approves

In defeating a measure to rescind the 310 area code overlay, telecommunications companies showed they won’t shrink from battle as the state moves to put tighter controls on area code changes, industry leaders said Friday.

The state Assembly early Friday approved a bill, AB 406, that sets additional hurdles in place before area code splits and overlays can be imposed.

But the bill, which had been approved late Thursday by the Senate, was passed only after a provision rescinding the 310 overlay on the Westside and South Bay was removed.

That change was credited to a fierce lobbying effort by telecom companies, and could serve as a preview of what’s to come as lawmakers and utilities regulators consider ways to slow the proliferation of overlays and splits statewide, including a split proposed for the San Fernando Valley.

“I was unable to get for 310 what I had my heart set on, which was the recision of the 310 overlay and 11-digit dialing,” said Assemblyman Wally Knox (D-Los Angeles), who wrote AB 406 (which became the vehicle for the legislation formerly known as AB 818).

Knox said a sustained lobbying effort by telephone industry representatives resulted in the removal of the 310 overlay and 11-digit dialing portion from the bill.

Representatives from Pacific Bell, GTE, AT&T;, MediaOne Telecommunications of California, the California Cable Television Assn. and the Cellular Carriers Assn. of California were among the 30 lobbyists arguing that the provision would diminish competition among carriers and consumer choice.

“The intensive lobbying effort should have been anticipated by everyone because the stakes were so high for the industry,” said Dennis H. Mangers, senior vice president of the California Cable Television Assn., a group whose members are seeking a foothold in the telephone business.

Even so, the arm-twisting in Sacramento stands in contrast to the role played by phone companies at public forums on the issue.

At a recent Van Nuys town hall meeting on splits and overlays, for example, no phone company representative spoke publicly–although at least one was in attendance, observing the proceedings.

Telephone company officials said Friday that they have sent representatives to numerous public hearings on the matter, but remained silent to give residents the chance to express their concerns.

*

Industry lobbyists said regulatory meetings and legislative sessions are the proper forums for them to state their positions.

In Sacramento, telecom lobbyists argued that rescinding the overlay in West Los Angeles and the South Bay would be unfair because phone companies had already spent millions to compete for local customers in the region, Mangers said. He also said numbers already had been assigned in the new 424 area code overlay.

“We reminded them that it was they who encouraged communications companies to do business in California,” Mangers said. “If they passed the bill containing that provision, they would be cutting off their own policy.”

Cable company MediaOne, for example, spent $600 million to upgrade its facilities to provide digital telephone service, high-speed Internet access and cable television to Los Angeles customers, particularly those in the 310 region, officials said.

“We have definitely been lobbying in Sacramento,” said Theresa L. Cabral, MediaOne’s senior corporate counsel. “Our concern is that we have made that investment and we can’t use it.”

Pac Bell protested the bill because rolling back the 310 area code overlay would hurt customers who need numbers, said Steve Getzug, a spokesman for the company.

Pac Bell and GTE, the two largest phone companies in Los Angeles, are pushing specifically for overlays when area code relief is needed.

With an overlay, new phone lines within a specific area code are given a new area code–even if it is in the same home or building. Additionally, all users in an overlay area must dial the area code–even to a number with the same area code.

*

Phone company officials say the overlay is less disruptive than actually creating a new area code through a geographic split, but critics say such splits and overlays would not be needed if regulators did a better job of allocating and conserving phone numbers.

Knox, who has emerged as the leading consumer advocate on the issue, said Friday that he will now take his fight to the PUC, which is scheduled to take up proposals for a 310 overlay and an 818 split on Wednesday.

“It is important for folks to know that the fight is not over,” he said. “The momentum we have built in the Legislature we will now take to the PUC.”

Gov. Gray Davis has not taken a position on AB 406, aides said. But if he does sign the bill, PUC officials will analyze it to determine its role in implementing new area codes and overlays, said Kyle DeVine, a PUC spokeswoman.

“Until we get direction from the commissioners,” she said, “we can’t say what we are going to do.”

The bill, which passed the Senate on a 35-0 vote, was approved in the Assembly on a vote of 79 to 1, with Assemblyman Tom McClintock (R-Northridge), dissenting. He could not be reached for comment Friday.

Nov. 19 (UPI) — The U.S. State Department has approved the possible sale of Patriot air defense launchers to Ukraine worth up to $105 million.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which is within the Department of Defense, delivered the certification to the U.S. Congress, the agency said in a news release Tuesday.

DSCA’s primary mission is to support U.S. foreign policy to train, educate, advise and equip foreign partners to respond to shared challenges, including in Europe.

The Patriot system will not will not alter the basic military balance in the region, or the impact on U.S. defense readiness, the agency said.

The Patriot contractors are RTX Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Lockheed Martin of Bethesda, Md.

The United States first shipped Patriot systems to Ukraine in April 2023, more than a year after Russia invaded its neighbor under the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“We’ve been talking about closing the sky since day one of this war,” Zelenskyy wrote on X on Nov. 10. “We understand that it’s our vulnerability. And we realize that Putin had a huge number of missiles, while we had very few air‑defense systems and only a small remaining stock of Soviet‑era missiles.

“These systems were no shield at all. Nevertheless, we built the air‑defense we could, and we continue to develop it.”

The Patriots are a deterrent to missiles and drones against military targets and civilian locations.

Ukrainian Defense Minister Denys Shmyhal applauded the decision, posting on X: “We are grateful to our American partners for such an important decision. Peace can only be achieved through strength!”

Zelensky has been pushing for more Patriot system.

“We want to order 25 Patriot systems from the United States,” Zelenskyy wrote in July. “For us, that’s a clear budget, and we understand the financial scope; however, certain elements are missing from the agreement.

“European colleagues can help us here — they can lend us their systems now and then take back ours once they arrive from the manufacturers. These systems are produced over several years, and we would not want to wait.”

Ukraine had requested an upgrade of M901 launchers to M903 configuration; classified and unclassified prescribed load lists and authorized stockage lists for ground support equipment; necessary ancillaries, spare parts, support, training and accessories; and other related elements of logistics and program support.

M903 launchers can carry up to PAC-3 missiles and other types of Patriot missiles, according to Lockheed Martin. The PAC-3 MSE has improved capabilities, such as updated software and systems that allow it to home in on and destroy an enemy target.

Implementation of this proposed sale will require five additional U.S. government and 15 U.S. contractor representatives to the European Combatant Command for up to one month to support training and periodic meetings.

The actual dollar value depends on final requirements, budget authority and signed sales agreement.

“The Patriots won’t solve all, or perhaps even many of the problems associated with Russia’s strikes against Ukraine, however they will provide an additional layer of coverage and redundancy that can help protect Ukraine’s civilian population, civilian infrastructure, and military forces,” Retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Amos Fox, now a fellow at Arizona State University’s Future Security Initiative, told the Kyiev Post.

Retired US Army Colonel Richard Williams, a former deputy director in NATO’s Defense Investment Division, also told the Kyiev Potg that European nations are “perhaps more suited to assist Ukraine with this threat.”

In July, the United States told Switzerland it would send Patriot systems intended for sale to the Swiss to Ukraine instead.

President Donald Trump made the announcement to reporters at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland after attending the Club World Cup final at New Jersey’s MetLife Stadium.

“They’re going to have some because they do need protection, but the European Union is paying for,” he said. “We’re not paying anything for it, but we will send it.”

Other nations have sent Patriots to Ukraine.

During a conference in Germany in July, NATO’s top commander said that he will send more Patriot systems to Ukraine.

Patriot production has been limited, with nations not wanting to send their systems and to maintain stockpiles.

The United States and other partner nations also need Patriot batteries elsewhere, including in the Middle East and Taiwan, which would use them against a possible Chinese invasion.

The UN Security Council has adopted the US’s 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan, approving an international stabilisation force and a ‘board of peace’ with extensive powers to oversee Gaza’s governance and reconstruction.

SEOUL, Nov. 14 (UPI) — The United States and South Korea on Friday released a joint fact sheet on a sweeping trade and security agreement that details a $350 billion investment pledge by Seoul and confirms Washington’s approval for its Asian ally to develop nuclear-powered submarines.

The document comes two weeks after U.S. President Donald Trump and South Korean President Lee Jae Myung finalized their trade negotiations on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Gyeongju on Oct. 29.

“With this, the Korea-U.S. trade and security negotiations, which have been one of the greatest variables affecting our economy and security, have finally been concluded,” Lee said in a televised press briefing and Facebook post on Friday.

Lee expressed “gratitude and respect” for Trump’s decision and said both sides “achieved the best possible outcome, based on common sense and reason.”

Under the terms of the deal, Trump’s so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on South Korean goods, including automobiles, will drop from 25% to 15%, returning to the level initially established in July during Lee’s visit to the White House.

In exchange for the lower tariffs, South Korea has pledged to invest $350 billion in the United States, including $150 billion in the U.S. shipbuilding sector and $200 billion for strategic sectors under a memorandum of understanding to be signed by the two countries.

To minimize the impact on South Korea’s foreign exchange market, Seoul’s annual investment cap was set at $20 billion, the fact sheet said.

“The two governments confirmed that Korea’s investments will proceed only within a level our economy can fully sustain and only in commercially viable projects,” Lee said. “The mistrust and concerns of some who were worried this was a ‘de facto grant’ under the guise of investment in projects with difficult returns have been completely dispelled.”

The fact sheet also formalized Washington’s approval for Seoul’s plan to build nuclear-powered submarines, a capability South Korean leaders have pursued for years. Seoul has framed nuclear-powered vessels as essential for tracking North Korean ballistic missile submarines and for expanding its reach across the Indo-Pacific. Officials also see the program as a catalyst for the country’s nuclear energy and naval shipbuilding industries.

The agreement said Washington will work with Seoul to define requirements for the project, “including avenues to source fuel.” Securing enriched uranium for submarine reactors had been a sticking point in the release of the fact sheet, as Seoul has sought revisions to its bilateral nuclear cooperation pact to allow greater flexibility in enrichment and nuclear waste recycling.

Lee called the submarines “a decades-old dream of South Korea and a vital strategic asset for peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.”

The agreement comes as Washington and Seoul undertake a broader effort to modernize their security alliance and reshape how the two countries share military responsibilities. The fact sheet noted that South Korea intends to raise defense spending to 3.5% of GDP “as soon as possible,” and reiterated a commitment to the eventual transition of wartime operational control to Seoul.

Seoul also pledged to spend $25 billion on U.S. military equipment purchases by 2030 and outlined plans to provide comprehensive support for U.S. Forces Korea amounting to $33 billion.

“The South Korea-U.S. alliance has evolved and deepened into a truly future-oriented strategic comprehensive alliance encompassing security, the economy, and cutting-edge technology,” Lee said.

As part of that broader strategic framework, the two governments reaffirmed their shared goal of a denuclearized Korean Peninsula and pledged to work together to implement the joint statement of the 2018 Singapore summit between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

The fact sheet called on North Korea to “return to meaningful dialogue and abide by its international obligations, including by abandoning its weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programs.”

North Korea has rejected calls for denuclearization since declaring itself a nuclear-armed state in 2022. In September, Kim signaled a willingness to resume diplomacy with Washington but warned that any discussion of giving up his regime’s nuclear arsenal would be off the table.

Nov. 12 (UPI) — The U.S. House, convening for the first time in two months on Wednesday, approved legislation sent two days earlier by the Senate to reopen the federal government, resuming programs and paying millions of workers.

President Donald Trump plans to sign the legislation, ending the longest shutdown in history at 43 days.

The House originally approved a spending bill in September on a majority vote, but the Senate needed 60 days and approval was held up in finding enough Democrats to agree to legislation that doesn’t guarantee enhanced health insurance subsidies starting Jan. 1.

At 8:21 p.m., the House voted 222-209 to send the stopgap funding bill to the president. The outcome wasn’t strictly along party lines with six Democrats voting yes and two Republicans voting no. There were two not voting and two vacancies.

The White House said Trump would sign the legislation on camera at 9:45 p.m. from the Oval Office. He earlier attended a private dinner at the White House with financial industry leaders.

“I’ll abide by the deal,” he said earlier Monday. “The deal is very good.”

His signature means at least 670,000 federal employees furloughed will return to work and roughly 730,000 essential workers, including air traffic control workers, will be paid, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Government programs will resume, including 42 million people receiving monthly payments from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. For the first time in history, November money wasn’t sent electronically.

After the House Rules Committee advanced the Senate bill Tuesday night, the full chamber convened at 4:08 p.m., and began debate for one hour at 4:36 p.m.

The bill advanced 213-209.

The GOP has a 219-214 advantage, with Democrat Adelita Grijalvi having been sworn in when the House convened. She was elected Sept. 23.

“For 40 days, hardworking Americans have endured flight cancellations, missed paychecks and empty dinner tables – all because Democrats closed the government,” Johnson posted on X with a video before the vote.

“It was foolish, pointless, cruel and entirely avoidable. Republicans have been working every day to get the government reopened for the American people, and today we should finally be able to overcome the Democrats and accomplish our mission.”

A provision was stripped from the House version regarding funds for eight senators to sue the Department of Justice for obtaining their phone records during an investigation when Joe Biden was president.

“House Republicans are introducing standalone legislation to repeal this provision that was included by the Senate in the government funding bill,” Johnson posted on X on Wednesday afternoon. “We are putting this legislation on the fast-track suspension calendar in the House for next week.”

Democrats have opposed the provision.

“What makes this corruption so staggering is that the payout is specifically designed to go to eight senators whose phone records were lawfully subpoenaed under due process by the Department of Justice,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations panel, wrote in a statement.
She accused the senators of voting “to shove taxpayer dollars into their own pockets — $500,000 for each time their records were inspected.”

The House had been out of session since Sept. 19, when it passed the first version of a continuing resolution to temporarily fund the government. The Senate held 14 votes on the same legislation, but failed to reach the 60-vote supermajority needed to pass it.

A majority of Democrats in the Senate voted against the legislation, seeking to tie the funding bill to a renewal of enhanced Affordable Care Act tax subsidies set to expire in the new year.

The Senate broke the impasse over the weekend after Republicans agreed to hold a separate vote on ACA tax credits. Unnamed sources told ABC News that Republicans promised to hold a vote on the issue in December, though House Speaker Mike Johnson has yet to commit to voting on any ACA measure passed by the Senate.

The credits were enhanced in 2021 by the American Rescue Plan Act during the pandemic and extended one year later through 2015. They increased the amount of financial assistance, expanded eligibility and capped the percentage of household income for the benchmark silver plan.

Eight senators who caucus with the Democrats voted Monday in favor of the new bill on Tuesday night, allowing the chamber to pass it with a vote of 60-40.

The new stopgap bill will fund the government through Jan. 30, provide a full year of funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and veterans programs.

Democrats criticized the bill.

“As Democrats, we’re committed to addressing this affordability crisis. That’s what this fight has been all about,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said outside the Capitol before the House convened. “We’ll continue this fight to fix our broken healthcare system.

“We’ll continue to fight for the principle that in this great country, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, healthcare can’t simply be a privilege available only to the well-off, the wealthy and the well-connected.

“Healthcare must be a right available to every single American. And that’s the fight that House Democrats will continue to wage for the American people.”

Jeffries unsuccessfully attempted a three-year extension of Obamacare by a discharge petition. There would be a vote if the minority party can secure support for a majority of the chamber — a total of 218 signatures. But there are only 214 Democrats and there wasn’t sufficient GOP backing.

“Affordable Care Act tax credits were extended by three years in the Inflation Reduction Act,” Jeffries said. “The legislation that we will introduce in the context of the discharge petition will provide that level of certainty to working-class Americans who are on the verge of seeing their premiums, copays and deductibles skyrocket in some cases, experiencing increases of $1,000 or $2,000 per year.”

Colorado Rep. Jeff Hurd said he wanted to extend the enhanced premium tax credits for time to work on “the underlying drivers that are pushing up those health care costs to begin with.”

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, with 1.4 million members, called on Congress to help Americans afford health insurance.

“AFSCME members have been clear from the start of this shutdown: we need to lower health care costs and fund public services,” AFSCME President Lee Saunders said in a statement to UPI.

“Unfortunately, this administration and the Project 2025 ideologues in Congress refused to come to the table to address the healthcare crisis gripping families across the country. We applaud all of the leaders in Congress who stood up and sounded the alarm about the massive insurance premium hikes affecting millions of Americans.

“The fight to protect families from these increases is far from over. Now that the government is reopening, we’re calling on members of Congress to keep their promise and hold a vote to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. Working families cannot afford to wait any longer to lower health care costs.”

The DOJ argued that the federal judge did not have the authority to make the decision.

A United States judge in Texas has approved the Department of Justice’s request to dismiss a criminal case against Boeing despite his objections to the decision.

On Thursday, Judge Reed O’Connor of the US District Court in Fort Worth dismissed the case, which will allow the plane maker to avoid prosecution over charges related to two deadly 737 MAX crashes: the 2018 Lion Air crash in Indonesia and the 2019 Ethiopian Airlines crash.

O’Connor said he disagreed with the Justice Department’s argument that ending the case served the public interest, noting that he lacked the authority to overrule it.

The government argued Boeing has improved, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is providing enhanced oversight. Boeing and the government argued O’Connor had no choice but to dismiss the case.

He said the deal with the aerospace giant “fails to secure the necessary accountability to ensure the safety of the flying public”.

In September, O’Connor held a three-hour hearing to consider objections to the deal, questioning the government’s decision to drop a requirement that Boeing face oversight from an independent monitor for three years and instead hire a compliance consultant.

O’Connor said the government’s position is “Boeing committed crimes sufficient to justify prosecution, failed to remedy its fraudulent behaviour on its own during the [deferred prosecution agreement], which justified a guilty plea and the imposition of an independent monitor, but now Boeing will remedy that dangerous culture by retaining a consultant of its own choosing”.

The DOJ first criminally charged Boeing for the crashes in January 2021, but also agreed to deferred prosecution in the case.

The plane maker was charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud the US. Courts found that Boeing deceived the FAA about what is called the manoeuvring characteristics augmentation system, which affects flight control systems on the aircraft.

“Boeing’s employees chose the path of profit over candor by concealing material information from the FAA concerning the operation of its 737 Max airplane and engaging in an effort to cover up their deception,” acting Assistant Attorney General David P Burns of the DOJ’s criminal division said in a statement at the time.

O’Connor said in 2023 that “Boeing’s crime may properly be considered the deadliest corporate crime in US history”.

Under the non-prosecution deal, Boeing agreed to pay an additional $444.5m into a crash victims’ fund to be divided evenly per victim of the two fatal 737 MAX crashes, on top of a new $243.6m fine and more than $455m to strengthen the company’s compliance, safety, and quality programmes.

On Wall Street, Boeing’s stock was up by 0.2 percent as of 11am in New York (16:00 GMT).

Oct. 31 (UPI) — Ohio’s representatives approved a bi-partisan redistricting map that might help Republicans gain more seats, but Democrats OK’d the plan because the others offered were worse for them.

The Ohio Redistricting Commission approved the measure unanimously Friday.

“Coming to an agreement that is in the best interest of the state, not just the most vocal elements of either party, I think is some of the toughest things that we can do as elected leaders in 2025,” said state Rep. Brian Stewart, R-Ashville, the Columbus Dispatch reported.

But Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio said it was the best option among bad ones.

“Facing this impossible challenge with no certain path to preserve a fair map, we worked toward compromise,” said Antonio, D-Lakewood.

Democrats faced a Friday deadline because the Ohio constitution allows Republicans to create a map without Democrats in November. They were also concerned about a case before the U.S. Supreme Court on the Voting Rights Act.

Democratic Rep. Emilia Sykes of Akron will get a slightly more favorable northeast Ohio district, but it will still be very competitive, Punchbowl News reported.

Toledo Rep. Marcy Kaptur‘s district will be more difficult to win, but not impossible. She’s the longest-serving representative in the United States, and she won a close race in 2024. Her district chose President Donald Trump by seven points.

“Let the Columbus politicians make their self-serving maps and play musical chairs, I will fight on for the people and ask the voters for their support next year,” she wrote on X.

Cincinnati Rep. Greg Landsman also saw his chances at re-election diminished.

Ohio House Minority Leader Dani Isaacsohn, D-Cincinnati, said all of Ohio’s Democratic congresspeople could still win.

“This is a district Greg Landsman can and will win in, and that’s what the people of Cincinnati deserve,” Isaacsohn said.

Ohio had a failed ballot measure in 2024 that would have put residents in charge of making district maps.

“There’s a lot of anger and frustration in this room, and it’s not just the result of this most recent betrayal. The anger and frustration has been years in the making,” said Mia Lewis, associate director at Common Cause Ohio, the Dispatch reported.

“You have shown all of us, all of Ohio, that politicians cannot be involved in drawing district lines.”

Jen Miller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Ohio, said the people were denied being part of the process. “Republican and Democratic voters feel like their parties sold them out — and they’re both right.”