipeline rupture.

    Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed $5.5 billion, 2,000-mile pipeline network would carry CO2 from 34 ethanol plants in five states to North Dakota for storage deep underground — a project involving carbon capture technology, which has attracted both interest and scrutiny in the U.S.

    North Dakota regulators earlier this month denied a siting permit for Summit’s proposed route in the state, citing myriad issues they say Summit didn’t appropriately address, such as cultural resource impacts, geologic instability and landowner concerns. On Friday, Summit petitioned regulators to reconsider.

    Other similar projects are proposed around the country, including ones by Navigator CO2 Ventures and Wolf Carbon Solutions, which would also have routes in Iowa.

    Here is what to know about Summit’s project as more proceedings begin.

    WHAT IS CARBON CAPTURE?

    Carbon capture entails the gathering and removal of planet-warming CO2 emissions from industrial plants to be pumped deep underground for permanent storage.

    Supporters view the technology as a combatant of climate change. But opponents say carbon capture and storage isn’t proven at scale and could require huge investments at the expense of cheaper alternatives such as solar and wind power, all at a time when there is an urgent need to phase out all fossil fuels.

    Carbon capture also is viewed by opponents as a way for fossil fuel companies to claim they are addressing climate change without actually having to significantly change their ways.

    “I think there’s a recognition even in the fossil fuel industry that, whether you like it or not and agree or not, (climate change) is a reality you’re going to deal with from a regulatory standpoint, and you’d better get out in front of it or you’re going to get left behind,” said Derrick Braaten, a Bismarck-based attorney involved in issues related to Summit’s project.

    New federal tax incentives have made carbon capture a lucrative enterprise. The technology has the support of the Biden administration, with billions of dollars approved by Congress for various carbon capture efforts.

    High-profile supporters of Summit’s project include North Dakota Republican Gov. Doug Burgum, a presidential candidate who has hailed the state’s underground CO2 storage ability as a “geologic jackpot,” and oil magnate Harold Hamm, whose company last year announced a $250 million commitment to Summit’s project.

    “Carbon capture and storage is going to be more and more important every day as we go forward in America,” Hamm has said.

    WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE FIVE STATES?

    The Iowa Utilities Board begins its public evidentiary hearing Tuesday in Fort Dodge, a hearing “anticipated to last several weeks,” according to a news release. The board’s final decision on Summit’s permit request will come sometime after the hearing.

    Minnesota’s Public Utilities Commission has a hearing set for Aug. 31 in which the panel “will make decisions about the scope of environmental review” regarding Summit’s permit application for its pipeline in two counties, said Charley Bruce, an energy facilities planner with the commission.

    A Summit attorney recently indicated to Minnesota that North Dakota regulators’ decision to deny a permit will not affect the company’s plans, including for other proposed routes in southern Minnesota.

    The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission is set to begin its evidentiary hearing for the project on Sept. 11 and expects to make a final decision by Nov. 15.

    Nebraska has no state-level regulatory authority for CO2 pipelines. Summit is working with counties individually in Nebraska.

    Counties don’t approve or deny a route, but can institute ordinances’ setbacks for land-use purposes that can dictate where a pipeline may go, and can enter into road haul agreements and road crossing permits, said Omaha-based attorney Brian Jorde. He represents more than 1,000 landowners opposed to CO2 pipeline projects in four states.

    Summit hasn’t hit “an insurmountable legal obstacle” in North Dakota regulators’ denial “because they literally said ‘try again,’” Braaten said.

    “If they get over themselves I think that they could do it and get approved, but I think they certainly shot themselves in the foot and they’re making it much harder in those other states because they’re going to come in with those commissioners there looking at them with a certain level of skepticism because you literally just got denied a permit in North Dakota,” he said.

    WHY ARE LANDOWNERS OPPOSED?

    Landowners have raised concerns about the pipeline breaking, as well as eminent domain, or the taking of private land for the project, with compensation.

    Eminent domain laws vary state by state, said Jorde, who represents hundreds of people Summit has sued in South Dakota to take their land for its pipeline.

    “When you have the power of eminent domain like a hammer over a landowner’s head, you can intimidate them into doing things they wouldn’t otherwise do, which is sign easements, which Summit then turns around and says, ‘Look at all these “voluntary” easements we have. Look at all the “support” we have,’ which is completely false,” Jorde said.

    Summit has submitted eminent domain requests to the Iowa board. A Summit spokesperson did not specifically address the company’s intentions related to eminent domain when asked by the AP.

    “Our team remains incredibly encouraged that Iowa landowners have signed voluntary easement agreements accounting for nearly 75% of the proposed pipeline route,” spokesperson Sabrina Ahmed Zenor said in an email. “This overwhelming level of support is a clear reflection that they believe like we do that our project will ensure the long-term viability of the ethanol industry, strengthen the agricultural marketplace for farmers, and generate tens of millions of dollars in new revenue for local communities across the Midwest.”

    WHAT ABOUT UNDERGROUND STORAGE?

    Summit submitted a draft application for underground storage to a three-member state panel which Burgum chairs and includes the attorney general. The timeline for a hearing and decision by the panel is unclear.

    Last year, Summit and Minnkota Power Cooperative agreed to “co-develop” CO2 storage facilities in central North Dakota. Their agreement gives Summit access to Minnkota’s storage site and sets a framework for jointly developing more CO2 storage nearby.

    Minnkota is pursuing Project Tundra, a project to install carbon capture technology at a coal-fired power plant.

    Braaten views Summit’s Minnkota partnership as a backup plan, to “piggyback on a sure thing,” he said.

    A North Dakota landowners group is suing over the state’s process for allowing CO2 and gas storage on private land, and land survey laws.

    Braaten said the lawsuit, which would affect the permitting of a Summit storage site in North Dakota, is not directed at Summit but is tied to longtime legal battles related to landowner rights.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Local governments are spending billions of pandemic relief funds, but some report few specifics

    Local governments are spending billions of pandemic relief funds, but some report few specifics

    [ad_1]

    Joplin officials say they have big plans for $13.8 million of pandemic relief funds the tornado-ravaged southwestern Missouri city received under a two-year-old federal law. Yet the latest federal records show none of the money has been spent — or even budgeted.

    In fact, about 6,300 cities and counties — nearly 1 in 4 nationwide — reported no expenditures as of this spring, according to an Associated Press analysis of data released by the U.S. Treasury Department. About 5,100 of those listed no projects — either planned or underway.

    So what gives? Is the money not needed? Are cities just sitting on it?

    Local and federal officials told the AP in interviews that the publicly available data is misleading — pockmarked by differing interpretations over exactly what must be reported, lagging in timeliness and failing to account for some preliminary planning. Critics contend it’s an indication of a flawed pandemic response.

    Federal officials estimate that governments have spending commitments for more than 80% of the funds, even if that’s hard to tell from their reporting requirements.

    Joplin, for example, plans to spend its pandemic aid on housing projects, high-speed internet, streets, a bicycle park, public safety equipment and more. The City Council approved the plan last month. But it won’t show up on federal reports until October.

    The city, which was devastated in 2011 by one of deadliest tornadoes in U.S. history, took a deliberate approach with its pandemic aid to develop “really transformational projects,” said Leslie Haase, the city’s finance director.

    Over the past couple years, it leveraged the pandemic aid to win millions of additional dollars of state grants. With the combined funds, it plans to relaunch an expired post-tornado program that helps people make down-payments on homes. The city also plans to spend millions of dollars to repair or demolish old houses.

    “I think by the time 2026 rolls around, Joplin will be a better community,” Haase said.

    The $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan — passed in 2021 by a Democratic-led Congress and signed by President Joe Biden — contained $350 billion of flexible aid to states, territories, tribes, counties, cities and towns. The Biden administration says the money was intended to provide both immediate aid amid a health crisis and a longer-term boost for communities.

    Governments must obligate that money for projects by the end of next year and spend it by the close of 2026.

    As of their April reports, more 26,500 governments collectively had spent 43% of their funds and approved plans for spending 77% of the money, according to the AP’s analysis.

    The actual amount of spending commitments likely is well over 80% when accounting for lag times and different reporting approaches taken by local governments, said Gene Sperling, the White House American Rescue Plan coordinator

    “What you see across the country is that counties, cities, states overwhelmingly have committed these funds, are using them, are on track to meet their legal deadlines to have all the funds obligated by the end of 2024,” Sperling said.

    But Republicans and fiscal conservatives have questioned whether the spending is necessary, noting that most states rebounded quickly from an initial tax plunge during the pandemic to post large budget surpluses.

    “Although the Left claimed their $2 trillion bill was designed to fight COVID, they wasted hundreds of billions of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars on ridiculous things,” Republican U.S. Rep. Jason Smith, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said in a statement to the AP.

    Among other things, the money helped finance an upscale hotel in Florida, a minor league baseball stadium in New York and prisons in Alabama — drawing outrage from some members of Congress.

    Some governments waited to do anything with the money until the Treasury Department finalized its rules in April 2022. Details are lacking on how some governments are using their funds because the Treasury relaxed reporting requirements for any money categorized by state or local officials as a replacement for lost revenues.

    According to the AP’s analysis, more than 6,000 local governments categorized their entire federal allotment as “revenue replacement” — often taking advantage of a Treasury rule that allows up to $10 million of assumed revenue loss without having to prove it.

    Though they can provide more details if they choose, governments categorizing all their federal aid as replacement revenue only have to report it as one project, the Treasury told the AP.

    But some didn’t even do that.

    The Denver suburb of Lakewood, Colorado, claimed its entire $21.6 million allotment as a revenue replacement, since it had dipped into reserves to pay police during the pandemic. It reported no projects.

    Yet the federal aid helped the city to construct sidewalks, replace computer software, upgrade the police radio system and make fire and safety improvements to a civic center, among other things, said Lakewood Chief Financial Officer Holly Bjorklund.

    Those were “essential things that really needed to be done and would cost more if we waited longer to address them,” she said.

    Maryland’s capital city of Annapolis also described no projects in its April report. But Annapolis already has used $1.2 million of its $7.6 million allotment as a revenue replacement for its depleted public transit funds, said city spokesperson Mitchelle Stephenson. It expects to tap more of the federal aid for city operations in the 2024 budget.

    The Treasury’s guidance about how to report revenue replacement funds used for government services wasn’t very clear, said Katie Buckley, federal funding assistance program director for the Vermont League of Cities and Towns. But Buckley said she advised local officials to report it all as one project for government services, and then list what that included.

    Counting the federal money as replacement funding for government services shouldn’t relieve local officials of describing what they did with it — even if it just went toward salaries or office supplies, said Sean Moulton, senior policy analyst at the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight.

    “This is taxpayer money, and a lot of it,” said Moulton, adding: “There should be accountability that follows it.”

    There are no particular repercussions for reporting things incorrectly. There also are no immediate penalties for not reporting at all — though Treasury’s guidance says “a record of late reporting” could lead to the “development of a corrective action plan, or other consequences.”

    Ascension Parish, Louisiana, which received $24.6 million, reported no expenses or projects as of April — though the Parish Council had approved a project list last year.

    A financial tracking document provided by the parish to the AP shows a purchase order was initiated last October for a $1 million improvement project at Youth Legacy Duplessis Park. The materials were delivered for the project in mid-March, before the Treasury’s reporting deadline. But most of the parish’s other projects weren’t underway yet by the April report.

    “We’ve haven’t spent a lot of the money, but we’ve got a lot contracts, a lot of design work,” said Patrick Goldsmith, the parish’s chief financial officer.

    He said the projects should be included when the next quarterly reports are released.

    While many governments have made “steady progress” using pandemic relief funds, some waited until closer to the July start of their fiscal years to approve spending plans, said Teryn Zmuda, chief economist and research officer at the National Association of Counties.

    “We don’t want to rush these funds,” Zmuda said. “While the intent of the dollars was to respond to the pandemic, it was also to very intentionally build your community based on its specific needs.”

    ___

    Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Missouri. Harjai, who reported from Los Angeles, is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Georgia Medicaid program with work requirement off to slow start even as thousands lose coverage

    Georgia Medicaid program with work requirement off to slow start even as thousands lose coverage

    [ad_1]

    ATLANTA — Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed paperwork creating a new state health plan for low-income residents to much fanfare at the state Capitol three years ago.

    But public health experts and advocates say since it launched on July 1, state officials appear to be doing little to promote or enroll people in the nation’s only Medicaid program that makes recipients meet a work requirement.

    The Georgia Department of Community Health, which has projected up to 100,000 people could eventually benefit from Georgia Pathways to Coverage, had approved just 265 applications by early August.

    “If we’re talking about directed outreach to the population that would most likely be eligible and interested, I haven’t seen anything,” said Harry Heiman, a health policy professor at Georgia State University.

    Heiman and other experts say the program’s slow start reflects fundamental flaws missing from Medicaid expansions in other states, including the extra burden of submitting and verifying work hours. And some critics note it’s happening just as the state, as part of a federally mandated review, is kicking tens of thousands of people off its Medicaid rolls — at least some of whom could be eligible for Pathways.

    “We’ve chosen a much more complicated and lengthy process that will take a long time even for the few folks who get coverage,” said Laura Colbert, executive director of the advocacy group Georgians for a Healthy Future.

    The Biden administration has already tried to revoke Georgia’s Medicaid plan once and will be monitoring it, so any missteps could have broader consequences. They could also hamper future efforts by Republicans to make Medicaid eligibility dependent on work.

    A spokesman for the governor’s office, Garrison Douglas, said enrollment would grow as applications continue to be reviewed.

    “While the federal government initiated and dictated a process for re-determining the qualifications of traditional Medicaid recipients, Georgia is the only state in the country simultaneously offering a new pathway to healthcare coverage and opportunity,” he said in a statement.

    The state’s department of community health said it was engaging stakeholders, community partners and others to help get the word out about the program. It did not provide details about that effort.

    “There’s still some more work that we have to do for Pathways,” Lynnette Rhodes, executive director of DCH’s Medical Assistance Plans division, said at a meeting this month. “But overall…the program is working.”

    The state launched Pathways just as it began a review of Medicaid eligibility following the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Federal law prohibited states from removing people from Medicaid during the three-year emergency.

    Georgia has already cut more than 170,000 adults and kids from Medicaid and is expected to remove thousands more as the yearlong review of all 2.7 million Medicaid recipients in the state continues. Nationwide, more than a million people have been dropped from Medicaid, most for failing to fill out paperwork.

    The department of community health said it delayed the reevaluations of 160,000 people who were no longer eligible for traditional Medicaid but could qualify for Pathways to help them try to maintain health coverage. It was not immediately clear whether the state reached out to those people and helped guide them to apply for Pathways.

    “From what we have seen thus far, they are not doing anything affirmatively to get these people enrolled in Pathways,” said Cynthia Gibson, an attorney with the Georgia Legal Services Program who helps people obtain Medicaid coverage.

    In contrast, Oklahoma officials implementing a voter-approved expansion of Medicaid in 2021 moved people in existing state insurance programs directly into the expansion pool without the need for a new application, according to the Oklahoma Health Care Authority. Nearly 100,000 people were enrolled in the expanded program within days of its launch.

    “States have a lot of tools that they can use to help make this process go more smoothly,” said Lucy Dagneau, an advocate for Medicaid expansion with the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

    Oklahoma and 39 other states have expanded Medicaid eligibility to nearly all adults with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level, $20,120 annually for a single person and $41,400 for a family of four. None of those states require recipients to work in order to qualify.

    That broader Medicaid expansion was a key part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul in 2010, but many Republican governors, including Kemp, rejected it. In addition to imposing a work requirement, Pathways limits coverage to able-bodied adults earning up to 100% of the poverty line — $14,580 for a single person or $30,000 for a family of four.

    Kemp has argued full expansion would cost too much money. State officials and supporters of Pathways say the work requirement will also help transition Medicaid recipients to better, private health insurance, and working, studying or volunteering leads to improved health.

    “I’m excited we’re moving forward in this direction,” said Jason Bearden, president of CareSource Georgia, one of the state’s Medicaid health plans. “This is good progress.”

    Critics say many low-income people work informal jobs and have fluctuating hours that will make it hard for them to document the required 80 hours a month of work, volunteer activity, study or vocational rehabilitation. They also blast the lack of an exemption to the work requirement for parents and other caregivers.

    For Amanda Lucas, the work requirement is insurmountable right now.

    Lucas said she had no idea Pathways started in July, but even if she did, she would not qualify because she has to take care of her 84-year-old father in Warner Robins, a city about 100 miles (160 km) south of Atlanta. He had a stroke and needs her to buy groceries, make food, pick up prescriptions, pay bills and manage myriad other tasks, she said.

    With risk factors for skin cancer, she worries about living without health insurance.

    “I try to keep an eye on my own moles,” she said. “I’m increasingly anxious because I’m 46.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Illinois will provide burial for migrant toddler who died on bus

    Illinois will provide burial for migrant toddler who died on bus

    [ad_1]

    SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Illinois will provide for Thursday’s funeral and burial for the migrant toddler who died last week on a bus headed to Chicago from Texas, officials said.

    Jismary Alejandra Barboza González, who would have turned 4 next week, died Aug. 10 while on a chartered bus, part of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s program begun last year of sending migrants crossing into the state to Democratic-led cities across the country.

    Rachel Otwell, spokesperson for the Illinois Department of Human Services, confirmed the girl’s name and said the Illinois Welcoming Center, a partially state-funded program, will cover burial costs for Jismary. The child’s great aunt, Gisela Gonzalez, said the family set out for the United States in May from their home in Colombia, where Jismary was born.

    The funeral service for the girl is scheduled for Thursday at a church in Warsaw, Indiana.

    Welcoming centers offer comprehensive services for migrants. But Otwell said the family has not requested other help.

    Otwell declined to identify which of the 36 welcoming center locations would provide the service. Nor would she say from what country Jismary’s family had emigrated.

    “Given the sensitivity of this tragic event, and the way migrancy has been unfortunately politicized, (the department) does not believe it is appropriate to share certain details, such as the exact center that has supported the family,” Otwell said.

    Jismary died Thursday while the bus traveled Interstate 57 through Marion County, in southern Illinois, about 90 miles (145 kilometers) east of St. Louis. County Coroner Troy Cannon’s autopsy was inconclusive as to the cause of death. He ordered microscopic tests of tissue samples from the child in a search for abnormalities. The coroner’s office said Wednesday it had no updates.

    Gisela Gonzalez, who lives in Venezuela, said there was no indication that the child was in distress or needed medical attention before she apparently suffered cardiac arrest on the bus. She said Jismary’s parents faced down the treacherous Darien Gap and crossed five Central American countries and Mexico before turning themselves in at a U.S. immigration checkpoint.

    According to the Texas Division of Emergency Management, passengers on the bus, which departed from the border city of Brownsville, were given temperature checks and asked about health conditions before boarding. The agency’s Friday statement confirming the girl’s death marked the first time Texas authorities have announced a death since it began shuttling migrants last August.

    Texas officials said that when the child became ill, the bus pulled to the side of the road and on-board security personnel called emergency responders. Paramedics assisted the girl, but she later died at a hospital.

    Abbott’s Operation Lone Star has dispatched 30,000 migrants who have crossed into Texas seeking asylum to Chicago, Washington, New York, Philadelphia, Denver and Los Angeles — so-called sanctuary cities — in a protest he says will end when President Joe Biden “secures the border.”

    ___

    Winder reported from Chicago. Associated Press writer Valerie Gonzalez in McAllen, Texas, contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Bidenomics’ delivered a once-in-generation investment. It shows the pros and cons of policymaking

    ‘Bidenomics’ delivered a once-in-generation investment. It shows the pros and cons of policymaking

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — There are so many dots on the maps they blur into blobs — each one reflecting trillions of public and private dollars flowing in the U.S. this past year to build thousands of roads, bridges and manufacturing projects in communities large and small, in states red and blue.

    They include an electric vehicle “battery belt” of manufacturing stretching from Michigan to Georgia, semiconductor fabrication plants in Arizona, Texas, Ohio and New York and broadband coming to Appalachia.

    Taken together, they represent President Joe Biden‘s ambitious attempt to use the levers of government to chart a new era of domestic manufacturing, modernizing the U.S. to compete in the 21st century.

    Packaged as “Bidenomics” by the White House, the effort is the product of three major bills approved in the last Congress that are also the president’s hoped-for roadmap for reelection. Republicans have balked at what they said was unwarranted federal spending. The debate between those two views could go a long way toward determining who wins the White House and control of Congress in 2024.

    On the ground, it’s a mix of the promise and pitfalls of domestic policymaking beginning to take shape across the country.

    “It’s this whole new world of opportunity,” said Monte Shaw, executive director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, who said firms are investing millions of dollars to upgrade facilities and transform the ethanol industry.

    Much like the development of the federal highway system in the 1950s or the space race to the moon in the 1960s, the undertaking is once in a generation. More recently, presidents have tapped Congress to deliver on their vision for social or fiscal policy, with the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, a decade ago and Trump’s GOP tax cuts in 2017.

    Now rounding year one, it remains a work in progress. The Inflation Reduction Act, the Chips and Science Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act are coming into fruition at a time of economic churn and stubborn inflation in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    “We spent decades underinvesting,” said Wendy Edelberg, a former chief economist at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and now a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution think tank. “And so we have a lot of catching up to do.”

    Democrats see the trio of bills — two of which also drew bipartisan support from Republicans — as their calling card to voters ahead of the 2024 election, the tangible results of Biden’s vision and tenure in the White House. For Republicans, many of whom voted against all three bills, Bidenomics is a powerful punchline about big government overreach.

    “What is ‘Bidenomics’?” said a memo circulated earlier this summer by Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Barrasso of Wyoming. “It is the inflationary Washington spending, costly regulations, and regressive taxes touted by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris,” he said, referring to the vice president.

    Economists acknowledge that while inflation has eased some from its pandemic spikes, the investments are adding to demand and price pressures, a factor in higher interest rates that can keep lending tight.

    Donald Trump, the leading Republican candidate trying to oust Biden in 2024, defines Bidenomics in contrast to what he calls his own “boom” years in the White House.

    ″‘Bidenomics’ is shorthand for ‘I pay more for less,’” said Jack Pandol, communications director at the National Republican Congressional Campaign, the House GOP campaign arm.

    Looking over the tiny dots on the maps being produced by the government and outside groups, the display of public and private investment is steadily coming into focus.

    Propelled by a mix of direct funds and lucrative federal tax breaks, the legislation is also luring outside dollars to the table.

    The White House said the federal policy has generated more than $500 billion in private investment announcements flowing to the states – much of it in Republican-held congressional districts as companies invest where land is cheap and labor unions lag. Even Republicans who voted against the bills are now vying for credit.

    The CHIPs bill alone has sparked some $200 billion in domestic semiconductor manufacturing, according to the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, and industry estimates.

    IRA’s centerpiece, a $400 billion federal investment to curb climate change, is standing up solar, electric vehicle and battery manufacturing, particularly in the Southeast region where Republicans dominate.

    At the same time, provisions in the IRA will allow counties and local governments to tap into federal green energy production tax credits typically used by private entities, enabling them to develop projects on their own.

    “What you’re seeing is that counties are kind of the laboratories of innovation,” Mark Ritacco, the chief government affairs officer at the National Association of Counties.

    Biden is encouraging Americans to go see for themselves.

    “Click onto Invest.gov, put in your location,” he said recently in South Carolina. “You’ll all see projects we’re delivering in communities all across America.”

    In many ways, the undertaking reflects Biden’s initial ideas when he took office for the “Build Back Better” agenda, which started as an industrial policy but morphed into a much-more unwieldly package of social programs that collapsed in failure.

    Instead, the other three bills came into focus, as Congress surprised the skeptics to deliver legislation to passage.

    The bipartisan infrastructure bill approved in 2021 poured money into repaving roads and building bridges, but it also pumped funds into public works projects nationwide.

    That included money to upgrade drinking water systems in a nation where millions of Americans still have lead pipes and $42 billion for broadband to connect some 8 million households to the internet – including 271,000 locations in West Virginia where Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito fought to ensure connectivity.

    “We have a real opportunity to finally bridge the digital divide in West Virginia,” she wrote in a summer op-ed.

    While a similar bipartisan effort powered the CHIPS bill to passage, investing $50 billion in semiconductors and science research, Democrats alone muscled the Inflation Reduction Act into law late over steep Republican opposition, which continues to this day.

    The GOP-led House has tried to dismantle the IRA law, but as it begins to take hold in communities that may become more difficult.

    Gov. Kim Reynolds of Iowa and other Midwestern Republican lawmakers fought to preserve the tax break that home-state ethanol producers are already banking on to upgrade their facilities.

    Biden has been increasingly eager to call out the political disconnect. The president announced plans to travel to the Georgia district represented by firebrand Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene that’s home to a solar plant expansion.

    He recently called out opposition from Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, whose district is home to a blade manufacturing plant for wind turbines.

    Economist Jason Furman, a former Obama official now at Harvard, acknowledged the pressure the laws put on inflation, but he said they are rapidly focusing private industry investment.

    “It does look like all three bills are catalyzing a lot of activity in a sort of larger and more rapid way than I would have expected,” Furman said. “This feels to me the biggest thing that’s happened to the half century.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mishmash of how US heat death are counted complicates efforts to keep people safe as Earth warms

    Mishmash of how US heat death are counted complicates efforts to keep people safe as Earth warms

    [ad_1]

    PHOENIX — Postal worker Eugene Gates Jr. was delivering mail in the suffocating Dallas heat this summer when he collapsed in a homeowner’s yard and was taken to a hospital, where he died.

    Carla Gates said she’s sure heat was a factor in her 66-year-old husband’s death, even though she’s still waiting for the autopsy report. When Eugene Gates died on June 20, the temperature was 98 degrees Fahrenheit (36.6 Celsius) and the heat index, which also considers humidity, had soared over 110 degrees Fahrenheit (43.3 Celsius).

    “I will believe this until the day I die, that it was heat-related,” Carla Gates said.

    Even when it seems obvious that extreme heat was a factor, death certificates don’t always reflect the role it played. Experts say a mishmash of ways more than 3,000 counties calculate heat deaths means we don’t really know how many people die in the U.S. each year because of high temperatures in an ever warming world.

    That imprecision harms efforts to better protect people from extreme heat because officials who set policies and fund programs can’t get the financial and other support needed to make a difference.

    “Essentially, all heat related deaths are preventable. People don’t need to die from the heat,” said epidemiologist Kristie L. Ebi, who focuses on global warming’s impact on human health as a professor at the University of Washington.

    With a better count, she said, “you can start developing much better heat wave early warning systems and target people who are at higher risk and make sure that they’re aware of these risks.”

    Currently, about the only consistency in counting heat deaths in the U.S. is that officials and climate specialists acknowledge fatalities are grossly undercounted.

    “Deaths are investigated in vastly different ways based on where a person died,” said Dr. Greg Hess, the medical examiner for Pima County, Arizona’s second most populous county and home to Tucson. “It should be no surprise that we don’t have good nationwide data on heat-related deaths.”

    Many experts say a standard decades-old method known as counting excess deaths could better show how extreme heat harms people.

    “You want to look at the number of people who would not have died during that time period and get a true sense of the magnitude of the impact,” Ebi said, including people who would not have suffered a fatal heart attack or renal failure without the heat.

    The excess deaths calculation is often used to estimate the death toll in natural disasters, with researchers tallying fatalities that exceeded those that occurred at the same time the previous year when circumstances were average.

    Counting excess deaths was used to calculate the human impact of a heat wave in Chicago that killed more than 700 people in July 1995, many elderly Black people who lived alone. Researchers also counted excess deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide more complete information about deaths directly and indirectly related to the coronavirus.

    But as things stand now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports just 600 to 700 heat deaths annually in the United States. A study published last month in the journal Nature Medicine estimated more than 61,000 heat-related deaths last summer across Europe, which has roughly double the U.S. population but more than 100 times as many heat deaths.

    Dr. Sameed Khatana, a staff cardiologist at the Philadelphia VA Medical Center and assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, has said deaths in which heat contributed significantly to fatalities from causes like heart failure should also be considered.

    Khatana participated in research published last year that counted excess deaths in all U.S. counties. The findings suggested that from 2008 to 2017 between 3,000 to 20,000 adult deaths from all causes listed on death certificates were linked to extreme heat. Heart disease was listed as the cause of about half of the deaths.

    After the Pacific Northwest heat wave in summer of 2021, the Canadian province of British Columbia reported more than 600 deaths due to heat exposure while Oregon and Washington each initially reported a little more than 100 such fatalities.

    “It’s frustrating that for 90 years public health officials in the United States have not had a good picture of heat-related mortality because we have such a bad data system,” said Dr. David Jones, a Harvard Medical School professor who also teaches in the epidemiology department at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

    There is no uniformity among who does the counting across U.S. jurisdictions. Death investigations in some places might be carried out by a medical examiner, typically a physician trained in forensic pathology. In other locales, the coroner could be an elected sheriff, such as the one in Orange County, California. In some small counties in Texas, a justice of peace might determine cause of death.

    Utah and Massachusetts are among states that do not track heat-related deaths where exposure to extreme heat was a secondary factor.

    The CDC, which is often several years behind in reporting, draws information on heat deaths from death certificate information included in local, state, tribal and territorial databases.

    The CDC said in a statement that coroners and others who fill out death certificates “are encouraged to report all causes of death,” but they may not always associate those contributing causes to an extreme heat exposure death and include the diagnostic codes for heat illnesses.

    Hess, the Arizona coroner, said determining environmental heat was a factor in someone’s death is difficult and can take weeks or even months of investigation including toxicological tests.

    “If someone was shot in the head, it’s pretty obvious what happened there,” Hess said. “But when you find a body in a hot apartment 48 hours after they died, there is a lot of ambiguity.”

    Hess noted that Pima County this year began including heat-related deaths in its tally of environmental heat fatalities. Maricopa County, home to Phoenix, America’s hottest big city, for years has included heat-related deaths. Clark County, Nevada, home to Las Vegas, now also considers deaths in which heat was a contributing factor.

    Maricopa’s Public Health Department counted 425 “heat associated” deaths last year, including those where heat was a secondary factor, such as a heart attack provoked by high temperatures.

    It reports there were 59 heat-associated deaths confirmed this year through Aug. 5, with another 345 under investigation. The latest count follows the hottest month in Phoenix on record, and a record 31 consecutive days that hit 110 degrees Fahrenheit (43.3 Celsius) or higher.

    Dallas, which regularly sees summer highs over 100 degrees Fahrenheit (37.7 Celsius), sweltered through an excessive heat warning this month and also grapples with oppressive humidity.

    Carla Gates, whose mail carrier husband died, noted cities worldwide now must learn to deal with extreme weather. She said her spouse, with 36 years on the job, tried to protect himself by taking a chest filled with ice and several bottles of cold water on his rounds.

    “Our climate has changed,” she said. “And I don’t think it’s going back to how it was 20 years ago. So we’re going to have to get used to it and we’re going to have to make some adjustments.”

    Now she wants to honor her husband by pushing legislation to ensure people working outside are better protected from the heat. Gates noted that the day her husband died he was in an old mail truck without working air conditioning.

    “I don’t wish this on anyone, anyone to get a phone call that their loved one died working, doing something that they love in the heat,” she said.

    ___

    LaFleur reported form Dallas. AP writers from around the U.S. also contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What’s behind the tentative US-Iran agreement involving prisoners and frozen funds

    What’s behind the tentative US-Iran agreement involving prisoners and frozen funds

    [ad_1]

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — The United States and Iran reached a tentative agreement this week that will eventually see five detained Americans in Iran and an unknown number Iranians imprisoned in the U.S. released from custody after billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets are transferred from banks in South Korea to Qatar.

    The complex deal — which came together after months of indirect negotiations between U.S. and Iranian officials — was announced on Thursday when Iran moved four of the five Americans from prison to house arrest. The fifth American had already been under house arrest.

    Details of the money transfer, the timing of its completion and the ultimate release of both the American and Iranian prisoners remain unclear. However, U.S. and Iranian officials say they believe the agreement could be complete by mid- to late-September.

    A look at what is known about the deal.

    WHAT’S IN IT?

    Under the tentative agreement, the U.S. has given its blessing to South Korea to convert frozen Iranian assets held there from the South Korean currency, the won, to euros.

    That money then would be sent to Qatar, a small, energy-rich nation on the Arabian Peninsula that has been a mediator in the talks. The amount from Seoul could be anywhere from $6 billion to $7 billion, depending on exchange rates. The cash represents money South Korea owed Iran — but had not yet paid — for oil purchased before the Trump administration imposed sanctions on such transactions in 2019.

    The U.S. maintains that, once in Qatar, the money will be held in restricted accounts and will only be able to be used for humanitarian goods, such as medicine and food. Those transactions are currently allowed under American sanctions targeting the Islamic Republic over its advancing nuclear program.

    Some in Iran have disputed the U.S. claim, saying that Tehran will have total control over the funds. Qatar has not commented publicly on how it will monitor the disbursement of the money.

    In exchange, Iran is to release the five Iranian-Americans held as prisoners in the country. Currently, they are under guard at a hotel in Tehran, according to a U.S.-based lawyer advocating for one of them.

    WHY WILL IT TAKE SO LONG?

    Iran does not want the frozen assets in South Korean won, which is less convertible than euros or U.S. dollars. U.S. officials say that while South Korea is on board with the transfer it is concerned that converting $6 or $7 billion in won into other currencies at once will adversely affect its exchange rate and economy.

    Thus, South Korea is proceeding slowly, converting smaller amounts of the frozen assets for the eventual transfer to the central bank in Qatar. In addition, as the money is transferred, it has to avoid touching the U.S. financial system where it could become subject to American sanctions. So a complicated and time-consuming series of transfers through third-country banks has been arranged.

    WHO ARE THE DETAINED IRANIAN-AMERICANS?

    The identities of three of the five prisoners have been made public. It remains unclear who the other two are. The American government has described them as wanting to keep their identities private and Iran has not named them either.

    The three known are Siamak Namazi, who was detained in 2015 and later sentenced to 10 years in prison on internationally criticized spying charges. Another is Emad Sharghi, a venture capitalist serving a 10-year sentence.

    The third is Morad Tahbaz, a British-American conservationist of Iranian descent who was arrested in 2018 and also received a 10-year sentence.

    Those advocating for their release describe them as wrongfully detained and innocent. Iran has used prisoners with Western ties as bargaining chips in negotiations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

    WHY IS THIS DEAL HAPPENING NOW?

    For Iran, years of American sanctions following former U.S. President Donald Trump‘s withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with world powers has crushed its already-anemic economy.

    Previous claims of progress in talks over the frozen assets have provided only short-term boosts to Iran’s hobbled rial currency.

    The release of that money, even if only disbursed under strict circumstances, could provide an economic boost.

    For the U.S., the administration of President Joe Biden has tried to get Iran back into the deal, which fell apart after Trump’s 2018 withdrawal. Last year, countries involved in the initial agreement offered Tehran what was described as their last, best roadmap to restore the accord. Iran did not accept it.

    Still, Iran hawks in Congress and outside critics of the 2015 nuclear deal have criticized the new arrangement. Former Vice President Mike Pence and the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Jim Risch, as well as former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, have all compared the money transfer to paying a ransom and said the Biden administration is encouraging Iran to continue taking prisoners.

    WILL THE U.S. RELEASE IRANIAN PRISONERS HELD IN AMERICA?

    On Friday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry made a point of bringing up those prisoners. American officials have declined to comment on who or how many Iranian prisoners might be released in a final agreement. But Iranian media in the past identified several prisoners with cases tied to violations of U.S. export laws and restrictions on doing business with Iran.

    Those alleged violations include the transfer of money through Venezuela and sales of dual-use equipment that the U.S. says could be used in Iran’s military and nuclear programs.

    DOES THIS MEAN IRAN-U.S. TENSIONS ARE EASING?

    No. Outside of the tensions over the nuclear deal and Iran’s atomic ambitions, a series of attacks and ship seizures in the Mideast have been attributed to Tehran since 2019.

    The Pentagon is considering a plan to put U.S. troops on board to guard commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of all oil shipments pass moving out of the Persian Gulf.

    A major deployment of U.S. sailors and Marines, alongside F-35s, F-16s and other aircraft, is also underway in the region. Meanwhile, Iran supplies Russia with the bomb-carrying drones Moscow uses to target sites in Ukraine amid its war on Kyiv.

    ___

    Lee reported from Washington.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Iraq moves toward easing its energy crisis with $27B TotalEnergies deal, but challenges remain

    Iraq moves toward easing its energy crisis with $27B TotalEnergies deal, but challenges remain

    [ad_1]

    BAGHDAD — A multibillion-dollar agreement signed with France’s TotalEnergies could help resolve Iraq‘s longstanding electricity crisis, attract international investors and reduce its reliance on gas imports from neighboring Iran, a point of tension with Washington.

    The $27 billion agreement signed in Baghdad on Monday after years of negotiation marks the largest foreign investment in Iraq’s history. It could even help combat climate change by reducing oil flares, and relieve some of the stress on Iraq’s dwindling waterways through a new desalination plant.

    But that’s only if the parties implementing the agreement can overcome the endemic corruption and political instability that has undermined Iraq’s oil sector for more than two decades.

    The Gas Growth Integrated Project focuses on bolstering the country’s oil-rich but underdeveloped Basra province. TotalEnergies would take on a 45% stake in the Basra Oil Company, with Iraq holding 30% and Qatar’s state-owned petroleum company taking the other 25%.

    It would recover natural gas from three oil fields and use it to generate electricity. Because Iraq lacks the necessary infrastructure, that gas is currently being burned off into the atmosphere. The World Bank estimates Iraq flares around 16 billion cubic meters of gas per day.

    The project also includes the construction of a seawater treatment plant that would relieve the pressure on Iraq’s water resources, and a solar power plant to be built with Saudi Arabia’s ACWA Power that would supply the local grid.

    Iraq is an OPEC member with some of the world’s largest oil reserves. But its electricity grid has suffered from decades of mismanagement and damage from various conflicts. Power outages are common, especially in the scorching summer months, forcing many Iraqis to rely on diesel generators or suffer through temperatures that exceed 50 degrees Celsius (122 degrees Fahrenheit).

    Iraq also relies heavily on gas imports from Iran, with which it has had close ties since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. The U.S. has been forced to grant some exceptions to the sanctions it maintains on Iran over that country’s disputed nuclear program. Budgetary shortfalls and surging demand have meanwhile forced Iran to reduce the supply in recent years, compounding Iraq’s woes and fueling violent protests.

    Iraq’s energy problems stem from its troubled politics.

    The power-sharing arrangement set up in the wake of the U.S.-led invasion divides the state and its institutions along religious and ethnic lines. Sectarian-based political parties bicker over ministries, install loyalists at top positions and dispense public sector jobs to their supporters. The system breeds widespread corruption, inefficiency and political gridlock.

    ExxonMobile, which saw a similar multi-project deal fall through after years of negotiations, announced in 2021 that it would be selling its shares from the West Qurna 1 oil field. London-based BP is spinning off development of the Rumaila field, Iraq’s largest.

    Iraq signed an initial contract with TotalEnergies in 2021, but political disputes delayed the final signing for another two years.

    TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné nevertheless struck an upbeat tone at the signing ceremony, saying the agreement would boost Iraq’s economy and create jobs, with Iraqis making up at least 80% of the project’s workforce.

    “It’s a very strong signal, not only to TotalEnergies to encourage to invest, but also to all other foreign investment,” he said in a statement. The company did not respond to several requests for additional comment.

    The state-run Iraqi News Agency said work would begin “in a matter of days,” with the Oil Ministry expecting tangible results in three years.

    Oil Ministry spokesman Assim Jihad said the ministry has been trying to launch such projects for over a decade but was held back by political gridlock, the COVID-19 pandemic and the war against the Islamic State extremist group, which at one point controlled much of northern and western Iraq.

    “Now there is political will to speed up implementing these kinds of projects,” he said.

    Bachar El-Halabi, an energy markets analyst at London-based Argus, says the megaproject “gives the country a breather” after recent years saw some oil majors pull out of Iraq.

    “This should, in theory, help decrease Iraq’s dependency on Iranian gas imports, which remains a sticky point between Baghdad and Washington,” he said.

    Marc Ayoub, an energy policy expert at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, a Washington-based think tank, said the project could face challenges down the line.

    “The political climate in Iraq is sensitive and could change at any moment,” he said.

    The size of the project, and the involvement of a major multi-national company, means “there would be less room for corruption,” he added. “But you never know. There’s always risk.”

    ___

    Chehayeb reported from Beirut.

    [ad_2]

    Source link