cuts

WASHINGTON — President Bush, formally abandoning the central pledge of his 1988 presidential campaign, declared Tuesday that preserving a healthy economy will require new taxes.

“It is clear to me that both the size of the deficit problem and the need for a package that can be enacted require” a series of measures including “tax revenue increases” as well as spending cuts, Bush said in a written statement issued after a breakfast meeting with congressional leaders of both parties.

He specifically mentioned the possibility of trimming “entitlement and mandatory” spending programs, a reference to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other benefit programs. He did not specify the type of tax increase he had in mind.

With his statement, Bush abandoned his campaign pledge–”Read my lips, no new taxes”–and opened the door to a “grand compromise” with Congress that could narrow or even close the federal deficit. Richard G. Darman, Bush’s budget director, has been advocating such a compromise almost since the day Bush took office.

At the same time, however, Bush may have sparked a full-scale revolt among conservatives in his party, many of whom believe that higher taxes are far worse for the country than continued deficits. He may also have given up what many Republican strategists see as the party’s most important issue–low taxes.

Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garaden Grove) said the President’s announcement that he would consider raising tax revenues set off a “firestorm” among conservative Republicans.

“I signed a letter today . . . that said, ‘Mr. President, we hope that (tax) rates are untouchable, that they are absolutely radioactive.’ ”

Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton), one of the most fiscally conservative members of Congress, said, “The Democrat game plan all along in this Congress has been to break George Bush of his promise not to raise taxes and so to lay the foundation of a campaign against him by saying he broke his promise and he can’t be trusted.

“And frankly, I’d disappointed in Mr. Bush. I thought he was smarter than falling for that.”

Democratic leaders, by contrast, welcomed Bush’s new stance, which was prepared, word by word, during the breakfast meeting.

Administration and congressional negotiators, who have been meeting since May 9 to try to craft a deficit-reduction package acceptable to all parties, have discussed a host of potential tax increases.

Some proposals, such as increased “user fees” and hikes in tobacco and alcohol taxes, might be relatively easy for Bush to embrace. The Administration has already proposed roughly $20 billion in new user fees and other minor revenue increases.

But Tuesday’s statement was made necessary because Democratic leaders said that package was unacceptable. And while White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said it was up to the negotiators to decide what to do next, he pointedly refused to rule out broader tax increases.

Republicans, however, may find it difficult to accept Democratic demands to increase income taxes for the wealthiest Americans. “I can’t see Democrats agreeing unless there are (income tax) rate changes that ensure that (the final package) is not unfair to the poor and middle class,” said House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dan Rostenkowski (D-Ill.).

Budget negotiators hope to work out a final package before Congress leaves Washington for its August recess.

Before Tuesday’s developments, said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Jim Sasser (D-Tenn.), the budget talks “were stalemated, going nowhere. The President broke an impasse.”

Bush himself told reporters at the White House Rose Garden Tuesday afternoon: “It is essential that these talks get moving and get moving faster. I want to see this economy grow. I want jobs. I want to see the deficit down.”

Democratic leaders had insisted when the talks began that they would not get involved in specific negotiations unless Bush publicly admitted that a tax increase would be needed.

At the time, the White House insisted that all issues were “on the table” and that Bush would impose “no preconditions” on the talks. But Democrats had insisted on a more explicit statement.

After Bush gave them what they had sought, Democratic leaders appeared solemn and reserved as they struggled to avoid seeming to take political advantage of Bush’s retreat.

“We hope this is not going to be the subject of a political campaign effort,” said House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.) “Someone who wants to complain about taxes being raised will have to complain against both parties.”

When the negotiations began, Democrats feared that Republicans would maneuver them into a corner–forcing them to call for a tax increase and then campaigning against them as “tax-and-spend” liberals.

Many Republican candidates for the Senate this fall already have been doing just that, much as Bush had done in 1988. In that year, Bush’s favorite line–”Read my lips, no new taxes”–formed the centerpiece of his standard stump speech.

Tuesday’s statement not only abandoned that pledge but also gave up on a central tenet of the Republican political philosophy for the past decade–that the deficit is caused by too much spending, not by too little revenue.

Fitzwater, explaining Bush’s decision, said that closing the deficit without new taxes would require spending cuts so large that they “would be unacceptable to all parties.”

The White House estimates that the federal deficit will be roughly $160 billion in fiscal 1991, which begins on Oct. 1. The Gramm-Rudman deficit reduction law would require about $100 billion in across-the-board spending cuts unless the President and Congress agree on a new budget plan.

To mollify conservatives, Bush aides spent much of the day circulating word that the White House was not agreeing to anything beyond the approximately $20 billion in new user fees and related taxes that Bush has already advocated.

“I’m not changing my mind at all” on taxes, Bush insisted during a 45-minute session with 15 Latino reporters from around the country.

Vice President Dan Quayle echoed the theme. “It should not be viewed as a change of policy,” he said in an interview in Los Angeles, where he was raising money for GOP candidates. “This is a deficit reduction summit, not a tax increase summit.”

Asked if he would now admit that Bush was breaking his campaign pledge against new taxes, Fitzwater responded with a laugh: “Are you crazy? . . . Everything we said was true then, and it’s true now. We feel he said the right thing then; he’s saying the right thing now.”

Democratic leaders reacted with some anger to the White House damage control efforts.

“The President’s statement is clear and unambiguous,” said Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.). “He said that it is clear to him that tax increases are required. This is a new statement by the President. Any attempt by White House officials or other Republicans to describe the statement otherwise are totally inconsistent with what occurred today.”

Even Fitzwater conceded as much as he listed a series of factors that had forced Bush to change his mind.

The most important was the weakening of the economy since Bush took office. Fitzwater noted that economic statistics continue to show interest rates higher and growth rates lower than the White House had hoped. Bush advisers and most Democratic economists hold deficits at least partly responsible, a point conservatives dispute.

Moreover, the mounting cost of the savings and loan bailout has swelled the deficit, Fitzwater said.

Not all members of Bush’s party, however, were willing to abandon their belief that new taxes are worse than continued deficits.

“Any tax rate increase now threatens recession,” Rep. C. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach) said in a statement. “Just the prospect of a tax increase is like a dagger pointed at the jugular vein of the American economy.”

Within hours of Bush’s statement, 90 Republican members of Congress signed a letter to Bush declaring “we were stunned by your announcement that you would be willing to accept tax revenue increases as a part of a budget summit package.”

Rep. Ron Packard (R-Carlsbad), who represents southern Orange County, said he was “a little bit disappointed and a little bit surprised, because I think it was in a way caving in on the issue.”

“A tax increase is unacceptable,” the GOP congressmen wrote. “We will not vote for a budget package that increases tax rates for the American people.”

Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Tex.), one of the authors of the Gramm-Rudman law, said that an agreement may not be worth having if it means a tax increase.

Times staff writers George Ramos and Robert W. Stewart in Washington and Cathleen Decker in Los Angeles contributed to this story.

GEORGE BUSH ON TAXES Oct. 12, 1987: “There are those who say we must balance the budget on the back of the workers–raise taxes again. . . . I am not going to raise taxes again.” Announcement of candidacy in Houston. Jan. 16, 1988: “I want to be the President who finally whips the budget into shape by holding the line on taxes.” Televised debate with five Republican rivals in Manchester, N.H. May 31, 1988: “I’m not going to propose a tax increase.” After meeting with campaign economic advisers at summer home in Kennebunkport, Me. June 14, 1988: “That’s the difference–as plain as day–between us. Tax cuts vs. tax hikes. I will not raise your taxes, period.” At Cincinnati rally, comparing his position with that of Democratic front-runner Michael S. Dukakis. June 24, 1988: “I’ve ruled them all out.” At a Cincinnati news conference, when asked if Bush included excise taxes or other “revenue enhancers” in his rejection of new taxes. July 9, 1988: “If you go to Yosemite Park with your trailer . . . you may have to pay a little more.” At Atlanta news conference, conceding that costs of some programs might rise for users but asserting that voters understood the difference between user fees and tax hikes. Aug. 18, 1988: “My opponent won’t rule out raising taxes, but I will, and the Congress will push me to raise taxes, and I’ll say no, and they’ll push again, and I’ll say to them ‘Read my lips: no new taxes.’ ” Acceptance speech, Republican National Convention, New Orleans. Jan. 31, 1990: “That budget brings federal spending under control. It meets the Gramm-Rudman target. It brings that deficit down further and balances the budget by 1993 with no new taxes.” State of the Union address, discussing budget he proposed to Congress. March 13, 1990: “You know my position and I have no intention of changing that position.” At White House news conference, when asked if he could promise no new taxes this year. May 24, 1990: “Things are complicated out there on this subject. . . . I’d like to do it exactly the way I propose. I’m now enough of a realist to realize that it might not be done exactly that way.” At White House news conference, when asked if he could fulfill his campaign promise. June 26, 1990: “It is clear to me that both the size of the deficit problem and the need for a package that can be enacted require . . . tax revenue increases.” Written statement after meeting with congressional leaders. PROJECTED IMPACT OF VARIOUS TAX INCREASES

Revenue Impac Proposal Next Year Fossil Fuels Tax fuels linked to global $23 warming Social Security Raise tax on benefits to 12 high earners Energy Impose 5% tax on wide range 14 of energy sources Gasoline Raise tax to 21 cents per 12 gallon from 9 cents Stock Market 0.5% tax on stock and bond 8 transactions Cigarettes, Raise 32 cents per pack and 10 Alcohol 25 cents per ounce Income Increase top income tax 4 rate to 33% Acid Rain Tax sources of air 3 pollution Estate Tax capital gains held 2 until death

t (in billions) Proposal Five Years Fossil Fuels $163 Social Security 100 Energy 80 Gasoline 59 Stock Market 58 Cigarettes, 51 Alcohol Income 42 Acid Rain 22 Estate 10

Source: Congressional Budget Office

PERSPECTIVE ON CHANGE–White House feared that Democrats would quit budget talks and blame Bush. A15

OTHER COVERAGE: A14

In his latest spat with a fellow NATO member, U.S. President Donald Trump condemned Spain as a “wasted cause” and “terrible partner” in the alliance. Speaking at the NATO Summit in Ankara, as NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte looked on, Trump said he wanted to cut off all trade relations with Spain. While Spanish officials have stressed that relations won’t be affected, it does raise questions about the long-term status of the U.S. military presence in Spain, should the situation deteriorate further.

“We don’t want to do any trade business with Spain anymore… I’d like you to cut it off,” Trump said. “Spain is a terrible partner in NATO. They don’t participate; they don’t pay. I don’t want anything to do with Spain. Cut off all trade with Spain, please, including visits. Watch them, watch them come running back; oh, they’ll come running back.”

He continued: “We don’t have to trade with them. I don’t want to do any more trade with them… Don’t even talk to them; they’re hopeless, bad people, because you know they have everybody else going and paying and working… They’re open about it, they’re hostile about it, and let’s see how hostile they remain when they call up, and they ‘please, please, we want to trade with you, sir. We want to trade with you, sir.’ They make so much money with us, and we’re going to see that they make a lot less. I want no business with them.”

According to U.S. Congress figures, mutual trade between the two countries was worth $75 billion in 2025, and the United States made $3 billion more from the relationship than Spain.

In an effort to heal the rift, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez later insisted that relations with the United States were “very positive,” and that he had spoken to Trump.

“We talked about the World Cup… there was no tension whatsoever, on the contrary it was all very friendly,” said Sánchez.

The BBC reported that government sources in Madrid said that Spain had no plan to change their “excellent social, cultural, and economic relationship.”

The background to this is Trump’s unhappiness with the Sánchez government refusing the U.S. military permission to use its bases at Morón and Rota in Spain for missions during the war against Iran.

Another point of conflict is Sánchez’s refusal to increase defense spending to five percent of GDP, in line with NATO targets.

This is not Trump’s first threat to cut off trade relations with Spain. The same had happened back in March, in response to Sánchez’s stance on the Iran war.

While there was no change to trade between the two countries after that, were relations between the United States and Spain to worsen, the continued access to Morón and Rota would become a question.

Of the two, Naval Station Rota, in the province of Cádiz, is the most critical. It sits in a strategic position at the mouth of the Mediterranean, which is one of the world’s most important naval control points.

Described by the U.S. Navy as “the gateway to the Mediterranean,” Rota is one of the most strategically important U.S. military hubs in Europe, critical to supporting U.S. and allied naval operations across multiple theaters. The installation is central for Naval Forces Europe-Africa/Central (EURAFCENT) and the U.S. Sixth Fleet.

Located on a 6,100-acre Spanish Navy facility in southern Spain, Rota functions as a major logistical gateway linking North America with Europe, the Mediterranean, Africa, and the Middle East.

The base supports the movement of personnel, equipment, fuel, and supplies through its three operational piers, a 670-acre airfield capable of supporting U.S. Navy and Air Force aviation operations, and some of the largest weapons and fuel storage facilities in Europe.

Perhaps the highest-profile resident unit at Rota is Destroyer Squadron 60 (DESRON 60), one of three U.S. Navy destroyer squadrons permanently based outside the continental United States and the only one of these to call Europe home.

In 2024, the Arleigh Burke class destroyer USS Oscar Austin arrived at Rota, as the first of two additional destroyers to join the Forward Deployed Naval Force-Europe, which will have an eventual total of six. These warships are notably modified with special defenses tailored to the European theater, as you can read about here.

Other key Navy units at Rota include Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron Seven Nine (HSM-79), the “Griffins,” flying the sub-hunting MH-60R Seahawk, and Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit Eight.

Turning to Morón, this airbase is located southeast of the city of Seville in southern Spain. While Naval Station Rota is a springboard for U.S. maritime forces, Morón provides a similar role for the Air Force. Its strategic position means it plays a key role as a forward operating location for air operations, rapid response missions, and contingency support across Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.

The base’s capabilities include airfield operations, aircraft support, logistics, maintenance, communications, security, and host-nation support, all of which are geared toward rapid deployment and sustainment of U.S. forces when and where they are needed.

Resident U.S. Air Force units at Morón, under the Third Air Force, include the 496th Air Base Squadron, a geographically separated unit (GSU) that comes under the command of the 86th Airlift Wing at Ramstein Air Base in Germany. The 86th Airlift Wing flies C-130J airlifters as well as C-21A and C-37A staff transports.

Morón also serves as a critical node in the transatlantic and transeuropean tanker bridges, making it a key logistical gateway for the massive movements that are critical to buildups in Europe and the Middle East, as well as for more routine transatlantic deployments.

As well as other U.S. Air Force assets that temporarily deploy to Morón, including from the Bomber Task Force, the base also regularly hosts deployments of U.S. Marine Corps aircraft.

Both Morón and Rota operate under the U.S.-Spain Agreement on Defense Cooperation, which allows the United States and Spain to operate alongside one another and share critical infrastructure.

Morón Air Base and Naval Station Rota remain key nodes in the U.S. military’s global posture, providing a strategically positioned bridge between Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Their combined capabilities allow U.S. forces to rapidly move, stage, and sustain aircraft, ships, personnel, and equipment across multiple theaters.

A loss of access to Morón and Rota would extend far beyond a bilateral dispute between Washington and Madrid. While the United States could maintain operations through other European and regional locations, replacing the unique combination of air, maritime, and logistical capabilities provided by the two installations would take time and impose additional strain on U.S. forces. Loss of access to these bases, especially Rota, could be one of Spain’s most powerful cards to play if Trump’s rhetoric turns into action.

More importantly, any decision by a NATO member to restrict access to critical allied infrastructure would have broader implications for the alliance, raising questions about the reliability of defense commitments and the political cohesion that underpins collective security.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

A review of a disability benefit is not expected to make “crude proposals” on changes to claimants’ payments, the minister leading the report has said.

Sir Stephen Timms told the BBC his interim review of personal independence payments (Pip) found the benefit was not “fit for purpose” and promised “fundamental change” in recommendations due in the autumn.

The disability minister said the “sustainability” of spending on the benefit, which is forecast to rise to more than £41bn by 2030, was “going to be a concern as we reach these decisions”.

Last year, the UK government asked Sir Stephen to review whether Pip was “fair and fit for the future”. His initial report will be published on Thursday.

The interim report concludes Pip is not working for millions of disabled people or the government, and suggests a sweeping overhaul of the assessment system is needed.

In evidence submitted to the review, Pip claimants described the assessment process as “dehumanising” for disabled people and a barrier to work.

The report also highlights the steep increase in the number of Pip recipients in recent years and the forecasted rise in spending on the benefit.

Pip is a benefit people with long-term illnesses and disabilities can claim if they need help with extra costs associated with living, work and care.

Eligibility for Pip is determined through an assessment.

Under the current assessment system, claimants are scored on a zero to 12 scale by a health professional on everyday tasks such as washing, getting dressed and preparing food.

Speaking to the BBC, Sir Stephen said Pip “does a very important job in helping people meet the additional costs of disability”.

But the minister said disabled people had told the review the assessment can be “demeaning” and “deter you from participating in society”.

“We’ve also found that it hasn’t kept pace with changing understanding of health and disability over the last 13 years since the benefit was introduced, so we do think quite fundamental change is needed,” Sir Stephen.

As of April this year, there were about four million claimants entitled to Pip in England and Wales.

The number of Pip recipients has risen considerably since the benefit was introduced in 2013, with the increase fuelled by claimants citing mental health conditions in recent years.

LOU Teasdale has split with footballer Andy Carroll for a third time – and for her sake, I hope this time it’s for good.

To me Andy is a classic Peter Pan, a man seemingly devoid of the ability to grow up and stop partying like he’s a single twenty-something.

We saw it in the run up to his marriage to the lovely Billi Mucklow back in 2022, when he made a buffoon of himself by passing out topless in bed with two women in Dubai, and now it seems history is repeating itself.

I watched him sidling up to two rather attractive women at Glastonbury last year and although it might have just been a flirt – who doesn’t get turned on by The Prodigy? – it was enough to get the red flags waving in my mind.

If you feel like this is the nineteenth time Andy and Lou have split over the past year, you’re a little way off but not totally incorrect.

They’ve been more on and off than my laptop over the past 12 months so I am hoping, if only for Lou’s sake, that this is the final time.

If she was one of my mates, I’d be staging an intervention because enough is enough.

This time around, insiders have said it’s Lou who has kicked Andy to the kerb, after he flew off on a boozy holiday to Ibiza, despite supposedly promising her he wouldn’t touch drink to save their relationship.

Lou, a respected make-up artist, has now wiped Andy from her social media.

But why she stood by him time and time again is what I cannot understand. They first started dating back in the autumn 2024 and on social media, naturally, it all seemed rather rosy.

Andy had only been single for a short time, following the end of his ill-fated marriage to Billi, the mother of his three youngest children.

But from the outside, all appeared to be well. And, long had been forgotten the scandal that had engulfed the lead up to their wedding back in 2022.

To recap, and if you don’t remember, Andy ended up landing himself in hot water after getting so drunk at his stag do in Dubai that he ended up topless and in bed with two women – who took photographs of him and shared them with pals.

I reported on the story at the time as I knew people close to Billi.

The former reality star was so humiliated by the footballer she almost called off the wedding.

Nothing happened between Andy and the women who partied with him in Dubai, but her friends confessed to me at the time that they were begging her not to marry him.

But their pleas fell on deaf ears and the pair looked genuinely happy in their wedding pictures in the summer of that year.

But fast-forward two years and they announced they were divorcing.

I rang one of her pals after hearing of his latest split with Lou and they made a pertinent point.

“Marrying Andy was something Billi did for love but it was never going to work out,” a friend admits.

“We told her not to go through with it but everything was in place for the wedding, calling it off would have been a nightmare.

“She did love him deep down and wanted to move past it though.

“Andy might not have cheated in Dubai but he was as drunk as a skunk and topless in bed with two women.

“What does it say about your future husband that he’s going to put himself in this position?”

Well, quite.

Not long after his split from Billi was revealed by The Sun, it emerged Andy had started dating Lou.

There was no crossover between the relationship and on the outside, things between Andy – who has two older children from a previous relationship – and Lou seemed happy.

Their Instagram accounts were full of snaps of them together in France, where Andy had been playing for fourth tier club Bordeaux.

But less than a year into their relationship, it all started to get a bit messy.

Lou, who is sober and has been for over a decade, appeared to have no issue with the fact Andy drank alcohol and the pair made it work.

But last summer, things came to a head in Mykonos – with Andy being quizzed by the police twice after two very public rows last June.

The first incident, at the Nikolus Tavern, was so shocking, a restaurant worker went on the record and told us Andy was “very drunk and furious” with Lou.

He added: “He was using very bad words. It was improper behaviour. The woman looked very upset.”

After speaking to police, Andy was allowed to return to Lou but just hours later alarmed staff called cops again after reports of damage to their £500-a-room at a posh hotel.

Andy was taken to a station for questioning but was released without being arrested. Despite the two incidents, Lou stuck by Andy and their relationship continued.

For eight more weeks, the pair went back to posting loved-up selfies online, until out of the blue – Andy’s pals confessed he had dumped Lou last August.

And thus the madness started.

A friend close to Andy was less than charming about their relationship when they told us about the break-up and said: “Andy got sick of Lou’s demands and her influencer lifestyle.

“She’s always posting on social media and he hates that. He told her it was over this week. He’s single now.”

Days later, Andy then confessed he’d “made a mistake” and they got together again.

But fast forward a few weeks and they split up once more.

This time was after a “make or break” holiday, with a friend saying: “They’ve tried to make it work, but they’re just too different.”

Bizarrely, even after all of this – they ended up patching things up – but unsurprisingly it’s now over again.

That relationship, which has become a very tedious version of Groundhog Day, should, in my opinion, end for good now.

And Lou, I implore you not to take Andy back.

There are only so many times someone can drag you down before something has got to give.

I had the misfortune of standing next to the Dagenham and Redbridge player at Glasto last summer as I watched The Prodigy and he got very friendly with two women during the set.

Lou had been on-site with Andy that weekend but by this point had retreated to the Babington House for a well-earned rest from the stench of the long-drops at Worthy Farm.

Being honest, I can’t work out what annoyed me more – having a colleague poke me repeatedly because Andy was all over these women while my favourite song Smack My B**** Up was playing or the fact he had the gall to act like a single man when he was in what appeared to be a loving relationship.

I’m not saying anything happened with those women, or that his actions went beyond a flirt and someone to lean on late at night.

But when a man truly loves a woman, he doesn’t give another one a second look, let alone put his arms around them when his missus’ back is turned.

We’ve all been the woman, or man, that forgives stupidity because we love. But as the old saying goes, once is happenstance, twice is a coincidence, three times is a pattern.

Don’t let him make a mug of you, Lou.

The routes have long been popular with holidaymakers visiting the Brittany area of France, offering a range of daytime and overnight services, and the company has confirmed it’s making changes to other lines as well

Brittany Ferries has announced its making big changes to its UK to France routes ahead of the autumn months as it blames the financial impact of Covid and the ongoing effects of Brexit.

The ferry operator will sell two of its ships, including one that operates the current Poole to Cherbourg route, which it has confirmed will be closed from November 1. Passengers will need to travel to Portsmouth where there’s a daily service to Cherbourg operating in its place.

It also confirmed in a statement that: “in the face of unfair competition on the Eastern Channel, caused by subsidies to run the loss-making Dieppe-Newhaven route, the company is looking to close the Portsmouth to Le Havre route from October 2026.”

Brittany Ferries confirmed the closure date as October 1, saying: “It has operated this route for as long as possible while legal challenges are still being considered by Brussels.”

It also clarified that it’ll be moving to a “more efficient schedule” from November 1 for its ships serving Guernsey, Poole and Cherbourg. Brittany Ferries Island will “serve a triangular route as follows: Portsmouth to Guernsey, Guernsey to Cherbourg, Cherbourg to Portsmouth”. While it’s fast craft the Brittany Ferries Voyager “will continue to serve Poole to Guernsey, but with the option to travel on to St Malo”.

The company confirmed there would be: “No job losses in the UK, but potentially a small number in Le Havre subject to a consultation process currently underway.”

Brittany Ferries began running the Poole to Cherbourg route back in 1986, and it runs on the 1992 ferry Barfleur, which the company has confirmed will now be sold. The Portsmouth to Le Havre route has been operated by Brittany Ferries since 2014. Sailings to Le Havre were run during the day, while the return journeys to Portsmouth ran overnight.

Christophe Mathieu, CEO Brittany Ferries, said in a statement: “Brittany Ferries has a track record in adapting its business to long- and short-term challenges. We overcame Covid when borders were shut, we continue to wrestle with the consequences of Brexit and we are taking steps to make a holiday in France or Spain as reasonable as possible.

“But we have to be realistic. We need adapt and that means a plan to secure a future that will continue to bring opportunities for all those who live and work in the regions we serve. We have informed our ports and will work with everyone affected on this plan for the future.”

The company’s statement went on to add that it’s still feeling the effects of its Covid loan, saying it has repaid half of it, but that “the long tail of the crisis continues”.

The ferry operator’s statement goes on to say: “Into this mix has been thrown the rising tax burden of ETS, the EU’s Emission Trading System. Brittany Ferries has invested in the cleanest, greenest fleet on the Channel, including five new vessels in five years, two of which were launched in 2025.

“Despite this, the company faces a bill of some €27 million in 2026, with no allowance for the industry-leading investment already made. That’s an EU financial burden even before the UK begins to introduce an equivalent scheme for ships operating in British waters.”

Have a story you want to share? Email us at webtravel@reachplc.com

June 27 (UPI) — Volkswagen is set to cut as many as 100,000 jobs, and end production at four of its plants, as part of a restructuring to better counter Chinese rivals in Europe.

The company is one of several German automakers that is making cuts as Chinese companies gain ground in both Germany and the rest of Europe, The Financial Times and Wall Street Journal reported.

BMW and Mercedes-Benz, as well as Stellantis and Renault, have lost market share in Europe as BYD, Chery and other Chinese brands have surpassed 10% of car sales on the continent after years of slow growth.

Volkswagen already had agreed with its employee’s unions to cut 50,000 jobs in Germany by the end of 2030 as part of making it “more efficient and leaner,” but some experts have questioned whether the increased moves will have their intended effect, the reports said.

“Every European player is losing today,” Thomas Besson, an auto market analyst at Kepler Cheuvreux, told The Times.

“This is a highly challenging situation for European carmakers,” Besson said, “because Chinese [manufacturers] are progressing [in Europe] at a much faster pace than expected, while [European manufacturers] continue to lose volumes in China and face very adverse conditions in the United States, notably due to tariffs.”

Volkswagen, which is Europe’s largest carmaker, would be dropping about 15% of its 660,000-person workforce, in addition to ending production at three Volkswagen plants and one Audi plant, CNBC reported.

The company also plans to reduce investments by about 15% — roughly $148 billion — over the next five years, while also launching new efforts at selling its products to compete with the Chinese companies.

“The entire [Volkswagen] group — including its brands and subsidiaries — must undergo profound change,” a company spokesperson told CNBC.

Every morning Marisol Winfrey Herrera’s three-and-a-half-year-old daughter Jo reminds her to turn off the tap while washing her hands and brushing her teeth.

When they leave home, she reminds her mother to keep a bottle of ice with them to offer it to homeless people, who they sometimes find wilting in the Tucson heat. At first, they press the ice-filled bottles on the homeless folks to help them revive, then they offer the water to drink and hydrate. At her daycare, Jo is taught water-saving habits to combat Tucson’s soaring heat.

It is what prompted Herrera to join No Desert Data Center, a residents’ group that opposes two large data centres coming up on either side of Tucson – the $3.6bn project on the city’s southeast edge and a $5bn project on its northwest side in the town of Marana, together known as Project Blue.

The group believes these would consume more water and power than the city set in the Sonoran Desert can afford.

“We are in the middle of a 30-year drought, which is now an extreme drought,” says Lisa Shipek, co-executive director of the Watershed Management Group, a Tucson-based nonprofit.

“Water was a unifying theme in our campaign. The Colorado River cuts are looming, and this project would take water away,” Herrera told Al Jazeera.

Water flows in the Colorado River, which provides much of Tucson’s water through the Central Arizona Project canal system, have dropped by 20 percent since the year 2000 compared with water flows in the 20th century due to climate change, melting snow caps and warmer weather, making water cuts to Tucson imminent as the state could face as much as 77 percent water cuts.

“We say Not One Drop for data centres,” says Herrera, speaking of the campaign’s particularly emotive appeal for residents as water cuts get deeper and temperatures rise, with Tucson recording the warmest weather in 125 years last July and August.

Beale Infrastructure, a San Francisco-based company that is owned by investment management company Blue Owl in New York, had asked the city of Tucson to acquire 290 acres that were outside city limits for Project Blue. That would make it the city’s largest water consumer and among its largest power consumers. Beale did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

But at city council meetings, City Councillor Kevin Dahl began seeing hundreds of residents turn up to express their opposition to the project.

“Not for many issues do we get so much response,” he said. Herrera was among those who went.

Pitting environment against unions

At council meetings, Beale executives proposed that Project Blue could be the economic engine the city needed. It would create a few thousand jobs for construction workers, ironmongers, plumbers and other such workers during the construction of the project and a few hundred after that.

“Sometimes people travel as far as Phoenix for work,” Dahl said about Arizona’s largest city, which is nearly a two-hour drive from Tucson.

The project could bring jobs closer. Beale also expected the project to generate nearly $250m in taxes for the city, county and state in the first 10 years.

This left councillors with a difficult decision to make, weighing the project’s economic benefits against allocating it a share of the city’s increasingly scarce water and power.

Activists also raised concerns about whether Tucson Electric Power (TEP), the power utility, would raise rates for consumers so it could expand capacity to provide power for Project Blue. After raising rates by 10 percent in 2023, TEP proposed a 14 percent rate hike in June 2025 for grid upgrades made in the previous year.

Lee Ziesche, an activist from the Democratic Socialists of America who is campaigning to make TEP a public utility, said Project Blue could “lead to higher temperatures and higher rates” because of the heat island effect of the air conditioners and higher rates for power.

She often hears from residents that a rate hike would make it hard to pay bills or put on air conditioning, even as the number of 100-degree Fahrenheit (37.8 degree-Celsius) days has increased in Tucson, which is among the hottest cities in the United States.

The same concerns of needing ramped-up air conditioning would plague data centres too, experts say.

“The viability of data centres in Arizona will always be subject to climate change and heat risks,” says Kate Gordon, chief executive of California Forward, a think tank that works on a sustainable economy.

“The heat in Arizona makes energy less efficient, and servers heat up, so projects will need higher amounts of water and cooling, which developers have to balance against a possibly lower real estate and labour cost,” she said. “I am always amazed at how climate does not figure in business plans.”

Dahl and Andres Cano, a supervisor in Pima County, in which Tucson is located, had discussions with Beale representatives.

“We thought they would go elsewhere if the city did not acquire the land” for the project, Dahl said. Cano also came away with the same impression.

In August 2025, Tucson councillors voted unanimously not to acquire the land for the project or provide it with water and power. In December, Cano became one of only two supervisors in Pima County to oppose the project, and it was approved for construction in an unincorporated part of the county.

“It will create short-term construction jobs for what will ultimately be a project with few wins,” Cano said. “This pitted the environment and unions, but industry is not for unions. This will have just about 100 jobs when it is done.”

With no access to Tucson’s water supply, Beale decided to cool its servers with air conditioners rather than water and use a closed-loop water system, so it would recycle and reuse water.

But Vivek Bharathan, a spokesperson for the No Desert Data Center, said using air conditioners would increase power usage.

Nearly half of TEP’s power comes from fracking, he says. Data centre demand will only mean “more fracking somewhere else, climate and health consequences all along the way”.

The state’s largest data centre

Even as Project Blue was making its way through a fraught approval process, Beale announced another data centre project in the neighbouring farming town of Marana. It was to be spread over 600 acres (242 hectares), twice the size of Project Blue. The area was spread over two farm plots, one owned by the Mormon church and the other by a family trust of city council member, Herb Kai.

This project, too, is slated to bring thousands of construction jobs to a farming town as well as tax revenues.

But when Jackie McGuire, a mother of three and former Wall Street banker, heard about it, she and other residents launched a campaign to stop the land from being rezoned for a data centre. Residents wanted Marana to stay a farming town.

McGuire, who works as a research analyst, said the data centres’ servers and large air conditioners that would be installed to keep them running would raise the project’s cost and make Marana unbearably hot.

Temperatures rose by up to 2.2F (1.22C) downwind from data centres in the Phoenix area, a study published in May had found.

“The heat generated will be like one to two million space heaters,” McGuire says. “It can go up to 112 degrees [44.4C] here already. The heat island effect could make Marana uninhabitable.”

The Marana data centre will be provided power by TEP and Trico, which announced a 7.23 percent rate hike in January.

McGuire and other residents campaigned to have a referendum on whether the land could be rezoned for a data centre. Their plea was not successful, and the city council approved the rezoning of the land.

But the experience of the campaign had invigorated McGuire, and she decided to run for city council herself. The central issue of her campaign is to bring transparency to the data centre’s functioning.

Even as the campaigns in Pima County and Marana raged on, La Osa, the state’s largest data centre project, took shape in Tucson’s neighbouring Pinal County. The 3,300-acre project by the Vermaland real estate group was expected to house 59 data centres and two of its own natural gas facilities, as well as a utility-scale battery storage system.

But residents worried about noise pollution from protracted project construction and a possible increase in power costs.

“I’m worried about the constituents in that area, about the power bills going up, even though you’re saying that they’re going to pay for it,” Pinal County Supervisor Rich Vitiello said in a board of supervisors meeting on May 27.

In the face of such opposition, a La Osa lawyer spoke at the meeting to say the project had been scaled down and would now house 11 data centres from the 59 planned earlier.

‘A straw to the aquifer’

Sharing limited water has long been an emotive issue in the state, and the looming Colorado River cuts and data centre projects have brought such concerns to a head.

Arizona fought one of the longest-running cases, stretching more than three decades, in the US Supreme Court over the sharing of Colorado River water with California. Eventually, Congress adjudicated to provide California with a greater share of the water, which turbocharged its economic growth.

“No water can flow into Tucson and Phoenix unless California gets its full share,” says Jason Robison, co-director of the Gina Guy Center for Land and Water Law at the University of Wyoming College of Law.  “Arizona has always been in a tough spot.”

It strengthened the state’s long-held tradition of conservation.

“Arizona communities have been preparing for the drought conditions we see today since 1980,” a spokesperson for the Arizona Department of Water Resources said in an emailed response.

Authorities have curtailed lawns in Tucson, he said, and educational campaigns of the kind Herrera’s daughter underwent are the norm.

It has meant that groundwater reserves go deep, and homeowners are assured of a water supply before it is given to data centres or farms.

“The use by data centres is low compared to farm use, especially alfalfa and hay,” says Eric Kuhn, retired general manager of the Colorado River Water Conservation District and co-author of Science Be Dammed: How Ignoring Inconvenient Science Drained the Colorado River.

However, “data centres are not under the same rules to replenish water” as other industries, says Sharon Medgal, director of the Water Resources Research Center at the University of Arizona. “So it adds a straw to the aquifer.”

Arizona’s governor, Katie Hobbs, who is up for re-election in November, has represented to the Bureau of Reclamation that the state is home to essential industry, including semiconductors, space and data centres, and so needs a higher share of water from the Colorado River. Water, as well as its use for data centres, has been an important issue in primary races across the state.

Construction began for Project Blue at the end of April. No Desert Data Centers’ activists arrived just after dawn to protest. Within days, they found subcontractors bringing in water to control dust on site from construction. County authorities cited Beale.

Then Beale began digging wells on site after reportedly receiving permits allowing that from the Arizona Department of Water Resources. This is likely for 31,000 gallons  (more than 117,000 litres) a year, which is just enough for toilets and kitchens and will likely be recycled for reuse after.

“This may not yet be a winning story,” Bharathan, the spokesperson for the No Desert Data Center, said. “But it is a continuing story.”

TV host Lorraine Kelly saw her team lose jobs in the IT shake up – her show Lorraine has been slashed to 30 weeks a year and gone from an hour to 30 minutes on screen

Lorraine Kelly has said the ITV cuts to her show have left her feeling “really rubbish” as rumours continue that she could leave.

The TV host has now been on screen for over 40 years, but said in an interview last year she was “not done yet” despite ITV cutting her hours. As part of daytime ITV budget cuts her show Lorraine has been slashed to 30 weeks a year and gone from an hour to 30 minutes on screen.

Speaking to Saga magazine when asked how she felt about what happened, Lorraine said: “Really rubbish. A lot of my team got made redundant. It was really hard and harder for them. We were very close-knit, but it’s all about budget. All television shows are in the same boat, we’re not alone.”

She went on to insist despite the role and hours changing, it was still “the best job in television” with lovely guests. Lorraine, 66, also spoke in the interview about her beloved dad John dying aged 84 in January and her mum’s health.

She said: “Mum’s health’s bad, but she’s grand. She’s very self-sufficient, like all those war babies are. I always keep an eye on her but don’t let her know I’m keeping an eye on her. I’ve said, ‘You can stay with us any time for as long as you like’. It’s weird. When something massive is happening, your hand still goes to your phone. Dad is – I keep speaking about him in the present tense – really into space. When [NASA’s rocket] Artemis II flew around the moon, I wanted to say, ‘Are you watching this? It’s amazing’. Then you remember he’s not there.”

She added: “When Dad wasn’t well, it brought us closer, supporting each other. It’s been a tough time, but the conversations you have with your relatives you wouldn’t have had otherwise are amazing: you talk about the past and then the wedding – that’s a new beginning.”

Lorraine is upbeat and optimistic despite a series of setbacks in life in recent months. In June 2025 Lorraine was told she was a “national treasure” during an interview and replied: “Well, that’s nice, but it’s only because I’ve been around for so long.

“I’ve been doing telly for over 40 years. It’s mad isn’t it? It’s absolutely crazy. I started in breakfast telly in 1984, and I’m still getting away with it. Extraordinarily.”

Speaking to Tom Kerridge on the Proper Tasty podcast, she added: “40 years in TV last year was incredible. I got a BAFTA. ‘Here’s a BAFTA for being alive’. I thought, ‘Hang on a minute, I’m not done yet’.”

Lorraine was told in person by ITV boss Kevin Lygo about the changes to her show which began at the start of 2026. Reports have suggested she is considering leaving her ITV show in the future and could work for BBC or other broadcasters. She made her Radio 2 debut at Christmas presenting in Jeremy Vine’s midday slot during the festive period. Her presence would also likely give any other channel a ratings boost if she ever moves, as she remains hugely popular.

* The full interview with Lorraine is in July’s Saga magazine, out now.

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

June 21 (UPI) — The Russian government on Sunday halted fuel sales to civilians and businesses not considered vital to functioning and security in Crimea.

Sergey Aksyonov, the governor of Crimea, announced people would be turned away from gas stations amid a fuel shortage and logistical difficulties related to the war with Ukraine, the BBC reported.

“Further decisions regarding the current situation in the republic’s fuel market will be announced at a later date,” he said in a post on Telegram.

The announcement came amid new attacks by Ukraine on energy and transportation infrastructure on the Crimean Peninsula, Politico reported. Russia illegally annexed the peninsula from Ukraine in 2014, and it has been at the center of fighting between the two countries ever since.

Ukraine has repeatedly targeted Russia’s energy supply in an effort to hobble its defenses and ability to transport troops and machinery. Fuel facilities in the Kerch Strait in Russia’s Krasnodar region have also been attacked.

Aksyonov said a Ukrainian drone attack on an oil depot in Kerch killed four people and injured 28.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said the attack was a “just response to Russia’s brutal attacks.”

“Russia understands only strength, and our long-range strength is certainly working for peace,” he wrote in a post on X.

WASHINGTON — More than $350 million from President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” has been quietly directed to White House security, an allotment that Democrats warn appears to be helping fund his new ballroom project — despite the president’s insistence that no taxpayer dollars would be used.

The apportionment of funds, which the White House’s Office of Management and Budget made late Friday, comes from two accounts that were intended to provide the U.S. Secret Service with extra money for hiring and training in the aftermath of last year’s assassination attempts on the president, according to Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee. The shift was made days after Congress rejected a $1-billion request for the White House in a Homeland Security bill that Trump signed into law and as the ballroom project is tangled in legal challenges.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley, whose panel initially drafted the security funding, said Thursday he was unaware of the allocations.

“The president said that it was all going to be paid for with private money,” said Grassley (R-Iowa). “And that’s what the country expects.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, charged that Trump’s actions are potentially illegal.

“After repeatedly telling the American people that zero taxpayer dollars would be spent on his gold-plated ballroom boondoggle, now Trump appears to be using a smoke and mirrors tactic,” Merkley said in a statement.

“Trump has proven that he can’t be trusted to follow the law,” Merkley said. “He only cares about wasting taxpayer money on his vanity projects.”

Ballroom project hits setbacks

Trump has faced setbacks in his attempts to build the ballroom on the White House grounds, where he ordered the demolition of the storied East Wing to make way for it.

Touring the construction site last month, Trump called the development a “gift” to the American people. He has repeatedly said that it is being paid for by donations — which has also run into ethics questions from watchdogs concerned about potential corruption and conflicts of interest.

Congress refused the Trump administration’s request for $1 billion for the ballroom last month. The administration wanted the money as part of a Homeland Security bill, but Republican and Democratic lawmakers rejected efforts to tack it on. It became politically toxic at a time when Americans are reeling from inflationary high costs of living.

The Washington Post reported earlier this week that the price tag for the project has ballooned to $600 million, according to a project summary prepared by the contractor, with more than half of that funding coming from taxpayers. Roll Call first reported on the apportionment of new funds for White House security.

At its core, arguments are swirling over how much of the White House project is to bolster security underground, with bomb shelters and a medical facility, and how much of the costs are related to the president’s promised 999-seat ballroom on top.

White House says Trump and donors are paying for the ballroom

A spokesman for the White House said that Trump and donors are funding some $400 million for the ballroom development, and that the coordination with the Secret Service had been noted in the initial announcement of the project.

“The East Wing Modernization Project is inextricably tied to the security of the President, the White House grounds and the certain security infrastructure assets,” said White House spokesman Davis R. Ingle in a statement.

He said the events over the past weekend, including an alleged attack plan targeting the UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House, proves why the project is needed.

“President Trump and generous American patriots are funding the ballroom to the tune of approximately $400 million, which will be a secure and appropriate venue for Presidents for generations to come,” he said.

Government lawyers have argued that the project includes critical security features to guard against a range of threats, such as drones and missiles.

The White House has said in court documents that the East Wing project would be “heavily fortified,” including bomb shelters, military installations and a medical facility underneath the ballroom. The Secret Service told senators last month that $220 million of the White House’s $1-billion request would go to harden the ballroom addition, with bulletproof glass, drone detection technologies, chemical and other systems.

The rest of the money would go for other security improvements, according to a document provided to Senate Republicans, including $180 million for a new, “long overdue” White House visitors screening facility.

Congress holds power of the purse

The shifting funds are certain to ignite growing concerns in Congress over the separation of powers, and the president’s use of federal funds allocated by lawmakers.

The money comes from Trump’s big tax breaks and spending cuts bill that the president signed into law last summer. It provided more than $1 billion for Secret Service resources, including “personnel, training facilities, programming, and technology; and performance, retention, and signing bonuses.”

The provision was uncontested at the time, even as Democrats voted against the broader bill. Democrats said they did not challenge this section or try to strip it out from the package.

Under the Constitution, only Congress has the specific authority to allocate funds across the federal government, including the executive and judicial branch operations.

While the president holds the power to sign — or veto — those appropriation bills, once the funding becomes law, it largely must stand.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

The looming impact of federal Medicaid cuts has reignited a long-simmering, costly battle between California’s medical industry and one of its largest health worker unions.

SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, with about 120,000 members, has put forward two ballot initiatives to cap the pay of medical executives and require community clinics to spend the bulk of their revenues on patient care.

The California Hospital Assn. has responded with its own ballot proposal that would make it tougher for unions to spend money on political initiatives in the future. It would require approval by a union’s rank-and-file membership for any spending of $1 million or more on statewide measures, or $100,000 or more on local ones.

The competing measures, which have drawn enough verified signatures to qualify for the November ballot, come at a time when the rising cost of healthcare is emerging as a top voter concern.

The Service Employees International Union affiliate has seized upon affordability angst to resurrect a proposal for a cap on healthcare executive compensation, which it has failed to achieve multiple times before. The proposed measure garnered more than 1 million petition signatures.

“This initiative reflects the serious crisis we face and that affordability is a real thing,” said Vikas Saini, president of the Lown Institute, a Massachusetts-based healthcare think tank. “I think it also reflects grassroots anger and a desire to do something.”

Mikey Vaughn, a certified nursing assistant at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, said the hospital often lacks supplies and staffing levels that he and his colleagues need in order to do their jobs effectively and without undue stress, despite its reputation as the go-to place for the rich and famous.

“The executive pay initiative would, I hope, be used to hire staff and to actually provide better resources for our patients,” he said. Vaughn is also a member of SEIU-UHW’s executive board and political committee.

Thomas Priselac, then-president and CEO of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, made $8.8 million in fiscal year 2024, according to the organization’s most recent available federal tax filing. Kaiser Permanente’s CEO, Gregory Adams, made nearly $13 million in 2024. Warner Thomas, head of Sutter Health, made just under $12 million.

Cedars-Sinai spokesperson Duke Helfand said the hospital would be unable to recruit and retain physicians, nurses, and specialists if the measure passed, dramatically impairing its ability to provide healthcare.

“Such a scenario would be disastrous not only for Cedars-Sinai but for hospitals across Los Angeles and California,” Helfand said.

The union wants to cap compensation at $450,000 a year for senior hospital and medical group executives, as well as other administrative and managerial staff. However, the initiative does not stipulate how dollars diverted from payroll must be spent.

The union has dubbed the latest proposal the Health Care Executive Compensation Act of 2026. A coalition of medical industry heavyweights opposing it — hospitals, physicians, and clinics, among others — has rebranded it the Health Care Endangerment Act.

Carmela Coyle, CEO of the hospital association, called the measure a cynical political ploy.

“It’s bad policy and it’s going to have bad consequences across California,” she said.

Glenn Melnick, a healthcare economist at the University of Southern California, said even if the initiative were fully implemented and pay cuts enacted, he doubts it would reduce the cost of healthcare for patients.

SEIU-UHW does not have an estimated total amount the initiative would claw back from pay packages that exceed the limit.

Opponents of the initiative note that it doesn’t just target executive pay; it would affect medical practitioners who are also managers. That could include chief medical officers and chief nursing officers, as well as heads of surgery, emergency rooms, oncology, obstetrics, cardiology and other specialties, they say.

It would be up to each hospital, health system and physician group to report which staff members exceed the cap and by how much.

Ultimately, who is subject to the pay cap “probably will have to be battled out in court,” Coyle said . “That’s why we are throwing everything we can at it.”

The second SEIU-UHW ballot initiative, on community clinics, is already in court. The California Primary Care Assn., which represents clinics, filed a federal lawsuit in April seeking to invalidate it before it reaches the November ballot.

The proposed measure would require federally designated community clinics to spend at least 90% of their revenues on activities directly related to their mission of providing care for low-income populations. If it were to pass, more than 90% of those clinic organizations would be on the hook for penalties totaling $1.7 billion in the first year alone and “would face similarly crippling penalties every year,” according to a report commissioned by the primary care association and conducted by the Berkeley Research Group, an international consulting company.

Louise McCarthy, president and CEO of the Community Clinic Assn. of Los Angeles County, said many pivotal services the clinics provide — such as translation and transportation — would likely not be counted toward the spending requirement.

“They are targeting a group of what they see as employers and we see as the safety net,” she said.

The lawsuit cites the harm to clinics and claims the proposed spending requirement would interfere with federal authority.

Renée Saldaña, a spokesperson for SEIU-UHW, characterized the lawsuit against the initiative as “a really desperate attempt by the clinic industry to try and avoid accountability.”

SEIU-UHW, proud of its political activism, is also behind a controversial billionaire tax proposal that would impose a one-time 5% levy on California residents with fortunes over $1 billion to backfill the funding gap created by federal cuts coming down the pike under Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The law, passed last July and signed by President Trump, is projected to squeeze nearly $1 trillion from the Medicaid health coverage program for low-income people by 2034, including as much as $30 billion annually in California.

The hospital association, the community clinic group and the California Medical Assn., which represents physicians, are neutral on the wealth tax proposal thus far. But Saldaña said all three of the union’s ballot proposals tie into an overarching strategy to counter the widening healthcare disparities caused by the federal law.

“We believe the primary concern of healthcare providers, including executives, should be to serve the community, heal patients, and not be in healthcare just to enrich themselves,” she said on the proposed pay cap.

Over the years, the union has submitted dozens of local and statewide ballot initiatives, including ones to cap the pay of hospital executives, regulate dialysis clinics, and raise the minimum wage of healthcare workers.

The hospital association calculates that SEIU-UHW has spent nearly $125 million on local and statewide initiatives since 2012. But healthcare industry groups have spent far more opposing them. The hospital association data shows that the union spent nearly $36 million on three ballot proposals to regulate the dialysis industry, but dialysis companies poured in $302 million to defeat them, according to state campaign finance records.

The union’s ongoing political efforts “threaten patient access to quality health care,” according to the hospital association’s ballot initiative, which could limit how much unions spend on future ballot measures.

Saldaña hinted at a possible lawsuit should that measure pass, saying “we don’t see the legal viability” of it. The proposal, she said, is an attempt “to silence the front-line healthcare workers.”

Ultimately, a ballot initiative won’t cure the ills that plague healthcare in the United States, said the Lown Institute’s Saini. What’s needed, he said, is “an evaluation and reimagination of healthcare.”

Wolfson writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.

SACRAMENTO — Disability rights advocates on Monday gathered outside the state Capitol to push back on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed cuts to in-home supportive services.

“These aren’t just numbers in a budget; these are real people,” said Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez (R-Indio). “These are children, seniors, veterans and individuals with disabilities whose independence and quality of life depend on these services every single day.”

The In-Home Supportive Services program helps disabled and elderly people remain in their houses by providing in-home care. It pays assistants to help with tasks such as showering, cooking or attending doctor appointments. Newsom’s revised budget proposal, which was unveiled last month, would cut $367.7 million from the program and shift some of that financial burden onto counties.

Gonzalez explained that the issue hits close to home for his family. He said his son has cerebral palsy and a seizure disorder, and relies on assistance to live with dignity.

“Families should not have to wonder every budget season whether the support they rely on will be taken away,” Gonzalez said. “These services should not be treated as bargaining chips in budget negotiations.”

Assemblymember Laurie Davies (R-Laguna Niguel) questioned why a successful state like California would need to enact such cuts.

“It’s hard to go a day without hearing the governor or the administration brag about how we are the fourth-largest economy in the world and yet we can’t fully fund [this program for] the most vulnerable?” Davies said.

The governor has previously explained that difficult decisions must be made as the state could soon face an economic downturn. The budget proposal relies on a tax windfall, largely attributed to the stock market success of artificial intelligence companies, to erase California’s deficit — but some analysts have warned that the AI bubble could burst.

H.D. Palmer, deputy director for external affairs for the California Department of Finance, on Monday said some of the proposed cuts are a byproduct of the federal government’s changes in funding and eligibility for health and human services programs.

The so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill” signed by President Trump last year shifted federal funding away from safety-net programs, he said.

Palmer stressed that state budget negotiations are ongoing.

“Until we land on an agreement, speculation regarding the resolution of any specific differences between the Governor’s budget plan or the Legislature’s respective budget proposals would be premature,” he stated by email.

Monday’s event drew some bipartisan support. Brody Fernandez, communications director for Assemblymember Esmeralda Z. Soria (D-Fresno), said the legislator had been fighting for In-Home Supportive Services funding since she was elected.

Fernandez said his daughter has special needs and her mother had to give up her career to become a full-time caregiver. “This is personal for us and for many of the incredible individuals standing behind me,” he said.

Graham Knaus, chief executive of the California State Assn. of Counties, told The Times that he appreciated efforts to raise awareness about the burden these changes would place on counties.

“We applaud the Senate and Assembly for recognizing counties’ concerns and rejecting this proposal,” he said. “We ask them to hold the line in final negotiations.”

Elizabette Guecamburu, a bookkeeper who has a rare neuromuscular disorder, spoke at Monday’s rally and implored the governor to remember the teachings of their shared alma mater Santa Clara University, a Jesuit-led private school.

“I want him to remember where he came from,” she said, adding that students were taught to value compassion and community. “Don’t forget your Jesuit roots.”

The low-cost airline is reducing the number of flights at 19 airports across Europe, including in the UK, and passengers have been warned to check their itineraries and alternative routes

Ryanair has slashed flights at 19 airports across Europe, including in the UK, ahead of its summer timetable.

Due to the changes, passengers have been urged to verify their itineraries and explore alternative routes.

Destinations affected by the reductions include Berlin, Manchester, Krakow and Malaga.

The decision comes as the budget carrier attempts to streamline its operations and tackle seasonal overcapacity, according to Travel and Tour World.

Travellers departing from or arriving at the airports facing reductions must verify their schedules to confirm their booking remains valid.

Full list of airports facing cuts:

United Kingdom

• London Stansted
• Manchester

Ireland

Germany

• Berlin Brandenburg
• Cologne Bonn
• Hamburg

Italy

Portugal

Belgium

France

Poland

Hungary

Romania

Bulgaria

Spain

The budget carrier has implemented the reductions to optimise its strategic network, ease economic pressures and manage rising costs.

The widespread cancellations form part of the airline’s efforts to safeguard profitability as the fuel crisis continues to fuel inflation worries.

The cuts come after Brits heading to Europe were caught in hours-long airport queues, with some passengers reportedly missing flights as new border checks continue to cause disruption across the EU.

The delays come following the rollout of the EU’s Entry/Exit System (EES), which officially launched on October 12, 2025. Under the new system, non-EU travellers including Brits are required to register fingerprints and have their photograph taken when entering or leaving the Schengen area.

Harare, Zimbabwe – Precious Mvundura woke up with joint pain, a high fever and a pounding headache on a chilly autumn morning in eastern Zimbabwe.

The 37-year-old initially thought it was just the flu. But when the headache persisted for three days, she became worried.

Her five-year-old son had also fallen ill and was sweating heavily.

In early May, the pair sought help from a village health worker in Chishakwe, a rural farming community outside Zimbabwe’s third-largest city, Mutare. Both tested positive for malaria.

“I felt relieved,” Mvundura told Al Jazeera.

“From the moment I took that medication, I started getting better.”

Her son has also recovered and is back in school.

Their ordeal comes as malaria cases and deaths surge across Zimbabwe after US funding cuts disrupted key malaria control programmes.

Shortly after returning to office for a second term in 2025, US President Donald Trump slashed foreign aid funding, including programmes backed by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). In Zimbabwe, the cuts disrupted tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and malaria research, prevention and treatment programmes.

Among the affected initiatives were the Zimbabwe Entomological Support Programme in Malaria (ZENTO) at Africa University in Mutare, which provided scientific research to support the country’s National Malaria Control Programme, and the Zimbabwe Assistance Programme in Malaria II (ZAPIM II), which helped strengthen malaria diagnosis, treatment and prevention in high-burden districts.

USAID had disbursed $270m for health and agriculture programmes in Zimbabwe in 2024.

Malaria cases jumped to 65,399 between January and April 2026, up from 36,000 recorded during the same period in 2025 and 17,000 in 2024, according to Zimbabwe’s Ministry of Health National Malaria Control Programme weekly surveillance report.

Deaths have also risen sharply, reaching 174 between January and April 2026, compared with 85 during the same period last year and 34 in 2024.

Mvundura and her son survived because they sought treatment early. In many other cases, the disease has been fatal.

Shortages of mosquito nets, test kits

Thomas Chuchu, the health programme lead at Save the Children Zimbabwe, said several malaria elimination activities previously supported by ZAPIM II had been disrupted.

“In practice, elimination has continued through government and other partners, but with weaker operational capacity and slower implementation,” Chuchu told Al Jazeera.

The ZAPIM II programme ran through Zimbabwe’s Ministry of Health system in 11 districts across the provinces of Central and East Mashonaland and the province of Matabeleland North.

Before falling ill, Mvundura said she had not been using mosquito nets or repellents.

“I only started using a mosquito net a friend shared when I fell sick,” she said.

In December 2025, Caroline Mawombedzi was diagnosed with malaria while living in Burma Valley, a farming community about an hour’s drive from Mutare.

She had last contracted the disease in the late 2000s while still a child.

In mid-May, her five-year-old daughter was also diagnosed with malaria by a village health worker in Chishakwe after suffering severe headaches and stomach problems.

Although her daughter received treatment, Mawombedzi said she could not afford preventive measures such as mosquito nets.

“I am unemployed. I cannot afford to buy a mosquito net. We have not been sleeping under a mosquito net for years,” she said.

Virginia Chakandinakira, a village health worker serving Chishakwe, said malaria diagnostic kits and drugs are now in short supply.

“I used to get plenty of malaria test kits and drugs. But in 2025, they did not give me. I referred everyone showing malaria to a nearby Chitakatira clinic,” she said. Chitakatira is a rural settlement about an hour’s drive from Chishakwe.

“I only received test kits and drugs in February. However, the supplies are limited. The authorities told us they were only distributing them to hotspot communities.”

Research programmes crippled

Professor Sungano Mharakurwa, the director of Africa University’s Malaria Institute, said the abrupt withdrawal of US support had worsened the malaria outbreak by affecting the programme.

ZENTO was contributing data from the surveillance of malaria-carrying mosquitoes, which guided strategies employed by the National Malaria Control Programme to control malaria transmission, he said.

The Trump administration’s funding cuts have also effectively put a stop to the US President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI), launched in 2005 by former President George W Bush to control and eliminate malaria worldwide. Mharakurwa said the PMI had played a major role in funding malaria medications, and communities had been left exposed without it.

He said the Malaria Institute later secured funding from the United Methodist Church General Board of Global Ministry, but it fell far short of previous US assistance.

Zimbabwe’s dependence on donor funding for essential medicines, diagnostic kits and mosquito-control supplies has left the country vulnerable.

Itai Rusike, the director of Zimbabwe’s Community Working Group on Health, said the government needed to strengthen domestic health financing to reduce dependence on foreign donors.

“It is risky for a country to depend substantially on external partners, as donors can withdraw financial support anytime should their interests shift,” he said.

Climate change fuels spread

Experts say climate change is also driving the spread of malaria and other vector-borne diseases across Africa.

Rising temperatures are allowing malaria to spread into higher-altitude areas, which were once less vulnerable to outbreaks.

Zimbabwe experienced El Niño between 2023 and 2024, a climate phenomenon marked by unusually warm temperatures in the Pacific Ocean, which typically disrupts rainfall patterns across Southern Africa.

Heavy rainfall followed in 2025 and 2026, creating ideal breeding conditions for mosquitoes.

Chuchu, from Save the Children Zimbabwe, said that the current spike in malaria cases was closely linked to the heavy rains during the 2025–2026 season.

“The rains created favourable breeding conditions for mosquitoes, particularly in already endemic provinces such as Mashonaland Central, Manicaland, Mashonaland East and Mashonaland West,” he said.

“The effect of heavy rains is likely being amplified by weakened prevention systems, including reduced mosquito-net coverage, delayed vector-control activities, reduced community surveillance, and challenges with timely testing and treatment following the discontinuation of ZAPIM,” he added.

Professor Mharakurwa, meanwhile, said that above-normal rainfall required equally strong preparation and resources to contain malaria transmission.

Government efforts

Zimbabwe aims to eliminate malaria by 2030, in line with the target set by the African Union.

Over the years, the government, working with international donors and aid organisations, has relied on indoor residual spraying, mosquito-net distribution, mass testing and public awareness campaigns to contain outbreaks, particularly in rural communities.

Health workers continue to carry out indoor spraying campaigns in malaria-prone areas, while village health educators use community meetings and radio programmes to encourage early testing and treatment. Authorities have also expanded surveillance and rapid-response systems in high-risk districts.

But some of these efforts have weakened following the disruption of donor-funded programmes. Key malaria elimination activities previously supported by ZAPIM II included active case tracking, targeted distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets and district rapid-response systems.

For years, the government and aid organisations distributed mosquito nets annually to vulnerable communities, such as Chishakwe. But since the US funding cuts, shortages have become increasingly common.

Village health workers say malaria diagnostic kits and treatment drugs are also running low in some rural areas, forcing suspected malaria patients to travel long distances to clinics for testing and treatment.

Health experts warn that unless funding gaps are urgently addressed, Zimbabwe risks losing years of progress made in reducing malaria infections and deaths.

For Mvundura and her son, surviving malaria still feels like escaping death.

“We cheated death,” she said. “It was so bad.”

Pricing for 2026 World Cup has been under heavy scrutiny, including in New York where city mayor cuts limited tickets.

Some lucky New York City residents will soon get a chance to snag cheap seats to this summer’s high-priced World Cup.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced on Thursday that 1,000 tickets costing $50 will be made available to city residents of the city of more than 8 million for the world’s most watched sporting event.

“To put that into perspective, that is five lattes in New York City,” Mamdani quipped from a bar in Harlem’s Little Senegal neighbourhood, alongside US men’s national team star Timothy Weah.

The tickets will be available for seven of the eight games played at the 82,000-seat MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, across the river from Manhattan. The lone exception is the high demand July 19 final, where some seats are costing nearly $33,000.

The tickets will also include free round-trip bus transportation to the stadium and will be distributed via a lottery starting May 25.

With persistent concerns about the sky-high costs for tickets to the games, Mamdani said the city ensure the ones they distribute go to New York City residents and are not resold on the secondary market.

He said the tickets will be non-transferable, with a “variety of ways” used by city officials to verify residency. They will only be handed out directly to fans as they board buses on game day.

“We are making sure that working people will not be priced out of the game that they helped to create,” Mamdani said.

The Democrat, who took office in January, said the effort underscores how his administration is not simply focused on making everyday things like housing and groceries more affordable.

“It extends to making it possible for every New Yorker to take part in the things that make us human,” he said.

During his campaign, Mamdani called on FIFA, football’s global governing body, to make it cheaper for New Yorkers to go to games by setting aside 15% of tickets at discounted prices. He had launched a petition calling on FIFA to reverse its plan to set ticket prices based on demand.

The $50 tickets don’t come directly from FIFA, but from those allotted to New York and New Jersey’s joint host committee for the games, according to the mayor’s office.

Previously, FIFA had made some $60 tickets available for every game at the tournament in North America following backlash over exorbitant prices.

Those reduced price tickets, though, went to the national federations of the teams playing, with the federations deciding how to distribute them to loyal fans who have attended previous games at home and away.

Besides the final, the home stadium for both the NFL’s New York Giants and New York Jets is set to host five group World Cup matches and two knockout stage games. Group stage matches for former winners Brazil, France, Germany and England, along with other nations, begin on June 13.

The European Commission on Thursday cut its 2026 growth forecast for the European economy, as the ongoing conflict in the Middle East drives energy prices sharply higher.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The EU economy is now expected to grow by just 1.1% in 2026, down from the 1.4% projected in the Commission’s autumn forecast. The eurozone outlook was revised down further to 0.9%.

In its report, the Commission warned that disruption to global energy markets — caused by escalating tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s key oil and gas shipping routes — has significantly worsened Europe’s economic outlook.

“Before the end of February 2026, the EU economy was expected to continue expanding at a moderate pace, alongside a further decline in inflation,” the report said. “However, the outlook has changed substantially since the outbreak of the conflict.”

Inflation is also expected to rise sharply due to the disruption around Hormuz.

EU inflation is forecast to reach 3.1% this year — a full percentage point higher than previously expected — driven mainly by soaring energy costs after oil and gas prices surged amid fears of supply disruptions in the Gulf.

For EU officials, the shock recalls 2022, when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered Europe’s worst energy crisis in decades.

The Commission described the latest turmoil as “the second such shock in less than five years”, warning that Europe’s dependence on imported fossil fuels leaves it highly vulnerable whenever geopolitical tensions threaten global energy supplies.

Consumer confidence has already fallen to a 40-month low, according to the forecast, as households prepare for higher heating and fuel bills while businesses face rising operating costs and weaker demand.

Investment is also expected to slow as companies confront tighter financing conditions and growing uncertainty. Export growth is weakening as global demand softens.

Despite the deteriorating outlook, Brussels said the bloc is better prepared than during the Ukraine-related energy crisis, thanks to years of investment in renewable energy, lower gas consumption and efforts to diversify away from Russian supplies.

“The push towards supply diversification, decarbonisation and lower energy consumption has left the EU economy better placed to absorb today’s shock,” the Commission said.

However, EU officials acknowledged that risks remain heavily skewed to the downside.

The report warned that prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz or across wider Middle Eastern supply chains could drive energy prices even higher, derail the expected easing of inflation in 2027 and potentially stall Europe’s recovery altogether.

The Commission also cautioned that shortages of refined oil products, fertilisers and other industrial inputs could spread through global supply chains, increasing food and manufacturing costs across Europe.

Meanwhile, European governments are preparing for growing fiscal pressure. Public deficits across the EU are expected to widen as governments increase spending to protect households from rising energy bills while also boosting defence expenditure amid mounting geopolitical instability.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has recently urged the European Commission to relax fiscal rules for households and industries struggling with soaring energy costs, arguing that energy security should be treated with the same urgency as defence spending.

At the centre of Rome’s request is the EU’s national escape clause, adopted on 8 July, which allows member states temporary fiscal flexibility to increase defence spending under exceptional circumstances.

Meloni said Brussels had already shown a willingness to loosen budget rules in response to Russia’s war in Ukraine and growing concerns about Europe’s military preparedness. Italy is now seeking similar flexibility for emergency energy measures.

Hundreds marched in Buenos Aires against President Javier Milei’s austerity policies and cuts to Argentina’s healthcare system. Protesters said funding cuts and rising costs are worsening access to healthcare and medicines and pushing the public health system into crisis.

British Airways has said it will cut flights to six destinations and permanently end its route to a seventh, citing the war in the Middle East

British Airways is cutting flights to seven major international airports in response to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

The airline said it has updated its schedule of flights for the Summer 2026 season, which ends on October 24. Customers have been told the changes were made to destinations in the Middle East due to the ongoing conflict between Iran and US-Israeli forces in the region.

As a part of the new schedule, British Airways has reduced the number of flights to seven cities in the Middle East. Services to Dubai are being reduced from three flights a day to one, with the daily service due to return on August 1 (meanwhile, a second daily flight is planned to start on October 16).

Flights to Doha in Qatar, Riyadh in Saudi Arabia and Tel Aviv in Israel are also being cut from twice‑daily to once‑daily. All three routes are expected to resume normal frequency on August 1.

READ MORE: Holiday hell as luggage piled at Heathrow and BA warns of ‘ongoing impact’READ MORE: British Airways cancels flights from Heathrow and Gatwick as hundreds stranded at airport

Following a wider review of the programme, the airline has also made the decision to permanently end its route to Jeddah in Saudi Arabia from April 24, The Express reports.

The airlines said in a statement: “Due to the ongoing situation in the Middle East, we have made further changes to our flying schedule to provide greater clarity for our customers.

“We are keeping the situation under constant review and are directly in touch with affected customers to offer them a range of options.

“Since the disruption began, we have helped thousands of customers return home, operated relief flights, and added additional capacity on key long‑haul routes. We will continue to assess and introduce further flying where possible.”

Destinations impacted by reduced British Airways flights

• Tel Aviv
• Dubai
• Doha
• Riyadh
• Bahrain
• Amman
• Jeddah

San Francisco, United States – Greer Dove’s days are packed with studying business and finance, as well as doing administrative work at college, along with caring for her eight-year-old daughter with special needs. But once a week, Dove, a single mother, makes sure to drop in at the food bank in California’s Marin County to pick up vegetables, fruit and other food. Along with the federal government’s food benefits, they keep her housing running.

“We need this so we can keep functioning at a high level,” she says. “She loves fruit, so I make sure to get it,” she says of her daughter.

Dove, who is also looking for a full-time job, has worked in restaurants, event management, retail, television shows, office administration and payroll over the years. But she has been on the federal government’s Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) for six years, and with the food bank, for more than three years. Before she got food benefits, Dove fed her daughter all she had and skipped meals or looked around for snacks in the offices she worked at to get her through the day.

United States President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), passed in June, cut SNAP benefits by more than $186bn over the next 10 years to make up for extending cuts to income tax. This could lead to more than 3 million people nationwide, and 665,000 recipients in California, losing such food benefits, according to estimates.

“This will bring a series of cuts that collectively present an existential threat to food benefits,” says Andrew Cheyne, managing director of government relations and public affairs at the County Welfare Directors Association of California.

California’s proposed billionaire tax, which seeks to impose a one-time 5 percent tax on the assets of the state’s more than 200 billionaires to make up for the funding gap created by the OBBBA, got more than 1.5 million signatures in April. It is likely to be on the ballot for the November midterm election.

While most of the nearly $100bn expected to be raised through the tax will go towards filling the gap in health insurance created by the OBBBA, 10 percent will be used to make up for the retrenchment in food benefits.

In California, where more than 5.3 million people, more than any other state, receive food benefits, the impacts of the cuts began to be felt in April when 72,000 immigrants started losing benefits. June onwards, nearly 600,000 recipients will be screened for work eligibility. Recipients, including those who are homeless, seniors, foster youth and veterans, will have to work, study or volunteer to receive food benefits. Failing the screening to meet work requirements for three months will lead to their food benefits being cut.

Brian Galle, professor of law at the University of California at Berkeley and one of the tax measure’s authors, says that in California, the state that introduced gig work, “jobs are increasingly precarious. You may find enough work or not. You may get tips or not. But nutrition needs are steady.”

Making impossible choices

On a recent Friday morning, new members lined up to enrol at a whitewashed, bunting-festooned La Ofrenda food bank in San Francisco’s Mission district. The food bank doles out fresh vegetables, fruit and bread that have been donated by large grocery stores once those products neared expiration date.

Gladys Lee had taken a 45-minute train ride after a friend told her about it. Lee worked at downtown San Francisco’s Hyatt hotel as a room cleaner for three decades until a back injury meant she could not push the heavy cleaning carts any more and had to leave. After seven years of struggling to find work, food was getting scarce, and Lee found her way to La Ofrenda. She packed what she could into a carton and held it in her arms for the train ride back.

Food benefit rolls have shrunk by more than 3.3 million nationally in the six months from July 2025, when the OBBBA was enacted, to January 2026.

In California, the rolls of Calfresh, as food benefits are known in the state, shrank by 288,000 or 6 percent from July 2025 to February 2026, according to analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington, DC-based think tank. This reduction in rolls happened even before the OBBBA cuts began.

Brooke Rollins, the agriculture secretary, wrote in a recent essay that the shrinking of SNAP rolls reflected an ebullient economy and buoyant job growth.

“The drop in SNAP recipients affirms that many Americans are moving from welfare to work,” she wrote. “It is no secret that Trump’s massive tax cuts and deregulation efforts are unleashing robust, private sector-led economic growth, which are fueling trillions in investments, booming wage growth”.

But unemployment remained stable at about 4.4 percent since July 2025, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics data, while SNAP rolls shrank.

“This last time we saw such a steep, quick decline, other than during natural disasters, is three decades ago when welfare reform was enacted,” says Dottie Rosenbaum, senior fellow and director of  Federal SNAP Policy at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Nationally, SNAP rolls shrank by 8 percent, while in California, they shrank by 5.5 percent, in part because the work eligibility requirements were delayed until June, while some other states have already implemented them.

At La Ofrenda, Roberto Alfaro, executive director of the nonprofit Homey, says he started the food bank when food costs went up during the pandemic. They have stayed high, he says. Now he sees people doing day jobs and night jobs and coming for food when they have paid rent.

“People are making impossible choices,” says Keely O’Brien, a policy advocate at the Western Center for Law and Poverty.

While California is the world’s fourth-largest economy, growth has come with a soaring cost-of-living crisis.

“With rising housing and utility costs, few households can dedicate that much of their income towards food,” O’Brien says.

The OBBA has also shifted the administrative cost of meeting work eligibility requirements to states, and beginning next year, part of the cost of SNAP will also fall on states.

“To make requirements more stringent, you are creating more government, more bureaucratic logjam,” says Jaren Sorkow, state director for the Children’s Defence Fund.

This has already led to a 51 percent drop in SNAP rolls in Arizona, which has begun implementing the OBBBA cuts, according to data by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Making something from nothing

Several measures to counter the $100bn gap in funding for health insurance and food benefits created by the OBBBA have been floated in California. The biggest of these is the one-time 5 percent tax on those with assets of more than a billion dollars. The tax will raise $100bn, its authors estimate.

As it seems set to be voted on in the November election, it faces mounting opposition from the state’s tech entrepreneurs who have funded measures to undercut the tax.

Tech entrepreneurs have called it an economic 9/11, saying taxing their assets, including shareholding in startups, will lead to a flight of capital and innovation from the state. Sergey Brin, a cofounder of Google Inc, now spends a week in Nevada and a week in his Bay Area offices and has spent more than $57m on opposing the billionaire tax. He has backed two measures that undercut the billion tax, which have also received 1.4 million and 1.5 million signatures and are also set to be on the ballot for the November election.

One of these measures prohibits future taxes on personal property, including financial assets, savings and retirement accounts, as well as intellectual property. The other would increase audits of taxpayer-funded programmes, and includes language that would essentially invalidate the billionaire tax.

In a recent statement to The New York Times, Brin said, “I fled socialism with my family in 1979 and know the devastating, oppressive society it created in the Soviet Union. I don’t want California to end up in the same place.”

The coalition of unions backing the billionaire tax is bracing for the fight ahead. “We expect to be outspent,” says Kris Cuaresma-Primm, director of partnerships for the coalition that is backing the billionaire tax. “We will keep communicating to people that there is a tidal wave of pain coming from the cuts, and we want to reclaim the losses from the OBBBA.”

Giulia Varaschin, senior tax policy adviser at the International Tax Observatory, who recently coauthored a study on wealth taxes, says there is little academic evidence that such taxes cause the wealthy to leave at a notable scale. “There is only a marginal flight with very little, if any, economic impact,” she says.

The study, coauthored with the economist Gabriel Zucman, who supports the California billionaire tax, did find that wealth taxes had not raised as much revenue as estimated in several European countries and became less popular as a result.

Varaschin says this was because these taxes were levied on a larger set of the wealthy, which included homeowners or small businesses, rather than the ultra-rich or billionaires. The taxpayers could hardly afford to pay it, and the government made exemptions instead. These taxes also did not touch assets, where much of the wealth of the ultra-rich lies, Varaschin says.

The California tax remedies this by taxing only billionaires and taxing assets, including shares in companies.

Daniel Shaviro, Wayne Perry professor of taxation at New York University, says, “Traditionally, these taxes can be hard to enforce because tax administration don’t want to go after these people.”

Even if it passes, “The governor could just say this is not a high priority for him and not enforce it,” Shaviro says, referring to Governor Gavin Newsom, who has opposed the tax.

But Primm says, “The governor is out of touch with Californians on this”.

Newsom is in the last year of his last term as governor. However, nearly all the candidates running for the June 2 primary for governor, except billionaire Tom Steyer, who is running as a progressive Democrat, also oppose this measure. While some have said this will lead to a flight of capital, others say the spending plan does not include expenses for education, which was not cut in the OBBBA.

Greer Dove, who gets food through Calfresh and the San Francisco Marin Food Bank for herself and her daughter, says the looming food benefit cuts are worrying. “The anxiety of it all is adding up. I could be next.”