interest

Effort to end triple-digit interest rates on small loans in California clears major hurdle

Legislation to cap interest rates on high-cost small loans in California cleared a major hurdle Wednesday in the state Senate despite strong opposition from deep-pocketed lenders.

The Senate Banking and Financial Institutions Committee approved Assembly Bill 539, which would set an annual interest rate cap of 36% plus a 2.5% federal funds rate on loans of $2,500 to $10,000, with a 6-0 bipartisan vote.

After years of failed attempts to set limits that would prevent triple-digit interest rates on small loans, legislators moved the bill forward and bucked lenders who have poured millions of dollars in recent years into lobbying efforts and campaign contributions — including $39,000 to state senators in the last month.

California has lagged behind the rest of the country in its efforts to regulate small loans. In a 2018 report, the National Consumer Law Center said 39 other states have implemented caps on five-year, $10,000 loans.

The state limits interest rates on loans under $2,500 to between 12% and 30% a year. With no monetary limit on loans valued between $2,500 and $10,000, some lenders have set rates over 200% on high-risk borrowers.

California trails in regulating short-term lenders. This bill could finally rein them in >>

More than one-third of California borrowers who take out loans with interest rates at 100% or more end up in default, according to the state’s business oversight department. Advocates say such loans are designed to fail.

“I cannot think of another product that fails so often without government stepping in to intervene,” said Assemblywoman Monique Limón (D-Santa Barbara), who introduced the bill.

Nearly 20 lenders, who offer auto title loans, personal loans and other installment loans, have spent about $3.5 million lobbying at the state Capitol since 2017. More than a dozen gave an additional $3.2 million to lawmakers, political parties and campaign committees over the last decade.

Opponents of the bill argue that the rate cap will push many lenders out of the California market, making it more difficult for subprime borrowers with bad or no credit to obtain loans.

“With this bill passing, we feel like you’re taking another option away from us and it’s very concerning,” said Maria Bello, a Rancho Cordova resident who testified against the bill. “We need our options open.”

Sen. Ben Hueso (D-San Diego) abstained from voting and said he agreed that it would limit Californians’ access to loans.

“Usually the ones who advocate for these programs are not the people who use these programs,” Hueso said. “Telling people how to manage their finances, I don’t think it’s the government’s job to do that.”

Lenders opposing the legislation contributed campaign money to several state senators on the committee in recent weeks, including Hueso and Sens. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena), Anna Caballero (D-Salinas), Ling Ling Chang (R-Diamond Bar) and Brian Dahle (R-Bieber).

Several state senators questioned the morality of allowing lenders to offer loans with high interest rates.

Sen. Maria Elena Durazo (D-Los Angeles) noted that some low-income borrowers are at high risk of defaulting, a reason that lenders offer loans with extremely high rates.

“The risk is higher, but imagine the risk when the percentage rate is so high,” she said.

Sen. Anthony Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge) said the proposal requires the Legislature to weigh the cost of high interest rates against the possibility of limiting some borrowers’ access to capital.

“There are people who are victims of predators,” Portantino said. “There are people who need that last-minute loan to get through that week. How do you protect somebody on both ends of this conversation?”

More stories from Taryn Luna »

taryn.luna@latimes.com

Follow @tarynluna on Twitter.



Source link

Trump wants credit card interest rates maxed at 10% for a year

President Donald Trump on Friday told credit card company officials to lower their interest rates to no more than 10% for one year starting on January 20. Photo by Joerg Carstensen/EPA

Jan. 10 (UPI) — If President Donald Trump has his way, credit card companies will limit their respective interest rates to no more than 10% for a year to make them more affordable.

Trump took to social media to call on all credit card companies to voluntarily lower their interest rates for one year, starting this month, to promote affordability.

“Please be informed that we will no longer let the American public be ‘ripped off’ by credit card companies that are charging interest rates of 20 to 30%, and even more, which festered unimpeded during the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration,” Trump said in a Truth Social post on Friday.

“AFFORDABILITY! Effective January 20, 2026, I, as president of the United States, am calling for a one-year cap on credit card Interest Rates of 10%,” he said, adding that Jan. 20 is the one-year anniversary of his second term in office.

The Federal Reserve reported a record-high average annual percentage rate of nearly 23% and rising in 2023, the now-defunct Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said.

That’s up from an average APR of 16.4% in 2021 and 20.4% in 2022, according to the Federal Reserve.

While the average APR rate rose significantly under the Biden administration, Trump last year eliminated the Biden administration policy that limited credit card fees to no more than $8.

The average fee previously was $32 for late credit card payments and other fee-triggering activities.

Source link

Banks balk at Trump’s push for 10% cap on credit card interest rates

Reviving a campaign pledge, President Trump wants a one-year, 10% cap on credit card interest rates, a move that could save Americans tens of billions of dollars but drew immediate opposition from an industry that has been in his corner.

Trump was not clear in his social media post Friday night whether a cap might take effect through executive action or legislation, though one Republican senator said he had spoken with the president and would work on a bill with his “full support.” Trump said he hoped it would be in place by Jan. 20, marking one year since his return to the White House.

Strong opposition is certain from Wall Street and the credit card companies, which donated heavily to his 2024 campaign and to support his second-term agenda.

“We will no longer let the American Public be ripped off by Credit Card Companies that are charging Interest Rates of 20 to 30%,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Researchers who studied Trump’s campaign pledge after it was first announced found that Americans would save roughly $100 billion in interest a year if credit card rates were capped at 10%. The same researchers found that while the credit card industry would take a major hit, it would still be profitable, although credit card rewards and other perks might be scaled back.

Americans are paying, on average, between 19.65% and 21.5% in interest on credit cards, according to the Federal Reserve and other industry tracking sources. That has come down in the last year as the central bank lowered benchmark rates, but is near the highs since federal regulators started tracking credit card rates in the mid-1990s.

Trump’s administration, however, has proved particularly friendly until now to the credit card industry.

Capital One got little resistance from the White House when it finalized its purchase and merger with Discover Financial in early 2025, a deal that created the nation’s largest credit card company. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is largely tasked with going after credit card companies for alleged wrongdoing, has been largely nonfunctional since Trump took office. His administration killed a Biden-era regulation that would have capped credit card late fees.

In a joint statement, the banking industry opposed Trump’s proposal.

“If enacted, this cap would only drive consumers toward less regulated, more costly alternatives,” the American Bankers Assn. and allied groups said.

The White House did not respond to questions about how the president seeks to cap the rate or whether he has spoken with credit card companies about the idea.

Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), who said he talked with Trump on Friday night, said the effort is meant to “lower costs for American families and to [rein] in greedy credit card companies who have been ripping off hardworking Americans for too long.”

Legislation in both the House and the Senate would do what Trump is seeking.

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) released a plan last February that would immediately cap interest rates at 10% for five years, hoping to use Trump’s campaign promise to build momentum for their measure.

Hours before Trump’s post, Sanders noted that the president, rather than working to cap interest rates, had taken steps to deregulate big banks that allowed them to charge much higher credit card fees.

Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) have proposed similar legislation. Ocasio-Cortez is a frequent political target of Trump, while Luna is a close ally of the president.

Sweet and Kim write for the Associated Press and reported from New York and West Palm Beach, Fla., respectively.

Source link

Jorgen Strand Larsen: Wolves willing to sell striker amid Nottingham Forest interest

Wolves are open to selling striker Jorgen Strand Larsen this month, amid interest from Nottingham Forest.

The Premier League’s bottom side recognise allowing the 25-year-old to leave may be best for all parties, if the right deal could be found.

That would include a switch to the City Ground, despite Forest being one of the teams also fighting against the drop from the Premier League.

Forest – missing last season’s 20-goal top scorer Chris Wood – are one of several clubs to have looked at Strand Larsen as an option.

Wood, who has been out with a knee injury since October, had surgery just before Christmas, with a comeback date yet to be determined.

West Ham‘s interest in Strand Larsen has cooled after being asked for £40m, and they have bought Valentin Castellanos and Pablo Felipe instead. Newcastle‘s priorities are now elsewhere after they failed with a £55m bid in the summer and signed Nick Woltemade.

Sean Dyche’s Forest are seven points clear of the relegation zone – and 15 above Wolves – after Tuesday’s 2-1 win at West Ham.

Arnaud Kalimuendo, Forest’s £26m summer signing from Rennes, joined Bundesliga club Eintracht Frankfurt on loan with an option to buy on Wednesday, leaving Igor Jesus and Taiwo Awoniyi as the club’s only strikers.

Strand Larsen has been targeted by unhappy Wolves fans this season, having scored just one Premier League goal.

It is part of the reason why Wolves are willing to allow the Norway international to leave, even though he only made his initial loan move from Celta Vigo permanent last July for £23m.

Yet, Strand Larsen is well-respected behind the scenes, where he is seen as a leader. He earned internal credit for the professional way he handled Newcastle‘s interest and bids.

He was rewarded with a five-year contract in September after a promising debut season, scoring 14 goals and helping Wolves finish 16th.

Wolves‘ likely relegation is a factor in Strand Larsen’s future – they only secured their first Premier League win of the season last Saturday, at the 20th attempt, as they beat West Ham 3-0.

Strand Larsen would not be expected to remain at Molineux in the Championship and selling him in January would generate a higher fee than the summer.

Source link

Meet Cliqua, the director duo that caught the eye of Bad Bunny

Amid stacks of cash and liquor bottles, Tony Montana and Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán sit together inside a painting. One fictional and the other real, the drug lords look nonchalant.

“That’s us!” says filmmaker Raúl “RJ” Sanchez with joyful mischief when I point out the centerpiece on the main wall of their office in Downtown L.A. Sanchez’s partner in artistic crime, Pasqual Gutiérrez, tells me they got the frame nearby at Santee Alley.

Located on a street corner in the Fashion District, their space, which doubles as a man cave, reflects their creative influences, their ties to L.A. and their offbeat sense of humor. Before they moved in 2021, the place was a shoe store called Latino Fashion — the storefront sign remains.

Walk in and you’ll find the bottom half of a mannequin flaunting male genitalia (“That was our stunt penis from [the short film] ‘Shut Up and Fish,’” says Sanchez laughing). There’s also a bulky metal structure that resembles a torture device, a teal green couch (which they got for under $100), photography books and keepsakes on shelves that once displayed footwear. It’s a mini museum to their history so far. Or, as Sanchez calls it, it’s “a living brain.”

Known artistically as Cliqua, the in-demand duo has already worked with some of the music industry’s biggest names. Their resume includes directing videos for Bad Bunny (“La Difícil”), the Weeknd (“Save Your Tears”), J Balvin (“Reggaeton”) and Rosalía (“Yo x Ti, Tu x Mi”).

This year, Gutiérrez crossed over into feature filmmaking with his docufiction debut “Serious People,” a deeply personal “cringe comedy” that he co-directed with longtime friend Ben Mullinkosson. Following its premiere at the Sundance Film Festival, the film had a theatrical release in November and is now available to stream on multiple VOD platforms.

On screen, Gutiérrez and Sanchez play versions of themselves: music video directors in an industry that takes itself too seriously. While expecting his first child with partner Christine Yuan, also a filmmaker, Gutiérrez found himself caught between his commitment to his partnership with Sanchez and his responsibility as a soon-to-be father. The Gutiérrez in “Serious People” hires a doppelganger to replace him in his professional commitments.

“There were some things coming our way where if both Raúl and I weren’t available to do it, they would go away. Clients would be uninterested if it wasn’t the Cliqua brand,” Gutiérrez says. “That was deeply frustrating and haunting for me because it was like, ‘Raúl isn’t choosing to have a baby, but I am. And this is affecting us, because he can’t do everything on his own because people aren’t letting him do it.’”

Though both Gutiérrez and Sanchez fit under the generic identity umbrella of “Mexican American,” each of them knowingly embodies a distinct “flavor of Mexican.”

“I definitely identify with Chicano a lot,” says Gutiérrez. “I am second-generation and growing up I knew about lowriders and East L.A. barrio s—.” Raised between East Los Angeles and Pomona, Gutiérrez believes his Latino identity is unique to L.A.

Sanchez, on the other hand, is the child of immigrants from Mexico City and Jalisco. As a first-generation kid in the South Bay city of Gardena, his worldview was shaped differently.

“We’ve always had that split. You represent more what it is to be in this country for more generations, and I feel like I’m new. The culture I associate with more is Mexican but more rancho s—,” Sanchez explains. A vivid memory for Sanchez is his grandfather slaughtering a pig and driving around South Central on his pickup truck selling it. “The Chicano heritage wasn’t a thing for me, it was more the immigrant experience,” he says.

“I grew up speaking more Spanglish,” says Gutiérrez. “But Spanish was Raúl’s first language.”

Their artistic alliance is an amalgamation of what each brings to their friendship. Sanchez got Gutiérrez into Los Tigres del Norte and corridos, while Gutiérrez introduced him to Lil Rob’s “Summer Nights” and the 1993 movie “Blood In Blood Out,” which Gutiérrez considers a foundational cultural artifact in his life.

“Both of us have crossed towards the other’s side a little more,” says Sanchez. The two met through their then-girlfriends (now their wives and mothers of their respective children) almost a decade ago. At that point they each were already directing music videos.

“We really bonded over that shared experience of, ‘What’s it like trying to navigate this industry as a Latino?’” adds Sanchez.

For Gutiérrez, one of five siblings, his interest in filmmaking is linked to one of his older brothers who had a bit of a double life. “He was a gang member, but he was also a low-key cinephile,” he says. “He used to work in art house theaters, and we used to just watch weird stuff for a little kid to watch. A lot of ‘Blood In Blood Out,’ but also stuff like ‘Amélie.’”

With his father’s support, Gutiérrez attended Chapman University to study film production.

“My pops said, ‘Growing up no one ever asked me what I wanted to do. That wasn’t even an option for me,’” Gutiérrez recalls. “‘And the fact that you got accepted to this school, we’ll just find a way. We’ll take all the loans out. Go try and see how it is.’ My father empowered me to follow my dreams for sure.”

Sanchez had a less linear path into filmmaking. He graduated from UC Berkley with a degree in ancient history with the intent of going to law school. Instead, he returned to L.A. to try his hand at film, an interest that evolved from his enjoyment of video games growing up and film studies courses in college.

But how does one break into making music videos?

“In the beginning, a lot of times you’re shooting videos for your friends,” says Gutiérrez. “If you are creative in L.A., you know other creatives and one of them is a music artist or one of them is a rapper or in a rock band. And you start that way.”

“My sister was dating a rapper, so I was shooting his videos,” adds Sanchez.

Still, they both aspired to make feature films.

“Even when we were at the beginnings of Cliqua, the language we have always used to even talk about music videos has always been film-centric,” says Sanchez. “Those are the influences. We speak in movies.”

After meeting and hanging out for a while, Gutiérrez and Sanchez were eager to work together. That opportunity came with the video for J Balvin’s “Reggaeton,” which they had to sign on to do without being able to do much preparation. In the aftermath of that positive experience, they decided to create Cliqua, which originally also included music artist Milkman (MLKMN).

The name comes from the book “Varrio” by Gusmano Cesaretti, an Italian photographer who documented East L.A. culture in the 1970s, including the Klique Car Club.

The video for J Balvin kick-started their careers. They soon found themselves a niche as reggaeton became globally popular and a new crop of artists revitalized its aesthetic. But even as they eventually crossed over to other corners of the industry and landed consistent work with the Weeknd, they were aware of the limits to their creative freedom.

“Music videos are funny because they’re obviously not truly our work either; we’re at the service of another artist,” explains Sanchez. “We’re executing someone else’s vision even if the brief is generally open. It’s not truly us, but we’re in there.”

“Music videos are hard, man,” adds Gutiérrez. “The difficult thing about music videos that’s different from feature filmmaking is that it’s so fast. You get a concept, and you maybe have two days to come up with an idea and write a treatment for it. Then from there, you have a shoot date, but the shoot date can get pushed and it can get pulled depending on the artist.”

In 2023, Gutiérrez and Sanchez released their first narrative short film, “Shut Up and Fish,” about four “Edgars” (young Latino men with bowl cuts) on a boat. Their impetus was to subvert the expectations of stories involving characters from their community.

“We wanted to make it feel like an [Ingmar] Bergman film, because we’d never seen that, especially with these kids,” says Gutiérrez. One of the actors they cast in the short, Miguel Huerta, plays Gutiérrez’s chaotic doppelganger in “Serious People.”

For “Serious People,” Gutiérrez and Mullinkosson invoked arthouse references, such as the vignettes in the films of Swedish auteur Roy Andersson, or the surveillance feel of Jonathan Glazer’s “The Zone of Interest.” Gutiérrez makes a point of mentioning these inspirations in Q&As and interviews in hopes of igniting the curiosity of those watching “Serious People.”

“Making [that culture] accessible has always been a goal, whether that’s conscious or unconscious,” says Gutiérrez.

It was an anxiety-induced dream that first inspired Gutiérrez to write “Serious People” to satirize the entertainment industry. In the dream, Gutiérrez went on Craigslist to hire a look-alike in order to balance his personal and professional commitments. As soon as he woke up, he told his dream in detail to Yuan, who suggested he turn it into a film.

Gutiérrez brought Mullinkosson on board given his background in documentary, and because he thought co-directing it with Sanchez might make it too meta for comfort.

“This industry is so competitive and so demanding that every single director has a fear that if you say no to a single project, you’re never going to get hit up again,” says Mullinkosson on Zoom from Chengdu, China, where he lives. “At the end of the day, we’re just making movies — like, this isn’t that serious.”

Sanchez hesitated at first about the idea of being on camera, but his loyalty to Gutiérrez proved stronger than the reservations. “I actually got a kick out of seeing myself on screen,” Sanchez says. “When you see yourself projected that big, you start to understand what you feel like to other people in the world, which was a very interesting out-of-body experience.”

“Vulnerabilities are what make movies special, especially this one because Pasqual, Raúl and Christine opened their real lives to being on camera, and it’s very personal,” says Mullinkosson. “When you can be as brave as them to share your real life, something beautiful happens.”

Gutiérrez and Sanchez, who also became a father soon after our interview, are currently developing a new feature film, “Golden Boy,” which they describe as a “Stand by Me”-type of story about four Edgars. One of them thinks former boxer Oscar De La Hoya is his long-lost father. They go on a journey across California to confront De La Hoya.

“Music is where we started, but the goal has always been to do long-form, to do features,” says Gutiérrez. “And now with ‘Serious People,’ one is out there.”

Source link

West Ham cool interest in Jorgen Strand Larsen

West Ham‘s interest in Norway forward Jorgen Strand Larsen has cooled after discovering Wolves want £40m for the 25-year-old.

The Hammers are committed to bolstering Nuno Espirito Santo’s squad with striking reinforcements.

Larsen was at the top of their list of potential signings and Wolves boss Rob Edwards did not close the door on the Norway forward leaving Molineux next month following the 1-1 draw at Manchester United.

However, West Ham think the price Wolves are wanting for Strand Larsen, who only signed a new contract to 2030 in September, is too high. They are looking at alternatives, although it cannot be ruled out that their interest might be revived.

Newcastle had bids of £50m and £55m turned down in the summer, although since then Wolves have embarked on a calamitous season that looks certain to end in relegation back to the Championship.

“We will make the right call on every individual,” said Edwards.

“Only time will tell. It will be a club decision and I am sure there will be movement in and out because we want to make an impact in the month.”

West Ham, who drew 2-2 with Brighton at the London Stadium to close the gap on fourth-from-bottom Nottingham Forest to four points, are now looking elsewhere, with Crystal Palace front-man Eddie Nketiah believed to be of interest.

Nketiah has scored four goals in 19 appearances for Palace so far this season.

However, the 26-year-old former Arsenal player has only started twice in the Premier League, most recently in the 4-1 defeat at Leeds on 20 December.

Source link

U.S. signs new health deals with 9 African countries that mirror Trump’s priorities

The U.S. government has signed health deals with at least nine African countries, part of its new approach to global health funding, with agreements that reflect the Trump administration’s interests and priorities and are geared toward providing less aid and more mutual benefits.

The agreements signed so far, with Kenya, Nigeria and Rwanda among others, are the first under the new global health framework, which makes aid dependent on negotiations between the recipient country and the U.S.

Some of the countries that have signed deals either have been hit by U.S. aid cuts or have separate agreements with the Trump administration to accept and host third-country deportees, although officials have denied any linkage.

The Trump administration says the new “America First” global health funding agreements are meant to increase self-sufficiency and eliminate what it says are ideology and waste from international assistance. The deals replace a patchwork of previous health agreements under the now-dismantled U.S. Agency for International Development.

U.S. aid cuts have crippled health systems across the developing world, including in Africa, where many countries relied on the funding for crucial programs, including those responding to outbreaks of disease.

The new approach to global health aligns with President Trump’s pattern of dealing with other nations transactionally, using direct talks with foreign governments to promote his agenda abroad. It builds on his sharp turn from traditional U.S. foreign assistance, which supporters say furthered American interests by stabilizing other countries and economies and building alliances.

A different strategy

The deals mark a sharp departure from how the U.S. has provided healthcare funding over the years and mirrors the Trump administration’s interests.

South Africa, which has lost most of its U.S. funding — including $400 million in annual support — due in part to its disputes with the U.S., has not signed a health deal, despite having one of the world’s highest HIV prevalence rates.

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, reached a deal but with an emphasis on Christian-based health facilities, although it has a slight majority Muslim population. Rwanda and Uganda, which each have deportation deals with the U.S., have announced health pacts.

Cameroon, Eswatini, Lesotho, Liberia and Mozambique also are among those that have signed health deals with the U.S.

According to the Center for Global Development, a Washington think tank, the deals “combine U.S. funding reductions, ambitious co-financing expectations, and a shift toward direct government-to-government assistance.”

The deals represent a reduction in total U.S. health spending for each country, the center said, with annual U.S. financial support down 49% compared with 2024.

A faith-based deal in Nigeria, a lifeline for several others

Under its deal, Nigeria, a major beneficiary of USAID funds, would get support that has a “strong emphasis” on Christian faith-based healthcare providers.

The U.S. provided approximately $2.3 billion in health assistance to Nigeria between 2021 and 2025, mostly through USAID, official data shows. The new five-year agreement will see U.S. support at over $2 billion, while Nigeria is expected to raise $2.9 billion to boost its healthcare programs.

The agreement “was negotiated in connection with reforms the Nigerian government has made to prioritize protecting Christian populations from violence and includes significant dedicated funding to support Christian healthcare facilities,” the State Department said in a statement.

The department said “the president and secretary of State retain the right to pause or terminate any programs which do not align with the national interest,” urging Nigeria to ensure “that it combats extremist religious violence against vulnerable Christian populations.”

For several other countries, the new deals could be a lifeline after U.S. aid cuts crippled their healthcare systems and left them racing to fill the gaps.

Under its deal, Mozambique will get U.S. support of over $1.8 billion for HIV and malaria programs. Lesotho, one of the poorest countries in the world, clinched a deal worth over $232 million.

In the tiny kingdom of Eswatini, the U.S. committed to provide up to $205 million to support public health data systems, disease surveillance and outbreak response, while the country agreed to increase domestic health expenditures by $37 million.

No deal for South Africa after disputes

South Africa is noticeably absent from the list of signatories following tensions with the Trump administration.

Trump has said he will cut all financial assistance to South Africa over his widely rejected claims that it is violently persecuting its Afrikaner white minority.

The dismantling of USAID resulted in the loss of over $436 million in yearly financing for HIV treatment and prevention in South Africa, putting the program and thousands of jobs in the healthcare industry at risk.

Health compacts with countries that signed deportation deals

At least four of the countries that have reached deals previously agreed to receive third-country deportees from the U.S., a controversial immigration policy that has been a trademark of the Trump administration.

The State Department has denied any linkage between the healthcare compacts and agreements regarding accepting third-country asylum seekers or third-country deportees from the United States. However, officials have said that political considerations unrelated to health issues may be part of the negotiations.

Rwanda, one of the countries with a deportation deal with the U.S., signed a $228-million health pact requiring the U.S. to support it with $158 million.

Uganda, another such country, signed a health deal worth nearly $2.3 billion in which the U.S. will provide up to $1.7 billion. Eswatini also has started receiving flights with deported prisoners from the United States.

Magome and Gumede write for the Associated Press. AP writers Evelyne Musambi in Nairobi, Kenya; Dyepkazah Shibayan in Abuja, Nigeria; Mark Banchereau in Dakar, Senegal; and Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.

Source link