Latest news with #HouseofRepresentatives
Saba Yemen
an hour ago
- Politics
- Saba Yemen
Ibb residents stage 180 marches to affirm Gaza support, Iran solidarity
Ibb - Saba: Ibb governorate on Friday witnessed an unprecedented scale of public mobilization, with 180 massive marches convened across its various districts. Demonstrators rallied under the unifying slogan "We are steadfast with Gaza and Iran against Zionist-American crimes," emphatically reaffirming their unwavering support for the Palestinian people and endorsing the Islamic Republic of Iran's responses to ongoing Zionist aggression. The central march, held at the Great Prophet Square in Ibb city, drew a significant assembly of local dignitaries, including Governor Abdulwahid Salah, members of the House of Representatives and Shura Council, and various deputies and mobilization leaders. Participants at this and other rallies across the governorate vehemently condemned what they termed the flagrant Israeli aggression against both Gaza and Iran. The participants underscored that these actions represent a severe breach of international and humanitarian laws, urging the global community to promptly hold Israeli occupation leaders accountable as war criminals. Across Ibb's diverse regions, residents echoed similar sentiments. Northern districts like Yarim, al--Saddah, al-Nadera, and al-Radhmah collectively hosted 31 marches, where participants vowed continued brave and steadfast support for the Palestinian people. They criticized the world's perceived silence, labeling it an encouragement for the occupation's continued belligerence. Concurrently, western districts, including al-Udayn, gathered in its center and ten other squares, specifically rejecting the evident American role in backing Israel's extermination of Palestinians and targeting of Iranian territory. Further south, al-Hazm district organized 25 marches, asserting that the Yemeni people cannot remain passive observers to the genocide, siege, and starvation in Gaza, nor to the overt aggression against Iran. These gatherings called upon the broader Islamic nation to fulfill its responsibility and take decisive action against Zionist-American arrogance. Similar large-scale demonstrations, ranging from 4 to 15 marches, occurred in districts such as Far' al-Udayn, Mudhaikhera, Dhi al-Sufal, al-Siyani, Hubaish, al-Makhader, al-Qafr, Ba'adan, al-Sha'r, al-Sabra, and Jeblah, consistently expressing solidarity with Gaza, Palestine, and the Iranian people. Across all protests, participants praised Iran's recent targeted strikes against the Zionist entity, viewing them as demonstrative of the usurping entity's inherent weakness. The participants reaffirmed unwavering support for the choices made by Sayyed Abdulmalik Badr al-Din al-Houthi in championing Gaza and defending Yemen's sovereignty. The demonstrators collectively held the Zionist entity and the United States fully responsible for the unacceptable and unlawful aggression against Iran, characterizing these actions as part of a broader policy of genocide and intimidation. A unified statement from the Ibb marches reiterated Yemen's unwavering military, popular, and comprehensive commitment to the Palestinian resistance in Gaza and throughout Palestine, vowing no fatigue or retreat. The statement emphasized that this resolute stance extends to any Arab or Islamic nation confronting the primary enemy—the Zionist Jews and their allies—grounded in religious, humanitarian, and moral duty. It declared full support and blessing for Iran's strong, decisive, and effective response to the aggressive Zionist entity, asserting it as a rightful duty for the entire Islamic nation, supported by free believers worldwide. The statement concluded by framing the aggression as an opportunity for Iran to deter and punish the foolish Zionist enemy and to seek retribution for the Palestinian people. It renewed a widespread call for a comprehensive boycott of all Israeli and American products and companies, urging global action against ongoing Zionist-American genocidal crimes in Gaza, Palestine, and across the region. Whatsapp Telegram Email Print
Indianapolis Star
2 hours ago
- Health
- Indianapolis Star
Hoosiers could be kicked off Medicaid under Trump's 'big beautiful bill.' What to know
Some Hoosiers could be kicked off Medicaid if President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' passes in its current form, as the state grapples with the revenue cuts that would come with it. Language added to the federal legislation on June 16 caps the Medicaid provider tax — which is used to cover 90% of the state's portion of the costs for the Healthy Indiana Plan — at 3.5%. Indiana utilizes a 6% provider tax, meaning the change would decrease funding from the fee by nearly half. Opponents of the provider tax view it as a loophole used by states to qualify for matching dollars from the federal government, which pays for 90% of the costs of the program, without having to dedicate much of their own funds. If passed as is, Indiana would not be able to afford the current costs of the Healthy Indiana Plan, the state's insurance program for low-income people, Indiana Family and Social Services Administration Secretary Mitch Roob said at a state budget committee meeting June 18. But neither Roob nor Gov. Mike Braun are asking Congress to keep the full 6%. Instead, Roob said at the meeting that he wants Congress to add language that would give states the flexibility to adapt. Those changes would allow the state to enroll fewer Hoosiers in HIP, according to Roob. 'Please give us the needed flexibility to roll back our eligibility if they change the fuel mix for our program,' he said at the meeting. Even without the added impact of the federal legislation, the state is making it more challenging to qualify for Medicaid. The latest version of HIP already includes more restrictions, such as work requirements for able-bodied recipients that passed the legislature this year. The new law includes a list of exceptions, though not all would be covered under the work requirement language proposed in the federal bill. In a statement June 18, Braun said the efforts to reduce federal spending were overdue. "However, flexibility in managing Indiana's HIP program will be essential for the state moving forward, especially if we are required to take on more of the financial obligation,' he said in the statement. 'This will require a hands-on approach to updating and maintaining Indiana's Medicaid system that only Hoosiers can provide.' Braun said he would work to 'stretch the dollar' for people with chronic diseases and those who 'really can't afford health care' when speaking to reporters at the Indiana Statehouse on June 19. 'That's what I'd like to have it there for, not what it's expanded into with very lax supervision, pushed by the feds and now with a bunch of begrudging state partners because it's been busting the budget,' he said. The provision has already faced some GOP opposition in the U.S. House of Representatives, which must approve this version of the bill before it can move on. With a slim Republican majority, it's possible the part of the bill that imposes the 3.5% tax cap could be removed. The version that already passed the House only capped future increases in provider fees.
The Hill
4 hours ago
- Business
- The Hill
How Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' stacks up against his 2017 tax bill
As Senate Republicans deliberate modifications to the reconciliation budget bill that the House of Representatives passed on May 22, one thing looks increasingly clear. Namely, the all-encompassing bill that President Trump favors will likely be enacted in July, despite protests from some Republican senators on various elements of the package. In that case, it would become the signature legislation of Donald Trump's second term, just as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was in his first term. So, how do the two bills compare? One of the major accomplishments of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was to make the U.S. corporate tax code competitive with the rest of the world by lowering the marginal tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. According to economists Kevin Brady and Douglas Holz-Eakin, it did so by making the corporate rate cuts permanent, which proved to be highly successful. They point out that economic growth and business capital spending accelerated after the bill was enacted, and the U.S. did not lose a single multinational headquarters following a decade of large exoduses. The legislation currently being considered, by comparison, is focused on extending cuts in personal tax rates that are set to expire at the end of this year. Proponents claim that if the personal tax rates expire, most Americans will face tax increases that could weaken the economy. Democrats, however, argue that the tax cuts in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act primarily benefit the very wealthy rather than middle-class or lower-income families, and they favor boosting taxes on the wealthy and corporations. Jeff Stein of the Washington Post observes that to counter this, Trump pivoted during the 2024 campaign by proposing new tax cuts that were easier to sell to specific groups of voters. The proposals included an end to taxes on tips, overtime and Social Security, as well as a tax deduction on borrowing costs to buy American-made cars. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said the Republicans in his chamber expect to deliver on these campaign promises, according to Bloomberg. Stein points out that, in the process, there has been a significant change in the way the Republican leadership views tax policy since Trump's first term. Most of the policies in the 2017 law were developed over the course of many years by think tanks in Washington, with former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and former Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) serving as the principal architects. Their overriding goal was to simplify the code and lessen distortions without adding to budget deficits. In comparison, the current Republican approach to tax policy is more populist-oriented and designed to provide tax relief to select groups of voters. Politico reports that Republicans are piling on new tax breaks in hopes of boosting tax refunds ahead of next year's midterm elections. The provisions include a larger child tax credit, a larger state and local tax deduction and others that would be made retroactively. One challenge is that the extension of the 2017 tax cuts and the new initiatives are estimated to cost the federal government about $4 trillion over the next 10 years. Accordingly, there is little chance that the budget deficit will be brought under control, with spending cuts of only $1.5 trillion below current projections contemplated over that period. Another concern is that the tax cuts in the bill passed by the House are less oriented to promote long-term growth than the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was. The Tax Foundation estimates that it would increase long-term GDP by only 0.8 percent (not annualized). It states that, 'by introducing narrowly targeted new provisions and sunsetting pro-growth provisions like bonus depreciation and [research and development] expensing, it leaves economic growth on the table.' Senate Republicans are trying to address this by including more permanent business tax cuts and full expensing for equipment and research and development in their version of the bill. The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board argues that one of the most constructive changes in the 2017 bill was letting businesses immediately deduct the full cost of capital outlays rather than spread them out. It boosted capital spending until full expensing was phased out in 2022. Another critique relates to fairness. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities contends that the House bill is skewed to the wealthy, costs more than extending the 2017 tax law and fails to deliver for families. It concludes that instead of changing course and prioritizing people with low and moderate incomes, the tax bill only offers more of the same. When the impact of proposed Medicaid cuts is factored into the equation, the Republican bill is unpopular with the public at large. For example, recent polls undertaken by Quinnipiac, the Washington Post-Ipsos and KFF all show that a plurality of voters oppose the House bill, with many citing the attempt to pare back Medicaid funding. Finally, my take is that Trump is making the same mistake Joe Biden did by believing that all-encompassing legislation is better than more targeted bills that spell out clear policy objectives. The principal difference is that Trump favors a grab-bag of tax cuts and spending cuts, whereas Biden was enamored with massive spending bills. In my book about Trump's economic policies in his first term, my assessment was that investors would respond enthusiastically to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which they did as the stock market rose steadily leading up to its passage. In comparison, the market's response this time is more ambiguous amid confusion about the objectives of the 'big, beautiful bill' and uncertainty about the global trade conflict. Nicholas Sargen, Ph.D., is an economic consultant for Fort Washington Investment Advisors and is affiliated with the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business. He has written three books, including 'Investing in the Trump Era: How Economic Policies Impact Financial Markets.'
GMA Network
6 hours ago
- Politics
- GMA Network
House to Imee Marcos: Stop pointing fingers, we delivered on San Juanico Bridge
House spokesperson Atty. Princess Abante cited official data showing that the House had secured P27 million in funding for the bridge in 2018, followed by P22 million in 2019, P105 million in 2021, P90 million in 2022, and P150 million in 2023. For 2026, a House-initiated proposal seeks to raise that amount to P400 million. The House of Representatives on Friday fired back at Senator Imee Marcos for deflecting responsibility over the upkeep of the San Juanico Bridge. They said that lawmakers should focus on solutions instead of pointing fingers and reminded Marcos that the House has long initiated funding for the landmark infrastructure. In a press conference, House spokesperson Atty. Princess Abante called out the senator for turning the issue into a personal attack rather than acknowledging her legislative responsibility, particularly in the national budget process. 'Una, bilang senador, kasama din sa tungkulin niya 'yung pagbalangkas ng budget ng bansa. Galing sa House, papunta sa Senate,' Abante said. (First, as a senator, her duties also include drafting the country's budget. From the House, to the Senate.) 'Kaya nung kinuwestiyon niya kung ano ang nangyayari sa pangangalaga ng San Juanico Bridge, eh sinagot lang natin na alam ko, sigurado ako based on records may pondong nailagay for the maintenance ng San Juanico Bridge since 2018, mismo advocated by the congressman of the 1st District of Leyte,' she added, referring to Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez. (So when she questioned what was happening with regards to the maintenance of the San Juanico Bridge, we just answered that I know, I am sure based on records there has been funding allocated for the maintenance of the San Juanico Bridge since 2018, itself advocated by the congressman of the 1st District of Leyte.) Earlier, Abante challenged Marcos to account for her own contribution to the upkeep of the bridge, after the senator reportedly downplayed government efforts by saying the budget allocated for the structure was good only for repainting. In Friday's press conference, Abante said that if the senator truly cared about the condition of the bridge, she should show what she has done to support it. 'Ngayon kung tatanungin niya ano 'yung nangyayari, dapat tanungin din bilang senador ano ang nagawa niya para sa San Juanico Bridge. Tutal, hindi pwedeng tanong lang nang tanong. Kailangan nagtatrabaho,' she said. (Now if she asks what is happening, she should also be asked as a senator what she has done for the San Juanico Bridge. After all, we can't just ask questions. We need to work.) Abante cited official data showing that the House had secured P27 million in funding for the bridge in 2018, followed by P22 million in 2019, P105 million in 2021, P90 million in 2022, and P150 million in 2023. For 2026, a House-initiated proposal seeks to raise that amount to P400 million. 'This is a concrete initiative of the House of Representatives. Gusto rin nating malaman ano rin ang initiative ng Senado, tutal gusto nilang malaman kung ano ang nangyayari. Nasa posisyon sila para gumawa ng solusyon, hindi maghanap ng sisi,' Abante said. (This is a concrete initiative of the House of Representatives. We also want to know what the Senate initiative is, because they want to know what is happening. They are in a position to create solutions, not find blame.) Speaker Romualdez, who represents Leyte's 1st District where the bridge is located, has long included San Juanico's rehabilitation in his infrastructure agenda even before becoming Speaker. The 2.16-kilometer San Juanico Bridge connects Samar and Leyte and is one of the longest bridge in the country. It serves as a crucial economic and transport link in Eastern Visayas and has also become a key tourism attraction. President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. recently declared a state of calamity over the bridge after recent typhoons caused structural damage, triggering emergency rehabilitation measures. — BAP, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
12 hours ago
- Politics
- GMA Network
Sara Duterte bound for Australia, to join rally for dad Rodrigo
Vice President Sara Duterte addresses the media in front of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands on March 14, 2025. Photo by: Jay-Vee Marasigan Pangan Vice President Sara Duterte will travel to Australia for another personal trip and to join a protest action calling for the release of her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte. According to an advisory Friday from the Office of the Vice President (OVP), her itinerary includes attendance in the "Free Duterte Now" rally on Sunday, June 22, in Melbourne. The elder Duterte is currently detained at the Scheveningen Prison in The Hague, Netherlands over charges of crimes against humanity for the extrajudicial killings during his administration's war on drugs. Last week, the Vice President traveled to Kuala Lumpur for a personal trip with her family. While in Malaysia, she attended a Philippine Independence Day celebration and engaged in a program consultation with overseas Filipino workers. The Vice President is facing an impeachment case for betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes. She was impeached by the House of Representatives on February 5, with over 200 lawmakers endorsing the complaint against her. After the Senate voted to return her case to the House of Representatives, her impeachment trial is currently expected to begin in the 20th Congress, which will open in July. The Office of the Ombudsman on Thursday directed Sara Duterte and nine others from the OVP and the Department of Education (DepEd) to respond to the charges filed by the House of Representatives in connection with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The order came after the House filed a complaint against Duterte and several others for plunder, technical malversation, falsification, use of falsified documents, perjury, bribery, corruption of public officers, betrayal of public trust, and culpable violation of the Constitution, a source said. The complaint stemmed from the recommendation of the House Committee on Good Governance and Public Accountability to file charges against Duterte for the alleged misuse of P500 million in confidential funds of the OVP and P112.5 million in confidential funds of DepEd from 2022 to 2024. The Vice President has denied the allegations against her. — VDV, GMA Integrated News
