Melinda French Gates donates $215M, funding $600M for women’s health

June 4 (UPI) — Melinda French Gates has added another $215 million to her organization Pivotal, which funds social initiatives for women and families around the world.
The latest boost in funding is specifically to address problems with women’s reproductive and menopause health, she said. French Gates has contributed $600 million to women’s health over the past two years.
As part of this round, she is donating $10 million to The Menopause Society for the education of healthcare professionals and to expand outreach in areas where access to menopause care is limited.
“For too long, perimenopause and menopause have been treated as invisible — something women are expected to manage quietly, without clear answers or support. That must change. By getting healthcare practitioners better training and investing in research, we can help ensure women have the care they need to live full and healthy lives,” French Gates said in a statement.
While midlife issues have seen more attention, thanks to social media, that attention doesn’t always translate to correct information from practitioners.
“The piece that I’m focused on with Pivotal is: How do we make sure that women get accurate information about what we do know about this phase of life? And how do we make sure that all providers are trained?” she told Time in an interview.
“In midlife, I would say we both don’t have enough knowledge or tools,” she said. “The research should have been started more than 50 years ago. We should have had many, many, many studies about this period of life, so that we have different tools, not just hormone replacement therapy. Then, we have a lack of provider training, which is the piece I’m going to work on with this particular amount of funding.”
The Menopause Society said the funding will help reach women who need the care.
“Menopause is a universal life stage, but quality care is not universally available,” said Dr. Stephanie Faubion, medical director of The Menopause Society, in a statement. “With this funding, we can scale evidence-based training for front line clinicians and extend our reach to areas where menopause care has long been overlooked. This is a meaningful step toward ensuring that women receive the informed, compassionate care they need and deserve so they can make smarter healthcare decisions. It also allows for exploration and a better understanding of the need for system changes.”
While the donation is critical, Faubion said the attention generated by French Gates is even more important.
“It shows that somebody like Melinda Gates and Pivotal feel that this is an important issue,” Faubion told the Independent. “It will illuminate the gaps that are still there … and it makes people not only aware, but maybe motivated to take some action.”
Though women make up half the population, health issues that affect them get only 2% of private healthcare funding, according to the World Economic Forum.
“The role of philanthropy, in my opinion, is to look at some of these societal problems that have been left behind, and shine light on them, show ways of making progress so you can then crowd in other donors and ultimately crowd in government funding,” French Gates told The Independent. “Part of what I’m doing here, I hope, is sending a signal to say, ‘This is really important. Let’s do something about it.’ And my hope is that I’ll be able to get others who will join me.”
California’s wildfire prevention funding at risk of drying up
With California facing increasingly destructive wildfires, experts and officials have long urged the strategic removal of dense, flammable vegetation that can erupt into particularly destructive flames from a lightning bolt or the spark of a power line.
But after years of record investment by the state in such wildfire risk mitigation, two key money sources are drying up, potentially reducing the state’s annual budget for vegetation removal by hundreds of millions of dollars.
Wildfire resiliency advocates are warning that the loss of these funds will leave the state vulnerable to devastation, and are calling on California’s next governor to take that threat seriously.
Currently, California relies heavily on two funding sources for wildfire mitigation work: A state program that charges polluters for their emissions and a climate bond approved by voters in 2024.
Late Friday, however, state officials adopted a new structure for the emissions program, called cap-and-invest, that analysts say will likely reduce wildfire mitigation funding by $200 million per year. At the same time, the governor’s latest budget proposal puts the state on track to allocate the majority of the climate bond’s $1.5 billion in wildfire prevention money within just three years.
As a result, California could go from routinely pulling more than $600 million a year from these sources, to just $150 million, according to an estimate from the Wildfire Solutions Coalition — a group of more than 80 organizations representing conservationists, business owners, fire officials and tribal leaders.
The coalition is urging the state to find new sources of funding for the work.
“We have the scientists, we have the technicians, we have the advocates,” said Michelle Decker, who is on the coalition’s executive committee and serves as president and CEO of the Inland Empire Community Foundation. “We see this problem. We can get ahead of this problem. It is a revenue issue.”
California wildfires have become increasingly costly. The 2025 L.A. fires alone caused an estimated $250 billion in damage and economic loss. Insurance companies have already paid out $22.4 billion.
In attempt to reduce the risk of damage to communities and ecosystems, the state has employed a wide range of tactics. These includes fortifying homes against wildfires, replanting fire-ravaged forests and thinning out vegetation with prescribed burns, goat grazing and manual thinning with heavy machinery to reduce the intensity of potential fires.
Research suggests wildfire mitigation work pays off. A recent analysis of 285 fires in the western U.S. found that every dollar spent on landscape projects saved about $3.75 in wildfire damage.
But as funding from cap-and-invest and the climate bond dwindle, the state must increasingly turn to Cal Fire, which devotes only a small portion of its budget to mitigation work.
“This is not an issue that can be pushed off to a timeline based solely on politics,” said Steve Frisch, a founding member of the coalition and president of the Sierra Business Council. “Fire happens whether we want it to or not.”
After a series of destructive wildfires in Northern California and the 2017 Thomas fire in Southern California, the state legislature began to explicitly focus on funding wildfire mitigation.
In 2018, lawmakers directed $200 million per year of cap-and-invest funds to wildfire mitigation projects.
As the Woolsey fire in Southern California and the Camp fire in Paradise raged later that fall, Trump accused the state of “gross mismanagement” of forest lands and threatened to cut off federal funds unless it was corrected.
Gov. Gavin Newsom and the legislature, with a significant budget surplus, began earmarking even more funds, leading to a peak of $1.1 billion in wildfire mitigation investments during the 2021-2022 fiscal year.
After the surplus dwindled, the legislature opted in 2024 to put a $10-billion climate bond in front of voters — $1.5 billion of which was dedicated specifically for wildfire mitigation work.
Newsom has since pointed to this high state funding to call on the federal government to step up its own investments into forest management work.
The federal government manages 57% of all forests in the state. While the U.S. Forest Service spent $3.1 billion mitigating wildfire conditions in the state over the last few years, California spent $4.3 billion, according to the California Forest Resilience and Wildfire Task Force.
However, the state has already allocated about $600 million of the climate bond’s wildfire mitigation pot for the 2024-2025 and current fiscal years. The latest budget proposal would allocate more than $300 million for this upcoming fiscal year. While many advocates support allocating the money quickly, it leaves little for future years.
Once that money is spent, California has to pay off the $10 billion bond with interest. The result is an estimated price tag of $16 billion, paid in roughly $400 million increments every year, for 40 years, according to the state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office.
As for the cap-and-invest funds, a fraught months-long debate at the California Air Resources Board on how to extend the program beyond 2030 resulted in a compromise that will cut the revenue it generates in half, the Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates.
Since other projects get priority — including $1 billion every year for California’s high-speed rail project — the new proposal would “likely leave no funding” for the wildfire and forest resilience line item, the Legislative Analyst’s Office found.
Cal Fire still holds a modest annual budget for wildfire mitigation work. In the 2024-2025 fiscal year, the agency had $500 million for forest management and fire prevention that was not directly tied to cap-and-invest or the bond — up from about $65 million two decades prior.
As for the federal government, independent analyses by Grassroots Wildland Firefighters and NPR found that Forest Service wildfire mitigation work is on the decline amid federal staffing cuts. The Forest Service claims the decrease in work was primarily due to poor weather conditions for activities like prescribed burns and staff being occupied with firefighting.
Both the state and federal government’s investments pale in comparison to the spending of California’s investor-owned utilities. In 2025 alone, the utilities planned to spend more than $9.2 billion on preventing their equipment from sparking the next devastating wildfire, primarily funded by Californians’ electricity bills.
Times staff writer Hayley Smith contributed to this report.
Hungary Nears EU Funding Deal as Peter Magyar Holds High Stakes Brussels Talks
Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar said he expects to finalize a political agreement with Ursula von der Leyen over the release of billions of euros in frozen European Union funds during talks in Brussels.
The negotiations focus on unlocking financial support that had been suspended under the previous government led by former Prime Minister Viktor Orban due to long standing EU concerns regarding corruption, rule of law standards, and judicial independence.
Hungary is seeking access to approximately 6.5 billion euros in EU recovery grants and 3.9 billion euros in low interest loans before a critical August deadline. Additional structural funds worth around 7 billion euros also remain frozen.
The talks come at a crucial moment for Hungary’s economy, which has struggled with weak growth, fiscal pressure, and budgetary strain over the past three years.
Why It Matters
The potential agreement carries major economic and political significance for both Hungary and the European Union.
For Hungary, securing the release of EU funds is essential to stabilizing public finances, supporting economic growth, and restoring investor confidence. The country’s economy has experienced prolonged stagnation, while high spending pressures and limited fiscal flexibility have increased urgency around external financing.
For the European Union, the negotiations represent an important test of how Brussels balances financial support with enforcement of democratic and governance standards among member states.
The dispute over frozen funds has become one of the most prominent examples of tensions between the EU and governments accused of weakening judicial independence or failing to address corruption concerns.
A successful agreement could signal improving relations between Brussels and Hungary after years of political friction under Orban’s leadership.
Key Stakeholders
Hungary’s Government
Prime Minister Peter Magyar is under pressure to secure financial relief while also demonstrating willingness to meet EU governance expectations.
European Commission
The European Commission must balance political compromise with maintaining credibility on rule of law enforcement and anti corruption standards across the bloc.
Hungarian Economy
Businesses, investors, and public institutions in Hungary are closely watching the outcome because EU funding plays a major role in infrastructure, development, and economic stability.
European Union Member States
Other EU governments are monitoring the negotiations as they could shape future disputes involving rule of law conditions and access to EU financial support.
Analysis
The negotiations reflect a broader shift in Hungary’s relationship with the European Union following the political transition away from Viktor Orban’s administration.
Under Orban, disputes with Brussels became increasingly confrontational, particularly over democratic governance, judicial reforms, media freedoms, and corruption allegations. Peter Magyar appears to be pursuing a more pragmatic approach focused on rebuilding trust with EU institutions while securing urgently needed economic support.
However, the remaining disagreements over anti corruption measures suggest Brussels still wants stronger guarantees before fully releasing funds. This highlights the EU’s growing willingness to use financial leverage as a tool for enforcing governance standards within member states.
For Hungary, the pressure is primarily economic. Frozen EU funds have limited the government’s financial flexibility at a time when growth remains weak and fiscal conditions are strained. Unlocking the money would provide both immediate economic relief and an important political victory for Magyar’s government.
At the same time, the negotiations also carry symbolic importance for the EU itself. Brussels will want to demonstrate that compromise does not come at the expense of accountability, especially after years of criticism over democratic backsliding within the bloc.
Future Outlook
If a political agreement is finalized, Hungary could begin unlocking critical EU funding in the coming months, easing fiscal pressure and improving economic confidence.
However, implementation will remain important. Brussels is likely to continue closely monitoring Hungary’s anti corruption reforms and governance commitments before fully releasing all frozen funds.
A successful deal may also help normalize Hungary’s relationship with the European Union after years of tension, potentially opening the door for broader cooperation on economic and political issues.
At the same time, the outcome could influence future EU disputes involving rule of law conditions and financial oversight, particularly as Brussels increasingly links access to funding with governance standards.
For Hungary, the immediate priority remains economic stabilization. But politically, the negotiations may also determine whether Peter Magyar can establish a more cooperative and sustainable relationship with Europe while distancing his administration from the confrontational legacy of the Orban era.
With information from Reuters.
Travel industry worries after Trump administration reiterates threat to ‘sanctuary city’ airports
The travel industry is on edge after Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin reiterated his threat to withdraw U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers from airports in so-called sanctuary cities in a move that could jeopardize international flights.
The U.S. Travel Assn. said that Mullin confirmed he is considering withdrawing the officers in a meeting where the trade group was pressing its concerns about other proposals the Trump administration is considering that could hamper travel. The travel association and major airlines quickly condemned the idea, and even Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said it doesn’t make sense to him.
“U.S. Travel believes such a move would have devastating consequences for the travel industry and communities that depend on international visitation,” the industry group said Friday in a statement.
Details of the meeting were first reported by the Atlantic.
Duffy said at a congressional hearing this week that he wasn’t familiar with Mullin’s remarks, and he’d like to learn more about the context and maybe ask Mullin a question about what he meant. But Duffy said it would be a bad idea to start restricting travel based on political views. After all, he acknowledged, at some point Democrats will be in charge and “you will all switch spots at one point — hopefully not too soon, Mr. Chairman.”
“We have people from around the world and around the country that need to be able to fly into all different kinds of places. We shouldn’t shut down air travel in a state that doesn’t agree with our politics,” Duffy said.
So it’s not clear how much support this idea has within the administration, though President Trump has previously threatened to withhold funding from sanctuary cities.
There is no strict definition for sanctuary policies or sanctuary cities, but the terms generally refer to jurisdictions that limit cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. And courts have rejected the idea of pulling funding from them in the past.
In Trump’s first term in office, in 2017, courts struck down his effort to cut funding to the cities.
It’s not clear exactly which cities and airports Mullin might target, but the Justice Department last year published a list of three dozen states, cities and counties that it considers to be sanctuary jurisdictions. They include California, Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego County.
The Airlines for America trade group was quick to say the idea would hurt the economy and disrupt travel.
“Reducing CBP staffing at major airports would have a devastating effect on the airline and tourism industries, causing a significant operational disruption to carriers, travelers and the flow of international cargo.”
Funk and Yamat write for the Associated Press.
Argentina protesters condemn Milei healthcare funding cuts | Newsfeed
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.
Published On 21 May 2026
Immigrant rights advocates rally for more state healthcare funding, criticize Newsom
SACRAMENTO — Human rights advocates on Tuesday rallied outside the state Capitol to push back on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed budget plan to reduce state-sponsored healthcare coverage for undocumented immigrants.
“We are here to demand a budget that protects California’s values,” said Kiran Savage-Sangwan, executive director of California Pan-Ethnic Health Network. “We are fighting for a budget that rejects Medi-Cal cuts, seeks new revenues and strengthens our safety net reserve to keep families whole.”
Newsom last week unveiled his revised budget proposal, which would further move away from his previous policy to provide free healthcare coverage to all low-income undocumented immigrants.
His proposal would require monthly premiums for undocumented immigrants receiving coverage from Medi-Cal, the state’s version of the federal Medicaid program. It would also continue to block new adult applications, a cutback imposed last year.
The governor has explained that his original policy was more costly than expected and that difficult decisions must be made as the state could soon face an economic downturn.
Speakers at Tuesday’s rally argued this was unacceptable.
The cuts would force many immigrants to choose between putting food on the table or visiting a doctor, said Savage-Sangwan. She said certain groups, including refugees, older adults and those with disabilities, would be left especially vulnerable.
“These are the kinds of actions we would expect from a federal government that scapegoats immigrants and sends violent ICE forces to terrorize our community,” she said. “Instead, these proposals were made by our own governor in a state that claims to value immigrant communities. We know California is better than this.”
The governor’s office did not respond to a request for comment about the rally.
The event drew about 100 attendees, including Anahi Araiza, a policy researcher with Imperial Valley Equity and Justice. She told The Times that many immigrants in their community struggle to afford medical care and subsequently put off doctor visits.
“They wait until it’s an absolute emergency,” she said. “We’ve heard stories where people delay care and then get diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer.”
The event was supported by several organizations, including California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, Survivors of Torture International, Communities Organized for Relational Power in Action, Health4All Coalition, and Organizing Rooted in Abolition, Liberation and Empowerment.
One man carried a large sign with an image of the Virgin Mary that read “Safety Net For All.” Other marchers donned flowing monarch butterfly wings. The orange-and-black insect became a symbol for the pro-migrant movement years ago because it travels long distances between Mexico and the United States.
Meanwhile, another group gathered outside the Capitol for a news conference to raise awareness about the instability caused by federal healthcare cuts.
Assemblymembers Patrick Ahrens (D-Sunnyvale), Robert Garcia (D-Rancho Cucamonga) and Tina S. McKinnor (D-Hawthorne) joined several doctors and nurses to call for a $500-million state investment into public hospitals.
“Public hospitals are the backbone of our healthcare system,” Ahrens said. “It is estimated that federal cuts will strip over $3 billion a year from the California public hospital system — we cannot balance our budget on the backs of the most vulnerable Californians.”
The Republican-backed “Big Beautiful Bill” signed by President Trump last year shifted federal funding away from safety-net programs and toward tax cuts and immigration enforcement. During a legislative hearing this year, healthcare professionals warned state lawmakers the cuts would harm all patients, including those with private insurance.
Tech leaders funding Matt Mahan’s campaign for California governor say it’s not about tech
San José Mayor Matt Mahan’s run for California governor has been defined from the start by his donor list.
Mahan entered the race late and with little statewide name recognition, but catapulted into contention thanks to massive funding from billionaire tech titans, venture capitalists, cryptocurrency investors and other Silicon Valley elites. In a state with more than 23 million voters and hugely expensive media markets, the money signaled Mahan would be a contender.
It also spurred accusations from his more liberal Democratic competitors and powerful labor leaders that Mahan is beholden to Big Tech, including forces aligned with President Trump.
California Labor Federation President Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher recently described Mahan as “funded by Trump’s big tech billionaires,” while fellow Democratic candidate Tom Steyer — a billionaire running against corporate interests — called him “MAGA Matt Mahan.”
That framing has persisted, despite Mahan being a centrist Democrat who has publicly criticized Trump.
On Thursday, Mahan released a four-page “Plan to Hold Big Tech Accountable and Ensure AI Works for All Californians.” The proposal called for AI and data centers to pay for their power and water needs, fund workforce stability initiatives and ensure human oversight of AI tools in critical sectors such as healthcare. It also called for the state to use AI to become more efficient, to bar cellphones in schools and to require parental consent for kids 15 and under joining social media.
In an interview with The Times, Mahan, 43, said AI is “one of the most significant trends in society” and needs to be addressed.
He also rejected the notion that he would do Big Tech’s bidding, and the idea that his support from tech leaders is entirely or even largely premised on his plans for their industry.
“I’ve spoken very little about tech with any of my donors,” he said.
Mahan said his fundraising has instead been “centered on how we get California on a better path in terms of building housing, improving the quality of our public schools, solving our biggest problems,” which “just resonates with people in the tech industry.”
A ‘digital native’
Mahan, the son of a teacher and a mailman, grew up in the farming community of Watsonville but commuted to San José to attend high school at Bellarmine College Prep on scholarship as a low-income student. He went on to Harvard University, where he was student body president and classmates with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, spent a year in Bolivia building irrigation systems, and then taught for two years in Alum Rock as part of the Teach for America program.
He then joined Causes, an early Facebook application that allowed nonprofits to build grassroots support online, and rose to become chief executive. In 2014, he co-founded Brigade, a nonpartisan platform where voters could advocate for issues, which was acquired in 2019. He won a San José City Council seat in 2020, and was elected mayor in 2022.
An early mayoral profile described Mahan as painting a whiteboard behind his desk to “write on the wall as I did in my tech days.” Another noted he used ChatGPT to write speeches. A third recounted how he’d used AI to make city buses run faster.
Mahan said he learned as a startup leader and a classroom teacher that metrics matter — that “when we take our precious tax dollars and invest them in public services, we should measure our performance.”
He said he has always believed government should take the best tech has to offer while being vigilant about the risks it poses, which maybe comes naturally to him as a millennial who remembers “the world before the internet” but is also something of a “digital native.”
Donors explain
Between Jan. 1 and April 18, Mahan’s campaign raised nearly $13.5 million, according to state campaign finance filings. During the same period, an independent expenditure backing Mahan called Back to Basics raised about $22.7 million, while another launched by the group Deliver for California raised nearly $3.3 million.
The donors are a who’s who of tech leaders, venture capitalists and other leaders in the gig, gaming, digital media and AI defense fields.
Sergey Brin, the co-founder of Google, gave the maximum individual contribution of $39,200 to Mahan directly, and $1 million to the Deliver for California committee. Reed Hastings, the co-founder and chairman of Netflix, gave the maximum contribution to Mahan, plus $1 million to the Back to Basics committee.
Some donors, such as LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, who gave the maximum to Mahan, are well-known supporters of progressive causes. Others, such as Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale and crypto founder David Marcus, who maxed out to Mahan, are also Trump backers.
Brin, a friend of Gov. Gavin Newsom since the Democrat was mayor of San Francisco, has been moving rightward recently. He has donated to the Republican National Committee and in March was appointed to the White House tech advisory council. He’s also a major donor to the nonprofit opposing the ballot measure for a new tax on California billionaires — which Mahan also is against.
Brin, Lonsdale and Marcus did not respond to a request for comment. Hastings and Hoffman declined to comment.
Several other tech donors did speak with The Times — and universally described their support for Mahan as less to do with his tech policies, and more to do with issues important to all Californians.
Jamie Siminoff, who sold his home security startup Ring to Amazon for $1 billion and gave the maximum donation to Mahan, said he thinks L.A., where he lives, is the “greatest city in the world” and California is the “best state in the world.” But he sees Mahan as someone who could make improvements by bringing the state toward the political middle on public safety, housing and homelessness.
“He’s just like a nice, pragmatic, sort of centrist person, from what I can see, [who] wants to make California better, and I’m 100% behind that.”
Siminoff said it doesn’t hurt that Mahan speaks the same language as many tech leaders, who are mostly just “pragmatic inventors and entrepreneurs” who want California’s leader to be “principled in thinking about fixing things.”
Ruchi Sanghvi, the first female engineer at Facebook and a former Dropbox executive who state records show donated $25,000 to Mahan, said she has known Mahan since he was leading Causes but fell out of touch. When he entered the governor’s race, and she “got all these emails from people that I respect” saying they were supporting him, she asked for a meeting.
At that meeting, she said, Mahan “really dug in on some of the core issues that I care about,” including housing, homelessness and education.
The San Francisco resident, political independent and mother of three said the idea that tech leaders are backing Mahan because they believe he will scratch their back in business is wrong. Referring to his tech plan’s restrictions on social media for youth, she said, “I don’t think of that as scratching my back.”
Instead, “what really resonates with me and my peers is that, yes, he is pragmatic,” Sanghvi said. “He cares about measurable outcomes, which I think is very critical.”
Marc Merrill, co-founder, co-chairman and chief product officer of L.A.-based video game developer and e-sports company Riot Games, gave the maximum to Mahan, as did his wife, Ashley, founder of the sleepwear brand Lunya. In a statement to The Times, Merrill said he and his wife are lifelong Californians who love the state and support Mahan because of his record “addressing California’s most pressing challenges with practical, results-oriented solutions” in San José.
Merrill said Mahan brought down violent crime, reduced homelessness with “data-driven programs that address root causes rather than just managing the problem,” and “fostered an environment where businesses are choosing to invest and grow in the city.”
Tech vs. labor?
Gonzalez Fletcher said tech leaders have long “been very clear about their desire to support candidates who won’t regulate AI, to support candidates who will go after organized labor” — and their support for Mahan is no different.
She pointed as an example to a March event attended by Mahan and hosted by one of his most vocal backers: Garry Tan, a venture capitalist and chief executive of Y Combinator, a startup incubator in San Francisco.
At the event — which was part of Tan’s launch of a new statewide group called Garry’s List, which he has described as a “Rotary Club for radical centrism” — Chris Larsen, the co-founder of the cryptocurrency network Ripple, railed against the influence of unions in California politics and the “weak” response from business leaders, according to video.
“We’ve got to fight on par with the unions when they’re proposing stupid, job-killing ideas like the San Francisco CEO tax,” Larsen said. He noted that several other candidates for governor, including former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, whom he’d donated to, had backed the measure to tax companies that pay their chief executive 100 times more than their average employee.
Neither Tan nor Larsen responded to a request for comment.
Gonzalez Fletcher, a former state legislator, said the argument that California Democrats have caused the state’s biggest problems by bowing to unions is false, and that what is more true is that “ruling class” Democrats such as Newsom “acquiesce to business interests” driving the state’s affordability and homelessness crises.
She said employers get away with underpaying workers and big landlords are allowed to take advantage of renters. She said Airbnb, as a tech example, has gone unchecked despite causing “a lot of the removal of housing stock.”
She said one reason she opposes Mahan is that he “suffers from the same love affair with Big Tech” as Newsom.
Steyer — who has funded his own campaign to the tune of nearly $200 million — has repeatedly struck a similar note.
Earlier this month, his campaign wrote that “Mahan continues to fail working Californians by catering to tech billionaires and wealthy special interest groups.” In February, it wrote that although Mahan had the support of “powerful special interests hellbent on keeping California a playground for the rich,” Steyer had the backing of “bus drivers, cafeteria workers, and custodians.”
Airbnb declined to comment but in the past has denied claims its platform substantially contributes to housing affordability issues, and has donated to housing initiatives. Airbnb co-founder Nathan Blecharczyk, a Mahan donor, did not respond to a request for comment.
Mahan said he values unions, in part because he grew up in a union household and benefited from the high-quality healthcare that provided, included when he was hospitalized for a collapsed lung as a teenager.
He said he has also worked with tech employers who “are inventing the future, quite literally,” and “creating a lot of jobs and opportunity.”
Mahan said the idea the two are inherently at odds is false, because “business needs labor, and labor needs business,” and the real question is “how to balance everyone’s needs.”
“If we don’t have a strong enough regulatory environment, and business has too much power, workers can be exploited, the environment can be exploited and we can see really negative social outcomes,” he said. “But the flip side is also true. If labor in our politics has too much power, you can also see distortions, you can see investment flow elsewhere, you can see less housing get built.”
Mahan said that “neither side has a monopoly on the truth,” and that government has to “bring people together and strike the right balance.”
He also defended Airbnb, which in San José pays taxes just like hotels, he said.
“We don’t see Airbnb as an antagonistic thing. We don’t let them take over the market, we regulate them, we charge them, and we use their tax revenue to provide services to people.”
He said the state’s housing crisis is due to over-regulation slowing new building to the point where it cannot keep up with job growth — which he called “fundamentally unsustainable and unfair” to low-income folks pushed out of job centers as a result.
The answer is building more homes, more quickly, he said, including by reducing building fees and streamlining permitting processes — which he said he has done in San José and would replicate statewide as governor.
“I am, first and foremost, focused on making government deliver results that make a real difference in people’s lives,” he said. “That’s my North Star.”
Concerns over federal funding for L.A. Olympics raised by state lawmakers
SACRAMENTO — As Los Angeles prepares to host the 2028 Olympics, state lawmakers are raising concerns that potential clashes with President Trump could cause chaos.
State Sen. Susan Rubio (D-Baldwin Park), speaking at a legislative hearing this week on the 2028 Games, expressed concern about Trump’s animosity toward California and questioned whether that could affect the federal financial support that is essential to the Olympics.
“I know we rely a lot on the federal funding,” Rubio said. “Can you assure me that we’re not going to be left in the middle of the planning carrying the bag?”
Rubio was addressing Joey Freeman, the vice president of state affairs for the LA28 Organizing Committee, who testified before lawmakers.
Freeman assured legislators that the organizing committee had a “wonderful working relationship” with the Trump administration. He said the committee successfully advocated for $1 billion in federal funds for state and local law enforcement, and $94 million to boost transportation planning.
LA28 leaders previously projected that the Games will cost more than $7.1 billion. They’ve said the money will come from a mix of sources, including corporate sponsors, ticket sales, merchandise, the federal government and the International Olympic Committee.
Rubio, however, said she remained worried that the federal dollars could fall through.
“As a state, our funding is also stretched thin, and at the end of the day we don’t want to have to step in to save the Olympics,” Rubio said.
Several other concerns were raised during the roughly three-hour hearing, including questions about how to best protect visitors and participants from federal immigration raids. The Trump administration’s increased enforcement actions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Border Patrol last year in the Los Angeles area led to clashes with protesters and widespread concerns about immigrant rights.
Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach) said legislators were working on a package of bills to help rein in ICE during the event.
“Immigration is still front and center,” she said. “People are feeling even more worried that they’ll continue to be deported and kidnapped.”
Other lawmakers grilled Freeman for more information about ticket sales. LA28 previously advertised tickets as being affordable for locals, but many shoppers last month were dismayed to find prices in the thousands.
Freeman said he did not have specifics on the community ticketing program, which earned a rebuke from Sen. Laura Richardson (D-San Pedro).
“You’re in an official state hearing and I think you know there was a problem because it was well-publicized in the news,” she said. “The fact that we came to this committee and you don’t know how many tickets were issued, you don’t know how many of those were under $100 — you don’t have the information that we need.”
Paul Krekorian, executive director of the Los Angeles Office of Major Events, chalked up many of the concerns surrounding the games to political negativity. He pointed to the success of the Olympics in Los Angeles in 1932 and 1984.
“You hear the tickets are too expensive, there aren’t going to be enough opportunities, it’s going to be a big disruption, there’s going to be a lot of traffic, the city just went through these horrible fires, how are we going to pull this off?” he said. “I just want to remind all of us — L.A. knows how to do this.”
Kurly secures fresh funding amid challenges at Coupang

A Kurly delivery truck operates in South Korea. The company has drawn fresh investment from internet giant Naver. Photo by Kurly
SEOUL, May 7 (UPI) — South Korean online retailer Kurly has attracted fresh investment, while its bigger rival, Coupang Korea, struggles to grapple with the aftermath of a massive data breach disclosed late last year.
Kurly said in a regulatory filing Wednesday that it would issue some 500,000 new shares worth $23 million, all of which will be acquired by the country’s internet giant, Naver.
Through the deal, which valued Kurly at around $1.9 billion, Naver will increase its stake in the e-commerce platform to 6.2% from 5.1%.
The Seoul-based company, which was founded in 2015, said that it would spend the funds to strengthen its long-term growth potential by expanding logistics infrastructure and pursuing new business initiatives.
“Starting with this investment, both companies plan to deepen their strategic partnership, focusing on generating tangible synergies and driving accelerated growth,” Kurly CEO Sophie Kim said in a statement.
By contrast, U.S.-listed Coupang Inc. has swung to a loss for the first time in seven quarters.
During the first three months of 2026, the e-commerce giant posted sales of $8.5 billion, up 8% from a year ago, but recorded an operating loss of $242 million compared with an operating income of $154 million a year ago.
Coupang Korea, which generates the vast majority of Coupang Inc.’s revenue, has faced criticism after unveiling a data leak last November involving tens of millions of its customers in South Korea.
To compensate customers following the accident, Coupang provided free vouchers worth more than $1 billion in early 2026, which has negatively affected the company’s earnings.
Coupang was trading at $17.25 a share at midday Thursday on the New York Stock Exchange, down about 50% from its 12-month high. The company lost 15 cents a share in the first quarter of 2026.
Kurly is not publicly listed.
White House says funds to pay TSA and other Homeland Security workers will ‘soon run out’
WASHINGTON — The White House is warning Congress that funding to pay Department of Homeland Security personnel will “soon run out,” sparking new threats of airport disruptions and national security concerns as the House slow-walks legislation to end what has been the longest-ever lapse in agency funding.
In a memo late Tuesday to lawmakers, the Office of Management and Budget said money that President Trump tapped to pay Transportation Security Administration and other workers through executive actions will be exhausted by May. It called on the House to quickly approve the budget resolution senators approved in an all-night session last week that would pave the way for full funding for the department.
“DHS will soon run out of critical operating funds, placing essential personnel and operations at risk,” the memo said.
The pressure from the Trump administration could help House Speaker Mike Johnson, whose narrow Republican majority has been stalled out, tangled in internal party disputes on a range of pending issues, including the Homeland Security funding. They have left the chamber at a virtual standstill.
The House was expected to vote as soon as Wednesday on the Senate budget resolution that is designed to unlock a multistep process to eventually fund the department. But by midday, House action again screeched to a halt. The administration has warned GOP lawmakers off making changes that could prolong passage.
“Restoring funding for the Department of Homeland Security has never been more urgent, as demonstrated by recent events,” the memo said, a nod to the situation over the weekend when a man armed with guns and knives tried to storm the annual White House correspondents’ dinner that Trump, the vice president and top Cabinet officials were attending.
Homeland Security shutdown is longest ever
Homeland Security has been operating without regular funds for more than two months after Democrats refused to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without changes to those operations after the deaths of Americans protesting Trump’s deportation agenda.
While immigration enforcement workers have largely been paid through the flush of new cash — some $170 billion — that Congress approved as part of Trump’s tax cuts bill last year, others, including TSA, have had to rely on Trump’s intervention through executive action to ensure their paychecks.
But with salaries topping $1.6 billion every two weeks, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said recently, those funds are drying up.
More than 1,000 TSA officers have quit since the shutdown began, according to Airlines for America, the U.S. airlines trade group that called Wednesday on Congress to fully fund the agency.
“The urgency to provide predictable and stable funding for TSA is growing stronger by the day,” the group said in a statement. “Time and time again, our nation’s aviation workers and customers have been the victim of Congress’ failure to do their jobs.”
Complicated budget strategy ahead
House and Senate Republicans have embarked on a go-it-alone strategy, attempting to approve funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without Democrats. They want to provide $70 billion for those immigration operations for the remainder of Trump’s term to ensure no further interruptions.
It’s a cumbersome process, the same that was used last year to approve Trump’s tax cuts bill, that will play out over several weeks.
The Senate launched the process last week, and is now waiting on the House to act. Once that budget resolution is approved, both the House and Senate are expected to draft the actual funding bill, a process that can take weeks.
In the meantime, Johnson is next expected to quickly turn this week to legislation that would fund the other parts of Homeland Security, including TSA, the Coast Guard and other agencies.
That bipartisan bill has support from Democrats and already passed the Senate a month ago, when Republicans reluctantly agreed to carve out the immigration-related funds that Democrats had opposed. But it has been stalled out in the House, as Republicans in that chamber disagreed with the Senate’s approach.
Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Rio Yamat in Las Vegas contributed to this report.
DeSantis signs Florida law banning local DEI funding, says white men are ‘disfavored’
ORLANDO, Fla. — White men have been discriminated against through diversity, equity and inclusion programs, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said Wednesday after signing legislation which prohibits counties and cities from funding or promoting DEI initiatives.
The Republican governor defined DEI at a news conference as “an ideological construct that is designed to promote a particular political agenda, particularly to the detriment of disfavored groups.”
“The disfavored groups, No. 1, obviously, would be white males, and I think they’ve been discriminated against,” DeSantis said in Jacksonville. “And it’s like a lot of people are, ‘Oh that’s fine. That’s fine.’ No, it’s not fine. It’s wrong.”
While the governor is entitled to his opinion, his views differ from “everyone else’s,” said Evelyn Foxx, president of the NAACP branch in Gainesville.
“If you talked to 100 white men, they wouldn’t feel the same way” as DeSantis, Foxx said when asked Wednesday about his comments. “The governor is out of touch with people, and that is the bottom line.”
Supporters say the purpose of DEI is to remedy the effects of long-term discrimination against certain groups. A nationwide push by conservatives to limit diversity programs has led many companies, schools and governments to pull back on those initiatives, particularly during the current Trump administration, and DEI has been a frequent target for the governor.
DeSantis also said Wednesday that Asian Americans had faced discrimination in university admissions and that people should be judged on their merits. During his two terms in office, DeSantis’ administration has championed legislation which prohibits public colleges and universities from spending money on DEI programs and promoted the “Stop WOKE Act,” which restricts how race and sex are taught in schools.
Democratic lawmakers have warned that the legislation was overbroad and potentially unconstitutional.
Under the legislation, residents can sue local governments for violations. If local officials are found to have funded DEI initiatives in violation of the law, they can be removed from office.
“When people know there is accountability, they are much more apt to toe the line,” DeSantis said.
Schneider writes for the Associated Press.
California could launch a wildlife coexistence program amid anger over mama bear’s death
SACRAMENTO — A month after a public uproar over a mama bear being euthanized after swiping at a resident in Monrovia, state lawmakers are considering mandating the use of nonlethal ways to help allow wildlife and humans to coexist.
Sen. Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) said she believes the bear’s death, and the state’s decision to kill four wolves last year that were preying on cattle, raised public concern.
“That made everybody realize we have to do better here,” she told The Times on Thursday. “We need to recognize the importance of seeing ourselves, humans, as part of a larger ecosystem that includes animals and plants and our world and trying to protect it.”
Senate Bill 1135, introduced by Blakespear, would direct the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to create the Wildlife Coexistence Program, which would provide public education, offer technical assistance and maintain a statewide incident reporting system. It would help communities deploy nonlethal devices to deter predators, like barriers or noise and light machines.
At a legislative hearing on Tuesday, Blakespear told the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water that a three-year state initiative offering similar services was seeing positive results — until it was discontinued two years ago after funding ran dry. She said it was time to implement a permanent program.
“Human population growth, habitat loss and the growth of industry across California inevitably leads to interaction between humans and wildlife,” Blakespear told legislators. “No two animal species are the same and each has unique behavior patterns and territories. SB 1135 recognizes these differences and gives communities the tools to prevent conflict and respond when it occurs.”
The bill would also rename a state program that reimburses ranchers who lose livestock to wolves, calling it the Wolf-Livestock Coexistence and Compensation Program. It would require ranchers seeking compensation to show they were using nonlethal deterrents approved by the department.
Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) stressed that life in rural areas is different than living in a city. She said some families and cattle ranchers have a genuine fear of predators.
“When these baby calves drop on the ground and then two wolves start ripping them apart, it’s not the prettiest thing you’ve ever witnessed,” said Grove, who abstained from voting on the measure. “These wolves are not puppies.”
More than 30 organizations are supporting the legislation, including the National Wildlife Federation, Defenders of Wildlife, California State Assn. of Counties, Animal Legal Defense Fund and Citizens for Los Angeles Wildlife.
The California Farm Bureau and the California Cattlemen’s Assn. are in opposition due to concerns over funding.
Last month, Blakespear sent a letter to the chair of the Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review requesting $48.8 million to implement the legislation, with $25 million earmarked for addressing wolf encounters. Half of the money for wolf conflicts would go toward deterrents; the remainder would compensate ranchers for their losses.
Kirk Wilbur, vice president of government affairs cattlemen’s association, said the organization is concerned about that division of funding — especially if funding is reduced.
Wilbur told legislators Tuesday that the organization supports some aspects of the bill and was having productive conversations with Blakespear to address their concerns.
The bill ultimately passed the committee with a 5-to-1 vote and now heads to the Senate Committee on Appropriations.
Human wildlife conflicts have made headlines in California recently, with a bear refusing to leave a basement for weeks in Altadena and a mama bear dubbed Blondie crossing paths last month with a woman walking her dog in Monrovia.
Blondie swiped the woman’s leg, and was subsequently euthanized by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Her two cubs were sent to the San Diego Humane Society’s Ramona Wildlife Center. The bear’s death upset many in the community, as thousands had signed a petition calling for other solutions, like relocation.
Deadly wildlife attacks on humans, however, are rare in California.
There have been six reported human fatalities from mountain lions since 1890, according to the state Fish and Wildlife Department. The agency recorded one human fatality from a coyote in 1981 and another fatality from a black bear in 2023. The department has no recorded human fatalities from gray wolves.
A renewed threat to JPL as the Trump administration tries again to cut NASA
WASHINGTON — NASA recaptured the world’s attention with Artemis II, which took astronauts to the moon and back for the first time in half a century. But the agency’s scientific projects could again be under threat as the Trump administration makes a renewed push to drastically cut their funding — including at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
The cuts, proposed in the Trump administration’s 2027 budget request to Congress, would pose further challenges to the already weakened Caltech-managed lab and could be broadly damaging to American efforts to bring back new discoveries from space. They echo last year’s attempt by the administration to slash NASA funding, which Congress rejected.
Though the Artemis project is billed as laying a foundation for a crewed NASA mission to Mars, exploration of the Red Planet is among the endeavors that could be slashed. The rover currently exploring Mars’ ancient river delta and a mission to orbit Venus are among projects with JPL involvement targeted for spending cuts, according to an analysis of the NASA budget proposal by the nonprofit Planetary Society.
“This isn’t [because] they’re not producing good science anymore. There’s no rhyme or reason to it,” said Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at the Planetary Society, which led opposition to the administration’s similar effort to cut NASA funding last year.
Storm clouds hang over the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on Feb. 7, 2024.
(David McNew / Getty Images)
This time, the administration is asking Congress to cut NASA funding by 23% — including a 46% cut to its science programs, which are responsible for developing spacecraft, sending them into outer space to observe and analyzing the data they send back.
The proposal would cancel 53 science missions and reduce funding for others, according to the Planetary Society analysis. The effort to pare down NASA Science comes amid the Trump administration’s broader effort to cut scientific research across federal agencies.
The plan swiftly drew bipartisan criticism from members of Congress, who rejected the administration’s similar 2026 proposal in January. Republican Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas, who chairs the Senate appropriations subcommittee that oversees NASA, indicated last week that he would work to fund NASA similarly for 2027, saying it would be “a mistake” not to fund science missions.
Moran plans to hold a hearing with NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman before the end of April to review the budget request, a spokesperson for his office said. The president’s budget request is an ask to Congress, which ultimately holds the power to allocate funding.
But until Congress creates its own budget, NASA will use the plan as its road map, which could slow grants and contracts. The proposal “still creates enormous chaos and uncertainty in the meantime for critical missions, the scientific workforce, and long-term research planning,” said Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park), whose district includes JPL.
A NASA spokesperson declined to comment Friday. In the budget request, Isaacman wrote that NASA was “pursuing a focused and right-sized portfolio” for its space science missions in order to align with Trump’s federal cost-cutting goals.
The budget “reinforces U.S. leadership in space science through groundbreaking missions, completed research, and next-generation observatories,” Isaacman wrote.
Jared Isaacman testifies during his confirmation hearing to be the NASA administrator in the Russell Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on Dec. 3, 2025.
(Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)
At JPL — which has for decades led innovation in space science and technology from its La Cañada Flintridge campus — questions had already swirled about the lab’s role in the future of NASA work.
Multiple rounds of layoffs over the last two years, the defunding of its embattled Mars Sample Return mission and a shift by the Trump administration toward lunar exploration and away from the type of scientific work that JPL executes had pushed the lab into a challenging stretch.
It has had a steady stream of employee departures in recent months, and those left have been scrambling to court outside funding from private investors, sell JPL technology to companies and increase productivity in hopes of keeping the lab afloat, according to two former staffers, who requested anonymity to describe the mood inside the lab.
“If we’re not doing science, then what are we doing?” asked one former employee, who recently left JPL after more than a decade there.
A spokesperson for the lab declined to comment, referring The Times to the budget proposal.
The NASA programs marked for cancellation or cutbacks support thousands of jobs at JPL and other centers, said Chu, who has led a push for increased funding for NASA Science. After last year’s layoffs, JPL “cannot afford to lose more of this expertise,” she said in a statement.
Among the JPL projects that appear to be slated for cancellation are two involving Venus, Dreier said. One, Veritas, is early in development and would give work to the lab for the next several years, he said.
The project would be the first U.S. mission to Venus in more than 30 years, Dreier said, and aims to make a high-resolution mapping of the planet’s surface and observe its atmosphere.
The Perseverance rover, which is on Mars collecting rock and soil samples, could face spending reductions. The budget request proposes pulling some funding from Perseverance to fund other planetary science missions and reducing “the pace of operations” for the rover.
Though how the Mars samples might get back to Earth is uncertain, the rover is still being used to explore the planet and search for evidence of whether it could have ever been habitable to life.
Researchers hope the tubes of Martian rock, soil and sediment can eventually be brought back to Earth for study. The team has about a half a dozen more sample tubes to fill and the rover is in good shape, said Jim Bell, a planetary scientist and Arizona State University professor who leads the camera team on Perseverance, which works daily with JPL.
He said NASA’s spending proposal put forth “no plan” for the future of the agency’s work.
“Are people just supposed to walk away from their consoles,” Bell asked, “and let these orbiters around other planets or rovers on other worlds — just let them die?”
The NASA document did not clearly show which programs were targeted for cuts and did not list which projects were targeted for cancellation. The Planetary Society and the American Astronomical Society each analyzed the proposal and found that dozens of projects appeared to be canceled without being named in the document.
Across NASA, other projects slated for cancellation according to the Planetary Society’s analysis include New Horizons, a spacecraft exploring the outer edge of the solar system; the Atmosphere Observing System, a planned project to collect weather, air quality and climate data; and Juno, a spacecraft studying Jupiter.
The administration’s plan also doesn’t prioritize new scientific projects, Bell said, which further jeopardizes long-term job stability and space discovery at centers like JPL.
“We’re going through this long stretch now with very few opportunities to build these spacecrafts,” Bell said. “All of the NASA centers are suffering from the lack of opportunities.”
Last year, the Trump administration proposed to slash NASA’s 2026 funding by nearly half. Instead, Congress approved funding in January that provided $24.4 billion for the agency — a cut of about 29% rather than the proposed 46%. The 2027 budget request asks for $18.8 billion.
Congress kept funding for science missions nearly steady, allocating $7.25 billion for science missions, about a 1% decrease from 2025. The administration had proposed cutting the science investment down to $3.91 billion. This time, the budget requests $3.89 billion.
Under the Trump administration, NASA has put an emphasis on moon exploration, including this month’s successful Artemis II mission. Isaacman, who defended the proposed cuts on CNN last week, touted the agency’s lunar plans, including a project to build a base on the moon.
The agency has indicated commitment to some existing science missions, including the James Webb Space Telescope, the to-be-launched Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, the Dragonfly spacecraft set to launch for Saturn’s moon in 2028, and other projects.
“NASA doesn’t have a topline problem, we just need to focus on executing and delivering world-changing outcomes,” Isaacman said on CNN.
Scientists have urged the government not to choose between funding science and exploration but to keep up investment in both.
“It’s ultimately kind of confusing, especially on the heels of the Artemis II mission,” said Roohi Dalal, deputy director for public policy at the American Astronomical Society. “The scientific community … is providing critical services to ensure that the astronauts are able to carry out their mission safely, and yet at the same time, they’re facing this significant cut.”
LIV Golf CEO confirms Saudi funding commitment is only through 2026
LIV Golf appears to be dying on the vine but doesn’t want to say so.
Amid several reports that the Saudi-backed Public Investment Fund will cease its abundant funding of LIV Golf after the 2026 season, officials with the four-year-old PGA Tour competitor chose to focus on the fact that the show will go on — at least through August.
During a broadcast interview from the LIV tournament in Mexico City, LIV Chief Executive Scott O’Neil would not say if the league has a funding commitment from the Public Investment Fund, or PIF, beyond this year.
O’Neil responded to a question about golfer Sergio Garcia saying this week that LIV Golf Chairman Yasir Al-Rumayyan “told us at the beginning of the year that he is behind us, that they have a project of many years.”
“It’s just not the way the world works,” O’Neil said. “We have commitments to have this … the reality is you’re funded through the season and then you work like crazy as a business to create a business and a business plan to keep us going.
“But that’s not different from any other private equity-funded business in the history of mankind.”
The interview was pulled from the internet shortly after it was posted.
PIF announced a new five-year strategy Wednesday that will reduce international investments from 30% to 18-20% of the portfolio and place greater emphasis on Saudi domestic initiatives to promote sports. LIV Golf does not fit into that category and was not mentioned.
“PIF will continue to support Saudi Vision 2030 objectives by delivering competitive domestic ecosystems,” Al-Rumayyan said in the announcement. “The 2026-2030 strategy is a natural next step in PIF’s growth journey.”
PIF approved more than $250 million in additional funding for LIV Golf this year, hiking the total investment to more than $5.3 billion since the league was launched four years ago. Documented losses are more than $1 billion from 2022 to 2024, according to Forbes.
LIV Golf executives were rushed from various corners of the planet to a meeting this week in New York where the future of the operation was discussed in private and decisions were made.
A few flew in from Mexico City, where this week’s tournament began Thursday at the Club de Golf Chapultepec. It is one of the highest-altitude golf courses in North America, and LIV golfers took deep breaths before answering press questions about reports that the organization was on the verge of collapse.
“For me, it didn’t make sense to think about it or waste time thinking about,” superstar golfer Jon Rahm said after shooting a first-round 65. “Since everything happened so suddenly and so quickly, I wasn’t very worried about it because normally, before the rumors start, we already know something — there’s always someone within the league who knows something.”
Communication at the tournament was spotty. A power outage at the course Tuesday caused interviews to be canceled, and streaming of the first round Thursday was down for about two hours because of what were described as technical difficulties.
Yet nothing could stop the speculation and growing unease about the future of LIV Golf. Money continues to hemorrhage, as does the roster of big-name golfers.
LIV Golf purses each week are $30 million — 50% more than PGA Tour purses. Enormous signing bonuses were doled out to secure the services of superstar golfers Phil Mickelson, Dustin Johnson, Cameron Smith, Bryson DeChambeau and Rahm. All received bonuses of at least $100 million to defect from the PGA Tour, and Rahm, a relative latecomer to LIV Golf, received a reported $300- to $500-million bonus.
Yet original LIV Golf members Brooks Koepka and Patrick Reed recently returned to the PGA Tour. Others are bound to follow.
Former PGA standout Greg Norman was the LIV Golf chief executive until resigning in August, citing exhaustion. His comments upon exiting might have foreshadowed the current difficulties.
“I knew there were going to be a lot of headwinds,” he told the Australian Golf Digest. “I didn’t anticipate the magnitude of those headwinds because … as time went by, those headwinds were created by misperceptions.”
Norman was replaced by O’Neil, whose internal message to the LIV staff Wednesday attempted to quiet concerns about PIF pulling the plug. He urged the golfers to focus on the season that is already underway.
“We are heading into the heart of our 2026 schedule with the full energy of an organization that is bigger, louder and more influential than ever before,” O’Neil wrote in the message obtained by Sports Illustrated. “The life of a startup movement is often defined by these moments of pressure. We signed up for this because we believe in disrupting the status quo.
“We have faced headwinds since the jump, and we’ve answered every time with resilience and grace. Now we answer by doing what we do best: putting on the most compelling show in sports.”
One of those headwinds is that “a compelling show” can be a relative term. LIV Golf has been popular in golf-starved locales such as Australia and South Africa, but TV ratings are low everywhere and interest in events held in the United States is tepid.
PIF — worth an estimated $1.15 trillion — launched LIV Golf as part of a strategy to transform Saudi Arabia into a global sports hub, using its vast oil revenue to drive economic diversification, create jobs and boost tourism. Initiatives include massive investments in soccer, tennis and esports in addition to golf.
The PGA Tour countered by increasing prize money and creating a series of limited-field “signature events” for top players. Rory McIlroy and Tiger Woods are among the sport’s top stars to steadfastly remain loyal to the PGA Tour, with Woods turning down an offer from LIV Golf of $800 million in 2022.
Mexico City is the sixth stop in the LIV Golf 14-tournament season that concludes in August. The Individual Championship finale is scheduled for Indianapolis from Aug 20–23.
Judge sides with Arizona election official in ruling that has implications for midterm voting
PHOENIX — The top election official in Arizona’s most populous county will get more authority in running elections after a judge sided with his office in a prolonged legal fight with the local board that shares responsibility for overseeing the vote.
The decision could have broad implications in one of the nation’s most prominent battleground states, which will have several high-profile races this fall. Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, has been roiled by election conspiracy theorists ever since President Trump lost the state to Democrat Joe Biden during his bid for reelection in 2020.
Justin Heap, the Republican recorder in Maricopa County, sued the predominantly Republican county board of supervisors last summer, alleging it had illegally taken control of certain aspects of election administration. Heap claimed the board transferred funding, IT staff and some key functions — including management of ballot drop boxes and establishing early voting sites — away from his office through an agreement negotiated with his predecessor, whom he had recently defeated in a GOP primary.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott Blaney mostly sided with Heap’s office in his ruling, which was filed Thursday but appeared on the public docket Friday. The board of supervisors “acted unlawfully and exceeded its statutory authority by seizing the Recorder’s personnel, systems and equipment and refusing to return them” to the recorder, he wrote.
Blaney also ruled that the recorder’s office is responsible for overseeing in-person early voting, among other duties, while the board is responsible for other operations, such as selecting election day voting locations, supplying polling locations and hiring poll workers.
“The Board’s assertion of plenary authority over election administration through its general supervisory powers is inconsistent with Arizona law,” the judge wrote.
Board Chairwoman Kate Brophy McGee said the board will consider an appeal.
“I disagree with other portions of the ruling, and I will explore all options with the Board of Supervisors, including an expeditious appeal,” McGee, a Republican, said in a statement. “From day one, the Board of Supervisors has provided Recorder Heap the resources and staffing needed to fulfill his statutory duties. We will continue to do so because voters always come first.”
In a statement, Heap praised the ruling as a “clear and decisive victory for the rule of law and for the voters of Maricopa County.”
“The court confirmed that the Board cannot override state law, use funding as leverage, or take control of election duties assigned to the Recorder,” Heap said. “This ruling restores both the authority and the resources necessary for my office to do its job.”
Heap, a former Republican state lawmaker, was elected in 2024 after unseating incumbent Stephen Richer in the GOP primary and defeating a Democratic candidate in the general election. In the past, Heap has stopped short of repeating false claims that the 2020 and 2022 elections were stolen but has said voters don’t trust the state’s voting system and that it’s poorly run.
False claims of fraud since the 2020 presidential election led to threats of violence against Richer and others in the Maricopa County elections office. Richer blamed Heap for contributing to an atmosphere of distrust and vitriol directed toward the office.
“He catered to the really ugly stuff that the people in that office had to live through,” Richer said of Heap, in an interview last month. “And he allied with people who were very much in the eye of the storm in terms of creating it.”
Once he took office, Heap terminated a previous agreement that was reached between Richer and the board that had revised how election operations were divided between the two offices. Heap filed his lawsuit with the backing of America First Legal, a conservative public interest group founded by Stephen Miller, now deputy chief of staff in the White House.
Kelety writes for the Associated Press.
Thune: Senate may vote next week on ICE, Border Patrol funding

April 14 (UPI) — A budget resolution to fund federal immigration enforcement could hit the Senate floor by next week, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Tuesday, as Republicans seek to bypass Democratic demands for reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol.
Federal funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol lapsed on Feb. 14 after Republicans agreed with the Democrats to remove the Department of Homeland Security from a larger spending package and avert a government shutdown.
Neither agency has been funded through regular DHS appropriations since, though they continue operating through other, emergency funding.
Democrats began demanding reforms to the federal immigration enforcement agencies before agreeing to restore funding after two U.S. citizens were killed by federal immigration officers amid President Donald Trump‘s aggressive immigration crackdown.
Amid a stalemate in negotiations, Republicans are considering passing three years of funding for the agencies through a complicated legislative mechanism called a budget reconciliation bill that permits certain spending legislation to pass with a simple majority rather than 60 votes, Thune told reporters Tuesday in the Capitol.
“Republicans are going to stand with our Border Patrol, with our law enforcement agencies and we’re going to ensure that they are funded, not only today but well into the future,” Thune, R-S.D., said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is preparing the resolution to fund the agencies that will be followed by the reconciliation bill “to ensure the job gets done,” he said.
Democrats have blocked funding for ICE and Border Patrol until reforms — including requiring judicial warrants and banning officers from wearing masks — are made, but the reconciliation bill tactic could ensure funding without any votes from Democratic lawmakers.
The same tactic was used last year to pass Trump’s sweeping spending and tax cut bill, which provided $75 billion for ICE.
“All of the things that the Democrats made this about, which was supposed to be about reforms to the way that ICE and Border Patrol operate — they get none of that,” Thune said.
“And now, we’re going to fund those agencies for three years into the future. The only thing the Democrats got out of this was they now own the issue of open borders and defund law enforcement.”
Republicans hold a narrow 53-47 majority in the Senate, with two independents caucusing with the Democrats, as well as a 218-213 majority in the House.
The Senate has twice passed bipartisan bills to fund DHS aside from ICE and Border Patrol, which the House has balked at. Democrats blame the Trump administration’s influence on the lower chamber.
“Republicans are dragging the Senate through a partisan circus just to avoid basic accountability for ICE and Border Patrol,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told reporters at the Capitol during a separate press conference on Tuesday.
He said Democrats will continue to push for immigration enforcement reforms.
“So, the pattern, unfortunately, with this administration is clearer and clearer,” the veteran New York Democrat said. “Chaos abroad — the war; chaos at home with not funding DHS with reforms. A failed war overseas, a manufactured crisis here in Washington — in both cases Republicans aren’t leading, they are following orders.”

















