cut

PBS filed a federal lawsuit Friday asking a court to block the May 1 executive order by the Trump White House to cut off funding to public media, calling the move a violation of the 1st Amendment.

The suit from the service that airs “Sesame Street,” Ken Burns documentaries and the “PBS NewsHour” for free to millions of American homes, said that Congress has repeatedly protected PBS from political interference by filtering its funds through the Corp. for Public Broadcasting, which is not a federal agency.

“The [executive order] makes no attempt to hide the fact that it is cutting off the flow of funds to PBS because of the content of PBS programming and out of a desire to alter the content of speech.”

NPR, which also receives CPB funding, filed a suit on similar grounds on Tuesday.

The White House alleges that PBS has “zero tolerance for non-leftist viewpoints.” Trump’s order called for an end to government dollars for CPB, the taxpayer-backed entity that has provided funding to NPR and PBS for decades through Congress.

Trump called the public media outlets “left wing propaganda.” The White House press release announcing the order — titled “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media” — contained 19 bullet points citing news coverage and other content by NPR and PBS that prompted the action.

The PBS suit says the data the White House cited to support that view are inaccurate and misrepresent the balanced range of viewpoints presented on PBS programs.

The White House has also asserted that government funding of broadcast media is no longer necessary in an era when consumers have a vast array of platforms for information and entertainment. PBS was founded when most of the country only had access to the three commercial broadcast networks and a handful of other TV stations.

PBS’ suit also says that, regardless of any policy disagreements the administration may have over the role of public television, “our Constitution and laws forbid the President from serving as the arbiter of content of PBS’s programming, including by attempting to defund PBS.”

Government escalates row with university over demands to curb pro-Palestine student activism and change racial diversity policies.

The administration of US President Donald Trump will move to sever remaining federal contracts with Harvard University, escalating a row centred on issues such as pro-Palestine student activism and racial diversity.

The New York Times and Reuters news agency reported on Tuesday that a draft letter from the General Services Administration (GSA) instructs all federal agencies to review and possibly cancel existing contracts with Harvard, worth an estimated $100m.

A copy of the draft letter shared by the Times states that Harvard has continued to engage in “race discrimination, including in its admissions process” and that the university’s failure to halt alleged acts of anti-Semitism suggests a “disturbing lack of concern for the safety and wellbeing of Jewish students”.

The move would be the latest effort by the government to use federal funds to force universities to accept changes sought by the Trump administration, including greater control over curricula, harsher steps against pro-Palestine students, and an end to policies that encourage racial diversity and greater opportunities for racial minorities.

The Trump administration has portrayed efforts to encourage greater racial diversity at US universities as a form of discrimination that prioritises racial identity over merit. Supporters say that such efforts, such as using race as one factor of many in admissions decisions, are necessary to remedy long histories of racist discrimination and exclusion in US higher education.

“GSA understands that Harvard continues to engage in race discrimination, including in its admissions process and in other areas of student life,” the letter reads.

The administration has also taken an aggressive stance on pro-Palestine activism on university campuses, which erupted after the beginning of Israel’s most recent war in Gaza in October 2023.

Critics have portrayed those steps as part of a larger assault on US universities, which Trump has depicted as hotbeds of political dissent and radical ideas at odds with the goals of his administration.

“The Trump administration has gone after Harvard because of the pro-Palestinian protests, and also has made a list of demands that goes far beyond any of that,” Al Jazeera correspondent Patty Culhane reported from Cambridge, Massachusetts, where Harvard is located.

“It wants detailed information on foreign students that Harvard is refusing to give. It wants basically a political audit to see where people’s ideologies are. So Harvard University has sued in court to stop many of these moves, and this will undoubtedly be the next one that goes before a judge.”

In March, the GSA and the Departments of Education (DOE) and Health and Human Services (HHS) announced an official review of $255.6m in Harvard contracts and $8.7bn in multi-year grants, stating that the review was part of an effort to combat alleged anti-Semitism on college campuses.

The administration also cut $400m in grants to Columbia University in New York City in March, despite a series of concessions to government demands.

The administration has said that campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza and the US provision of billions of dollars of weapons to Israel are driven by anti-Semitism and create an unsafe environment for Jewish students on campus.

Several international students have been arrested and detained by the administration for their involvement in pro-Palestine activism, including a Turkish international student named Rumeysa Ozturk at Tufts University, who was arrested on the street by federal agents for co-signing an op-ed calling for an end to the war.

Trump has consistently threatened to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status, and moved last week to block the university’s ability to accept international students, who currently make up about 27 percent of the university’s total enrolment.

A judge blocked that effort, which Harvard had called an act of retaliation for “our refusal to surrender our academic independence and to submit to the federal government’s illegal assertion of control over our curriculum, our faculty, and our student body”.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is asking federal agencies to cancel contracts with Harvard University worth about $100 million, a senior administration official said Tuesday, intensifying the president’s clash with the nation’s oldest and wealthiest university.

The government already has canceled more than $2.6 billion in federal research grants for the Ivy League school, which has pushed back on the administration’s demands for changes to several of its policies.

A draft letter from the General Services Administration directs agencies to review contracts with the university and seek alternate vendors. The administration plans to send a version of the letter Tuesday, the official said. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal deliberations.

The New York Times first reported on the letter.

President Trump has railed against Harvard, calling it a hotbed of liberalism and antisemitism. The school filed a lawsuit April 21 over the administration’s calls for changes to the university’s leadership, governance and admissions policies. Since then, the administration has slashed the school’s federal funding, moved to cut off enrollment of international students and threatened its tax-exempt status.

Contracts include scientific research, executive training

The administration has identified about 30 contracts across nine agencies to be reviewed for cancellation, according to another administration official who was not authorized to speak publicly and provided details on the condition of anonymity.

The contracts total roughly $100 million. They include executive training for Department of Homeland Security officials, research on health outcomes related to energy drinks and a contract for graduate student research services.

Agencies with contracts that are deemed critical are being directed not to halt them immediately, but to devise a plan to transition to a different vendor other than Harvard.

The letter applies only to federal contracts with Harvard and not its remaining research grants.

Trump threatens to give Harvard’s funding to trade schools

Trump laid into Harvard on social media over the weekend, threatening to cut an additional $3 billion in federal grants and give it to trade schools across the United States. He did not explain which grants he was referring to or how they could be reallocated.

The president also accused Harvard of refusing to release the names of its foreign students. In a new line of attack, he argued that students’ home countries pay nothing toward their education and that some of the countries are “not at all friendly to the United States.” International students are not eligible for federal financial aid, but Harvard offers its own aid to foreign and domestic students alike.

“We are still waiting for the Foreign Student Lists from Harvard so that we can determine, after a ridiculous expenditure of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, how many radicalized lunatics, troublemakers all, should not be let back into our Country,” Trump said on social media.

It wasn’t clear exactly what he was demanding. The federal government already has access to visa information and other records on foreign students at Harvard and other universities.

The Department of Homeland Security has demanded that Harvard turn over a trove of files related to its foreign students, including disciplinary records and records related to “dangerous or violent activity.”

Harvard says it complied, but the agency said its response fell short and moved to revoke the university’s ability to enroll foreign students. A federal judge in Boston temporarily blocked the move after Harvard sued.

Other nations respond

Japan’s government said Tuesday that it’s looking for ways to help Harvard’s foreign students. Education Minister Toshiko Abe told reporters she planned to ask Japanese universities to compile measures to support international students.

The University of Tokyo, Japan’s top school, is considering temporarily accepting some Harvard students hit by the Trump sanctions.

Superville and Binkley write for the Associated Press.

The layoffs come days after US President Donald Trump threatened 50 percent tariffs on EU goods.

Swedish automaker Volvo is set to cut 3,000 white-collar jobs amid restructuring efforts as prices begin to rise due to tariff-driven uncertainty.

The company announced the news on Monday. The layoffs come as the Swedish automaker tries to resurrect its rock-bottom share price and drum up better demand for its cars by restructuring part of its business and cutting costs.

CEO Hakan Samuelsson, who was recently brought back to the role after heading the company for a decade until 2022, unveiled a programme in April to slash costs by $1.9bn (18 billion Swedish crowns), including a substantial cut to Volvo’s white-collar staff, who make up 40 percent of its workforce.

“It’s white collar in almost all areas, including R&D  [research and development], communication, human resources,” Samuelsson told the Reuters news agency.

The layoffs represent around 15 percent of the company’s office staff, Volvo Cars said in a statement, and would incur a one-time restructuring cost of $160m (1.5 billion crowns).

Volvo Cars’ new CFO Fredrik Hansson told Reuters that while all of its departments and locations would be impacted, most of the redundancies will happen in Gothenburg.

“It’s tailored to make us structurally more efficient, and then how that plays out might vary a bit depending on the area. But no stone is left unturned,” Hansson said.

With most of its production based in Europe and China, Volvo Cars is more exposed to new United States tariffs than many of its European rivals, and has said it could become impossible to export its most affordable cars to the US.

The company said in a press release that it would finalise a new structural setup by the third quarter of this year.

Volvo withdrew its financial guidance as it announced its cost cuts last month, pointing to unpredictable markets amid weaker consumer confidence and trade tariffs causing turmoil in the global auto industry.

The layoff announcement comes only days after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose a 50 percent tariff on imports from the European Union from June 1. On Monday, however, he backed away from that date, restoring a July 9 deadline to allow for talks between Washington and Brussels.

As a result, Volvo’s CEO said the move would make it harder for it to sell one of its electric vehicles (EVs) — the EX30 EV that is made in Belgium — in the US market.

James and Georgina Nair, both 78, have been coming to Tenerife for 30 years, usually twice a year. But, since they became pensioners, they have made just the one annual trip

A Liverpool couple who have been regular visitors to Tenerife for three decades are now cutting back on their trips due to soaring costs.

James and Georgina Nair, both 78, from West Derby, Liverpool, cherish Tenerife as a “special” place and are planning to celebrate their diamond wedding anniversary there next year. The pair, James, a retired engineer, and Georgina, a former seamstress, have enjoyed the Spanish island’s charms for 30 years, typically visiting twice annually. However, since retiring, they’ve reduced their visits to once a year.

“We’d be lost without a holiday like this,” but noted that the area has undergone changes, not all of which they appreciate. Complaining about rising prices, Mr Nair told the Express: “Everywhere you go now, everything’s double the price.”

Do you have a travel story to share? Email [email protected]

READ MORE: Britain’s Magaluf’ unrecognisable since ‘mankini ban – but not everyone is happy

Georgina raised the increased cost of a gin and tonic, now around €7.50 (£6.30), lamenting the switch from draft to bottled mixers, which incurs extra charges. Her husband reminisced about the wider availability of Carling beer in the past, noting that while local beers are often cheaper, he remains loyal to his preferred British brand.

Despite these gripes, the Nairs acknowledge that Tenerife has seen improvements, with many bars having “changed hands” and “modernised”. Georgina concluded with affection for the island: “I love it here. The different hotels, different character.”

She reminisced about how they often visited a local pub over the years, which has since changed its character.

Recent months have seen protesters flooding the streets of Tenerife and the Canary Islands, voicing their concerns over the impact of over-tourism. When The Express quizzed the retirees on their views, James expressed his disapproval: “Personally, I don’t like what they’re doing. Ordinary tourists like me and my wife, we give more to the economy.”

He continued, highlighting the irony of the situation: “We’ve only come for a holiday. They’ve shot themselves in the foot. Many people are employed in hotels – they’d be out of work. They’re going after their own people.” He also noted that during the pandemic, Tenerife’s tourist hotspots “suffered a lot”.

Georgina chimed in with her perspective: “It’s a special place, we know the area very well. We can understand where they come from. But we help them.”

The rising price of a break in many popular Spanish destinations has given some Brits cause to pause before booking a holiday in recent years. As has the rise of protests aimed at overtourism issues.

“Spain has been at the forefront of locals’ overtourism protests – perhaps 100,000 massed across the Canaries last weekend – and cruise limits are in place in Barcelona and Palma. This is not just about cruise passengers, though. There are wider issues of mass beach and city tourism in Spain and beyond and the impact it can have on a community,” the Mirror’s travel editor Nigel Thompson recently wrote on the topic.

“That said, we should not forget the huge amount of valuable income tourism can generate. Billions poured into economies and hundreds of thousands of jobs are not to be ignored, just as the grievances of locals in destinations are not to be ignored either. A very tricky issue to balance out.”

A power cut in southern France caused by suspected sabotage has disrupted screenings on the final day of the Cannes Film Festival.

About 160,000 homes in the city of Cannes and surrounding areas lost power early on Saturday, before supply was restored in the afternoon.

Officials said an electricity substation had been set on fire and a pylon at another location damaged.

Organisers of the international film festival say the closing ceremony will go ahead as planned as they have an alternative power supply.

Prosecutors say a first power cut occurred when a substation in the village of Tanneron, which supplies Cannes, was attacked by arsonists in the early hours.

At about 10:00 (08:00 GMT) the legs of an electricity pylon near the town of Villeneuve-Loubet were cut, triggering a second outage.

In Cannes, shops and restaurants struggled to operate.

“Another hour and I’ll throw everything away,” Laurent Aboukrat, who owns Cannes’ Jamin restaurant, told the AFP news agency. He said his fridges had been off since the morning.

“Cannes is in a total slowdown, meltdown, there’s no coffee anywhere, and I think the town has run out of croissants, so this is like crisis territory,” Australian producer Darren Vukasinovic told Reuters news agency.

Several screenings were interrupted by the cut in the morning, before festival organisers were able to switch to private generators.

Saturday is the last day of the festival. French actress Juliette Binoche and her jury are set to announce the winner of the Palme d’Or – the highest prize awarded at the festival.

Major power outage hits the prominent film festival on its closing day and impacts 160,000 homes in the area.

French police were investigating a possible arson attack as being the main cause for a power outage which hit the Alpes-Maritimes region in southern France, including Cannes which is hosting its world-famous annual film festival.

“We are looking into the likelihood of a fire being started deliberately,” a spokesperson for the French national gendarmerie said on Saturday, adding that no arrests had been made at this stage.

The local authority for the Alpes-Maritimes region had said earlier on Saturday that the western part of the area, which includes Cannes, was suffering from a major electricity outage and that grid operator RTE France was working on restoring power.

The outage, which affected 160,000 homes, according to RTE and regional officials, started shortly after 10am local time (08:00 GMT) on Saturday.

Police sources said the outage was caused by an overnight fire, probably an arson attack, at a high-voltage substation in the village of Tanneron.

Traffic lights were knocked out and businesses closed on the main shopping street of the Alpes-Maritimes holiday destination.

Separate power outages swept across the Iberian Peninsula and parts of southern France on Monday, disrupting critical infrastructure and airport operations. Officials denied foul play.

While Spain and Portugal suffered blackouts last month, the French Basque Country saw brief power outages with interruptions lasting only a few minutes, according to the French electricity transmission network.

The latest outage came just hours before the 78th Cannes Film Festival is due to close on Saturday evening with an award ceremony at the Palais des Festivals.

Despite the power cut, festival organisers said switching to an alternative electricity power supply enabled them to “maintain the events and screenings planned for today in normal conditions, including the closing ceremony”.

After a politically charged two weeks, a jury led by French actor Juliette Binoche is expected to announce the winners among 22 films competing for the Palme d’Or for best film.

This year, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the genocide in Gaza and United States President Donald Trump were the biggest talking points at the festival. More than 900 actors and filmmakers signed an open letter denouncing the genocide in Gaza, according to the organisers.

The A-HyM Hypersonic Air Master is designed to carry 170 passengers and cruise at an altitude of 30,000 metres while travelling at speeds of Mach 7.3

A groundbreaking hypersonic airliner could cut London-New York flight times to a mere 45 minutes.

The revolutionary A-HyM Hypersonic Air Master is set to transform air travel by flying at Mach 7.3-over 5,600 mph (9,000 kph). Designed to carry 170 passengers, it could reduce the transatlantic journey from the usual seven hours, making transatlantic travel quicker than ever before.

In comparison, Concorde typically flew from London to New York in just under three and a half hours, compared to about eight hours on a subsonic flight. Spanish designer Oscar Viñals says the A-HyM would cruise at an altitude of 30,000 metres, far above conventional jets, using advanced heat-resistant materials like titanium and carbon fibre to withstand temperatures up to 1,000°C.

Its innovative Sonic Boom Mitigation System aims to reduce the disruptive noise of breaking the sound barrier, potentially allowing supersonic-and even hypersonic-flights over land without disturbing communities below. Powered by a next-generation hydrogen-fuelled combined-cycle engine, the aircraft would blend turbojet, ramjet, and oblique detonation technologies for both speed and eco-friendliness.

READ MORE: ‘Concorde’s final flight was 20 years ago – the supersonic jet was always doomed’

Inside, passengers would enjoy spacious, comfortable cabins equipped with virtual panoramic windows and advanced entertainment systems designed to handle the unique conditions of hypersonic flight.

Although only a concept at this stage, the A-HyM illustrates how rapid breakthroughs in materials science, propulsion systems, and aerodynamics are making the prospect of ultra-fast and sustainable global travel increasingly plausible.

According to Oscar Viñals: “This aircraft concept would allow its users not only to experience a unique flight at dizzying speeds in excellent conditions, but it would also allow them to “master” time, because a trip, for example, from London to Los Angeles would only take an hour and a half, from boarding at Heathrow international airport to disembarking at LAX (Los Angeles International Airport).”

READ MORE: Five best ‘extreme day trips’ with short UK flight time – and what to do thereREAD MORE: Private Maldives island stay comes with one-of-a-kind Ferrari – but it’ll cost you

The A-HyM aircraft’s developers are far from the only ones perusing the dream of commercial super-sonic flight. In January the Boom supersonic jet – dubbed the ‘new Concorde‘ – officially broken the sound barrier.

The Colorado-based company Boom launched its XB-1 test plane from California‘s Mojave Air and Space Port for a test flight in January, reaching a speed of Mach 1.1, or 844 miles per hour while flying at about 35,000 feet.

A plane is classed as having reached ‘supersonic’ speeds once it passes Mach 1. The Boom XB-1 is the first civil supersonic jet made in the US to break the sound barrier.

The goal of crashing through the sound barrier, and the loud bang that happens when planes do, is part of the reason super-fast air travel proved difficult from a business perspective.

As iconic and beautiful as the Concorde’s curved-delta wing shape was, there had always been a fundamental problem with the plane before it was mothballed for good. Smashing through the sound barrier causes a huge bang that has big consequences of those on the ground. During a 1965 test over Oklahoma city by the US Air Force, hundreds of reports of smashed windows were made.

The potential to cause this kind of disruption meant that Concorde could only fly certain routes at supersonic, meaning no high-speed flights over land. This crushed the business case for the aircraft in the US as cities such as Los Angeles and New York could not be linked up effectively.

Climate scientists also began to express alarm about the impact of the Concorde on the ozone layer, specifically the potentially damaging impact its emissions could have while flying at 60,000 feet – something it needed to do to get into air thin enough.

The relatively small number of passengers onboard coupled with the large amount of fuel required to fly so fast (compared to slower air travel), meant fluctuations in oil price hit the airline hard. At points customers were paying close to $12,000 for a single trip, back in 2003. Operators Air France and British Airways had to have reserve planes made as back-ups, which added to the spiralling bill.

ENERGY bills are set to drop this July, bringing much-needed relief to millions of households.

The energy regulator Ofgem has confirmed the new price cap, which comes into effect on July 1, 2025.

The average gas and electricity bill is set to drop from £1,849 to £1,720, saving the typical household £129 a year.

But bear in mind the exact amount you pay can be higher or lower depending on your usage, and the cap is reviewed every three months.

This is significantly higher than the drop this time last year, when it decreased from £1,690 a year to £1,568.

The savings will still provide relief to millions, as over 22million households on standard variable tariffs are directly affected by the price cap, which is updated every three months.

Experts at Cornwall Insight had rightly predicted the energy price cap would drop to £1,720 in July.

Currently, the price cap sets annual energy costs at around £1,849.

However, many households may still pay more than Ofgem‘s headline figure.

This is because the price cap doesn’t cap total bills but limits the maximum cost per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of gas and electricity, along with daily standing charges.

Ofgem’s headline figure is based on the assumption that a typical household consumes 2,700 kWh of electricity and 11,500 kWh of gas annually.

So if you use more than a typical households expect to pay more.

However, energy experts say that households could make significant savings by switching to a fixed-rate energy deal now.

By choosing a fixed deal, customers can lock in consistent rates for a set period, potentially avoiding fluctuations in energy prices.

Of course, opting for a fixed energy deal carries the risk that, if energy prices drop further, you might end up paying more than you would on a variable tariff.

However, analysts have long said that households should not anticipate any significant drops in prices this year.

In response, National Energy Action Chief Executive Adam Scorer said: “Any fall in the price of energy is always welcome news, but this is a short fall from a great height. Bills remain punishingly high for low-income households.

“Four years of extraordinarily high energy bills has taken its toll. We hear heart-breaking cases every day.

“The likely expansion in eligibility for the Winter Fuel Payment will be a relief for some, but National Energy Action is calling for deeper energy bill support and a real focus to support households out of debt.”

How can I find the cheapest fixed deals?

To find the best fixed energy deals, start by visiting price comparison websites, which aggregate various offers from different energy suppliers.

The best sites include Uswitch.com and MoneySavingExpert’s Cheap Energy Club.

Enter your postcode and current energy usage details to receive a list of available deals tailored to your needs – it’ll take you less than five minutes.

You’ll then be able to compare the rates, contract lengths, and any additional features or benefits offered by each deal.

Next, visit the websites of individual energy suppliers to check if they have exclusive deals that are not listed on comparison sites.

Sometimes, suppliers offer special promotions or discounts directly to customers.

Compare these offers with those on the comparison websites to ensure you get the best possible rate.

Finally, consider customer service reviews and the overall reputation of the suppliers.

Once you have identified the best deal, follow the instructions to switch your energy provider.

What energy bill help is available?

There’s a number of different ways to get help paying your energy bills if you’re struggling to get by.

If you fall into debt, you can always approach your supplier to see if they can put you on a repayment plan before putting you on a prepayment meter.

This involves paying off what you owe in instalments over a set period.

If your supplier offers you a repayment plan you don’t think you can afford, speak to them again to see if you can negotiate a better deal.

Several energy firms have schemes available to customers struggling to cover their bills.

But eligibility criteria vary depending on the supplier and the amount you can get depends on your financial circumstances.

For example, British Gas or Scottish Gas customers struggling to pay their energy bills can get grants worth up to £2,000.

British Gas also offers help via its British Gas Energy Trust and Individuals Family Fund.

You don’t need to be a British Gas customer to apply for the second fund.

EDF, E.ON, Octopus Energy and Scottish Power all offer grants to struggling customers too.

Thousands of vulnerable households are missing out on extra help and protections by not signing up to the Priority Services Register (PSR).

The service helps support vulnerable households, such as those who are elderly or ill.

Some of the perks include being given advance warning of blackouts, free gas safety checks and extra support if you’re struggling.

Get in touch with your energy firm to see if you can apply.

May 22 (UPI) — Walmart has announced plans to lay off 1,500 corporate employees, part of what it calls a restructuring as it weighs plans to raise prices amid Trump administration tariffs.

“We are reshaping some teams in our Global Tech and Walmart U.S. organizations where we have identified opportunities to remove layers and complexity, speed up decision-making, and help associates innovate rapidly,” a memo to employees obtained by The Hill Wednesday said.

The memo said the retail giant is eliminating some jobs and creating new ones aimed at building on business priorities and growth strategy.

While Walmart said the corporate restructure is not directly related to the looming tariffs, it has said it is weighing the options of price increases and trying to absorb the tariffs when they are imposed, as it has done with past levies.

During a corporate earnings call last week, Walmart CEO Doug McMillion said the giant retailer would not be able to absorb all of the tariffs and said it would likely have to pass some costs on to consumers. Walmart said Wednesday it would be raising some prices.

Economists use Walmart as a gauge to consumer spending and have said that given the large percentage of goods the retailer imports, absorbing all of the tariffs would be difficult.

Earlier this week, President Donald Trump posted Walmart should “eat the tariffs” on social media.

“Walmart should stop trying to blame the tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain,” Trump wrote. ” Walmart made billions of dollars last year, far more than expected.”

Walmart CFO John David Rainey countered Thursday that the company is facing unprecedented financial pressure due to the tariffs.

“We have not seen prices increase at this magnitude, in the speed which they’re coming at us before, and so it makes for a challenging environment,” he told CNBC.

WASHINGTON — Landmark legislation that would rewrite the tax code and levy steep cuts to programs providing healthcare and food stamps to the poor passed the House early Thursday, a development that was celebrated by President Trump despite the bill facing an uncertain future among Senate Republicans.

The measure, titled the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” would boost funding for border security and the Defense Department, eliminate taxes on tips and overtime, provide a new tax deduction to seniors and renew the 2017 tax cuts passed during the first Trump administration. To pay for those new funding commitments, the bill proposes eliminating green energy tax benefits passed under President Biden, as well as an estimated $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Even still, the bill would add so much money to the debt that Congress may be forced to execute cuts across the board, including hundreds of billions to Medicare, in a process known as sequestration, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The House vote fell along party lines. By opposing the bill, the Trump administration said that Democrats were supporting the largest tax increase on middle-class Americans in decades, a reference to the upcoming expiration of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts at the end of the year.

Democrats, on the other hand, have accused Republicans of voting for the deepest cuts to healthcare in modern times. By creating new barriers to Medicaid coverage through the introduction of work hour requirements, as well as increasing premiums under the Affordable Care Act, the CBO and other nonpartisan organizations estimate up to 14 million Americans could lose their insurance coverage.

Those drastic changes to the healthcare landscape have given pause to several Republican senators.

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine has said she is “very wary of cutting Medicaid.” Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri said he “can’t support” substantial cuts to Medicaid benefits. And after the vote on Thursday, Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas said that material changes should be expected to the House bill.

“We need to go back through that bill with a fine tooth comb and make it better,” Marshall said in an interview with Newsmax. “I think there’s opportunities in Medicaid to make that bill better, to make sure that we strengthen it, that we preserve it for those who need it most.”

Any Senate rollback of cuts to the Medicaid program could face resistance from the House Freedom Caucus during the reconciliation process. Members of that group, which proclaims a commitment to fiscal conservatism, have called for even deeper cuts to the Medicaid program.

Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, chair of the House Freedom Caucus, voted “present” early Thursday morning, preserving negotiating leverage as the bill makes its way across Capitol Hill.

“I voted to move the bill along in the process for the president,” Harris wrote on social media. “There is still a lot of work to be done in deficit reduction and ending waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicaid program.”

The vote came hours after Trump met with GOP holdouts at the White House. As late as Wednesday afternoon, before meeting with the president, several of those lawmakers were casting doubt on the prospects of the bill’s passage this week, ahead of a Memorial Day deadline set by House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina was dismissive of the Freedom Caucus on Thursday, telling CNN that the cuts they are pushing for would barely make a dent in the national debt.

“You had your chance,” Graham said to the caucus. “Some of these cuts are not real. We’re talking about over a decade — you know, if you do $1.5 trillion, that’s like a percent and a half. So let’s don’t get high on our horse here that we’ve somehow made some major advancement of reducing spending, because we didn’t.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota also mocked the caucus, calling it “rich” for its members to lecture Senate Republicans on fiscal conservatism, “and end up with not that conservative a bill.” The CBO estimates the House legislation would result in a $3.8-trillion increase to the deficit.

If passed, the new work requirements to Medicaid would kick in at the end of 2026, right after the midterm elections. Green energy tax credits would phase out for any project that is not already under construction 60 days after the law comes into force.

The cap on the state and local tax deduction, known as SALT, will increase to $40,000 from $10,000, phasing out for individuals and households making more than $500,000. And while the president campaigned on a promise to eliminate taxes on Social Security, a parliamentary rule precluded Republicans from including a full cut. Instead, the bill proposes an enhanced tax deduction for senior citizens of up to $4,000.

On Truth Social, the president’s social media platform, Trump wrote that the bill is “arguably the most significant piece of Legislation that will ever be signed in the History of our Country!”

“There is no time to waste,” he added. Johnson, the speaker, has set a goal of sending the bill to the president’s desk by Independence Day.

Trump’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the president’s team was “suiting up” for negotiations with the Senate now that the bill has passed the House. “We will see how it goes,” she said.

“The ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ is named the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ for a reason, because it is a one big beautiful bill that encompasses just about everything this president could want for the American public. It delivers on so many of his core campaign promises. So surely we want to see those campaign promises signed into law,” Leavitt said. “He’s expecting them to get busy on this bill and send it to his desk as soon as possible.”

The two House Republicans who voted against the bill, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Warren Davidson of Ohio, should face primary challenges for their defiance of the president’s directive, Leavitt added.

“What’s the alternative, I would ask those members of Congress. Did they want to see a tax hike? Did they want to see our country go bankrupt? That’s the alternative by them trying to vote no,” she said. “The president believes that the Republican Party needs to be unified.”

May 21 (UPI) — Education Secretary Linda McMahon, testifying before a House subcommittee on Wednesday, defended a 15.3% leaner budget from last year as part of the department’s “final mission.”

President Donald Trump‘s budget request would cut funding to the Education Department by about $12 billion to wind down the agency. The House bill allocated $30.9 billion and the Senate version $31.9 billion.

She said her top priorities are support for charter schools, which would receive a $60 million funding increase, as well as improving literacy rates and returning education to states. Charters schools are the only ones with a budget funding rise.

“The fiscal year ’26 budget will take a significant step toward that goal,” McMahon told legislators on the House Committee on Appropriations’ education subcommittee. “We seek to shrink federal bureaucracy, save taxpayer money and empower states who best know their local needs to manage education in this country.”

As Republicans supported her plans, Democrats blasted her.

“By recklessly incapacitating the department you lead, you are usurping Congress’ authority and infringing on Congress’ power of the purse,” Rosa DeLauro, of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the appropriations committee, said.

She decried cuts for higher education.

“Your visions for students aspiring to access and pay for college is particularly grim,” DeLauro said. “Some families do not need financial assistance to go to college, but that’s not true for the rest.”

Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, of New Jersey, also blasted states gaining greater authority.

“I’m asking you, do you realize that to send authority back to the states, to eliminate your oversight, to eliminate your accountability, to eliminate your determination as to resources going to schools that are teaching public schools that are teaching underserved communities, this will result in the very reason that we had to get the involvement of our government in this, and that’s a yes or no,” she said.

“It isn’t a yes or no, but I will not respond to any questions based on the theory that this administration doesn’t care anything about the law and operates outside it,” McMahon responded.

Coleman said: “From the president of the United States conducting himself in a corrupt manner to his family enriching him and himself corruptly … I’m telling you, the Department of Education is one of the most important departments in this country and you should feel shameful [to] be engaged with an administration that doesn’t give a damn.”

McMahon said she is not trying to remove 8% to 10% that goes to states, and instead moving programs to other departments.

She described her agency as a federal funding “pass-through mechanism” and other agencies could take over the job of distributing allocations from Congress.

“Whether the channels of that funding are through HHS [Health and Human Services], or whether they’re funneled through the DOJ (Department of Jusrtice], or whether they’re funneled through the Treasury or SBA [Smal Business Administration] or other departments, the work is going to continue to get done,” McMahon said.

Plans are to move the student loan programs to the SBA, which McMahon was the administrator during the first Trump administration.

The reductions include eliminating two federal programs designed at improving college access for disadvantaged, TRIO, and low-income students, Gear Up, at a cost of $1.6 billion. Also, the federal Work-Study Program would shift responsibility to states, and funding would be eliminated for Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants to undergraduate students.

And funding would be reduced 35%, or about $49 million, for the already-scaled back Office for Civil Rights, which investigates harassment and discrimination on college campuses and in K-12 schools.

The budget shifts funding from programs supporting diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

She said full funding would remain for Title I-A, which allocates funds to schools with the highest percentages of children from low-income families, and those with the Disabilities Education Act for free public education and support services for children with disabilities.

“Here we are today with a Department of Education that was really stood up in 1980 by President Carter,” McMahon said. “We’ve spent over $3 trillion during that time, and every year we have seen our scores continue to either stagnate or fall. It is clear that we are not doing something right.”

On March 20,, Trump signed an executive order directing McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education.”

Six days earlier, the agency announced a workforce reduction that would cut nearly 50% of employees, 1,315.

The department, already the smallest Cabinet-level agency before the recent layoffs, distributed roughly $242 billion to students, K-12 schools and universities in the 2024 fiscal year. The fiscal year ends Sept. 30.

WASHINGTON — President Trump implored House Republicans at the Capitol to drop their fights over his big tax-cut bill and get it done, using encouraging words but also the hardened language of politics over the multitrillion-dollar package that is at risk of collapsing before planned votes this week.

During the more than hourlong session Tuesday, Trump warned Republicans to not touch Medicaid with cuts, and he told New York lawmakers to end their fight for a bigger local tax deduction, reversing his own campaign promise. The president, heading into the meeting, called himself a “cheerleader” for the Republican Party and praised Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.). But he also criticized at least one of the GOP holdouts as a “grandstander” and warned that anyone who doesn’t support the bill would be a “fool.”

“We have unbelievable unity,” Trump said as he exited. “I think we’re going to get everything we want.”

The president arrived at a pivotal moment. Negotiations are slogging along and it’s not at all clear the package, with its sweeping tax breaks and cuts to Medicaid, food stamps and green energy programs, has the support needed from the House’s slim Republican majority. Lawmakers are also being asked to add some $350 billion to Trump’s border security, deportation and defense agenda.

Inside, he spoke privately in what one lawmaker called the president’s “weaving” style, and took questions.

The president also made it clear he’s losing patience with the various holdout factions of the House Republicans, according to a senior White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

But Trump disputed that notion as well as reports that he used an expletive in warning against cutting Medicaid. Instead, he said afterward, “That was a meeting of love.” He received several standing ovations, Republicans said.

Yet it was not at all clear that Trump, who was brought in to seal the deal, changed minds.

“We’re still a long ways away,” said Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the House Freedom Caucus.

Conservatives are insisting on quicker, steeper cuts to federal programs to offset the costs of the trillions of dollars in lost tax revenue. At the same time, a core group of lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states wants bigger tax breaks for their voters back home. Worries about piling onto the nation’s $36-trillion debt are stark.

With House Democrats lined up against the package, calling it a giveaway to the wealthy at the expense of safety net programs, GOP leaders have almost no votes to spare. A key committee hearing is set for the middle of the night Tuesday in hopes of a House floor vote by Wednesday afternoon.

“They literally are trying to take healthcare away from millions of Americans at this very moment in the dead of night,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York.

Trump has been pushing hard for Republicans to unite behind the bill, the president’s signature domestic policy initiative in Congress.

Asked about one of the conservative Republicans, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Trump lashed out.

“I think he is a grandstander, frankly,” the president continued. “I think he should be voted out of office.”

But Massie, a renegade who wears a clock lapel pin that tallies the nation’s debt load, said afterward he’s still a no vote.

Also unmoved was Rep. Mike Lawler, one of the New York Republicans leading the fight for a bigger state and local tax deduction, known as SALT: “As it stands right now, I do not support the bill. Period.”

The sprawling 1,116-page package carries Trump’s title, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” as well as his campaign promises to extend the tax breaks approved during his first term while adding new ones, including no taxes on tips, automobile loan interest and Social Security.

Yet, the price tag is rising and lawmakers are wary of the votes ahead, particularly as the economy teeters with uncertainty.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group, estimates that the House bill is shaping up to add roughly $3.3 trillion to the debt over the next decade.

Republicans criticizing the measure argued that the bill’s new spending and tax cuts are front-loaded, while the measures to offset the cost are back-loaded.

In particular, the conservative Republicans are looking to speed up the new work requirements that Republicans want to enact for able-bodied participants in Medicaid. They had been proposed to start Jan. 1, 2029, but Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said on CNBC that work requirements for some Medicaid beneficiaries would begin in early 2027.

At least 7.6 million fewer people are expected to have health insurance under the initial Medicaid changes, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said last week.

Republican holdouts are also looking to more quickly halt green energy tax breaks, which had been approved as part of the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, and are now being used for renewable energy projects across the nation.

But for every change Johnson considers to appease the hard-right conservatives, he risks losing support from more traditional and centrist Republicans. Many have signed letters protesting deep cuts to Medicaid and food assistance programs and the rolling back of clean energy tax credits.

At its core, the sprawling legislative package permanently extends the existing income tax cuts and bolsters the standard deduction, increasing it to $32,000 for joint filers, and the child tax credit to $2,500.

The New Yorkers are fighting for a larger state and local tax deduction beyond the bill’s proposal. As it stands, the bill would triple what’s currently a $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction, increasing it to $30,000 for joint filers with incomes up to $400,000 a year. They have proposed a deduction of $62,000 for single filers and $124,000 for joint filers.

Trump, who had campaigned on fully reinstating the unlimited SALT deduction, now appears to be satisfied with the proposed compromise, arguing it only benefits “all the Democratic” states.

If the bill passes the House this week, it would move to the Senate, where Republicans are also eyeing changes.

Mascaro, Freking, Askarinam and Cappelletti write for the Associated Press. AP writers Darlene Superville and Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.

After ITV announced a major shakeup to it’s daytime television shows, it’s feared Loose Women’s cast could be cut by up to a third with the show being reduced across the year

Major changes are coming to ITV, and it could spell bad news for a number of popular presenters. It was announced recently that the organisation is having a massive shake-up with how its daytime TV will feature, and it appears the Loose Women crew could feel the full force of the switches.

ITV daytime is set to look very different in a few months following the announcement of the huge change. It sees a rejig of a number of shows, including Good Morning Britain. ITV news and magazine shows usually run from 6am to 1.30pm weekdays and include the breakfast show followed by Lorraine, This Morning and Loose Women.

However, from January 2026, Good Morning Britain will be extended by 30 minutes to run from 6am to 9.30am daily. The change also sees Lorraine Kelly’s show cut in half.

It will now run from 9.30am until 10am, and only be on our screens for 30 weeks of the year – the same amount of weeks as Loose Women will now air.

It’s thought up to a third of the 26-strong pool of Loose Women presenters could now face losing their job. A source told The Sun: “Everyone is completely gutted and in shock.

“We can’t believe they would dismantle these brilliant shows. It’s the death of daytime TV.”

Another added: “There’s no way all the Loose Women will be needed now there’ll be far fewer episodes to fill.”

Despite the on-screen show being cut, Loose Women: The Podcast will continue and provide more work for the cast.

The overhaul was announced yesterday by Kevin Lygo, managing director of ITV’s media and entertainment division. He said: “Daytime is a really important part of what we do, and these scheduling and production changes will enable us to continue to deliver a schedule providing viewers with the news, debate and discussion they love from the presenters they know and trust as well generating savings which will allow us to reinvest across the programme budget in other genres.

“These changes also allow us to consolidate our news operations and expand our national, international and regional news output and to build upon our proud history of trusted journalism at a time when our viewers need accurate, unbiased news coverage more than ever.”

He added: “I recognise that our plans will have an impact on staff off screen in our Daytime production teams.

“We will work with ITV Studios and ITN as they manage these changes to produce the shows differently from next year, and support them through this transition.

“Daytime has been a core element of ITV’s schedule for over 40 years and these changes will set ITV up to continue to bring viewers award winning news, views and discussion as we enter our eighth decade.”

READ MORE: Beauty buffs find ‘genius’ way to make fake tan last longer – it sells every 20 seconds

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

Donald Trump made a rare trip to Capitol Hill to try and convince Republican members of Congress to approve his “big, beautiful bill” that would cut programmes for the poor and lower taxes while raising the US’ national debt.

Nonpartisan analysts say bill would add $3-5tn to the nation’s $36.2tn debt over the next decade.

United States President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax-cut bill has won approval from a key congressional committee to advance towards possible passage in the House of Representatives later this week.

The rare Sunday night vote marks a big win for Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson, after hardline Republican conservatives on Friday blocked the bill from clearing the House Budget Committee over a dispute involving spending cuts to the Medicaid healthcare programme for lower-income Americans and the repeal of green energy tax credits.

Four hardline members of the committee’s 21 Republicans allowed the legislation to advance by voting “present”. The bill passed in a 17-16 vote, with all Democrats voting against it.

The hardliners had spent much of the day in closed-door negotiations with House Republican leaders and White House officials.

Johnson met with Republican lawmakers shortly before the meeting, telling reporters that the changes agreed to were “just some minor modifications. Not a huge thing.”

Republican House Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington said he expects deliberations to continue on into the week, “right up until the time we put this big, beautiful bill before the House”.

Nonpartisan analysts say the bill, which would extend the 2017 tax cuts that were Trump’s signature first-term legislative win, would add $3 trillion to $5 trillion to the $36.2 trillion national debt over the next decade.

Credit ratings agency Moody’s cited the rising debt, which it said was on track to reach 134 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035, for its decision on Friday to downgrade the US’s credit rating.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview with CNN on Sunday that the bill would spur economic growth sufficient to offset any growth in the debt, adding that he did not put much credence in Moody’s downgrade.

Economic experts have warned that the downgrade – following previous downgrades by Fitch Ratings and S&P – is a clear sign that the US has too much debt and lawmakers need to either increase revenues or spend less.

Trump’s Republicans hold a 220-213 majority in the House, and are divided over how deeply to slash spending to offset the cost of the tax cuts.

Hardliners want cuts to Medicaid, which some Republican senators have pushed back against, saying it would hurt the very voters who elected Trump in November, and whose support they will need in 2026 when control of Congress is again up for grabs.

The bill’s cuts would kick 8.6 million people off Medicaid.

It also aims to eliminate taxes on tips and some overtime income – both Trump campaign promises – while boosting defence spending and providing more funds for Trump’s border crackdown.

Democratic US Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut said the credit rating cut spelled trouble for Americans.

“That is a big deal. That means that we are likely headed for a recession,” Murphy told NBC’s Meet the Press.

“These guys are running the economy recklessly.”

McIlroy entered his second round with ground to make up after shooting a three-over 74 on Thursday.

He hit only four of 14 fairways in his first round and, according to PGA Championship Radio Sirius XM, he had been unable to use his usual driver because it was deemed to be non-conforming during testing by the United States Golf Association earlier this week.

The radio station reported that the decision did not mean McIlroy was at fault or even aware of the issue. They also said the USGA said testing results were kept confidential unless the player wanted to make it public.

The early signs in round two were better, a 15-footer dropping for birdie on the second hole, while three more shots were gained around the turn as McIlroy improved to one under par.

However, all of the breathing room he had earned ended up being required during a testing back nine.

An excellent par save on the 13th stopped the rot after two straight bogeys, before birdies on the next two holes restored a gap to the cut line – which was hovering between one and two over par during the latter stages of the second round.

There was some late drama as, heading down the 18th at level par, McIlroy pulled his tee shot left and his ball ricocheted off a hospitality tent before landing close to the water hazard.

But he recovered to make a bogey five, confirming his spot in the final two rounds.

Schauffele had found himself in trouble following two bogeys on the front nine but fought back sufficiently to extend his stay in North Carolina.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gov. Gavin Newsom presents his revised 2025-26 state budget during a news conference Wednesday in Sacramento.

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

OVER 150,000 on benefits will see their payments cut under Personal Independence Payments (PIP) changes, the DWP has confirmed.

The Government is shaking up the way PIP is assessed meaning hundreds of thousands will miss out from November 2026.

1

It comes as ministers look to cut the increasing welfare bill by clawing back billions of pounds of benefits.

But the changes will also have a knock-on effect on carers who qualify for benefits because they look after someone on PIP.

From late next year, new and existing PIP claimants being reassessed will have to score a minimum of four points in at least one activity to receive the Daily Living Component.

The higher rate of the Daily Living Component is currently worth £110.40 a week.

Claimants will also have to score at least eight points when being assessed.

The Government estimates this means by 2029/30 around 800,000 won’t receive the Daily Living Component of PIP.

But it has also confirmed 150,000 will be missing out on Carer’s Allowance or the Universal Credit Carer’s Element by 2029/30 too.

This is because to receive either of these carer’s benefits you have to be caring for someone who receives the Daily Living part of PIP.

It means new and existing PIP claimants finding they are no longer eligible will disqualify their carer’s from next November when the changes kick in.

What are Carer’s Allowance and the carer’s element of Universal Credit?

Carer’s Allowance is paid to those caring for someone else (who is on benefits) for at least 35 hours a week and is worth £83.30 a week.

You don’t have to be related to the person you care for, or live with them, to qualify.

If you are on Carer’s Allowance you also receive National Insurance credits which contribute to your NI record.

What classes as someone needing “care” is based on them qualifying for a number of benefits. These are:

• Personal Independence Payment – Daily Living Component
• Disability Living Allowance – the middle or highest care rate
• Scottish Adult Disability Living Allowance – the middle or highest care rate
• Attendance Allowance
• Pension Age Disability Payment
• Constant Attendance Allowance at or above the normal maximum rate with an Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit
• Constant Attendance Allowance at the basic (full day) rate with a War Disablement Pension
• Armed Forces Independence Payment
• Child Disability Payment – the middle or highest care rate
• Adult Disability Payment – daily living component at the standard or enhanced rate

The person you are caring for must also need help with certain tasks including: washing and cooking, being taken to the doctors and household tasks like managing bills or going food shopping.

Carer’s Allowance is issued to those living in England, Wales or Scotland aged 16 or over.

It’s worth noting, receiving Carer’s Allowance can impact the benefits the person you are caring for gets.

For example, they will usually stop receiving a severe disability premium or an extra amount for severe disability premium if they are on Pension Credit.

You can apply for Carer’s Allowance and find out more about the exact eligibility criteria via www.gov.uk/carers-allowance/how-to-claim.

The carer’s element of Universal Credit is added to your Universal Credit standard allowance if you care for someone and they receive a number of qualifying benefits. These are:

• Adult Disability Payment – standard or enhanced award
• Armed Forces Independence Payment
• Attendance Allowance
• Child Disability Payment – middle or highest care award
• Constant Attendance Allowance – full day rate, intermediate rate or exceptional rate with Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit
• Constant Attendance Allowance – full day rate with a War Disablement Pension
• Disability Living Allowance – middle or highest care rate
• Personal Independence Payment – either rate of the Daily Living Part

To get the carer’s element you’ll also need to be providing 35 hours a week of care to the person receiving the qualifying benefit.

You get an extra monthly amount worth £201.68.

If you are receiving an extra amount because you have a limited capability for work and work related activity (LCWRA), you won’t qualify for the extra carer’s element part.

Meanwhile, if the person you care for gets the severe disability premium, it will stop when you claim the carer’s element of Universal Credit.

Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing [email protected].

Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories

The BAFTA TV Awards took place last night as the biggest stars and shows on screen were honoured – however, a few stars couldn’t help but let slip a few swear words

The BAFTA TV Awards was sent into chaos behind-the-scenes after its stars and winners kept swearing on stage. The award ceremony is televised an hour after it actually happens, giving producers time to cut a number of expletive moments from the broadcast.

While host Alan Cummings delivered warning throughout the show to attendees over their language, Danny Dyer couldn’t get but let slip during his sweary acceptance speech for Best Male Comedy Performance.

The Mr Bigstuff star thanked Sky for “giving the show a shot” before adding: “F***ing hell, I’m choked up.”

He later said: “I’m getting choked up again, f**k me!” before paying tribute to his daughters Dani and Sunnie Jo. “Girls, Sunnie and Dani. I’ve done it girls, I’ve f***ing done it!” he said.

During the broadcast, Alan was forced to issue an apology over Danny’s language, saying he was “asked to apologise” for the language from Danny.

Danny wasn’t the only star to drop the odd expletive, with even host Alan stumbling on his words wen speaking about the BAFTA Fellowship. He accidentally referred to it as the “b****d” Fellowship before exclaiming, “Oh f**k me!”

Meanwhile, Sophie Willan – who took home the gong for her comedy series Alma’s Not Normal – made a number of efforts not to swear, but couldn’t help letting one slip. “I’m not allowed to swear and all I want to do is Beep Beep, Bloody Beep!!” she said.

“I just want to say, these lot are flupping brilliant. Blimming fabulous!” Despite attempting to replace expletives with more TV-friendly words, she later let a few slip out. “It’s been s*** hot,” she said before realising her error and covering her mouth.

All three speeches were edited out of the programme before it made to broadcast, The Sun has reported.

Last night’s BAFTAs were a big night for the BBC, with Mr Loverman, Industry, Blue Lights, Gavin and Stacey and Rob and Rylan’s Grand Tour taking home gongs alongside other shows.

It was Mr Bates Vs The Post Office that won big however, with the ITV series taking home the award for Limited Drama at the ceremony.

While taking to the stage to accept the award, producer Patrick Spence said: “We’ve shown we cannot abide liars and bullies. And we’d like to put on record that being trusted by the sub post-masters to tell their story has been the greatest privilege of our lives.”

Join The Mirror’s WhatsApp Community or follow us on Google News , Flipboard , Apple News, TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads – or visit The Mirror homepage.