اینترنت

برچسب: cut

  • Trump Will Cut More Federal Workers Next Year

    Trump Will Cut More Federal Workers Next Year


    Since his second inauguration, Trump has fired tens of thousands of federal workers, based on snap recommendations by Elon Musk’s team of whippersnappers. They have gone into government departments and agencies and decided in a day or so which workers to fire and which contracts to terminate. They don’t have enough information or time to make considered judgments, so they treat every federal worker as dispensable. The numbers fired are hard to determine, because federal judges have repeatedly reversed their actions. Some have been approved by the courts. The outcome is still in flux, though we do know that little is left of USAID or the U.S. Departnent of Education.

    Government Executive reports that Trump plans a new round of layoffs in his second year. It’s unclear what his end goal is: is he destroying the federal government for some reason? With all the laid-off workers, he hasn’t reduced the budget. It’s grown, due to greater expenses for ICE, border security, and defense.

    Some agencies, like FEMA and the National Weather Service, are being stripped to the bone. What will remain of our government at the end of his term?

    Government Executive reports:

    The Trump administration is looking to slash a net of 107,000 employees at non-defense agencies next fiscal year, which would lead to an overall reduction of more than 7% of those workers. 

    Agencies laid out their workforce reductions in an expanded version of President Trump’s fiscal 2026 budget released on Friday, which includes both ideas they can implement unilaterally and proposals that will require congressional approval. If agencies follow through on their plans, the cuts will likely be even steeper, as the Defense Department and some other agencies did not include their announced cuts in the new budget documents. 

    The cuts represent changes projected to take effect next year relative to fiscal 2025 staffing levels. The ongoing cuts that have already occurred were generally not factored into the current workforce counts and the White House noted those figures “may not reflect all of the management and administrative actions underway or planned in federal agencies.” 

    Agencies are currently operating under a directive from Trump to slash their rolls, though those plans are largely paused under court order and awaiting resolution at the Supreme Court. 

    Under the budget forecasts, the Education Department will shed the most employees, followed by the Office of Personnel Management, General Services Administration, Small Business Administration and NASA. Education has already moved to lay off one-third of its workforce, but those reductions in force are currently paused by a separate court order. 

    The departments of Labor, Housing and Urban Development and Agriculture are also expecting to cut more than 20% of their workforces. 

    The Trump administration will seek to eliminate more than 107,000 jobs across government, but the net impact is mitigated by targeted hiring at certain agencies and offices. The Transportation Department is the only agency to project an overall staffing increase, driven by hiring at the Federal Aviation Administration and for IT. The Homeland Security Department will seek to significantly staff up at Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement as the administration ramps up its border crackdown and deportation operations, though DHS will see an overall cut due to planned reductions at the Federal Emergency Management Agency—which is set to shed 13% of its workforce—and the Transportation Security Administration—which will cut around 6%. 

    Many offices will be cut nearly entirely, such as the research and state forestry offices within USDA’s Forest Service. The department’s Natural Resources Conservation Service would shed nearly 4,000 employees, including two-thirds of employees providing technical assistance on conservation planning and forecasting on snowpack and water supply.  

    HHS, which has already laid off 10,000 employees, would eliminate 10 offices entirely, though some of the impacted employees are being absorbed into the new Administration for Health America or other reorganized areas. NASA is planning to shutter its Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Engagement office and would cut its Science office in half. DHS would eliminate its Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction office. Cuts at the Treasury Department would be driven by reductions at the Internal Revenue Service— which would zero out its Business Systems Modernization office—though the Bureau of Fiscal Service is also planning to slash one-quarter of its staff.

    At the Interior Department, the National Park Service is planning to cut about 27% of its employees, Fish and Wildlife Service would cut 19% and U.S. Geological Survey would cut 32%.  

    The full scope of the cuts across government will likely expand over time: The Veterans Affairs Department is set to shed more than 80,000 employees and layoffs—assuming a court injunction is lifted—are expected as soon as this month, though they are not a part of the budget. The Defense Department has said it will cut around 60,000 civilian employees, but it has yet to detail those plans in Trump’s budget. 



    Source link

  • NPR Will Fight Trump’s Effort to Cut Off Funding

    NPR Will Fight Trump’s Effort to Cut Off Funding


    Oliver Darcy, media journalist, writes about NPR’s decision to fight the Trump administration’s efforts to shut it down.

    Trump is directly infringing on freedom of the press, punishing NPR because it is not slavishly devoted to him and his views.

    I listen to NPR for straightforward, unbiased news. I appreciate their long-form reports on a wide array of subjects. Many parts of the country are news deserts, where the only media available are the rightwing Sinclair radio stations and FOX News.

    The nation needs NPR, just as the world needs Voice of America, which Trump is defunding.

    As with so many of his decisions, I wonder who benefits? I have no answer.

    Darcy writes:

    When Trump signed an order to defund NPR, the network faced a choice over how it would respond—but CEO Katherine Maher made one thing clear from the start: there would be no backroom negotiations.

    In the days following Donald Trump’s May 1 executive order to strip NPR of all federal funding, leaders at the public broadcaster began deliberating their options. But even before the network’s legal team got to work on the litigation, one decision had already been made. NPR chief executive Katherine Maher made clear that the outlet would not quietly negotiate with the White House—an approach other media companies have recently taken under immense political pressure. 

    “As an independent media organization,” Maher told me by phone Tuesday, “we wouldn’t go ahead and have that conversation because that would be negotiating on editorial principle.” 

    On Tuesday morning, NPR and three of its member stations in Colorado filed a federal lawsuitagainst Trump and his administration, alleging the executive order he signed was not only punitive, but also unconstitutional. In a 43-page complaint, the stations argued that Trump’s directive violated theFirst Amendment, usurped Congress’authority over federal spending, and more broadly, posed a threat to the editorial independence of public media nationwide. 

    The language of the filing was unambiguous. It framed the executive order not as a routine dispute over funding priorities or media policy, but as a retaliatory strike designed to punish critical coverage and reshape the information environment in Trump’s favor. “The Order’s objectives could not be clearer,” the lawsuit stated. “The Order aims to punish NPR for the content of news and other programming the President dislikes and chill the free exercise of First Amendment rights by NPR and individual public radio stations across the country.” 

    I asked Maher what it felt like to take a sitting president to court. She didn’t hesitate. “What did it feel like?” she rhetorically asked me. “It felt like recognizing that there are responsibilities that one takes on in running a media organization, and this was one of those.” She emphasized that the case wasn’t just about NPR’s national desk or morning programming—it was about the entire public media system: “We did this on behalf of our newsroom. We did this on behalf of our editorial independence. We did this on behalf of public media at large.”

    Maher, who only took the helm of NPR in January 2024, told me that the legal option became increasingly clear as the organization studied the implications of the executive order. “We took a look at [the order] and wanted to be able to make sure that we really analyzed it,” she said. “We got to understand what avenues existed for us to be able to seek relief—and litigation was something that we came to once we realized that fundamentally this was a First Amendment issue.” The legal review moved quickly. “Obviously, it’s only been four weeks,” Maher added, “and so you can imagine it happened on a pretty quick timeline.”

    The lawsuit was filed by not just NPR, but also Colorado Public Radio, KSUT Public Radio, and Aspen Public Radio. Together, they asked the court to block enforcement of the order and affirm that federal support for public broadcasting, which Congress has repeatedly approved, cannot be overturned by presidential fiat. For its part, NPR receives just 1% of its annual operating budgetdirectly from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the private nonprofit that distributes federal funding. But local member stations across the country receive a much larger slice of their budgets from the $535 million in taxpayer funds CPB distributes. PBS, facing a similar predicament, said Tuesday it is also actively weighing a legal challenge of its own.

    While Trump has long treated NPR as a proxy for elite coastal media (he’s referred to it as a “liberal disinformation machine,” among other insults), Maher declined to say in her own words why he despises the outlet with the white-hot passion of a thousand suns. “I really couldn’t say what the president thinks or doesn’t think,” she told me. “It’s beyond my powers to get inside his mind.” At the same time, she acknowledged the broader context in which public broadcasting has become a partisan target. “I think that we recognize that there has long been pushback about public media,” she said.

    In any case, the legal issue, she insisted, is separate from any political debate. When asked whether she worries that suing the president could further cement in the minds of the MAGA faithful that NPR has a bias against him, she pushed back. 

    “I fundamentally reject the idea that defending the Constitution is partisan,” Maher told me. “We are taking this action on behalf of the First Amendment. We’re taking this action on behalf of the free press. Regardless of your political beliefs, we all benefit from that.” She added that the lawsuit should be viewed as an act of civic duty, not political retaliation: “I would much rather people saw this as an act of patriotic commitment to our Constitution on behalf of citizens rather than saying that this is somehow partisan or political.”

    Of course, that’s not how her actions have been portrayed by MAGA Media, which—similarly to Trump–views NPR as a liberal mouthpiece of the so-called “deep state.” Maher seemed to acknowledge that reality, but said she would continue to work to get the outlet’s message out. She even said she would be willing to appear on outlets like Fox News to do so. “I’m always happy to talk to people who are happy to talk to us,” Maher said. “I think that we’d be open to having that conversation.”

    What happens if the court doesn’t rule in their favor? Maher didn’t give the possibility of such an outcome any oxygen. “I’m really confident that we will [win],” she said. “I feel that we’re on very, very solid ground, so I’m not concerned about the downside.”



    Source link

  • Are you cut out to be the next student member of the California State Board of Education?

    Are you cut out to be the next student member of the California State Board of Education?


    Anya Ayyappan, left, being sworn in as the student member of the California State Board of Education by Board President Linda Darling Hammond.

    Credit: Courtesy California State Board of Education

    As education policy and issues at school boards across California continue to grab headlines, it’s more important than ever that K-12 students — especially those in a state as diverse as ours — have a representative at the table who can voice concerns and have their opinions and input heard.

    That’s why, as the current student member of the State Board of Education, I strongly encourage all eligible high school students to apply to be the student member for the 2025-26 school year. The application window is now open.

    As student member, you can represent the voice and perspectives of millions of students across California. Your input ensures that student concerns and interests are considered in educational policymaking and decisions made by the State Board of Education. Your insights and experiences as a student can shape policies related to curriculum, standards, assessments and other aspects of education in California.

    During my term, I have advocated for increased student involvement in decision-making processes like adopting instructional materials, designing local control and accountability plans and determining actionable goals based on school climate surveys. I have also forged connections with student leaders across California’s various regions, including the Central Valley and Northern California, that have been traditionally underrepresented.

    These channels of communication allow for coordinated student-led initiatives and diverse input on items discussed by the state board. Based on my conversations with students, I have supported the integration of artificial intelligence in classrooms and increased project-based learning opportunities.

    Recently, I joined the Statewide Model Curriculum Coordinating Council to review lesson plans on Native American history and culture, ensuring they capture authentic, diverse voices. I will be continuing this work beyond my term.

    In addition to providing me with the opportunity to serve my state, this role has given me a deeper understanding of California’s education system. Seeing the incredible work that is being done, along with all the work that remains to be done, has had a profound impact on me, sparking my desire to continue exploring education policy in college.

    Serving on the board provides you with a unique learning experience regarding governance, policymaking, and the educational system. You’ll gain valuable insights into how decisions are made at the state level and how they impact students and schools.

    The application is the first step. The selection process starts with the board’s Screening Committee reviewing all applications and selecting 12 semifinalists. Of those 12, California law requires that student members of a school district governing board select six for further consideration by the State Board of Education. The state board uses the annual Student Advisory Board on Education conference — which takes place Nov. 10-13 in Sacramento — to perform this function. 

    At this conference, the semifinalists make individual presentations to all other advisory board participants about why they should be the next student member — an incredible opportunity to gain valuable experience and make personal connections. Following a secret ballot by the advisory board participants, six candidates will be submitted for further consideration by the state board’s Screening Committee.

    Each of the final six candidates will be interviewed by the committee, after which committee will recommend three finalists to the State Board of Education. Following the board’s action to select the three finalists, the names of the three finalists will be sent to the governor for the final decision.

    Hopefully, after reading this, many students will be inspired to apply. If you or someone you know qualifies for the student member position and wish to apply, you have from now through Sept. 20 to do so. And with summer coming soon, we encourage you to apply soon.

    If appointed by the governor, you’ll have the opportunity to network with other board members, educators, policymakers and stakeholders in the education field. This networking can open doors to future opportunities and collaborations.

    Serving on the board can enhance your leadership, communication and advocacy skills. It’s a chance to develop as a leader and make a meaningful impact on education in your state while also enhancing your resume and future academic or career opportunities.

    Merely going through the process allows you the chance to gain valuable experience and provides many opportunities to help your community. It also helps you think more critically about the education system and how your help can impact students across our state.

    As a student, your voice is powerful. I highly encourage you to apply!

    •••

    Anya Ayyappan is currently serving as the student member of the California State Board of Education. She is a senior at Dougherty Valley High School in San Ramon.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Wall Street Journal: Trump Tax Plan Will Not Cut the Deficit

    Wall Street Journal: Trump Tax Plan Will Not Cut the Deficit


    Richard Rubin of The Wall Street Journal politely explains the lie behind Trump’s “big beautiful budget plan”: it will not cut the deficit. It will increase it.

    WASHINGTON—House Republicans pushed President Trump’s “big, beautiful” tax-and-spending bill past a key hurdle late Sunday night, but the last-minute grappling has them colliding with a stark reality: The plan won’t reduce federal budget deficits and would make America’s fiscal hole deeper.

    The bill could reach the House floor this week, and it is a tenuous balance between the party’s tax-cut wing and factions seeking larger, quicker spending cuts. To get a bill through the House with their 220-213 majority, GOP tax cutters trimmed their ambitions and scheduled some breaks to expire. Many spending hawks, meanwhile, backed the plan while groaning that it doesn’t go far enough fast enough. Others are holding out for more…

    Moody’s Ratings, in downgrading the U.S.’s AAA rating on Friday, said it didn’t expect Congress to produce material multiyear spending or deficit reductions. Publicly held federal debt stands at about $29 trillion, nearly double the level when Trump and Republicans passed the 2017 tax law. Nearly $1 in every $7 the U.S. spends goes toward paying interest, more than the country spends on defense.



    Source link

  • Cal State board anticipates a ‘painful year’ as campuses cut costs

    Cal State board anticipates a ‘painful year’ as campuses cut costs


    California State University officials meet for the July 2024 meeting of the board of trustees.

    Credit: Ashley Bolter / EdSource

    California State University is taking the forecast of a snowballing budget gap so seriously, even a recent message touting a new hire came with the equivalent of a financial weather advisory.

    The nation’s largest university system welcomed Emily F. Cutrer as the new interim president of Sonoma State University last week with the stern reminder that she must address “enormous financial pressures” facing the university, where fall 2023 enrollment was down more than 36% over the last decade.

    That sobering message was repeated to the system’s 23 campuses at the last board of trustees meeting before the fall term — a moment of truth when campus leaders aiming to reverse declines in student enrollment will find out if their bids to attract and retain students worked. Even if efforts to boost enrollment succeed, cutting costs could prove a necessity on many campuses, CSU officials warned. Board Chair Jack B. Clarke Jr., addressing school presidents directly, said they ultimately will determine how to manage limited resources. 

    “Presidents, we understand that you’re going to have to make some hard decisions and, within your campus communities and your general communities, you’re going to be criticized,” he said. “Understand that we’re behind you in terms of making the hard decisions.”

    CSU could be staring down a $1 billion budget gap in the 2025-26 school year as the result of dwindling state support for higher education and rising costs, staff said at the July board of trustees meeting.

    CSU has also unveiled a plan to reshuffle dollars from campuses that fall short of enrollment goals. In April, the system released a preliminary budget document sketching how the system could reallocate $32 million in enrollment funding from 12 campuses that didn’t meet resident enrollment targets or target increases and shift it into nine campuses where 2024-25 resident enrollment targets have been increased. A CSU spokesperson said the system is finalizing those plans over the coming weeks.

    The system expects more budgetary trade-offs going forward, CSU Chief Financial Officer Steve Relyea said to trustees at their July meeting. Major expenses include a backlog of facilities and infrastructure projects, employee compensation costs and obligations the schools must meet under legal mandates such as Title IX, the federal law barring sex-based discrimination in schools.

    “We anticipate negative impacts on academic offerings and student support services,” Relyea said. “The funding that we’re receiving, while it’s more, is still not sufficient to cover the increased cost on our current operations, and at this point universities will likely have to redirect significant dollars from existing university budgets to cover employee compensation commitments.”

    Enrollment drops lead to cuts

    CSU earlier this year agreed to a 10% raise for faculty represented by the California Faculty Association following a one-day strike. Trustees last week voted to approve salary increases for four campus leaders over the objections of some speakers during public comment. 

    The grim forecast underscores the challenges facing CSU at a time of flagging student enrollment across higher education amid declining public trust in the value of a college degree. Systemwide, fall 2023 enrollment stood ​more than 30,000 students shy of its 2020 peak. 

    Campus efforts to entice students back to campus include easing transfers into the system, reengaging students who started but did not finish a degree and more support for students of color. And CSU leaders say they remain focused on long-term goals like boosting graduation rates for historically underrepresented students and rebuilding trust in Title IX and other anti-discrimination programs. 

    Funding those priorities will require hard choices. Officials anticipate they can partially plug holes in the budget with reserve funds, but they said school presidents and the system itself must tighten their belts to cover the rest — cuts they acknowledged could prove painful and unpopular. The university system also will have to contend with pressure from faculty, who argue they should have a greater say in university decision-making.

    Cuts are nothing new at some CSU campuses. In recent years, as enrollment fell more than 15% from pre-pandemic levels at schools including Cal State Channel Islands, San Francisco State and Sonoma State, campus leaders have held off on filling some open positions or launched voluntary separation programs to reduce staffing costs. Cal State Monterey Bay in May announced 16 layoffs and an additional 86 departures under an early retirement program. At Cal State East Bay, another campus that has seen a dip in enrollment, campus leaders in May announced that the school would no longer sponsor its women’s water polo to save money. 

    “Upending 19 student-athletes’ East Bay careers is without precedent,” said Jeff Newcomb, a lecturer and president of the California Faculty Association’s East Bay executive board, at the July meeting. “Going forward, authentic shared governance — it’s hard— but it’s crucial if we are to emerge from austerity measures with trust and strategic vitality.”

    Take Sonoma State as another example. 

    The school has weathered enrollment declines with serious cost-cutting. To manage a budget shortfall, spokesperson Jeffery Keating said in a statement, Sonoma State has trimmed $21.4 million from its base budget since 2020-21 and plans an additional $7.5 million cut in 2024-25. 

    Some of those savings have come from reducing the number of faculty and staff, including through attrition and early retirement programs. Keating said faculty and staff headcount fell 22% between 2019 and 2023.

    The aim has been “to protect student services and academic programs,” according to the statement, and the school doesn’t plan to scale back areas like financial aid, health services or career counseling. 

    He said the school sees some positive signs on the horizon: It projects that net student headcount will rise in 2024-25.  

    Across the system, CSU anticipates a $218 million shortfall this school year, according to a budget presentation. Making up the difference in funds likely will require tapping into reserves and “aggressively pursuing new students and working to retain current students,” said Ryan Storm, the system’s assistant vice chancellor for budget. 

    The budget presentation was not the first time Cal State has flashed financial warning signs. 

    The cost of educating CSU students far outstrips the money the system actually has to educate them, a 2023 report by CSU leaders found. Trustee Diego Arambula reminded colleagues last week that the gap between what the system estimated it should spend to meet student needs and what it does spend was $1.5 billion, and could grow as campuses trim their budgets.

    The search for savings

    The search for cost savings starts with the central office, Chancellor Mildred García said.  

    The Chancellor’s Office is reviewing each of its divisions in pursuit of “not efficiency for its own sake or purely for cost savings, but for mission-driven efficiency,” she said in a report to the trustees. In that vein, the office will split the division of academic and student affairs into two, a reorganization García said was estimated to save at least $500,000. 

    The July meeting also highlighted CSU’s smallest university — Cal Maritime — as both a cautionary tale and a possible inspiration for how the system’s campuses might share costs and academic programs in the future.

    The board considered a proposal to merge the maritime academy into Cal Poly San Luis Obispo in a bid to save the Vallejo-based maritime school following a steep drop in enrollment and rising overhead costs. The board will resume those discussions in September and make a final decision in November.

    Cal Maritime interim President Michael J. Dumont told the board the school has “taken a chainsaw to every expense on our campus” in pursuit of financial sustainability. Trustees praised the proposal to integrate the maritime academy into Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as an “elegant solution” that would save costs as the campuses consolidate administrative services and other operations.  

    CSU officials have left the door open for future campus mergers but say no additional integrations are immediately planned.

    A document announcing the integration proposal said it’s in keeping with CSU’s goal to look for cost savings “from consolidation of certain administrative functions and from inter-campus cooperation and collaboration in the offering of programs and services.” 

    In response to questions about whether future campus mergers are likely, a CSU spokesperson cited a document that says CSU “must remain open to considering all options in the future to ensure the financial health of the system and its universities.”

    That includes ongoing initiatives to save money short of full mergers, such as negotiating systemwide contracts with vendors and purchasing electricity for multiple campuses on the wholesale energy market. 

    “There are a lot of tools in the toolkit in addition to an integration like this,” CFO Relyea told trustees last week. 

    And Relyea noted that the $1 billion budget gap forecast for the 2025-26 school year is an estimate based on assumptions that could prove flawed. A shortfall could be avoided by making permanent cuts this school year, pausing new investments, bridging the gap with reserves and successfully lobbying the state for additional money, he added. 

    Some campuses might try to streamline their budgets in ways students won’t notice.

    That’s the goal at Cal State Northridge, where administrators said that measures like cutting nonessential staff travel or delaying plans to replace older technology and equipment were among the ways they hope to save money.

    “Everything that’s related to student success, we’re trying to shield that as much as we can,” said Edith Winterhalter, who leads the university’s budget department. “It’s really on the administrative side that we’re doing a lot of strategies to reduce our costs as much as we can.”

    ‘A painful year’

    A wild card in CSU’s finances is its reliance on the California Legislature, which has funded roughly 60% of the school system’s operating costs in recent years. That can expose the university system to swings in state revenue.

    CSU dodged the worst in this year’s budget. Early budget drafts proposed pushing a 5% funding hike that had been promised for 2024-25 into the following year. The final budget landed on a compromise: a one-time cut of $75 million, offset by an ongoing increase of $240 million. Staff attributed the improvement to an energetic lobbying campaign on behalf of the universities.

    The budget outlook going forward is less rosy. Anticipating more lean years ahead, state legislators envision an 8% cut to CSU’s ongoing state funding in 2025-26, according to a CSU budget presentation. On top of that, state legislators have proposed that CSU front $252 million in the 2025-26 school year, which the state would subsequently reimburse in 2026-27. A similar spend-and-reimburse maneuver would occur in the 2026-27 school year.

    Such an arrangement could prove risky for Cal State, Storm observed.

    “If we spend, in advance, hundreds of millions of dollars and the state does not reimburse us, it would significantly deplete our one-time balances and reserves, and we could be left with new ongoing commitments and no new funding to support them,” he said. 

    That reality has compelled Cal State to look to grow other funding sources, including what students pay to attend its universities. Trustee Christopher Steinhauser defended the board’s previous decision to increase tuition by 6% annually starting this fall, saying the additional revenue will allow the system to save hundreds of jobs. 

    “We heard earlier in the spring we have to do less with less,” Steinhauser said. “This is going to be a painful year. … If we didn’t pass that tuition, we would be in a whole big mess, much bigger than we’re in now.” 

    CSU leaders have also pointed to other possible sources of funding, including operating campuses year round and pursuing more public-private partnerships. Trustee Larry L. Adamson urged university presidents to think creatively about raising money from philanthropic sources as one additional revenue stream. 

    “How many endowed chairs do we do every year in the CSU? And I think the answer is few to none,” he said during last week’s meeting. “We have to start doing more and more of that kind of thinking, as the UCs and privates do constantly. And instead of trying to just raise money for buildings, which we do a lot of, let’s start trying to raise money that offsets our actual ongoing expenses.”





    Source link

  • Breaking News: Trump Administration Encouraging Other Nations to Sign Up For Musk’s Starlink Internet Service to Cut Tariffs

    Breaking News: Trump Administration Encouraging Other Nations to Sign Up For Musk’s Starlink Internet Service to Cut Tariffs


    The Washington Post reported that the Trump administration is promoting Elon Musk’s Starlink Internet service while negotiating trade deals.

    Less than two weeks after President Donald Trump announced 50 percent tariffs on goods from the tiny African nation of Lesotho, the country’s communications regulator held a meeting with representatives of Starlink.

    The satellite business, owned by billionaire and Trump adviser Elon Musk’s SpaceX company, had been seeking access to customers in Lesotho. But it was not until Trump unveiled the tariffs and called for negotiations over trade deals that leaders of the country of roughly 2 million people awarded Musk’s firm the nation’s first-ever satellite internet service license, slated to last for 10 years.

    The decision drew a mention in an internal State Department memo obtained by The Washington Post, which states: “As the government of Lesotho negotiates a trade deal with the United States, it hopes that licensing Starlink demonstrates goodwill and intent to welcome U.S. businesses.

    A series of internal government messages obtained by The Post reveal how U.S. embassies and the State Department have pushed nations to clear hurdles for U.S. satellite companies, often mentioning Starlink by name. The documents do not show that the Trump team has explicitly demanded favors for Starlink in exchange for lower tariffs. But they do indicate that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has increasingly instructed officials to push for regulatory approvals for Musk’s satellite firm at a moment when the White House is calling for wide-ranging talks on trade.

    In India, government officials have sped through approvals of Starlink with the understanding that doing so could help them cement trade deals with the administration, according to two people familiar with the matter, speaking on the condition of anonymity to reflect private deliberations.

    Other nations seeking relief from Trump’s killer tariffs have discovered that adopting Starlink is part of the deal. I think this is called cronyism.



    Source link

  • Fresno Unified teachers condemn district for plan to cut extra class time for students

    Fresno Unified teachers condemn district for plan to cut extra class time for students


    Fresno Unified School District will cut its Designated Schools program that provides 30 additional instructional minutes to over 24,000 students each day. Fresno Teachers Association President Manuel Bonilla and around 100 educators protested the decision on Wednesday.

    Credit: Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource

    About 100 Fresno Unified educators slammed the state’s third-largest school system for its “unilateral” decision to eliminate a decadelong initiative for underserved students during a news conference Wednesday evening. 

    The district’s decision-making is being challenged as leaders face pushback for getting rid of a student-focused program that, from the district’s perspective, isn’t consistently meeting the needs of those students. 

    The district will cut its Designated Schools program, an initiative to improve student achievement through additional daily instruction. The district announced in January that the program, affecting about 40 schools, 24,000 students and over 1,250 educators, will end after this school year.

    Fresno Teachers Association President Manuel Bonilla said educators feel devalued and disrespected because eliminating the Designated Schools program without input from the school community is not a classroom-centered decision as it takes money away from the classroom, from teachers and from much-needed resources. 

    “It is a huge cut to trust,” Bonilla said. “It is a huge cut to respect and to value in this district. And we’re here to say, ‘We’re not going to put up with it.’”

    For the superintendent and district staff, the main consideration in the decision to eliminate the program is its effectiveness: “Are we getting the return for the investment that we’re making?” asked interim Superintendent Misty Her. 

    “While we have gotten some results, they’ve not been consistent,” Her said. “We’ve not had consistent (growth) year after year.” 

    What are Designated Schools?

    At Designated Schools, which are intended to close academic gaps at a faster pace, students have 30 extra minutes of instruction each day, teachers have 10 additional work days for professional training, and campuses have a full-time teacher on special assignment to assist with reading or math intervention, costing the district $30 million annually.

    Designated Schools are typically located in neighborhoods with large numbers of students who are socioeconomically disadvantaged. They serve vulnerable student populations that often start behind other groups. The extra time and resources are meant to catch students up by focusing on foundational skills they’re missing, teachers told EdSource. 

    Those students are going to lose 30 minutes of instruction every day, Bonilla said, equating the time to 90 additional instructional hours each year. 

    For example, during that 30 minutes of intervention time, teachers divide their classes into small groups by proficiency level and target students’ weak points. Teachers have the assistance of support staff who provide enrichment activities and targeted instruction.

    “Having that 30 extra minutes makes such a difference for these students, and we can see the gains, and we can see the growth that they make,” said Kate Hooper, a first grade teacher at Wilson Elementary, a Designated School.

    What does the decision mean?

    Designated School teachers are paid for the extra time and extra days they work, so eliminating the program means less pay for them. 

    Bonilla said the decision forces teachers to take a 12% pay cut, ranging from $651 to $1,150 each month. 

    District spokesperson Nikki Henry asserts that district officials stand behind their decision to end the $30 million program, but that much of what’s been communicated by the teachers union is “blatantly false” and “fear-based rhetoric.” 

    Nearly two-thirds of Designated School teachers will not see a pay reduction because there are already pay increases planned in their salary schedules, Henry said. In 2023, when the school district and teachers union reached a “historic” contract, the district agreed to 4.5% educator raises with a 2.5% bonus next school year. The remaining one-third of impacted teachers will see about a 2% decrease over two years. 

    Rather than keeping money in classrooms, Bonilla accused the district of wanting to pad its reserves and put the money toward consultants who, teachers say, don’t help them or students. According to Bonilla, the district’s reserves currently sit at about $234 million.

    Most of the money is already tied up by the district’s financial obligations, Henry said, explaining that only about 7%, or $121 million, belongs to the unrestricted reserves that can be used. The district plans to spend the reserves to a projected 4% in the next two years, she said. 

    Fresno Unified is in its second year of budget cuts with at least two more years of “tough decisions” ahead. Though cuts were at the district level for this school year, they will likely touch the classroom next school year, including consultant contracts, Henry said. 

    Much like other California school systems, the district is facing declining enrollment, less funding due to lower average daily attendance, and lower than expected cost of living adjustments from the state — all of which contributed to the decision to end the program. Now the district must add the volatility at the federal level to that, district officials said. 

    Is funding the only reason for the decision?

    The Designated School program seemingly includes all the components necessary to better student outcomes: more time with kids, more time for teachers’ professional learning and more support staff. 

    Henry said that in evaluating student growth over time, regardless of where student proficiency started, Designated Schools perform about the same as non-designated schools. 

    “You put $30 million a year into a program, and they perform similarly to non-designated schools,” she said. “There’s not a bigger growth.”

    And there should be, Henry said. The Designated Schools initiative was meant to show that with extra investment, schools make academic gains faster. 

    An analysis of the program, conducted by Hanover Research in the 2020-21 school year, also found that evidence of the program’s effectiveness on academic outcomes is mixed.

    “It’s just, more than anything, disheartening, coming from people who haven’t been in the classroom in a very long time,” Hooper, the Wilson Elementary teacher, said. 

    She and other teachers say they see the gains students are making. Devyn Stephens, another Wilson Elementary teacher, said she had a first grader who didn’t know their letters or sounds on the first day of school and is now able to read at a kindergarten or early first grade reading level, adding that she can’t imagine that being possible “without that 30 minutes.”

    Wilson Elementary third grade teacher Jessica Avila said the time is needed to ensure her students know how to read since the third grade curriculum is to read to understand, not learn to read. 

    There are “a few bright spots” in the data, the district admits, but not enough. The district did not provide the school-specific data it used to make its decision.

    Henry said after-school programs, which include homework help and intervention, will absorb the students who will no longer have 30 extra minutes of instruction in the classroom. Fresno Unified will also look to other programs that can make a difference.

    Since eliminating the program is a superintendent and staff-level decision, district staff won’t be recommending the program’s continuation in next year’s budget. Technically, the school board has the discretion and authority to add it back. 

    To many, that process is the problem. 

    “It’s not just the teachers that are suffering in regards to this lack of leadership, a lack of direction and student-focused decisions,” Bonilla, the teachers union president, said about a decision that affects tens of thousands of students. “They have not gone to our community whatsoever to have a discussion.”

    “If the district wants to own this, they need to come out and be real leaders and talk about it with the community.”





    Source link

  • West Contra Costa compromises on staff cuts, but may have to cut student services instead

    West Contra Costa compromises on staff cuts, but may have to cut student services instead


    United Teachers of Richmond gather at West Contra Costa school board meeting Wednesday to protest staff cuts approved a week earlier.

    Credit: Monica Velez / EdSource

    In a move consistent with dozens of California school districts, West Contra Costa Unified board members have had to choose between eliminating staff and services for students or exploding its budget deficit.   

    At the start of the debate at Wednesday night’s school board meeting, the district had proposed cutting about 177 staffing positions and, after nearly three hours of debate, the board voted 3-1 to cut all but eight. But saving those eight positions jeopardizes funding for services for at-risk students.

    “Ultimately, with these decisions, our students will suffer the most without the staff that is needed to provide them with an excellent education that they deserve and which is necessary to decrease the longstanding education gaps for the district’s Black and brown students,” said Sheryl Lane, executive director of Fierce Advocates, a Richmond organization focused on working with parents of color.

    Out of the positions that are being eliminated, 122 are already vacant, according to district officials. And so far, the district has also received 27 resignations and 47 retirement notices. 

    It’s unclear if there will be layoffs, but on Feb. 6, interim Superintendent Kim Moses said that because of vacancy levels, the district administrators “expect that there will be a certificated job available for all current WCCUSD (West Contra Costa Unified School District) educators for the 2025-26 school year.”

    Throughout this month, educators, parents, students and community members showed up in large numbers to speak, as they have in all board meetings since the budget talks started, urging the board to reconsider cutting staff positions. 

    “We saw today the dysfunction,” United Teachers of Richmond President Francisco Ortiz said during the meeting. “We need collaboration. Every single cabinet member has my direct phone number. Every board member has my phone number. We have been excluded from the decision-making process and in the collaboration since the new administration took over. This situation has been imposed on us, but we’re ready to fight.” 

    A split board

    It took nine amended resolutions for a vote to pass on Wednesday night. Trustee Demetrio Gonzalez-Hoy attempted to save high school teachers, school counselors, social workers, psychologists, speech therapists, and career technical education educators. 

    But the board was split.

    Board President Leslie Reckler and trustee Guadalupe Enllana voted down the motions while Gonzalez-Hoy and trustee Cinthia Hernandez were determined to save some staffing positions. 

    The successful resolution saved one part-time psychologist position, one part-time and seven full-time high school teachers. Reckler voted down the resolution and trustee Jamela Smith-Folds was absent. 

    In an email to EdSource, Reckler argued the board had already approved the fiscal solvency plan and if the cuts weren’t passed, “it shows the board to be an unreliable steward of public funds, and I will not be lumped into that category.”

    “My prime responsibility is to ensure the long-term fiscal solvency of the school district and ensure continued local control in decision-making,” Reckler said. “Last night’s vote will make it more difficult for the school district.”

    The top priority for Gonzalez-Hoy was to save the high school teacher positions because cutting them would have caused some schools to go from a seven-period day to six, he said. English learners, students with disabilities and students who need more academic support would be most affected because they often need to take on extra courses and benefit from having more class periods. 

    “I could not in good conscience make those reductions, knowing the unintended impact they would have,” he said. “Even though it was a very difficult conversation and decision, I did vote to cut the majority of the positions, in part due to our ability to possibly retain some of those positions through grants, but also due to our financial situation.”

    In an emailed statement, Enllana said the board and district can no longer continue to be “driven by individual interests but must prioritize the needs of all students.” 

    “There is a clear distinction between needs and wants. Our first responsibility is to secure what our students need, and then work towards fulfilling the wants under our current budget.”

    California schools are in a budget crisis

    This week, other Bay Area school boards also made the difficult decision to lay off employees for the coming school year. Oakland’s school board voted to cut 100 positions, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. According to KQED, San Francisco Unified will also send pink slips to more than 500 employees. 

    West Contra Costa Unified has to balance between the need for fiscal solvency and keeping the schools adequately staffed with teachers, social workers, psychologists and other support staff. 

    “These decisions by the school board are tough ones and speak to the structural changes needed at the state level to change the revenue it receives that can go towards funding local school districts, like WCCUSD,” Lane said.

    The district has been under financial stress since last year and could risk insolvency if its fiscal plan isn’t followed. 

    When districts can’t get out of deficits, they risk being taken over by the state and losing local control over budget decisions. Twenty-six years ago, West Contra Costa became the first district in the state to go insolvent and received a $29 million bailout loan, which took 21 years to pay off. 

    To stay out of a deficit, West Contra Costa has to cut $32.7 million in costs between 2024 and 2027. District officials have said about 84% of the budget is used to pay salaries and benefits — the reason staffing cuts would be unavoidable. 

    The district needs to put forth a fiscal solvency plan approved by the Contra Costa County Office of Education to avoid going insolvent and risking a takeover, Moses said. The staffing cuts are tied to the plan and must happen for the district to stay on track. The board approved the plan earlier this month. 

    “It would be multiple millions of dollars of impact to the general fund if we don’t take action,” Moses said during the meeting. “The response to the county, if that is the case, I think we would be sending a strong message that we are not addressing our fiscal stability, and that would not be advisable as they are oversight agents.”

    The price of compromise

    Saving the high school teacher and psychologist positions will add $1.5 million to $1.75 million to the deficit, Moses said. The district doesn’t have a choice but to use funds that are meant for student services and will likely have to dip into the $4 million set aside for math curriculum. 

    “We value all staff and their dedication to our community; however, the fiscal health of our district has to be prioritized as the foundation for our ability to continue normal district operations,” Moses said in a news release Thursday. “I am concerned about the added fiscal uncertainty we face after last night’s board meeting.”

    Cutting the money for teacher and math support is a step backward for the district, which makes it more difficult for educators to help students improve, said Natalie Walchuk, vice president of local impact at GO Public Schools, an organization advocating for equitable public education. In West Contra Costa, only 1 in 4 students are performing at grade level in math and just 6.1% of seniors are ready for college-level math.

    “Teachers need the right tools and resources to support their students, yet the district has lagged for years in adopting a new math curriculum,” Walchuk said. “While we recognize the difficult financial decisions the board had to make, it is critical that the district prioritizes student learning.” 

    The positions on the chopping block came from two pots of money — the general fund, which accounts for 40 positions, and grants, which cover 137 positions. Money for grant-funded positions is either expiring or has been used faster than projected, said Camille Johnson, associate superintendent of human resources.

    Trying to save the grant-funded positions would add to the deficit, Moses said. Although the district staff is working to secure more grants, the funds districts receive from the federal government are uncertain. 

    “We were not in a position to consult the (teachers) union because we do not have money to pay for these positions,” Moses said during the meeting. “Negotiations in terms of what stays and what goes was not possible in this scenario because it’s strictly driven by money that is expiring or money we aren’t responsible for assigning.”

    The district doesn’t have a choice but to eliminate some positions because they are dependent on school sites approving the positions in their budgets, Moses said. If approved, about 78 positions could be reinstated. 

    The deadline to give layoff notices is March 15.





    Source link