Zion Tech Group

Tag: Order

  • Denver Health pauses youth gender-affirming care after Trump executive order


    Denver Health this week paused gender-affirming surgeries for minors following threatened funding cuts from the Trump administration, leaving few options for transgender youth seeking that care in the metro area.

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday ordering institutions that receive federal funding to stop performing gender-affirming surgeries on anyone under 19, and forbidding them from offering puberty blockers or hormones for gender-affirming purposes.

    The health system, which operates the region’s safety-net hospital, has not said whether it also is halting hormonal treatment.

    “Denver Health is committed to and deeply concerned for the health and safety of our gender-diverse patients under the age of 19 in light of the executive order regarding youth gender-affirming care,” the system said in a statement Thursday. “We recognize this order will impact gender-diverse youth, including increased risk of depression, anxiety and suicidality.”

    Trump’s executive order also directed federal agencies to explore ways to exclude coverage for gender-affirming care from Medicare, Medicaid, Tricare and insurance plans sold on the individual marketplace.

    The Denver hospital was not alone in its actions.

    In Virginia, VCU Health and Children’s Hospital of Richmond said they have suspended gender-affirming medication and gender-affirming surgical procedures for those under 19. In Washington, D.C., Children’s National Hospital said it had “paused prescriptions of puberty blockers and hormone therapy to comply with the directives while we assess the situation further.”

    Denver Health officials did not say how often the hospital performed gender-affirming surgeries on people younger than 19. Most transgender people don’t undergo surgery until adulthood, if at all, but guidelines for treating patients allow surgeries to remove mammary tissue and create a masculine chest appearance in cases where the patient has the mental capacity to decide and is particularly distressed by their breasts.

    The pause, first reported by 9News, doesn’t affect care for patients over 19. Hospitals that don’t comply with the order would risk losing funding through Medicare and Medicaid, which could be financially crippling for almost any facility.

    Denver Health is particularly exposed, though, because it already faces financial headwinds and disproportionately relies on federal programs. In late 2024, the health system was on track to lose about $11 million for the year, following a $35 million loss in 2022 and a small profit in 2023.

    The system hasn’t said how much money would be at risk if it didn’t fully comply with Trump’s order. About two-thirds of patient days in Denver Health’s hospital had either Medicare or Medicaid as the source of payment, according to the most recent hospital transparency report from the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing.

    “These programs represent a significant portion of Denver Health’s funding, and the executive order specifically states that should we not comply, our participation in these programs is at risk,” the health system said in its statement. “The loss of this funding would critically impair our ability to provide care for the Denver community.”

    The language in Trump’s executive order — using words such as “maiming,” “sterilizing” and “mutilation” — contradicts what is typical for gender-affirming care in the United States. It also labels guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health as “junk science.”

    WPATH said in a statement that restrictions and bans on “access to necessary medical care for transgender youth are harmful to patients and their families.”

    Gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth isn’t common. A new study shows that fewer than 1 in 1,000 U.S. adolescents with commercial insurance received puberty blockers or hormones during a recent five-year period, and the bulk of gender-affirming surgeries are not performed on youth.

    The move by Denver Health leaves few other options for younger people in the region.

    Children’s Hospital Colorado stopped offering gender-affirming chest surgeries to young adult patients in 2023 and referred them to University of Colorado Hospital. Children’s never performed gender-affirming surgery on patients under 18, but continued to offer other treatments, such as therapy, puberty blockers and hormonal treatment, a spokesperson said at the time.

    Children’s didn’t offer an explanation at the time, but the move coincided with increased public pressure and harassment of institutions offering gender-affirming care.

    The new executive order appears to require Children’s to also halt those services, or lose federal funds. In a statement, the hospital said it continues to assess the order’s impact.

    UCHealth previously offered gender-affirming care to patients who were at least 18, but will raise the age limit to 19 in compliance with Trump’s executive order, spokesman Dan Weaver said.

    “We know these changes may be challenging, especially for 18-year-old patients previously approved for gender-affirming care, and behavioral health support services will be available to help support our patients navigate these changes,” he said in a statement.

    Catholic-affiliated CommonSpirit Health doesn’t provide gender-affirming care to anyone, while HealthOne and AdventHealth don’t offer those services to minors.



    Denver Health, a leading healthcare provider in Colorado, has announced that they are pausing their youth gender-affirming care services following an executive order issued by former President Donald Trump.

    The executive order, which was signed in January 2021, bans federal funding for gender-affirming care for transgender youth. This includes hormone therapy, puberty blockers, and gender-affirming surgeries.

    In a statement released by Denver Health, they expressed their disappointment in having to pause these critical services for young transgender patients. They emphasized their commitment to providing inclusive and affirming care for all patients, regardless of their gender identity.

    The decision to pause youth gender-affirming care has sparked outrage among LGBTQ+ advocates and healthcare professionals who believe that transgender youth deserve access to gender-affirming care. Many are calling for the executive order to be overturned and for Denver Health to resume these services as soon as possible.

    As the fight for transgender rights continues, it is crucial for healthcare providers like Denver Health to stand up for the rights and well-being of all patients, regardless of their gender identity. The pause on youth gender-affirming care serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing challenges faced by the transgender community, and the importance of advocating for their rights and access to healthcare.

    Tags:

    1. Denver Health
    2. Youth gender-affirming care
    3. Trump executive order
    4. LGBTQ+ healthcare
    5. Transgender youth
    6. Denver healthcare
    7. Gender identity support
    8. Healthcare policy
    9. LGBTQ+ rights
    10. Denver Health services

    #Denver #Health #pauses #youth #genderaffirming #care #Trump #executive #order

  • Why these pregnant moms are suing the Trump administration over the birthright citizenship executive order




    CNN
     — 

    Liza counted the months until Donald Trump would be president. And she counted the months until her baby was due.

    The timing filled her with dread. She’d learned from a friend that Trump planned to end birthright citizenship, right around the time she’d learned she was pregnant.

    Last week, the moment she feared came even faster than she expected.

    “I was shocked that it happened so quickly. … My world fell apart,” says Liza, a grad student in Texas who’s 24 weeks pregnant. Trump’s executive order banning birthright citizenship, she says, has thrust her family’s life into uncertainty.

    Now the mass communications student from Russia is part of a group of pregnant moms – and advocacy organizations who represent them – who are fighting back.

    “We have to do it for us, for our baby, and for all the other people like us,” she told CNN.

    The federal lawsuit Liza and others filed is among a number of legal challenges arguing the ban violates the Constitution and longstanding legal precedent. Ultimately, the Supreme Court could have the final say.

    Advocates argue the mothers’ voices particularly convey the urgency and significance of this moment.

    “The executive order is already creating chaos in immigrant communities,” says Conchita Cruz, executive director of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP). The organization is also a plaintiff in the case, and Cruz says its members include numerous families who would be impacted by the ban.

    CNN has reached out the Justice Department for comment on the lawsuit. In response to another federal lawsuit over the order filed in Seattle, administration officials have argued that the 14th Amendment only grants birthright citizenship “to those persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction — and thus excludes children of noncitizens here illegally as well as children of temporary visaholders.”

    In their lawsuit filed in federal court in Maryland, Liza and other plaintiffs argue that the government’s interpretation “violates long-settled law” and unjustly denies citizenship to US-born children who “are plainly ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States.”

    Losing birthright citizenship wouldn’t be merely a bureaucratic matter, according to Liza, who asked to be identified only by her first name because she fears she could face persecution for speaking out. On top of the stress of pregnancy, she says, she now finds herself worrying that her baby won’t be able to get health care or go to school, or that the child could even face deportation someday. Getting a birth certificate from the Russian Embassy wouldn’t be an option, she says, as her husband is seeking asylum and they fear persecution from the Russian government.

    “My baby will be stateless,” she says.

    Liza says she fears returning to a country she fled in 2023 – and now fears for the future of her unborn child in a country that feels more unwelcoming by the day.

    “It looks like my baby will have less rights than I have,” she says. “You feel unwelcome in your own country. You come here for opportunities. You come here to study, to change the world. … And then it’s all for nothing. They clearly tell you that they do not want you here.”

    She thought she’d found safety and stability in the US. Now nothing seems certain

    Mónica, a doctor from Venezuela who’s living in South Carolina, thought she and her husband had finally found stability in the United States six years after arriving.

    “We’ve been trying to do everything the right way,” she says. “We’ve been working, we have been paying taxes and we actually were able to buy our own home.”

    The moment seemed right to have a child, Mónica told reporters last week.

    “Time was passing, and this was something that was important to us. And we had reached a point of stability in this country,” she said.

    And now at 12 weeks pregnant, she says she should be focusing on her baby’s health.

    But lately, she says her thoughts have been consumed by other worries.

    “Instead, my husband and I are stressed, we’re anxious and we’re depressed about the reality that my child may not be able to become a US citizen,” says Mónica, who asked to be identified by a pseudonym to protect her safety.

    Further complicating matters, it isn’t clear whether Trump’s executive order applies to her. Monica has Temporary Protected Status, which allows her to legally work in the US, and she’s applying for asylum. If she wins her case, she would eventually become a legal permanent resident of the US. But there’s no telling how long that process will take, she says.

    “I’ve been waiting for many years, and I might be waiting for another 10 years before they even call me for an interview, it seems,” she says.

    In the meantime, she says, she also fears her child will be stateless. The Venezuelan Embassy in the US has been closed for years.

    “I don’t know what will happen. … and I don’t understand how it is that my child could be treated differently than other children,” she says. “It should be a right for him to be born in the United States and get US citizenship.”

    Barbara was a lawyer in Cuba, and she’s always liked the idea of fighting injustice. Now, about two years after arriving in the US, she’s working as a school custodian in Kentucky while seeking asylum in the US. And she’s about four months pregnant. Being listed among the impacted ASAP members in a legal filing, she says, has given her strength.

    “Everything that’s in my hands, I’m going to do,” she says. “I want to support this cause because really it’s the children who are being harmed by this, it’s the pregnant women who are going to receive this stress, it’s the families of so many immigrants that are going to be affected.”

    Barbara says the baby, due this summer, would be her second child, a little sister for her 4-year-old daughter.
    Her family has already begun buying baby items to prepare.

    Barbara asked to be identified only by her first name to protect her family’s safety. The stress of handling pregnancy while also worrying about whether the baby girl she’ll have this summer will be a US citizen is overwhelming, she says.

    “After they announced it, I couldn’t sleep. It’s a double concern,” she says. “I feel like they can suddenly steal my baby’s future.”

    It’s a sharp contrast to the supportive environment that Barbara says she, her husband and her 4-year-old daughter have found in Kentucky.

    “There’s a huge Hispanic community,” she says, including many Cubans. And Barbara says they feel at home.

    “My dream is to settle permanently in this country,” she says, “and with God’s blessing, to have our family and a peaceful life.”

    In the days since the lawsuit was filed, Liza says she’s found herself mulling many questions.

    Chief among them: “How do these kids hurt Trump?”

    She says it’s difficult to understand why the US president would target her unborn child and so many others.

    “It’s not making anyone’s life better — not mine, not my family’s, not the people who voted for Trump,” she says. “I would just like people to understand that. Hurting someone does not make your life better.”

    Liza's husband, Igor, is a Russian artist seeking asylum in the United States. After learning Liza was pregnant with their child, he created this oil painting, titled

    A better life is what Liza says she dreams of for her own child.

    “The baby will be bilingual. I think that’s a big thing. There will be so many opportunities for the baby. And in the US…if you work hard, you will get what you deserve,” she says.

    The future for a child in this country, she says, is still bright.

    Despite all the uncertainty of this moment, Liza says that’s one thing she knows.

    CNN’s Tierney Sneed and Hannah Rabinowitz contributed to this report.



    In a recent development, a group of pregnant mothers have decided to take legal action against the Trump administration over the birthright citizenship executive order. The controversial order, which seeks to end automatic citizenship for children born on U.S. soil to non-citizen parents, has sparked outrage and concern among immigrant communities.

    These pregnant mothers argue that the executive order is not only discriminatory but also goes against the principles of the Constitution. They believe that every child born in the United States should have the right to citizenship, regardless of their parents’ immigration status.

    Furthermore, these mothers are concerned about the impact that this order will have on their children’s future. By denying them citizenship, they fear that their children will be deprived of essential rights and opportunities that come with being a U.S. citizen.

    The lawsuit aims to challenge the legality of the executive order and protect the rights of children born to non-citizen parents in the United States. These mothers are determined to fight for their children’s right to citizenship and ensure that they are not unfairly targeted by discriminatory policies.

    As this legal battle unfolds, it is clear that these pregnant mothers are willing to stand up and fight for the rights of their children. Their courage and determination serve as a powerful reminder of the importance of upholding the values of equality and justice for all.

    Tags:

    pregnant moms, Trump administration, birthright citizenship, executive order, lawsuit, legal action, immigration policy, constitutional rights, citizenship rights, pregnant women, immigration reform, legal challenge, Trump policies, government lawsuit

    #pregnant #moms #suing #Trump #administration #birthright #citizenship #executive #order

  • Federal grant freeze: Trump White House rescinds order


    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s budget office on Wednesday rescinded a memo freezing spending on federal loans and grants, less than two days after it sparked widespread confusion and legal challenges across the country.

    The memo, which was issued Monday by the Office of Management and Budget, had frightened states, schools and organizations that rely on trillions of dollars from Washington.

    Administration officials said the pause was necessary to review whether spending aligned with Trump’s executive orders on issues like climate change and diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

    But on Wednesday, they sent out a two-sentence notice rescinding the original memo. The reversal was the latest sign that even with unified control of Washington, Trump’s plans to dramatically and rapidly reshape the government have limits.

    Administration officials insisted that despite the confusion, their actions still had the intended effect by underscoring to federal agencies their obligations to abide by Trump’s executive orders.

    “The Executive Orders issued by the President on funding reviews remain in full force and effect and will be rigorously implemented by all agencies and departments,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, blaming the confusion on the courts and news outlets, not the administration. “This action should effectively end the court case and allow the government to focus on enforcing the President’s orders on controlling federal spending.”

    The vaguely worded order, legal pause and eventual cancellation left organizations confused and worried again about what might be next.

    Nourishing Hope, which runs foods pantries, home meal delivery and an online food market in Chicago, gets roughly 20% of its food budget comes from the federal government. CEO Kellie O’Connell said the biggest issue when the memo surfaced was getting clear and accurate information so they could figure out how to plan for the coming months.

    If their federal funds were frozen, O’Connell said, they could make it a few weeks. But the wider concern was the possible end of assistance, like food stamps, which would increase demand on her organization.

    President Donald Trump’s budget office on Wednesday rescinded a memo freezing spending on federal grants, less than two days after it sparked widespread confusion and legal challenges across the country.

    “If that were to significantly diminish or get eliminated, it will be nearly impossible for the charity food system to step up,” she said of food stamps. “It would be potentially catastrophic for our communities.”

    On Tuesday, Trump administration officials said programs that provide direct assistance to Americans, including Medicare, Social Security, student loans and food stamps, would not be affected.

    However, they sometimes struggled to provide a clear picture. Leavitt initially would not say whether Medicaid was exempted from the freeze, but the administration later clarified that it was.

    The White House’s change in direction caught Congress off guard, particularly Trump’s Republicans allies who had defended him throughout the brief saga.

    “This is Donald Trump. He throws hand grenades in the middle of the room, and then cleans it up afterwards,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota. “I just think the guy’s a genius.”

    Cramer acknowledged the initial memo may have generated too much political heat, with red and blue states raising alarms over the funding freeze. But the senator suggested Trump “maybe didn’t understand the breadth” of what had been proposed.

    But Democrats said the White House had overreached beyond what Americans want.

    “Most people voted for cheaper eggs,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico. “They did not vote for this chaos.”

    The funding pause was scheduled to go into effect at 5 p.m. Tuesday. It was stayed by a federal judge until at least Monday after an emergency hearing requested by nonprofit groups that receive federal grants.

    An additional lawsuit by Democratic state attorneys general was also pending, and a hearing was held Wednesday in federal court in Rhode Island. Chief Judge John J. McConnell said he was inclined to issue an order blocking any attempt at a funding pause, saying there was the possibility of “irreparable harm.”

    After the initial memo was distributed Monday, federal agencies were directed to answer a series of yes or no questions about each program by Feb. 7. The questions included “does this program promote gender ideology?” and “does this program promote or support in any way abortion?”

    Although Trump had promised to turn Washington upside-down if elected to a second term, the effects of his effort to pause funding were being felt far from the nation’s capital. Organizations like Meals on Wheels, which receives federal money to deliver food to the elderly, were worried about getting cut off. Even temporary interruptions in funding could cause layoffs or delays in public services.

    Barbara Teed, 73, of Bloomington, Minnesota, said she felt “panic, absolute panic” when she learned the freeze could affect her.

    Teed lives with her 38-year-old son, Ryan, who has Down syndrome. Both receive meals from Bloomington-Eden Prairie Meals On Wheels.

    “This is sometimes my only meal of the day. So it’s really, really important to me,” said Teed.

    Reynier Prieto, whose 5-year-old son, Liam, attends the Head Start program at Easterseals South Florida, said the program is helping address speech development issues so that Liam can hopefully attend public school next year.

    “It’s the most important thing for our life right now,” Prieto said. “That’s the way that we can go out of our home and work, and we know that he’s in good hands.”

    Losing a program like Head Start could be bad for many families, and government officials should take the time to examine each one that receives federal money, Prieto said.

    “Programs like this, they need to review it and make sure that it’s not cut because this actually helps the community,” Prieto said.

    Democratic critics of the order celebrated the memo’s rescinding.

    “This is an important victory for the American people whose voices were heard after massive pressure from every corner of this country,” said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington. She said Trump had “caused real harm and chaos for millions.”

    Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said, “Americans fought back and Donald Trump backed off.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Sophia Tareen in Chicago, Mark Vancleave in Minneapolis, David Fischer in Miami and Michael Casey in Boston contributed to this report.





    The Trump White House has rescinded its order to freeze federal grants, allowing funding to flow once again to a wide range of programs across the country. This decision comes after criticism from lawmakers and advocacy groups, who argued that the freeze would harm vulnerable populations and disrupt essential services.

    The federal grant freeze was initially put in place as part of an effort to review and potentially reallocate funding to align with the Trump administration’s priorities. However, the move caused confusion and uncertainty among grant recipients, many of whom rely on federal funding to support their work.

    With the freeze now lifted, organizations and agencies can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that their funding is secure for the time being. This reversal is a positive step towards ensuring that critical services and programs can continue to operate without interruption.

    While the Trump White House has taken a step back from its initial decision to freeze federal grants, the future of funding for these programs remains uncertain. Advocates and stakeholders will continue to monitor the situation closely and advocate for the protection of federal grant funding for the benefit of all Americans.

    Tags:

    federal grant freeze, Trump White House, order rescinded, government grants, funding, federal budget, policy changes

    #Federal #grant #freeze #Trump #White #House #rescinds #order

  • California Wildfires: Trump executive order could divide control of state water system, putting even distribution at risk


    From rivers to dams to hundreds of miles of aqueducts, moving water around California takes a massive system, engineered over the better part of a century.

    Now, with a new executive order, President Donald Trump is directing federal agencies to essentially assert control over critical sections of that system, claiming mismanagement as he tries to assign blame for the wildfires in Southern California.

    “Well, it’s a lot of things. It’s a very sweeping executive order that attempts to exempt the federal water delivery system from federal law and state law and also attempts to sort of eviscerate state control of state water resources,” said Jon Rosenfield, research biologist with the environmental group San Francisco Baykeeper.

    First, it helps to understand that California’s water system has a kind of split personality, starting with some major dams being run by federal agencies, others by the state, along with two massive canal systems, flowing side by side in stretches. The state water project delivers much of its water to Southern California, while the federal project is a major supplier to agricultural areas in the Central Valley. For more than half a century, they’ve worked in a delicate balance, with coordinated agreements.

    RELATED: Trump tours LA wildfires after threats to withhold aid over water policy, voter ID

    That is, possibly, until now.

    “And because these systems are so interrelated and because they have needed to coordinate so much, having one partner say we’re not going to play by the rules anymore puts a tremendous burden on the other partners and really puts the entire water distribution system at great risk,” Rosenfield said.

    However, in the executive order, Trump directed federal agencies to deliver more water in a section called “Overriding Disastrous California Policies.” And to “deliver more water and produce additional hydropower, including by increasing storage and conveyance, and jointly operating federal and state facilities, to high-need communities, notwithstanding any contrary State or local laws. The Bureau of Reclamation shall take all available measures to ensure that State agencies – including the California Department of Water Resources – do not interfere with the Bureau of Reclamation’s operation of the project to maximize water delivery…”

    MORE: President Donald Trump goes off the rails when asked about California wildfires

    “These may be inconvenient environmental regulations. These are regulations, by the way, that are benefiting not just Delta communities but Bay Area communities that really rely on the San Francisco Bay Delta system for drinking water and other purposes. So, these protections are in place and in place for everybody,” said John Buse, senior counsel with Center for Biological Diversity

    He argues that water management had nothing to do with the Southern California wildfires. He believes it will take time to see what elements of the order actually go into effect and expects lawsuits will follow to protect water quality and the Endangered Species Act.

    “This is one of many fairly far-reaching and, we think, overreaching executive orders. So, we’re going to have to keep an eye on things and try to hold tight. See what comes out,” Buse said.

    With control of vast amounts of California water, potentially in the balance, environmental groups say one major concern is maintaining enough flow through the Delta to push back salt water and keep drinking water supplies protected.

    Now Streaming 24/7 Click Here

    Copyright © 2025 KGO-TV. All Rights Reserved.



    The devastating California wildfires have once again brought to light the urgent need for proper management of the state’s water resources. With the Trump administration’s latest executive order, there are concerns that control of the state water system could be divided, potentially putting the even distribution of water at risk.

    California is already facing water shortages and drought conditions, and the wildfires have only exacerbated the situation. Proper management of the state’s water resources is crucial in ensuring that all communities have access to clean water for drinking, agriculture, and firefighting efforts.

    The executive order could potentially divide control of the state water system between federal and state authorities, leading to confusion and inefficiencies in managing water distribution. This could further strain resources and hinder efforts to combat the wildfires and provide relief to affected communities.

    It is essential that all levels of government work together to ensure the equitable distribution of water in California. Dividing control of the state water system could only serve to create more challenges and hinder the state’s ability to effectively respond to the ongoing crisis.

    As the wildfires continue to ravage California, it is imperative that we prioritize the proper management of our water resources. The consequences of not doing so could be catastrophic for the state and its residents.

    Tags:

    California wildfires, Trump executive order, state water system, water distribution, natural disasters, environmental policy, government intervention, emergency preparedness, California drought, water management, climate change adaptation.

    #California #Wildfires #Trump #executive #order #divide #control #state #water #system #putting #distribution #risk

  • Madonna slams Trump over executive order barring transgender military service


    Pop star Madonna took a swipe at the Trump administration’s wave of executive orders with a social media message made in solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community.

    “It’s so sad to watch our new Government slowly dismantling all the Freedoms we have been fighting for and WON over the years,” the 66-year-old singer wrote in an X post on Tuesday. 

    After adding a pride flag and broken heart emojis, she concluded the post by urging her fans, “Don’t give up the Fight!”

    The “Material Girl” and “Vogue” singer’s post came hours after Trump signed an executive order titled “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” which bars transgender Americans from serving in the military.

    MADONNA SHARES RARE GLIMPSE OF HER 6 CHILDREN TOGETHER IN LAVISH CELEBRATION FOR 66TH BIRTHDAY

    Madonna has been an outspoken Trump critic for years. (Nicholas Hunt via Getty Images)

    Last week, Trump also signed an executive order recognizing only two sexes – male and female – in all areas of the federal government, also mandating that the government adhere to biological sex rather than gender.

    Conservatives lauded the move as a “return to common sense,” but critics met the decision with scrutiny.

    Madonna, who has been an outspoken advocate for the LGBTQ+ community in the past, was also an outspoken critic of Trump during his first term in office.

    In 2017, she delivered a profanity-laced speech at the Women’s March in Washington, D.C., shortly after Trump assumed office for his first term.

    MADONNA CONFESSES CHALLENGES OF MOTHERHOOD, BALANCING CAREER: ‘I’M STRUGGLING’

     President Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office on January 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C.  (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE

    “I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House,” she said at the time, before adding that she “knows this won’t change anything.”

    The soundbite made headlines, earning rage among those in Trump’s corner. After Trump defeated former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Nov. 2016, Madonna said his victory “felt like someone died.”

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    “It wasn’t a bad dream that I had,” she added at the time, saying she wanted to “rain on [Trump’s] parade.”



    Madonna slams Trump over executive order barring transgender military service

    In a scathing Instagram post, pop icon Madonna has criticized President Trump for his recent executive order banning transgender individuals from serving in the military. The singer, known for her outspoken support of LGBTQ rights, called the decision “cruel and unjust” and accused the president of discriminating against a marginalized community.

    Madonna went on to express her solidarity with transgender service members, stating that they deserve “the same rights and opportunities as anyone else.” She also urged her followers to speak out against the discriminatory policy and to stand up for equality and inclusivity.

    The executive order, signed by Trump in August, has faced backlash from LGBTQ activists and civil rights groups, who argue that it is a blatant attack on transgender rights. Madonna’s powerful statement adds to the growing chorus of voices condemning the president’s decision and advocating for equality for all individuals, regardless of their gender identity.

    Tags:

    Madonna, Trump, executive order, transgender military service, LGBTQ rights, celebrity news, political controversy, activism, social media backlash

    #Madonna #slams #Trump #executive #order #barring #transgender #military #service

  • Trump order freezes funding for Illinois EV charging network


    In its quest to get a million electric vehicles on the road by 2030, Illinois was counting on $148 million in federal funding to help build a statewide network of public EV chargers.

    Now that funding has been frozen — and targeted for possible reduction or elimination — under a wide-ranging executive order that President Donald Trump signed on his first day in office.

    Also in limbo: another federal program that was to provide Illinois with millions of dollars for public EV chargers.

    “I’m very nervous right now that (the Trump executive order) is going to limit Illinois’ ability to achieve its EV future,” said Brian Urbaszewski, environmental health programs director at the Chicago-based Respiratory Health Association.

    If the federal funding drops or disappears, “it really puts that (1 million EV) goal that we have in Illinois in jeopardy,” he said.

    EVs and their chargers appear to be a prime target of Trump’s “Unleashing American Energy” executive order, but they are by no means the only Illinois clean energy projects that could be in for a bumpy ride as the president takes bold steps to reverse the ambitious clean energy policies of his predecessor.

    The executive order pauses funds coming from President Joe Biden’s signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, including incentives for solar and wind projects and a federal tax credit of up to $7,500 for EV buyers.

    The executive order also targets the opportunity for states to adopt California-style vehicle emissions rules that exceed national standards, an approach that Illinois is currently considering.

    The executive order sets up a 90-day review period for clean energy projects funded under the Inflation Reduction Act and the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, after which agency heads will submit recommendations.

    Illinois experts and advocates noted that there are still a lot of unknowns. Environmental Law and Policy Center Chief Executive Officer Howard Learner said Trump’s power is limited in areas such as solar energy tax credits and EV tax credits, which were voted into law by Congress.

    “No president in an executive order can willy-nilly overturn congressional legislation,” Learner said.

    The president can go to Congress with his preferred policies and ask for changes, Learner said, but solar energy tax credits and wind production tax credits already have strong bipartisan support.

    Double Black Diamond Solar near Waverly, south of Springfield, seen on July 31, 2024. (E. Jason Wambsgans/Chicago Tribune)
    Double Black Diamond Solar near Waverly, south of Springfield, seen on July 31, 2024. (E. Jason Wambsgans/Chicago Tribune)

    Funds for the Illinois EV charger network under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program, on the other hand, are subject to more direct presidential control.

    “Here the administration does have a degree of flexibility, and can decide, with regard to new expenditures, whether to move forward or not,” Learner said. “If (the expenditures) have been congressionally authorized and appropriated, the administration has to follow what Congress has decided.”

    Of the $148 million in money for an electric charger network that Illinois was expecting from the EV formula program, the state announced $25 million in grants in September for 37 projects with 182 new charging ports. Applications are currently open for a second round of funding, expected to distribute about $24 million in grants.

    It’s unclear how much of the money could be vulnerable under the Trump executive order, but Urbaszewski said the state has to first spend its own money and then get reimbursed by the EV formula program or the federal Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Grant Program.

    That reimbursement system means money stays in federal hands longer, which could be a disadvantage if funding is cut off.

    “That, and the fact that those two programs are specifically called out in the executive order — specifically — makes me a little nervous,” Urbaszewski said.

    Asked about the effects of Trump’s executive order on Illinois, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency issued a written statement saying, “At this time, IEPA is not aware of any impacts to grants and will be monitoring the situation closely.”

    At the Union of Concerned Scientists, Midwest Policy Director James Gignac highlighted another issue for Illinois: the Inflation Reduction Act’s solar and wind incentives.

    “There’s a lot of development that’s underway, based in part on those incentives. If they were to be eliminated, reversed or taken away, that could have an effect for sure on this area,” he said.

    The executive order is not expected to have much impact on residential solar in Illinois, according to Illinois Solar Energy & Storage Association Executive Director Lesley McCain. The federal government currently offers a tax credit worth up to 30% of the cost to install a solar roof.

    “The executive order does not impact (that tax credit), as it is part of the federal tax code, but we will keep a close eye on further developments,” McCain said in a written statement.

    Urbaszewski, who supports a bid to adopt the California-style clean car and clean truck rules in Illinois, said those rules could help Illinois meet its EV goals if federal EV-charger funding were cut.

    The rules, currently under consideration by the Illinois Pollution Control Board, would require that all new passenger vehicles sold in Illinois be zero emissions by 2035.

    During his first term, Trump tried to rescind a waiver that allowed California to pursue car emissions standards stricter than the federal government’s.

    “This is all going to end up in court, and it’s going to take years to figure out whether the U.S. EPA under Trump actually has the authority to take back a waiver once it has been granted,” Urbaszewski said.

    In the meantime, he’d like to see Illinois adopt the California standards, which he said would accomplish the EV formula program goal of expanding the Illinois charging network.

    “If there’s a lot of (electric) cars that show up, businesses are going to smell opportunity, and they’re going to build chargers,” he said.

    Working turbines spin in the wind over farmland in Henry County on Oct. 2, 2024. (Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune)
    Working turbines spin in the wind over farmland in Henry County on Oct. 2, 2024. (Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune)

    The Inflation Reduction Act has spurred economic growth in both blue states and red states, and Learner said that solar energy tax credits and wind power production tax credits have strong support on both sides of the aisle.

    Since the Inflation Reduction Act, companies have announced 751 new clean energy projects in the U.S., including battery manufacturing sites, new or expanded electric vehicle manufacturing facilities, and solar and wind manufacturing plants, according to a recent report from Climate Power, a strategic communications organization.

    More than half of those projects are in congressional districts represented by Republicans in the House of Representatives.

    Learner sees a parallel between the Biden climate plan and another high-profile piece of Democratic legislation: the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare.

    During his first term, Trump vowed to repeal Obamacare, but the program developed bipartisan support as a wide range of Americans started to experience its benefits.

    “Today, Obamacare is in place,” said Learner. “There have been some ways in which it’s been cut back or changed by the first Trump administration, and by some of the Supreme Court decisions, but by and large, (24) million Americans are now covered by Obamacare and the program has been successfully implemented.”

    nschoenberg@chicagotribune.com

    Originally Published:



    The Trump administration has recently issued an order to freeze funding for Illinois’ electric vehicle (EV) charging network, sparking controversy and concern among advocates for clean energy and transportation.

    The move comes as part of a broader effort by the administration to roll back regulations and support for renewable energy initiatives. The EV charging network in Illinois has been a key part of the state’s efforts to promote electric vehicles and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    Advocates argue that freezing funding for the EV charging network will not only hinder the state’s progress towards reducing emissions and combating climate change, but it will also stifle innovation and economic growth in the clean energy sector.

    Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has condemned the Trump administration’s decision, vowing to fight back against any attempts to undermine the state’s clean energy goals. He has called on lawmakers and stakeholders to come together to find alternative solutions to fund and support the EV charging network.

    As the debate continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how this order will impact the future of electric vehicles and clean transportation in Illinois and beyond. Stay tuned for updates on this developing story.

    Tags:

    1. Trump administration
    2. Funding freeze
    3. Illinois EV charging network
    4. Electric vehicle infrastructure
    5. Government funding
    6. Clean energy initiative
    7. Environmental policy
    8. Electric vehicle adoption
    9. Trump executive order
    10. Energy sustainability

    #Trump #order #freezes #funding #Illinois #charging #network

  • ‘It’s absurd’: Mexicans mock and shrug off Trump’s order to rename Gulf of Mexico




    CNN
     — 

    When Google announced it was complying with US President Donald Trump’s executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, many Mexicans responded with a laugh and a long, exhausted sigh.

    At her daily press briefing on Tuesday, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum largely shrugged off Google’s move, noting that Trump’s order only applies to the US continental shelf, suggesting that her country would not abide by it.

    “The Gulf of Mexico is still the Gulf of Mexico,” she said.

    Many of her fellow Mexicans have been similarly dismissive.

    On social media, users shared images poking fun at what some called Trump’s “obsession” with their country and the unorthodox nature of his decision. Some soccer fans suggested sarcastically that Trump was paying tribute to the popular Mexican football team, Club América.

    But not everyone is laughing. In an editorial for the Mexican newspaper El Universal, legal expert Mario Melgar-Adalid advised the country to push back.

    “Mexico must firmly oppose this interference, otherwise the next step could be that instead of the United Mexican States (Mexico’s formal name), as established in our Constitution, they will begin to call us Old Mexico,” he wrote.

    In the Mexican coastal state of Veracruz, which borders the gulf, Governor Rocío Nahle rejected Trump’s move. “Today and always … for 500 years it has been and will continue to be our rich and great ‘Gulf of Mexico,’” the governor wrote on social media last week.

    Juan Cobos, a former resident of Veracruz who now lives in Mexico City, called it “absurd,” saying hundreds of years of history could not be erased by a pen stroke.

    “You can’t change something overnight, what we’ve grown up with – history, geography, all that. You can’t be so authoritarian that you can change it from one day to the next.”

    Another resident told CNN that “many Veracruzanos express annoyance, others confusion, and for many it is amusing … because people do not care that the name of the Gulf of Mexico will soon change, and they find it fun to play with the name change.”

    Another Mexico City resident called Trump’s order “so childish,” telling CNN, “Obviously it is not right.”

    Google said on Monday its move was in line with its “practice of applying name changes when they have been updated in official government sources.” The company noted that the change would be applied only in the United States. Users in Mexico will continue to see the “Gulf of Mexico” on Google Maps. The rest of the world will see both names.

    US President Donald Trump delivers remarks on his policy to end tax on tips in Las Vegas, Nevada, on January 25, 2025. After visits to disaster sites in North Carolina and California, the Vegas stop is more of a feel-good victory lap, as he lays out his plans to exclude tips from federal taxes -- an enormously popular move in a city built on the hospitality industry. (Photo by Mandel NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

    Trump, in his executive order last week, said he directed that the body of water be renamed the Gulf of America “in recognition of this flourishing economic resource and its critical importance to our nation’s economy and its people.” The order calls for all federal government maps and documents to reflect the change.

    He also ordered that the nation’s highest mountain, Denali, change its name back to Mount McKinley, in honor of President William McKinley. Google said it would also update the name of its maps when the Geographic Names Information System, a government database of names and location data, is updated.

    Sheinbaum responded with ridicule at the time. At a press conference, she presented a 1607 map that labeled parts of North America as “Mexican America,” and dryly proposed that the gulf should be renamed as such.

    She said: “It sounds nice, no?”





    “It’s absurd”: Mexicans mock and shrug off Trump’s order to rename Gulf of Mexico

    President Trump’s recent order to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America” has sparked outrage and disbelief among Mexicans. Many have taken to social media to mock the decision, calling it ridiculous and unnecessary.

    One Twitter user wrote, “As if changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America will change anything. It’s just absurd.” Another user joked, “I guess we should start calling the United States the ‘United States of Mexico’ now.”

    Despite the backlash, the Mexican government has yet to issue an official response to Trump’s order. Some have speculated that they are simply ignoring the issue in order to avoid giving it more attention.

    Overall, Mexicans seem to be taking Trump’s latest move in stride, with many choosing to laugh it off rather than get upset. As one user put it, “At the end of the day, it’s just a name. The Gulf will always be the Gulf of Mexico to us.”

    Tags:

    1. Mexico reacts to Trump’s Gulf of Mexico order
    2. Mocking Trump’s Gulf of Mexico renaming
    3. Mexican response to Trump’s absurd order
    4. Gulf of Mexico renaming controversy
    5. Trump’s Gulf of Mexico decree ridiculed by Mexicans
    6. Mexico’s shrug off Trump’s name change for Gulf of Mexico
    7. Humorous reactions to Trump’s Gulf of Mexico renaming
    8. Mexican social media mocks Trump’s Gulf of Mexico decision
    9. Trump’s order to rename Gulf of Mexico ridiculed by Mexicans
    10. Gulf of Mexico renaming sparks Mexican laughter and disbelief

    #absurd #Mexicans #mock #shrug #Trumps #order #rename #Gulf #Mexico

  • DEI topics webpage at Northeastern University changed post POTUS order


    Northeastern University is among the first New England universities to change language on its website about diversity, equity, and inclusion commitments following president Donald Trump’s sweeping executive order signed Jan. 21, which called for an end to DEI policies for recipients of federal grants and contracts.

    The order also threatens investigations of universities with endowments over $1 billion to deter DEI programs, putting more than 15 New England institutions, including Northeastern, on notice. The Trump administration says diversity programs “constitute illegal discrimination.”

    Universities across the nation are conducting internal audits to identify programs and titles that could put them at risk, said Angel Pérez, chief executive of the National Association for College Admission Counseling. He said schools are reevaluating how they describe recruitment programs that were designed for students of color.

    “Instead of saying this program is for students of color, they might focus on socioeconomic status or marginalized students, which includes Jewish and some Asian students,” Pérez said. “That’s not new or different but DEI has been used to think primarily of Black and Latinx students. Institutions are trying to come up with new language that it is inclusive of a much larger population than public [currently] thinks.”

    Northeastern overhauled its DEI page on its website on Jan. 24, three days after Trump signed the executive order titled, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.”

    The Boston university removed the banner headline on the webpage, which previously said, “The Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. Northeastern believes in a welcoming and inclusive environment for all.” Now, the website is headlined: “Belonging at Northeastern,” and says the school’s “reimagined approach centers on embracing the experiences of individuals across the global university system to maximize impact at the institutional level.” The website URL previously read as diversity.northeastern.edu; now it reads as belonging.northeastern.edu.

    Northeastern spokesperson Renata Nyul said the university’s “commitment to embracing our entire global community remains steadfast.”

    ”While internal structures and approaches may need to be adjusted, the university’s core values don’t change,” Nyul said. “We believe that embracing our differences — and building a community of belonging — makes Northeastern stronger.”

    Marty Meehan, president of the University of Massachusetts system, said in an interview Wednesday there have been no layoffs of DEI personnel at any of the UMass campuses since Trump signed the executive order, but he also expects language and messaging around such programs and positions to change.

    “It won’t change our commitment to diversity and our commitment to inclusiveness,” Meehan said. “It means a lot of companies and nonprofits are looking at the language — what language we use to identify that mission to be inclusive.”


    Hilary Burns can be reached at hilary.burns@globe.com. Follow her @Hilarysburns.





    Recently, the DEI topics webpage at Northeastern University underwent some changes following an executive order signed by President Joe Biden. The order, aimed at promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education institutions, prompted the university to update its webpage to align with the new guidelines.

    The DEI topics webpage now features a more comprehensive list of resources and initiatives aimed at promoting diversity and inclusion on campus. This includes information on student organizations, events, and programs that support underrepresented and marginalized communities.

    Additionally, the webpage now includes a section dedicated to highlighting the university’s commitment to promoting a more inclusive campus culture. This includes information on recent diversity initiatives, faculty and staff training programs, and efforts to increase representation of diverse voices in the curriculum.

    Overall, the changes to the DEI topics webpage reflect Northeastern University’s ongoing commitment to creating a more inclusive and equitable campus environment for all students, faculty, and staff. By staying up-to-date with the latest DEI guidelines and initiatives, the university is taking proactive steps towards promoting diversity and inclusion in higher education.

    Tags:

    DEI topics, Northeastern University, POTUS order, diversity, equity, inclusion, higher education, policy changes, social justice, university updates

    #DEI #topics #webpage #Northeastern #University #changed #post #POTUS #order

  • Where To Order Takeout In New York City


    One of New York City’s best nights for restaurant reservations is also among the most chaotic for takeout. Perhaps the one night of the year New Yorkers prefer to stay in rather than go out, Super Bowl Sunday has millions ordering pizza, wings, tacos, local beer and many more game day snacks. And if you don’t plan ahead, well, you may be looking at dinner long after halftime—if you’re lucky.

    Prepare for the Big Game by pre-ordering takeout specials to ensure you’re well satiated on Sunday, February 9. Here’s where to get Super Bowl specials in New York City:

    Breads Bakery

    Starting February 6 and running through February 9, Breads will offer plenty of thematic items for pickup and preorder. Think whole wheat bread shaped and cross-laced like a football and sourdough stenciled with the Eagles or Chiefs logo. Hosts can pick up buffalo cauliflower sliders on mini football-shaped whole wheat rolls, mini pretzel veggie sandwiches, mac and cheese with caramelized onions, a crudité platter with hummus and bleu cheese dips and more. $8 at up, breadsbakery.com

    Amy Ruth’s

    The legendary Harlem soul food restaurant now has a location at 39 West 14th Street and is offering catering and party platters. The Southern style menu includes fried and baked chicken, jumbo fried chicken wings, catfish, barbecue ribs and sides like mac and cheese, collard greens, candied yams and cornbread. Feed your crew with platters for eight to 100 people, with prices starting around $100 (prices vary based on size and items). For catering orders, call Sharon at 347-797-3442.

    Gotham Burger Social Club

    Gotham Burger Social Club at Threes Brewing in Greenpoint is tackling Super Bowl parties with craft beer and football-style snacks, in-house and for takeout. Score big with packages for large groups like the 1st Down with nachos, 25 wings and mozzarella sticks for $70, or go for the touchdown with the ultimate package including all of the above plus 50 wings and dip for $110. Pre-order takeout by emailing tanya@gbsc.nyc. Also, for one day only, Gotham Burger Social Club at Essex Street will have $20 buffalo wings for dine-in, takeout and delivery through Uber Eats.

    Wonder

    Wonder, the food hall chain seen from Jackson Heights to Williamsburg to the Upper West Side, is offering six different packages, which can be bundled and scheduled for quick delivery. Options include the Wing Trip Buffalo Bundle with 48 Wing Trip wings in your choice of four flavors, plus four sides of fries and four large sauces, dips by the pound with enough chips to share, a Tejas Barbecue Texan Bundle with two smoked meats of your choice plus three sides and more. $14.95 and up, wonder.com

    Bubby’s

    Served in portion for four football fans, Bubby’s game day platters are loaded with fan-favorite bites and are available for pick-up or delivery on February 9th from 4:30–7:30 p.m. Orders must be placed by February 6th. The $80 appetizer platter includes tater tots with jalapeño cheese dip, buffalo wings, jalapeño poppers, and pigs in a blanket with honey mustard. The $120 dinner platter includes everything in the appetizer platter, plus mini burgers, and Bubby’s signature salted chocolate chip cookies.

    The Great Indian Takeout

    The team behind Adda, Dhamaka, Masalawala & Sons, and Michelin-Starred Semma (i.e. the hardest Indian restaurants to book in New York City) is now offering their groundbreaking Indian food for takeout. Spice up Super Bowl Sunday with a butter chicken bundle (butter chicken, veg samosa, butter naan, aged basmati rice), railway lamb curry (lamb, spiced curry sauce, julienned ginger), chili gobi (crispy cauliflower florets, spicy chili sauce), and samosas (spiced potatoes, peas, tamarind chutney). Order via Doordash

    Ipsa Provisions

    This homemade-style New York-based frozen food company is offering a slew of macaroni and cheeses for Super Bowl Sunday. A Southwest nacho mac and cheese is mixed with short ribs and topped with chips for a little extra crunch, beer cheese and brat mac is infused with Stella Artois and pulled pork mac and cheese is swirled with homemade barbecue sauce. Starts at $13 per serving, eatipsa.com

    CookUnity

    New York’s chef-made meal marketplace is offering limited-edition themed meals, shareable sides, snacks and entertainment platters made by chefs from across the country. Super Bowl specials include buffalo chicken dip from Pat LaFrieda, a hot sauce sampler and short rib mac ‘n cheese from Jose Garces, crispy parmesan chicken tenders from Tony Perez, jalapeño chorizo fundido from tlacualli, a fanfetti football cake jar from Miriam Milord and more. Starts at $54 for four meals, CookUnity.com



    Looking for a delicious meal without having to leave the comfort of your home? Look no further than these top spots to order takeout in New York City:

    1. Joe’s Pizza – If you’re craving a classic New York slice, Joe’s Pizza is the place to go. Their thin crust and gooey cheese will have you coming back for more.

    2. Xi’an Famous Foods – For some spicy and flavorful Chinese cuisine, order from Xi’an Famous Foods. Their hand-pulled noodles and cumin lamb will definitely hit the spot.

    3. Shake Shack – Indulge in a juicy burger and crinkle-cut fries from Shake Shack. Don’t forget to add a milkshake or concrete to complete your meal.

    4. Los Tacos No. 1 – For some authentic Mexican tacos, order from Los Tacos No. 1. Their freshly made corn tortillas and flavorful meats will transport you to the streets of Mexico.

    5. Superiority Burger – Vegetarians and vegans will love the creative and delicious offerings from Superiority Burger. Their plant-based burgers and sides are sure to satisfy any craving.

    Whether you’re in the mood for pizza, Chinese food, burgers, tacos, or something plant-based, these top spots in New York City have got you covered for a tasty takeout meal. Place your order today and enjoy a delicious meal from the comfort of your own home.

    Tags:

    • New York City takeout
    • NYC food delivery
    • Ordering takeout in NYC
    • Best takeout restaurants in NYC
    • Food delivery options in New York City
    • Where to order takeout in NYC
    • NYC takeout recommendations
    • Top takeout spots in New York City
    • Ordering food in NYC
    • New York City restaurant delivery

    #Order #Takeout #York #City

  • Things to know about the Trump administration order on car and pickup fuel economy


    DETROIT (AP) — Hours after being sworn in as the new U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Sean Duffy took aim at the main way the federal government regulates miles per gallon for cars and pickup trucks — also a principal way that it regulates air pollution and addresses climate change. Duffy ordered the federal agency in charge of fuel economy standards to reverse them as soon as possible. The standards have been in place since the 1970s energy crisis and were intended to conserve fuel and save consumers money at the gas pump.

    Here are five things to know about the action.

    What is the Trump administration doing exactly?

    Duffy ordered his chief of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to “propose the rescission or replacement of any fuel economy standards” necessary to bring the rules in line with Trump’s priority of promoting oil and biofuel.

    The order came in a DOT memorandum Tuesday night. Duffy said the rules need to better align with the administration’s overarching agenda because “the existing CAFE standards promulgated by NHTSA are contrary to Administration policy.”

    The NHTSA chief would have to initiate a full rule-making process to set looser standards, which took two years during the first Trump administration. When he came into office the first time, rules from the Obama administration were going to require miles per gallon increase 5% each year, but by 2020, the DOT under Trump was able to loosen that to 1.5% each year through model year 2026.

    What does this mean for consumers and the climate?

    Duffy says eliminating the rules will increase Americans’ access to the full range of gasoline vehicles they need and can afford.

    Others disagree. “This will raise consumer’s costs at the pump, increase tailpipe pollution and jeopardize U.S. automakers’ future, and no one voted for any of it. The only beneficiaries will be oil executives and China’s auto industry, which will be happy to sell electric vehicles around the world with little U.S. competition,” said Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Safe Climate Transport Campaign.

    In recent years, automakers have been producing gasoline cars that get significantly better mileage, which lowers the cost of driving and means lower sales for oil companies — both refineries and producers.

    Transportation was the largest contributor to U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2022, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Every atom of carbon pumped into a car’s gas tank comes out the tailpipe and many combine with oxygen to make carbon dioxide which holds onto extra heat for more than a century.

    Why does Trump want to repeal fuel efficiency rules?

    Duffy’s action aligns with a number of President Trump’s promises, notably to end an “electric vehicle mandate” — referring to former President Joe Biden’s target for 50% of new car sales to be electric by 2030.

    Duffy wrote “These fuel economy standards are set as such aggressive levels that automakers cannot, as a practical matter, satisfy the standards without rapidly shifting production away from internal-combustion-engine vehicles to alternative electric technologies.”

    The standards do not kick in immediately, but instead allow automakers time to adjust their designs and production in order to meet them.

    The new Secretary said “artificially high” standards force car manufacturers to phase out gasoline powered vehicles, making cars more expensive for buyers and “destroying consumer choice at the dealership.”

    “It’s hard to understand this action in the context of trying to reduce costs for consumer and help U.S. industry be more competitive, since this will have the opposite effects,” said Roland Hwang, policy director at the University of California, Davis Institute of Transportation Studies.

    “Creating this regulatory uncertainty puts a tremendous number of automaker jobs and investments at risk, and undercuts the American auto industry’s global competitiveness,” he added. “Strong fuel economy standards are critical to ensure automakers are investing in advanced technologies necessary” to do so.

    There is no requirement for automakers to produce or consumers to purchase electric vehicles. The fuel economy standards work in sync with EPA limits on carbon dioxide from vehicle tailpipes to address climate change, which Trump also rejects.

    “It’s reasonable for the new leadership at the Transportation Department to review current fuel economy standards,” said John Bozzella, president and CEO Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a group that represents the industry. “As we’ve said, the existing CAFE rules are extremely challenging to achieve – even in the best of circumstances. They also expose automakers to billions of dollars in civil penalties.”

    Duffy said CAFE rules are supposed to establish realistic rules for fleets “that run on combustible liquid fuels like gasoline and diesel fuel.” He also cited the nation’s vast oil reserves, biofuel feedstocks and refining capacity as reason to establish lower standards.

    Trump has issued a series of orders including an energy emergency declaration, and has said the U.S. will “drill, baby, drill.”

    What’s the idea behind American fuel economy standards?

    CAFE, or Corporate Average Fuel Economy, rules date back to oil shocks Americans suffered in 1974 and 1980. The first ones went into effect in 1978. They are intended to help drivers use less fuel by requiring automakers’ fleets to meet average mile-per-gallon targets that initially increased with each model year, until progress stalled in the 1980s.

    Americans then saw no appreciable improvement in miles per gallon for around two decades. In recent years, automakers have offered car-buyers plenty of internal combustion engine — meaning gasoline-powered — cars with much better mileage, and that is largely due to increasingly stringent standards.

    What were the latest fuel economy rules going to do?

    The latest standards set under the Biden administration required automakers to average about 38 miles per gallon of gas by 2031. That’s in real-world driving. The current average is around 28 miles per gallon.

    In every model year from 2027 to 2031, the rules are supposed to increased fuel economy 2% per year for passenger cars, while SUVs and other light trucks are set to increase by 2% a year from 2029 to 2031. An earlier proposal had even higher requirements.

    The standards aligned with tighter Biden-era EPA limits on pollution from passenger and commercial vehicles, and the former president’s broader support for incentivizing electric vehicle manufacturing and purchases.

    The Biden administration said when it made the rules they would save almost 70 billion gallons of gasoline through 2050.

    Bozzella said U.S. tailpipes are overseen by three federal agencies and multiple rules, so changes the Trump administration proposes to the CAFE standards will have to be coordinated with the other emissions rules overseen by EPA and the Energy Department.

    ___

    Alexa St. John is an Associated Press climate solutions reporter. Follow her on X: @alexa_stjohn. Reach her at [email protected].

    ___

    Read more of AP’s climate coverage at http://www.apnews.com/climate-and-environment

    ___

    The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.




    1. The Trump administration has rolled back Obama-era fuel efficiency standards for cars and pickups, freezing the requirements at 2020 levels.
    2. This decision is part of the administration’s efforts to reduce government regulations and boost the auto industry.
    3. The new rule is expected to result in cheaper vehicles for consumers, but critics argue that it will also lead to more pollution and higher fuel costs in the long run.
    4. The order has faced backlash from environmental groups, states, and car manufacturers who had already started investing in more fuel-efficient vehicles.
    5. The administration argues that the new rule will save lives by making new cars more affordable, leading to more people replacing older, less safe vehicles.
    6. The order may face legal challenges, as several states have already indicated they will sue the federal government over the decision.
    7. The Trump administration has also proposed revoking California’s authority to set its own, stricter fuel efficiency standards, setting up a potential legal battle with the state.
    8. The debate over fuel efficiency standards is likely to continue, with the Biden administration expected to reverse the Trump administration’s policies once in office.

    Tags:

    1. Trump administration
    2. Fuel economy
    3. Car regulations
    4. Pickup truck emissions
    5. Environmental policy
    6. Automotive industry
    7. Government order
    8. Vehicle efficiency standards
    9. Trump executive action
    10. Climate change impact

    #Trump #administration #order #car #pickup #fuel #economy

Chat Icon