Presidential Candidate of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), John Dramani Mahama says he remains unfazed by attempts from the governing New Patriotic Party to downplay his proposal to support startups and create jobs for individuals interested…
business credit
Bill Gates’ carcinogenic lab-grown meat business has proven to be such a spectacular failure that the billionaire is now begging government’s to subsidise his fake meat companies to keep them afloat.
The world’s biggest nature protection conference opens in Colombia Monday with the United Nations chief calling for countries to “convert words into action” and fatten a fund seeking to address biodiversity loss. On the eve of the official start of the conference, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres urged “significant investment” in the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund
Tampa Bay is working to recover from two recent back-to-back hurricanes that impacted the state weeks away from the presidential election.
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill face major deadlines and key issues on their to-do list after the November elections, including averting a federal government shutdown before the end of 2024 and taking action to address the debt limit in the new year.The November elections where control of the White House and both chambers of Congress are at stake will shake up the political landscape, creating uncertainty over how lawmakers will tackle the challenges ahead. Another unknown is the fate of future Republican leadership in both the House and the Senate, a dynamic that will factor heavily into how legislative fights play out.In the immediate aftermath of the elections, funding the government will take center stage as lawmakers confront a Dec. 20 funding deadline during a lame-duck session the post-election period before the newly elected Congress is sworn in.There are also growing calls for Congress to pass quickly additional disaster relief in the wake of hurricanes Milton and Helene and the widespread damage caused by the storms.A new Congress will convene in the opening days of 2025, and lawmakers will have to confront the federal debt limit, which will be reinstated on Jan. 2, a challenging and high-stakes issue that often comes down to the wire on Capitol Hill.Funding fightCongress set up a spending fight at the end of this year after passing a stopgap bill in late September to fund the federal government until Dec. 20.Pushing the funding deadline into December raises questions over how lawmakers will prevent a holiday season shutdown. And the outcome of the elections will determine how strong or weak a hand House Speaker Mike Johnson and other Hill leaders have to play in spending talks.Many lawmakers, and conservatives in particular, oppose sweeping spending packages known as an omnibus. But Hill leaders could face pressure to either take that route or pass yet another stopgap bill since there will be little time after the election to pass individual appropriations bills for various government agencies.Lawmakers will also have to confront the issue of disaster relief when they return to Washington.President Joe Biden and other leaders have warned that Congress will soon need to pass additional funding to fill the federal governments rapidly dwindling disaster-relief coffers after two major hurricanes slammed into the southeast.The Small Business Administrations disaster loan program has already run out of funding due to high demand from constant extreme weather disasters, adding further urgency to the calls for Congress to act. The SBAs fund is different than the Federal Emergency Management Agencys disaster relief fund, which provides assistance to individuals impacted by hurricanes.Debt LimitThe debt limit will loom large early in the new year when it is reinstated on Jan. 2, presenting a challenge for the new Congress. Addressing the debt ceiling is crucial so the federal government can continue borrowing to pay existing financial obligations that lawmakers and presidents have already approved.After the limit is reinstated, the Treasury Department can take what are known as extraordinary measures and use the cash it has on hand to prolong the amount of time before a default could occur. It is challenging to predict the timing of the so-called X date, the point when the U.S. would be unable to pay all its bills in full and on time, a likely catastrophic scenario that would trigger wide-ranging global economic impacts.That deadline may not come until months after the debt limit is reinstated, and lawmakers frequently wait until the last minute to act. But pressure will ramp up on the new Congress and the new presidential administration to either raise or suspend the debt limit once it is reinstated in early January.The U.S. has never defaulted on its obligations and leaders of both parties want to avoid a default. But fiscal conservatives and deficit hawks are likely to try to force spending and budget cuts in exchange for addressing the debt limit as they did in 2023 and may have some leverage, particularly if Republicans do well in the November elections.The difficulty of pinpointing the X date with specificity, in addition to the fact that the debt ceiling has become highly subject to political brinksmanship, makes addressing the limit a risky prospect for lawmakers.Congress thrives on deadlines and operating at the last minute, said Shai Akabas, the executive director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center. When it comes to the debt limit, there is no definitive last minute because we dont know exactly when that point will arrive, unlike a government shutdown.Akabas continued, I definitely think the dynamics next year create a particularly uncertain and potentially more volatile situation than we have seen in the past and that will of course depend on the elections, but we know that theres going to be a new administration and that there could be new majorities in both the House and the Senate.Defense policy bill and other key issuesAnother agenda item during the lame duck session will be for Congress to pass a final, compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2025.The House and Senate have put forward their own versions of the annual, must-pass defense policy bill and top lawmakers must now reconcile those two measures including differences in spending levels and policy provisions by negotiating a final version that can pass both chambers.The NDAA outlines the policy agenda for the Department of Defense and the US military and authorizes spending for Pentagon priorities, though it does not appropriate the funding itself.The Republican-led House voted in June to pass its version of the bill for fiscal year 2025, while the Senate Armed Services Committee, led by Democrats, has voted to advance that chambers version of the legislation.Lawmakers are also facing a year-end deadline to renew key agriculture policy when Congress returns after the elections.The farm bill a sweeping piece of legislation that sets food and agriculture policy in the United States is typically renewed every five years, but can also be renewed through shorter-term extensions. In 2023, Congress passed a one-year extension of the 2018 farm bill, which ran through Sept. 30. But key programs under the farm bill dont lose funding until Dec. 31, setting up yet another major deadline at the end of the year for Congress to act during the lame duck session.When lawmakers return to Washington, the pressure will be on to reauthorize the legislation by passing a new five-year farm bill or another shorter-term extension.In addition, key provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 the law that former President Donald Trump championed are set to expire at the end of 2025, including more than $3.4 trillion in individual income and estate tax cuts. As a result, negotiations over a tax package will be a major issue for the new Congress and the new administration.CNNs Lauren Fox and Ted Barrett contributed to this report.
In U.S. politics, tax policy often becomes a critical issue for defining economic priorities and future plans.Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump have each championed tax policies that reflect the economic ideologies of their political parties. Their individual views tend to differ drastically.However, ahead of the 2024 general election, both Harris and Trump have come out saying they support the removal of taxes on tips for workers in the service industry.What are the points where they disagree? Here’s the breakdown:Kamala Harris’ tax policy: Taxing corporations to support the middle classHarris aligns with progressive tax policies that aim to reduce income inequality by shifting a greater tax burden onto wealthy individuals and corporations.Her stance is similar to that of President Joe Biden, under whose administration several tax proposals have been advanced that Harris supports.According to U.S. News and World Report, a cornerstone of Harris’ policy is raising the corporate income tax rate from 21% to 28%. This ensures that businesses, especially large corporations, contribute a larger share of federal revenue. Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, believe that these tax increases on the wealthy and corporations will fund critical public services, such as infrastructure, education and health care.Harris has also proposed increasing the Medicare tax from 3.8% to 5% for people making more than $400,000. This includes raising the top individual tax rate from 37% to 39.6%. Additionally, Harris advocates for increasing the capital gains tax rate for those earning more than $1 million annually, aiming to close the gap between how investment income and wage income are taxed.Harris also supports measures to expand the child tax credit to $3,600 for children aged 2-5, $3,000 for children 6-17, and $6,000 for a childs first year. This credit provides significant financial relief to middle- and lower-income families.Harris and Walz also plan to provide $25,000 down payment assistance to qualifying first-time homebuyers and increase the $5,000 tax deduction for small business startup costs to $50,000.Donald Trumps tax policy: Cutting taxes to boost businessesDonald Trump’s tax policies, in contrast, are rooted in Republican principles that emphasize lower taxes, particularly for businesses and high-income earners, with the belief that such cuts spur economic growth. His signature legislative achievement, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017, slashed the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% and reduced individual income tax rates across most brackets.His 2024 campaign with running mate JD Vance builds off of plans from his previous presidency. Trump and Vance have proposed ending taxes on Social Security benefits and imposing a 10%-20% tariff on most imported goods and a 60% tariff on goods imported from China. U.S. News and World Report clarifies that a tariff is a tax on imported goods and is typically used to encourage consumers to buy products made domestically.What policy outcomes could look like The tax policies advocated by Kamala Harris and Donald Trump reflect starkly different economic ideologies. Harris’ focus is on redistributing wealth to reduce inequality and support middle-class families, while Trump prioritizes tax cuts to incentivize business investment.The Republican plan with Trump would “would increase primary deficits by $5.8 trillion over the next 10 years,” according to the Penn Wharton Budget Model. The same budget model reports that Harris plan would “increase primary deficits by $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years.”
Horizon Surgical will use the round led by ExSight Ventures and to continue development of the Polaris system for eye surgery.
Nigerian government is covering part of the vaccine costs, with global vaccine group GAVI and international partners funding the rest
The federal government and the non-profit Edmonton 2 Spirit (E2S) announced $6.4 million in funding on Friday for supportive housing helping Indigenous 2SLGBTQI+ people get out of gender-based violence situations.
As reliable as the election cycle, the advertisements for ballot questions are once again flooding the internet and the airwaves in Massachusetts. This election, some of the most heavily advertised questions before voters involve whether to set a minimum wage for tipped workers, whether to keep the MCAS test as a graduation requirement and whether to legalize natural psychedelics for treatment.But a close look at the money that is paying for those ads reveals barely any grass-roots support, meaning small donations from typical voters. Instead, the average donations are thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars, made by wealthy individuals, corporations and unions. Sometimes there is a clear line between the donors’ interests and the outcome of the election. Other times, the connection is not so clear.Take Question 4, asking voters to approve psychedelics for treatment. So far, no money has been donated to oppose it.But $4.4 million has been donated as of Oct. 1 to support it, according to data from the state Office of Campaign and Political Finance. A 5 Investigates’ analysis shows that 80 percent of the money comes from out of state. In fact, more money has come from California than Massachusetts. The top donor, giving $1 million to the campaign, is All One God Faith Inc., a California company operating as Dr. Bronner’s, a natural products company.Two individuals gave $500,000 each: a Beverly Hills philanthropist and Massachusetts donor, the chief technology officer of local software company HubSpot. Overall, the average donation is $74,186.A spokesperson for the campaign supporting the psychedelics ballot question said, “The Yes on 4 campaign is about creating new mental health treatment options for those suffering from PTSD, depression, and other conditions that traditional medicine has failed. We have received contributions as small as one dollar from dozens of individuals who are extremely passionate about finding new pathways to health for themselves and anyone else who feels like they are out of answers.”A spokesperson for the campaign opposing legalization of psychedelics said the effort is being run by “volunteers and grassroots supporters who know this is an ill-conceived ballot question with dangerous repercussions” that “provides nothing more than false hope and empty promises to people in desperate need of help and it is truly shameful.”Speaking generally, Northeastern University political science professor Costas Panagopoulos said ballot questions in Massachusetts often draw special interest money.”We’re seeing a ton of money being spent, and a lot of that money is not coming from voters, it’s not coming from average people, it’s coming from corporations and other entities that have a vested interest in the outcome of these ballot initiatives,” Panagopoulos said.”Who are these people, and what are they trying to get by donating to this?” 5 Investigates’ Karen Anderson asked.”Sometimes they really care about these issues, but oftentimes there are corporations and other entities that stand to benefit a great deal from whatever happens in places like Massachusetts. They can make a lot of money depending on the outcome of these races, and that’s why they invest so heavily,” he said.Panogopoulos said the floodgates to special interest money opened in 1978 after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against a Massachusetts law blocking corporate money from ballot questions. Since 1988, we found campaigns have spent nearly $400 million on ballot questions, according to OCPF data.Unlike candidates for office, committees supporting or opposing a ballot question can accept donations of any size from individuals, corporations, unions or other groups. Candidates can only accept $1,000 per calendar year from individuals, unions and some other groups. Businesses cannot donate to candidates in Mass.With Question 5, which would raise the minimum wage for tipped workers, 97 percent of the nearly $1 million supporting it comes from the progressive group One Fair Wage.Opposing it is $1.5 million in donations from restaurant owners and the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, among others. The Mass. Restaurant Association alone has given $630,788 as of Oct. 1.The group opposing raising the minimum wage for tipped workers said in a statement: “The Committee to Protect Tips is proud to be the most bi-partisan coalition of elected officials, restaurants, tipped employees and advocacy organizations formed this cycle. Our coalition has contributions from a wide variety of restaurants including many neighborhood restaurants and small businesses. We are extremely humbled by the almost 100 servers and bartenders that have contributed to the campaign on their own. We are the ONLY campaign working on Question 5 to have received contributions from servers and bartenders working in Massachusetts.”A spokesperson for the campaign in support of raising the minimum wage did not respond to requests for comment.Question 2, which would eliminate the MCAS as a graduation requirement if passed, is not exactly drawing grass-roots support either. The Massachusetts Teachers Association has funded the entire $7.6 million campaign so far to convince people to vote yes.On the other side: CEOs and business groups including the Mass. Business Alliance, Mass. High Technology Council and the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce are among the donors who have given $1,526,206 in all.A spokesperson for the Massachusetts Teachers Association said the effort is grass-roots because the MTA’s budget is comprised entirely of dues from its members: public school and college educators.”We don’t have a dime from corporate interests, foundations, anything else. This is all our members’ money and they vote for their representatives to take on these campaigns,” the spokesperson said, adding that the donors to the campaign wanting to keep the test as a graduation requirement are mostly “big corporate executives, corporations, right-wing and education reform groups.”A spokesperson for the group opposing Question 2 said the group was “a broad coalition of teachers, parents, education advocates, and community and business leaders formed to preserve high standards for students and ensure equitable academic opportunities for all kids across the Commonwealth.”The campaign spokesperson added: “The special interest in this campaign, the Massachusetts Teachers Association, proposed the ballot question to advance its own interest and is wholly financing it from its own bank account without even one penny donated by anyone else. It has dipped into its vast campaign war chest to spend millions of dollars to weaken our states education standards.”Voters should know who are funding the ads that are trying to influence them, but the information is not always apparent, Panagopoulos said.”Oftentimes, these ballot initiatives are so under the radar that voters don’t have the kind of information they need to evaluate them adequately,” he said.”And does that lead to good public policy?” Anderson asked.”Sometimes it does and oftentimes it doesn’t, because the outcomes are reflecting the preferences of the entities that funded powerful advertising campaigns,” he said.
Denver Health CEO Donna Lynne told city council that the hospital system is on track to provide more than $155 million in uncompensated care.
Kiva is a global nonprofit that crowdfunds microloans for small businesses. A local hub was established after an official launch on Friday.