SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " funding " 2,703 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
AI and Funding Cuts Worsen Crisis for Child Abuse Investigators
The unrelenting pace of AI-generated child abuse material is pushing law enforcement to the brink.
Outrage rescued an important ocean research program. Crucial ones remain at risk.
Senators saved a network of ocean sensors from "supreme stupidity." But other cutting-edge efforts are running out of funding, too.
Romania’s Political Turmoil Deepens After PM Hopeful Loses Vote
Romania’s prime minister nominee failed to win parliamentary approval for his proposed cabinet, prolonging a political deadlock that risks stalling key reforms for crucial European Union recovery funding.
We must support 'strange' science, RNA biologist Jeff Coller writes in The New York Times
Without federal funding, American researchers can't chase scientific questions that may lead to lifesaving cures, Hopkins RNA biologist Jeff Coller writes in 'The New York Times'
State advances over four hundred projects in bid for Rural Health Transformation Program funding
The state received about 1800 letters of interest from organizations, and those chosen are advancing to the application phase, or are getting grants for project planning.
The Trump administration is threatening to cut DHS funding unless states change their election laws. Here are their demands
Miller-Meeks Joins Governor Reynolds to Announce Major Milestone for Rural Health Care in Iowa
Congresswoman Mariannette Miller-Meeks, M.D. joined Governor Kim Reynolds in Muscatine to announce that Iowa has become the first state in the nation to fully allocate its first-year funding from the Rural Health Transformation Program created through the Working Families Tax Cuts.
Trump delays billions in HHS grants with political review
The Trump administration is holding up billions in grant funding because of a new political review process that goes up through Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the White House.
Detroit's women's sports bar, Bar IX, launches crowdfunding campaign -- How to get involved
As Detroit's women's sports bar continues to draw crowds to pop-up watch parties, the team behind Bar IX is now centering its efforts on finding a permanent place to call home.
SMI Provider Raises $17M for Expansion Efforts
Vanna Health, a serious mental illness provider, has secured $17 million in a Series B funding round. The San Francisco-based company will use the
Mobile health tops early RHTP funding trends
State rural health transformation programs aim to overcome high startup costs and allow rural providers to deliver complex care locally with remote ultrasound, RPM and other mobile health technologies, says one industry expert.
University of Hawaiʻi researchers awarded $12M grant to advance AI, data science in medicine
The funding will be dedicated to accelerating biomedical discoveries through AI and data science to benefit people in Hawaiʻi and the Pacific region, and worldwide.
California is getting ready to increase a health insurance tax. Will it affect your premium?
Legislators approved a redesigned health tax that shifts more cost onto privately insured Californians to help preserve billions in federal Medi-Cal funding.
Prosper AI lands $30M backed by Andreessen Horowitz to build AI workforce for healthcare operations
Nine months after announcing its seed funding round, Prosper AI banked $30 million to scale its agentic AI platform to power administrative tasks from patient scheduling to insurance verification a | Prosper AI banked $30 million to scale its agentic AI platform to power administrative tasks from patient scheduling to insurance verification and patient billing.
Health clinic in St. Louis loses federal funding. CareSTL was already collapsing.
CareSTL Health, which serves low-income and uninsured patients, has already shuttered four of its five locations.
The feds promised Minnesota’s rural hospitals grant money to ease massive Medicaid cuts. Hospitals are still waiting.
Rural health care providers in Minnesota and across the country are bracing for heavy Medicaid funding cuts next year.
Health equity researchers fear unseen level of scrutiny under White House proposal
Health disparities researchers say a new White House proposal could disqualify much of their work from federal funding — perhaps the most serious threat yet to the future of their field.
California is getting ready to increase a health insurance tax — will it affect your premium?
Legislators this week approved a health tax bill meant to continue critical federal funding for the state’s Medicaid program.
AI giants are funding ad wars in races across the country
In some races, the AI-backed political groups have spent more than the candidates they are backing.
Opinion | We Need to Keep Funding Weird Science
Science turned a serendipitous finding about lizard venom into one of the most important drugs of the century, but that type of research is getting harder to do.
Hawai‘i set to receive nearly $25 million for Native Hawaiian health care
US Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) announced that the five Native Hawaiian Health Care Systems and Papa Ola Lōkahi, which coordinates health care programs and services for Native Hawaiians, will receive nearly $25 million in federal funding from the US Department of Health and Human Services.
Philadelphia-area STI disparities still fueled by stigma and misinformation, health care leaders say
At a Philadelphia panel on HIV and health equity, experts pointed to gaps in education, funding and access to care.
UAM lands $500,000 grant for Weevil Wellness Center, with funding through March 2027
The University of Arkansas at Monticello (UAM) received a $500,000 grant to construct an integrated health facility designed to serve students, faculty, and sta
Measles, landfill solar and a bridge over the Sound: CT Politics news
Plus: CSCU’s investigation, rural healthcare, utility profits, brownfields funding, and Chris Murphy's loneliness legislation.
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders announces $5 million in funding for UA Food Sciences Center of Excellence
Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders has allocated $5 million from the Restricted Reserve fund to the University of Arkansas Department of Food Science for the construction of a Center of Excel…
Letter: Trustees play politics over funding school district | Morgan Hill Times | Morgan Hill, San Martin, CA
Voters should have had the opportunity to decide on a bond. But these three board trustees denied that opportunity and made it clear that evening that our students’ needs do not guide their decisions, but their own personal feelings toward Superintendent Dr. Carmen Garcia do.
Congressman attacks Evers for his push to apply for federal funding
Wisconsin applied for federal funding through the Rural Health Transformation Program, which was included in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill.
Trump backs down on plans to slash ocean science funding
The U-turn takes pressure off the EU, which would struggle to fill the ocean monitoring funding gap.
HHS announces over $700M in grants for mental health initiatives, addiction treatment and housing programs
The money includes $238.6 million to improve suicide crisis hotlines and $223.1 million to expand community behavioral health clinics. Dozens of programs all over the country are set to receive the funding.
NIH Chief Defends His Management of the Agency
National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya hit back Thursday at critics of funding cuts and other shifts at the agency, accusing them of resisting the kind of “fundamental change” he believes is necessary for modernizing the NIH and improving scientific research. Bhattacharya said that ...
How Healthcare Policy Shifts Are Reshaping Care for Vulnerable Patients
The Bronx is the poorest congressional district in America and the sickest county in the state of New York. Montefiore Einstein, the academic medical center in the Bronx, serves a population that is 85% dependent on Medicaid and Medicare. As federal Medicaid rules tighten and funding shrinks, more ...
Get Funding for Your Small Business with Grants!
Funding your small business is easier with GrantWatch at your side. Discover grants for small businesses and learn what it takes to apply!
Architect Labs raises $24 million to take on Broadcom, Marvell custom chip business
Architect Labs said on Thursday it had raised $24 million in seed funding to build a company that will use artificial intelligence to speed and ease the design of custom chips.
Colorado’s gamble on sports betting
A Denver Post special report examining how the legalization of online sports betting impacted addiction, water funding and athletes.
How sports betting became Colorado’s ticket to funding $140 million in water conservation projects
Supporters say the gambling money is a godsend. Critics say legalized sports betting has come at a cost — fueling an addiction crisis that Colorado is unprepared for.
Braun bets on AI to boost Hoosier businesses amid growing backlash
An effort to close AI use gaps statewide comes with unclear funding and growing skepticism.
RFK Jr. presents $700 million in mental health funding, but experts say grants aren’t new
RFK Jr. presents funding intended to address mental illness and addiction, particularly among homeless people.
Yakuza Creator's New Game Seems To Have Lost Its Director After NetEase Reportedly Pulled Funding
Daisuke Sato is now describing himself as 'ex-Nagoshi Studio'
US Health Department announces over $700 million to combat mental health, addiction, homelessness
U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Wednesday announced more than $700 million in new funding opportunities aimed at tackling mental illness, addiction and homelessness.
HHS announces over $700 million to fund behavioral health, other initiatives
The Department of Health and Human Services June 17 announced it will provide more than $700 million in funding for initiatives on mental illness, addiction and homelessness.
House bill would strip federal funding from colleges with alleged ties to Chinese Communist Party
Rep. Pat Fallon introduces the Espionage Protection Act to cut federal funding for universities with alleged ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
Secretary Kennedy Announces Over $700 Million in New Funding to Address Mental Illness, Addiction, Homelessness
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. announced a funding opportunity for the STREETS program to support recovery and evidence-based treatment.
Quality care, reliable funding are top issues for seniors
Good Samaritan leaders are meeting directly with members of Congress and staff as they advocate for quality senior care, funding and workers.
This week in Santa Cruz County business: Santa Cruz-based crowdfunding site, Sea Dubs mark milestones; next steps for Pajaro Valley apple growers
In her weekly look at local business, Jessica M. Pasko notes highlights for Climatize and the Santa Cruz Warriors, what South County farmers are hearing in the wake of bad news from Martinelli's and plenty more comings, goings and dates to know.
Latvia pilots citizen engagement in research grant evaluations
Latvia has introduced an element of citizen engagement to the evaluation of nationally funded research grants. The aim is to both create more connections between science and society, and to improve the quality of its evaluations. The move comes as research funders across Europe are experimenting with ways to improve evaluation processes in the face of a sharpened focus on science’s impact on society. Evaluators of grant applications submitted to Latvia’s Fundamental and Applied Research Programme (FLPP), the country’s main research funder, will this year have the option of consulting citizen feedback on challenges the public thinks science should focus on to inform their decisions. “In recent years, both public discussions and policy-level debates in Latvia have highlighted the importance of demonstrating how publicly funded research contributes to society, the economy and the resolution of real-world challenges,” said a source at the Latvian Council of Science (LCS), which manages the FLPP. “At the same time, research institutions themselves expressed interest in improving the project evaluation framework while continuing to ensure that funding is awarded to the highest-quality projects,” the source added. The citizen input comes from a survey that was conducted between 25 February and 16 March 2025, to which 1,737 people responded. It gathered information on what the public views as problem areas for Latvia, and the role of science and technology in providing solutions to these problems. A summary of these responses has been included as an annex to the FLPP 2026 call for proposals that evaluators can refer to, purely in an advisory manner, when judging proposals. Results from the survey show that the main problem areas identified by the public were in healthcare and public health, followed by the development of new treatment methods and medicines, and then digital technology, data security and cyber security. At the bottom of the list was research aimed at acquiring new knowledge about the universe, matter and the laws of nature. Further analysis looked at the public view of the possible role of science in solving these problems. The survey charted 4,167 individual responses based on open-ended questions that were derived from the participants’ answers. The analysis again found that medical and health sciences topped the scoring, with 788 responses referring to the field. Humanities and the arts were bottom of the list, with 625. Digging further into the details, the survey suggests citizens are aware of and concerned about a number of research areas. This includes technologies and innovation to improve the environment or reduce pollution, the development of modern military technologies and cybersecurity tools, and the development and application of artificial intelligence, among others. “We hope this initiative will help strengthen public trust in science and create a more meaningful dialogue between researchers and society,” the LCS source said, adding that it offers benefits to researchers, evaluators and to the general public. More space for citizen engagement in evaluationsThere is a gradual but increasing use of citizen engagement in research evaluation processes around Europe, especially in healthcare, but it remains relatively rare, said Henry Sauermann, a professor at the European School of Management and Technology in Berlin and an expert in citizen science.“Given that we are at a point where citizen involvement is extremely limited, there is presumably space for more, but it's not that we should do it just because we want to do it,” he told Science|Business. He said some research lends itself better to having citizen input, and this usually tends to be on the applied end of the science spectrum where the public can offer useful feedback based on their experiences. He added that advising scientists on certain topics to study is also a useful approach, in the way that Latvia is doing. “The public does fund a lot of science, there's a lot of tax money going into this. We of course do want to preserve academic freedom, but it's also not unreasonable to incorporate more feedback or input from citizens where possible,” he said. Related articlesCitizen science: where, when, and how to let the public contribute to researchHow can Europe cope with a flood of AI-assisted research grant proposals?Data Corner: Horizon Europe’s AI, digital and data call success rate is 5.2%There are several ways of involving citizens in science funding. The most minimal way is having a few representatives on a panel, such as members of a patient group or union. The most direct way is crowdsourcing funding for specific projects. There is an increasing number of online platforms that allow the public to chip in to support scientific proposals.Sauermann studied this in a recent paper and found that it can have its uses, but it still is not clear if there are benefits to it. There are various assumptions linked to citizen engagement, for example that it increases public trust in science, or that it provides a representative view of what the public thinks about science. These are not necessarily true, Sauermann found. People who participate in engagement activities tend to already be very trusting of science, and, on the whole, it is generally the well-off and well educated who contribute, giving a narrow view of public opinion. On whether citizen input can help manage the increasing number of proposals that are being submitted due to assistance from AI, Sauermann is more sceptical. “The obvious answer to the flood of AI-written proposals is AI-driven evaluation,” he said, adding that it doesn’t mean citizen engagement shouldn’t be a part of evaluations in a well thought-out manner. Southern Denmark’s successful approachOne successful example of citizen engagement in science evaluations was implemented in southern Denmark. Between 2019 and 2025, citizens in the region were invited to vote to fund one of five pre-selected projects in the field of healthcare. The project, called A Healthier Southern Denmark, was a collaboration between regional authorities, the University of Southern Denmark, and two media partners. Over the seven years, there were 75,000 votes and significant public engagement online and on social media. “It was a bit of a wild project, we’d never done something like that before and we were a bit nervous about what would be said in the media about it. But actually, people were very positive,” said Anne Kathrine Overgaard, one of the main organisers of the project from the University of Southern Denmark. The university and its researchers have learned a lot from the experience, particularly about engaging with society and shaping their research to match real-world needs. This is important with Europe’s increasing focus on competitiveness and bringing innovations to market faster, Overgaard said. She hopes to see more citizen engagement in evaluation processes and in science more broadly. “For many years, citizen engagement has been a bit of an add-on to proposals, just to check a box. But I think things are changing,” she said. It’s less about citizens just gathering data and more “about the dialogue between the public and the scientists,” she said. The initiative ended last year as the team wanted to regroup to find fresh momentum. The development of AI and AI-written proposals has made Overgaard reflect on how the project could be reworked to help evaluators. She hopes to bring it back in the future. “It could be a good idea to try this initiative again in a slightly re-worked format,” she said.
Trump accused Obama of funding Iranian terrorism. His agreement could grant Iran access to much more money
President Donald Trump’s nascent agreement with Iran is beset by problems right now, but at the top of the list may be the issue of money flowing to Iran.
The science behind restoring the White House South Lawn after UFC Freedom 250
After UFC Freedom 250, this company plans to provide funding, resources and technical expertise to restore the White House South Lawn.
Political contribution limits in Oregon take effect in January — but it’s unclear if election officials will
Three months after lawmakers provided more guidance and funding for the law's rollout, there are still several major unknowns.
Researchers receive funding to launch USC’s first clinical study of psilocybin for mental health
Related News NIH investment totaling 30.7M will expand USC-led AI effort to decode Alzheimer’s disease April 2, 2026 USC study maps brain network changes linked to bipolar disorder severity and […]
Chautauqua County Announces Funding Opportunity for Youth Sports Programs
MAYVILLE, N.Y. — The Chautauqua County Youth Bureau is looking to expand opportunities for young people to experience the many benefits of youth sports, including teamwork, leadership, physical activity and personal growth.
What does the appointment of H.E. Monica Geingos as PMNCH Board Chair mean for Namibia, Africa and the future of global health leadership?
The appointment of H.E. Monica Geingos as PMNCH Board Chair marks a significant moment for global health leadership. As funding pressures and health inequities grow, her leadership reflects the increasing role of African voices in shaping global health governance and advancing equity, accountability and investment for women’s, children’s and adolescents’ health and well-being.
Aphelion and Life is Strange developer Don't Nod in trouble as it struggles to secure funding for its next project
Don't Nod is in trouble yet again, as the company prepares to address a shortage of cash in its reserves.
Wisconsin is offering $40 million for rural health care, part of Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill'
The funding will go to hospitals, clinics and other providers to hire community health workers, create partnerships and buy dental care technology.
Making Sure Open Science Stays Open
Digital research infrastructure is essential to open science, but it is often overlooked and vulnerable to policy changes and funding cuts.
Why U.S. science funding needs reform
The federal funding system for scientific research in the U.S. is crumbling. Here’s how it can be rebuilt
Alan Guth
The M.I.T. cosmologist shares his thoughts on physics, the federal funding of science and the resilience of the scientific community
3 La Grande business could get a helping hand
LA GRANDE — La Grande’s Urban Renewal Agency and Urban Renewal Advisory Commission meet Monday, June 29, for a joint special session to allocate project funding. Mountain West Plaza, Flying […]
Threats to Science Research, Changes to OMB Rules, and How We Fight Back
Join the AAUP, AFT Higher Education, and Stand Up for Science for an action hour on the proposed OMB rules that would politicize science research funding.
What federal cuts to science funding could mean for the Great Lakes
Some groups that do research and collect data on the Great Lakes are facing existential threats as the annual budgeting process for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration gets underway.
Business Monday: New small business network offers support for aspiring entrepreneurs on the Big Island
The new network seeks to cultivate local businesses grounded in cultural values and shared prosperity through mentorship, funding and resources.
Berkeley Wellness Center to close as California shifts mental health funding
The arts-focused community space for people with mental health challenges is one of seven wellness centers in Alameda County that will close.
Aderholt bill funding health, education includes millions for Alabama hospitals
A U.S. House Committee passed a bill to fund domestic spending on health and education programs, including millions for Alabama hospitals.
InStride Health lands $30M series C to expand pediatric mental health services
InStride Health, a provider of specialty mental healthcare to children, teens and young adults, landed $30 million in series C funding to fuel its growth as it expands to new markets and broadens i | InStride Health, a provider of specialty mental healthcare to children, teens and young adults, landed $30 million in series C funding to fuel its growth as it expands to new markets and broadens its network of payer partners.
State names first round of projects funded by federal rural health program
The state this week announced its first round of federal rural health grant funding, which allocated $36 million to projects to help communities with one-time infrastructure improvements and improve technological gaps. The Nevada Health Authority on Monday named the 25 projects that were awarded funding as part of the $180 million part of the Rural […]
Scientists warn US proposal would politicize federal science funding
Scientists warn an OMB proposal would give political appointees control over federal research funding, end peer review and ban DEI and gender studies, threatening US scientific progress.
Trump litigation has helped lift AG Campbell's political star
Attorney General Andrea Campbell has sued the federal government more than 50 times since President Trump took office, using millions of dollars in extra taxpayer funding to help form the state-level bulwark that, more often than not, has won in court.
Column: New federal rules threaten scientific research
Proposed changes to US research funding and administration threaten public health and scientific progress. Political oversight and restrictions on research topics.
SBA moves to revise 8(a) rules while preserving tribal, ANC eligibility
Details By Brian Edwards Native Contracting June 13, 2026 The U.S. Small Business Administration has proposed changes to its 8(a) Business Development Program that would eliminate race-based presumptions of social disadvantage for individually owned businesses while leaving eligibility standards unchanged for tribally owned enterprises, Alaska Native corporations and other Native entity-owned participants. In both the title and summary of the proposed rule published in the Federal Register, SBA emphasized that the changes only apply to individually owned firms and “do not impact entity-owned firms,” including tribes, Alaska Native corporation, Native Hawaiian organizations and community development corporations. The proposed rule, announced June 11, would require all individual applicants seeking admission to the 8(a) program to submit evidence demonstrating social disadvantage. Membership in a racial or ethnic group alone would no longer establish eligibility, according to the SBA. For Indian Country, the agency said eligibility standards for businesses owned by federally recognized tribes, Alaska Native corporations, Native Hawaiian organizations and community development corporations would remain unchanged. The proposal comes after the Department of Defense reaffirmed that participation by tribes and Alaska Native corporations in the 8(a) program is based on their political status under federal law rather than diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. In a May 28 letter to Alaska's Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Michael P. Duffey wrote that participation by federally recognized tribes and Alaska Native corporations in federal programs is “grounded in their political status as Native Americans, not DEI initiatives.” The SBA proposal follows a 2023 federal court ruling that found unconstitutional the program's rebuttable presumption that members of certain racial and ethnic groups were socially disadvantaged. SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler said the proposed rule would establish a single standard for individually owned applicants by requiring evidence of social disadvantage. The 8(a) Business Development Program provides participating firms with business development assistance and access to federal set-aside and sole-source contracting opportunities. The program remains a major source of federal contracting revenue for tribal enterprises and Alaska Native corporations. Native-owned firms received $16.1 billion of the program's approximately $26 billion in federal contract awards during fiscal 2024, according to data previously reported by Tribal Business News. The proposal also arrives amid ongoing concerns from Native contractors about SBA administration of the program. In May, the Native American Contractors Association and 53 Native-owned businesses urged SBA to address delays in processing 8(a) applications, saying some reviews had stretched beyond regulatory deadlines and appeared to have stalled since August 2025. The proposed rule is open for public comment through July 13. The Federal Register notice does not reference tribal consultation or indicate whether SBA determined consultation was unnecessary because tribal eligibility standards are unchanged. The SBA has not announced when the proposed rule would take effect. The agency is expected to accept public comments before issuing a final rule.About The AuthorAuthor: Brian EdwardsBrian Edwards is associate publisher and associate editor of Tribal Business News and Native News Online. He is a longtime publisher, editor, business reporter and serial entrepreneur. Subscribe Today!Other Articles by this authorDefense Department reaffirms tribal, ANC eligibility in SBA 8(a) programTribal heritage projects eligible for up to $100K in federal funding through NPS programIHS launches tribal long-term care construction initiative with three projectsIḷisaġvik College acquires site for long-planned Utqiaġvik campus This article is available to paid digital subscribers. Click here to sign in or get access.
Nurses rally in Kalamazoo over concerns about federal health care funding changes
Nurses at Beacon Kalamazoo gathered in Bronson Park on Saturday as part of a nationwide “Red Alert” tour, raising concerns about federal healthcare funding.
In Retrospect: Poland, Russia, Europe
In April I spent a few days with Zryw, a Polish non-profit organization that recruits young people to enter politics and public life. Their aim is to build a new generation of civic leaders in Poland. I’ve followed their evolution from the beginning; my son is one of the founders. (“Zryw” means “impulse” or “burst of speed” in Polish). Julie Chmielewska, one of Zryw’s leaders, interviewed me at the event. Here is the conversation, lightly edited for grammar and context: Julia Chmielewska: Assuming that culture shapes institutions, could we conclude that some cultures are more prone to authoritarianism? Anne Applebaum: I don’t think so. Every culture, every nation, and every country has the potential for change. When we look at history, we can see that nations do change. Poland has changed, for example, from the 1980s to today. There’s a completely different mentality here than the one I encountered when I first visited, in 1988. The current generation sees the world through a different frame. So no, I don’t believe that certain nations are doomed to authoritarianism, or to anything. Of course, there are political and cultural traditions, but they can always be challenged. JC: So do you think there’s something intrinsic in human nature that pushes people to democracy, freedom? AA: I think there is something in human nature, a deep instinct, that pushes people towards freedom, yes. People who live in authoritarian countries – and I’ve heard this from them over and over again – sooner or later find themselves angered by a feeling of helplessness. They can see the unfairness of crooked courts, irrational political decisions. They naturally dislike the fact that somebody has all the power while they have none. In those circumstances, people who have no political background at all sometimes are politicized just by that frustration. I’m thinking of Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, for example, who was a Belarusian housewife, until the circumstances of her husband’s arrest forced her to become a politician. I met a woman who is a Uyghur from China, and who had come to live in Turkey. After several of her family members were arrested, she too was propelled into a political role. These kinds of experiences make people interested in democracy or political reform, even if they thought they didn’t care. I also think that the opposite is true: some people instinctively prefer homogeneity, order, hierarchy. They don’t like the confrontation of opinions or the noise of debate, and they lean towards a single leader or a unified regime. I think that most of modern history is shaped by the clash between those two different sides of human nature. JC: Which force do you find more powerful today? AA: I think they both have a lot of power and there’s no way of predicting who wins. Even in countries that seem very shut off or stuck in an authoritarian system can change. We’ve seen that happen. And vice versa, I think democracies can also begin to fail and slide into authoritarianism. So it’s very important not to be complacent in either direction. JC: I want to go into your history and your experiences. You’ve lived in Russia during a time of incredible change in the late 80s, and then you came back to do research in post-Soviet Russia. AA: I was a student in Russia just before the collapse of the Soviet Union. I then traveled and worked there extensively in the 1990s, and I met people who really were full of hope. They hoped that Russia could become a democracy, or at least a place that guaranteed freedom of speech, freedom of the press. These weren’t ideas that came from Washington. Although now the narrative in the Kremlin is different, I met many people who were working towards exactly that kind of transformation. A friend of mine ran a series of seminars – once a year, and then later several times a year, in cities all over Russia – designed to get people to discuss politics in new ways. She invited young politicians and journalists, as well as foreigners. I went to many of them, in Moscow as well as Volgograd and Novosibirsk. Over two decades, hundreds of people came to these seminars, and all of them wanted Russia to be different. I remain convinced that many Russians still want Russia to be different. It’s just that the old system, in the form of Putin, a representative of that system, returned. The KGB reimposed their power. And this wasn’t because of something to do with culture, this was to do with money and politics, and who was in charge. JC: You’ve partially answered my question... I wanted to ask whether that excitement of the 1990s was an exception from the Russian historical norm which has been rather authoritarian? AA: Of course, if you look at the history of Russia since the 18th century, there have always been liberal groups, reformers and revolutionaries. There were the Decembrists, in the early 19th century, and the rural populists later on, who tried to organize the peasantry. A significant group of liberal Russians appeared at the turn of the 20th century, people like the father of the writer Vladimir Nabokov, who was a Russian politician before the revolution. These groups were small in number, but sometimes had a broader significance. The Russian dissident movement in the 1950s and 1960s actually invented the modern human rights movement. It was their idea to hold the leaders of the Soviet Union accountable for the language they used, to remind them of the treaties they had signed and the promised they had made. They created the Helsinki group, for example, that held Soviet leadership to the language of the Helsinki Treaty, which formally ended the Second World War and which contained guarantees of human rights, at least on paper. That idea spread to Eastern Europe, and similar tactics were used here in Poland. (Benjamin Nathans recently wrote a great book about the Soviet dissidents, To the Success of Our Hopeless Cause) JC: But seemingly, even if they do ever get power, they could never hold on to it. AA: We don’t know, because they have never really had power. But in any case, we also don’t know what will happen in the future. There is no reason to assume that Russia will forever be condemned to totalitarianism. Even during the first fifteen years of Putin’s regime there was some form of democratic politics. Only when the full-scale war began did he bring everything to an end: he shut down all remaining independent organizations and killed his most important opponent, Alexi Navalny. But does that mean he is popular, that he enjoys legitimacy? Even now, we don’t really know what Russians think about him, or about the war. There is no way of doing real polling in Russia because nobody will answer an independent pollster over the phone. JC: Do you think that the flock of young people, especially young men, who fled Russia after the start of the war represent a continuation of liberal movements that refuse to partake in the authoritarian state, or do you think they are moving for the sake of self-preservation – “I don’t want to go to the army, so I leave”? AA: I’m sure it’s both. I actually know many people who left Russia for political reasons either in the very last years before the war, or else just after the war began. JC: And do you see a change in the young generation versus the old one that have fled? AA: It’s hard for me to say because the people who I know were mostly already politicized. I do know some younger people who left, but most of them were already either active in the opposition, or working as journalists. Many of them very self-consciously think of themselves as maintaining Russian culture abroad, just as in the 20th century the Soviet dissidents or the anti-communist White Russians once thought of themselves as people who maintained the true Russian culture, outside of Bolshevik Russia. JC: Let’s move on to Poland. One of your first experiences with Poland was reporting on Margaret Thatcher’s first state visit, in the autumn of 1988. You followed her around the farmers’ market. AA: She was making a symbolic gesture. She wanted to welcome free markets, but the only one she could really visit was the farmers’ market at Hala Mirowska. JC: And I want to talk about this area because today you can look out of any window in that district, Mirów, and see rows and rows of skyscrapers. How does it feel to see a country built from the ground in such a short time, both politically and economically? AA: You know, when you’re living in a period of dramatic change, it’s always hard to know whether the change is positive or negative. The transformation in Poland created winners and losers, as well as new classes of people, new political movements of different kinds. At the time, it sometimes just felt like turbulence. Now, we can look back at the 1990s and early 2000s in Poland and see in retrospect that the country was headed in towards prosperity and European integration. In around 2009 or 2010, I remember speaking to a woman who worked cleaning government offices, and who asked me if her daughter should study in Amsterdam or in London. This seemed to me to be a real transformation, and it happened very fast: within a few years, Poles stopped feeling like second-class Europeans, and a generation of younger Poles appeared who had no qualms about crossing borders. JC: We again live in turbulent times. Do you think we’re heading towards positive outcomes? AA: I can’t make predictions, because everything that happens tomorrow depends on what people do today. Also, history doesn’t have a trajectory. It doesn’t move in a particular direction. You only think it does afterwards. As I said, you can look afterwards at Poland in the 1990s and you could say this was a period of great progress. But not everybody at the time saw that. Sometimes people are very wrong about a given country’s trajectory. I remember people writing about Ukraine in the 1990s, about how dangerous it was that Ukraine was independent, that this was going to be an anti-semitic state, that Ukrainian nationalism was going to come back... and although you can say many bad things about Ukraine, the country made many bad choices, actually it became a pretty tolerant state which now has a Jewish president and until recently a Muslim defense minister. JC: In the 1990s Poland’s and Ukraine’s GDP were roughly similar. Ukraine was even a bit richer. So the starting point was similar for both of these countries, but they’ve turned out very, very differently. Even if we stop in 2014. Why do you think Ukraine “chose East”? Was it external influence? AA: No, I think Ukraine was in a different position. First of all, central and eastern Ukraine had been part of the Soviet Union since the 1920s, and had therefore experienced a longer period of occupation, repression, Sovietization and even Russification. Ukraine did not have, as Poland did, an alternative elite: a large cadre of economists and politicians, who already had some experience in opposition politics and in independent thinking. In Poland, the transformative finance minister, Leszek Balcerowicz, had already thought about how an economy might be decentralized before he took office. We can argue about how successful he was, but at least he was prepared to try something new. In Ukraine, people weren’t prepared. For one, there hadn’t been much space even for an illegal opposition in the previous couple of decades. Ukraine was also in many ways still emerging from colonial occupation. For the previous couple of centuries, many of the most capable Ukrainians had moved to Russia, and the first generation of leaders in independent Ukraine tended to be former Soviet apparatchiks. They didn’t immediately seek to become closer to western Europe. Instead, they looked for some kind of economic and political “third way” and an accomodation with Russia. Ukraine became stuck in this position, half-in, half-out and became pretty profoundly corrupt. JC: The Polish alternative elite had a vision of where they wanted the country to go. I think the general perception now is that this vision ends with the next election, right? Is this a natural process of gaining power? AA: Their vision, and it was shared by the time by politicians who now call themselves both left and right, was that Poland should join the EU and NATO, as fast as possible. My husband (Radek Sikorski) was in the very first government that said it wanted to join NATO. At the time this was taken very badly in Washington: the demand for NATO membership absolutely came from Poland, not from the US. But even then, in the early 1990s, many Poles already understood that the Russian sphere of influence would grow once again, that it was important to become part of the transatlantic alliance and an integrated Europe as fast as possible: NATO, the EU, the Council of Europe, all of the trading and security alliances. That consensus lasted through several different governments and over many years, even governments containing former communists. For twenty years, right, left and center disagreed about many things, but they all agreed on the direction that the country should go. In retrospect, that consensus created the basis for prosperity in Poland. JC: And regarding the Polish-Ukrainian relations. We know that antagonisms, e.g. the myth of Wołyń [a massacre of Poles that took place in what is now Western Ukraine, in 1943] are increasingly used in Polish political discourse today. In Ukraine, nationalist historians make heroes out of UPA, the Ukrainian revolutionary army, which is held responsible for this tragedy. Where do you see a start for burying the hatchet? Is the reconciliation of our nations possible? AA: So here’s a strange thing: For more than a decade after they both gained independence, Poland and Ukraine participated in a number of projects that were designed to solve exactly these kinds of Polish-Ukrainian differences. Books were published that were jointly written by Polish and Ukrainian historians, monuments were built. These projects were successful: If you’d asked me this question in 2010, I would have said that there are no real historical issues between Poland and Ukraine, that the two countries had mostly reconciled. For a number of reasons, this began to shift. In Poland, children and grandchildren of victims of the Wołyń massacre felt their tragedy hadn’t been fully recognized. In Ukraine, nationalist groups wanted the UPA partisans who had fought against the Soviet Union recognized for their heroism, despite the fact that some in this broad and not well-defined group were also linked to Wołyń. In both eastern Poland and western Ukraine, the memory of the ethnic cleansing that took place there in the late 1940s - Poles were moved West, Ukrainians East - to accomodate new borders has left feelings of displacement and bitterness. The wave of Ukrainian immigration, which started before the war, may have provoked some of this. But don’t underestimate the role played by Russia, which has always wanted to create discord between Poland and Ukraine, and pumps out propaganda to that effect in both countries. Vandalism on both sides of the border, damage done to cemeteries and monuments, is sometimes carried out by provacateurs working for Russia, just to create bad feelings. The Polish-Ukrainian conflict also hides a different reality: although there are real grievances and bad memories, the truth is that the biggest tragedies both nations experienced in the twentieth century were inflicted by the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. That should unite these two countries, not divide them. JC: This week (19.04.2026 – Ed.) in Hungary we saw that using historical narratives to create grievance has no longer worked. Are you optimistic about the direction after Orban’s loss? AA: The Hungarian election was really important because it shows that people can actually resist powerful, dominant propaganda. The ruling party Fidesz controlled all of the TV, 90% of the newspapers, the constitutional court, the bureaucracy... and yet people had the nerve to vote against it and resist it. It’s also an important election because Hungary created a huge network of well-funded think tanks and foundations that were funding other far right groups and projects. So that loss is going to have a knock-on effect in other places too, maybe even in Poland. JC: What you’ve said about resisting propaganda reminds me of one of the interviews you did about talking to Russians in the post-Soviet era who claimed that people knew that the system was lying. Why do people choose to believe in these regimes anyway? AA: Because it’s useful. Stephen Kotkin, an American historian, once described how people would learn how to “speak Bolshevik”: It was just a language that you needed to use in order to get by in society. If you didn’t talk the way the regime wanted you to talk, then you might have problems, or lose your job, or your kids would not get into university. It was a way of getting along. Communist Poland was similar, at least in the early years. When I was writing a book about the Sovietization of Eastern Europe after World War II, I met a lot of people who wanted to talk a lot about the war, when many of them had done really heroic things. But almost nobody wanted to talk about the decade afterwards, between 1945 and 1956. This was when you had the short period of terror, violence and Polish Stalinism. To stay safe, people felt the need to just go along with what others were saying, or stay out of politics, or use communist jargon without necessarily believing it. I don’t judge them for it, and I wouldn’t describe all of those people as collaborators. It’s easy to feel moral certainty in retrospect, because we know that communism ended. But if you were living in 1949, it might not have been clear to you that communism was going to end. In very repressive societies, maybe about 10% of people who are really evil – collaborators, torturers. Maybe 10% of people are really brave and who find ways to resist. And then around 80% of people have kids, they have parents, they have to have jobs and they’ve had to get through it somehow. Strange though it may sound, I’ve found that the work I did on that book is now very useful in explaining some of what’s going on in the United States today. There are plenty of members of the Republican Party in Congress who know perfectly well that Donald Trump says many things that aren’t true. But they avoid criticizing him because it’s inconvenient, because they would get in trouble, because someone would attack them on the internet. So actually you don’t even need mass terror to get people to conform. JC: Is Gen Z reinventing agency? AA: We’ll see. In any generation you can find groups of people who want agency. If you live in a society that’s unfair, for example where a tiny number of people have captured most of the wealth, then at a certain point people rebel. This is always easier for younger people, who have you have less to lose. The question now is how the internet will affect the relationships between citizens and the state, and how it will change organizations. The “Twitter revolutions” people spoke about as early as 2008-9, mass protests organized online, have often proved to be very superficial. Although you can easily join something just by clicking, the work of creating a real movement requires physical participation. Successful mass movements of the past, for example the Civil Rights movement in the United States, were built by people who had spent many years together. They had participated in non-violent workshops together. They practiced and prepared. Just using the you can get everybody to show up at a certain moment, but then when the protest is broken up, nothing happens. It’s also true that the repressive regimes have more recently learned how to use the internet to undermine leaders and movements. Most of all, they now understand how to make people cynical. The form of propaganda that most modern authoritarians use - and I think the Russians really pioneered this - deploys sneering cynicism. Instead of praising the rulers, the regime propagandists mock the opposition movement leadership for being supposedly corrupt or sexually degenerate, with the goal of undermining any kind of idealism. JC: MAGA grew on the internet? AA: MAGA is a real grassroots movement. They had symbols, red hats, they showed up at rallies. But you’re right that the cynicism, the sarcasm and the distrust that the movement embodies came originally from the internet, and this is different. Fifty years ago, most European political parties had a social base in real organizations, in trade unions for Social Democrats, in church groups for Christian Democrats. As people stopped going to church and as the trade unions became smaller, the social base of these parties disappeared. Now people who wouldn’t have known one another in the past meet on the internet and create new movements, many of which don’t last. JC: Is history ending? Going in stale circles? AA: History never ends. In truth, human beings want contradictory things at the same time: order and freedom, stability and change. These things are never resolved, and when a society swings too far in one direction, people always push it the other way. But each time that happens, the result is different. Certainly it is true that we are now in a period when old philosophers and ideas from the 1930s are undergoing a revival. Carl Schmitt, who was a philosopher who was very influential on the Nazis, is back as an influence on both the far left and the far right, once again inspiring people to think that all politics has to be existential, that all politics is about defining and defeating enemies. In the US, some are also bringing back dominionism, the idea that we need a Christian and not a secular state. It’s also true that we are living through a more fundamental shift. The old left-right divide, which was mostly about the size of the state, is much less important now. Instead, we are arguing about more fundamental things: what are our rights, what protects our freedom. Or how much power do we want to give small elites, versus how much power to give ordinary people. In America a small group of very wealthy people now control information, because they control the social media platforms and AI, which means they determine what people will read and learn. Finding a way to preserve preserve zones of autonomy and independent thinking, this is going to be the main task for the next generation. JC: What is the one book that a person interested in Central Europe should read? AA: You could read my book “Iron Curtain: the Crushing of Eastern Europe” which tells the story of how the Soviet Union imposed its culture on the region. Or read Tim Snyder’s history of the region, “The Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus 1569-1999.” And everyone should read “The Captive Mind” by Czesław Miłosz, which describes exactly the phenomenon we were talking about: why do people collaborate? I joined Scott Galloway and the brilliant Fiona Hill in a discussion about the wars in Ukraine and Iran, the future of global power, and what these conflicts reveal about America's role in the world. Scott told us that this was the 400th edition of his podcast, which is quite a number: My friend Francesco Chiamulera runs a brilliant series of literary events, Una Colline di Libri, A Hill of Books, in the Prosecco Hills, a region of vineyards and elegant hill towns in the Veneto, north of Venice. We did an event in Vittorio Veneto and also drove and biked around the countryside. Buy Autocracy Inc Buy Iron Curtain Open Letters, from Anne Applebaum is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
Advocates push for more funding to implement Daniel’s Law
So far, the bill hasn’t passed in the state Legislature.
ECRD 2026: Europe’s rare disease bottleneck is funding rather than science
Derisking assets to attract capital and rethinking funding models should be key priorities for Europe to retain its research pipeline.
Bipartisan Policy Center to Host Webinar on Rural Health Transformation Program
The Bipartisan Policy Center will host a webinar June 30 from 11 a.m. to noon EDT on how states are leveraging funding through the Rural Health Transformation Program (RHTP) to strengthen rural healthcare delivery through technology and workforce investments.
Infectious disease threats test public health
As Trump officials step up efforts against New World screwworm, health experts warn funding cuts may weaken disease responses.
She Used A.I. to Create Better Forecasts for Extreme Weather. Then Her Funding Was Cut.
Amy McGovern was the director of an A.I. institute dedicated to weather forecasting — until the National Science Foundation ended its funding.
House committee votes to halt prior authorization pilot impacting radiology services
Lawmakers have opted against authorizing funding for the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction Model, citing concerns it will overburden patients and providers.
New federal rule proposal threatens to reshape how U.S. science research is funded
A proposed White House rule would let political appointees override scientific peer review and control science funding decisions, writes Jeffrey Woytach of LaGrange in a letter to the editor.
Thousands protest across Austria and Poland calling for ...
Proposed budget cuts and lack of funding have led to demonstrations throughout both countries
From funding to government contracts: Hilton Head free business seminar series launches June 16
Money Talks is a free six-part business seminar series for entrepreneurs, June 16–Aug. 25 on Hilton Head Island. Sessions cover financing, legal, taxes, fraud.
Farm stress program warns funding gaps can disrupt mental health services for farmers
An extension educator says consistent funding would provide better mental health resources for farmers. Remington Rice with Michigan State University Extension’s Managing Farm Stress Program recently testified during a Michigan House subcommittee hearing about increasing demand for the program. “If we want a strong agricultural system, we have to support the people who make that system work,” […]
SAMHSA Announces $40 Million in Funding Opportunities to Prevent Addiction, and Address Child Trauma, Suicide, Mental Illness
SAMHSA, an HHS division, announced $40M for eight grant programs supporting President Trump’s Great American Recovery Initiative.
My Student Experience: Science Education Majors Receive Funding to Travel to National Science Teaching Association (NSTA) Conference in California
As a science education major in NC State’s College of Education, Gillian Grimmick is always thinking about creating lesson plans and lab activities for her future classroom. So, she was thrilled when she had the opportunity to attend the National Science Teaching Association (NSTA) conference in Anaheim, California, in April.
How Vancouver is winning over small businesses
New funding, partnerships and city support are making the once-sleepy suburb more attractive.
Perspective: Another blow to science in America (and what you can do about it)
Holly Jones looks at the plan to put science grant funding into the hands of politicians, not scientists.
Free Broward business conference connects entrepreneurs to funding, AI and more
The Broward and Beyond Business Conference will take place June 12 at the Broward County Convention Center. The event is free and open to entrepreneurs, startups and businesses of all sizes.
Political reviews are causing a huge grant backlog at the National Park Service
Hundreds of millions of dollars in National Park Service funding is sitting in limbo at the Department of Interior, awaiting a political review that longtime agency staff say has put a stranglehold on the agency’s work.
House Democrat says fight over ICE funding was ‘worth it’, despite $70B bill passing anyway
After political standoff, Wisconsin closed fish hatcheries. Anglers say it's a huge mistake.
A battle over funding for the state's fish and wildlife account and a lack spending authority forced the closure of Brule and Osceola fish hatcheries and deep cuts to fish stocking statewide.
What federal cuts to science funding could mean for the Great Lakes
Facing another round of cuts, NOAA-funded researchers worry about undermining public safety, the maritime economy, and health on the Great Lakes.
WHO urges targeted action to strengthen emergency workforce capacities for shared health risks across the Asia-Pacific region
At a time when the world is more interconnected than ever, the World Health Organization (WHO) is disseminating a comprehensive regional analysis of shared health risks across Asia and the Pacific, urging Member States to invest in enhancing workforce capacities regionwide to mitigate these risks and ensure health systems are better prepared to anticipate, tackle and withstand a range of crises and shocks. Over 100 delegates from 49 countries and areas in the Asia-Pacific region reviewed results from the regional risk analysis during the WHO-led Asia Pacific Health Security Action Framework (APHSAF) Stakeholders Meeting in Malaysia. Synthesizing insights from 21 strategic risk assessments and more than 800 multisectoral experts, the regional analysis highlighted an urgent imperative: countries must proactively invest in emergency workforce preparedness to navigate a landscape where climate hazards, disease outbreaks and geophysical events increasingly overlap. These complex converging crises create devastating, compounding impacts on health systems and communities – reiterating the need for investing in a fit-for-purpose regional health workforce and multisectoral action.Key findings: an evolving risk landscape More than half of the participating countries ranked flooding, cyclones, dengue and pandemic-potential respiratory pathogens as being of high or very high risk, while antimicrobial resistance, landslides and gastroenteritis remain widespread concerns as well. “Given that 51% – over half – of these assessed hazards are deeply interconnected, isolated health interventions are no longer sufficient,” said Dr Saia Ma’u Piukala, WHO Regional Director for the Western Pacific. “Extreme weather events like cyclones and floods directly trigger subsequent disease outbreaks, while environmental degradation – driven by sea-level rise, coastal erosion and saltwater intrusion – fuels health risks across the Pacific. Mitigating these cascading risks requires unified, cross-sectoral action linking environmental, agricultural and public health policies to build true regional resilience.” Priority recommendations for action To address critical vulnerabilities, WHO calls on Member States in the Asia-Pacific region to urgently prioritize the following strategic actions: Bridge workforce capacity gaps. Embed and standardize emergency preparedness within academia to promote regional workforce interoperability. Foster multisectoral coordination. Address ad-hoc taskforce responses and fragmented surge support through formalized contingency plans and standard operating procedures that are frequently updated and tested. Secure sustainable financing for emergencies. Overcome systemic barriers to access dedicated funding for both immediate anticipatory actions and long-term emergency preparedness initiatives. Enable emergency-ready primary health care. Embed emergency management into public health workforce readiness planning. Ensure that emergency planning is inclusive. Establish clear pathways for inclusive emergency planning that actively involves communities most at risk and other vulnerable groups. Optimize communication. Update risk communication and community engagement strategies, aligning them with seasonal risk calendars. Elevating workforce readiness to meet regional health risks While the gaps identified are significant, the Asia-Pacific region possesses solid foundational pillars, including dedicated clinicians, laboratory staff, rapid response teams, emergency medical teams and extensive community networks. However, to adequately address the compounding nature of modern crises, the various components of the emergency workforce must collaborate cohesively. True resilience depends entirely on transforming this currently fragmented workforce into a highly trained, interconnected and rapidly deployable asset. To achieve this, WHO is actively advancing regional workforce capacities through the Global Health Emergency Corps initiative. This initiative – supported by the Gates Foundation and the Institute of Philanthropy – seeks to build a seamless network of emergency workforce across borders and sectors, ensuring that when a crisis strikes, a standardized, well-coordinated and trained workforce is immediately ready to respond. “Scaling up emergency workforce readiness is no longer optional,” said Dr Gina Samaan, Regional Emergency Director for WHO in the Western Pacific. “It is the definitive factor that will determine how effectively the Asia-Pacific region safeguards health and protects lives in an increasingly unpredictable future.” ____________________For more information, or to arrange media interviews, contact: Ara Johannes, WHO Western Pacific Health Emergencies Division: johannesa@who.int WHO Western Pacific Communications: wprocom@who.int
The limits of self-funding: From the Politics Desk
Plus, Iran war whiplash.
The Health and Wellbeing of Formerly Incarcerated People in Connecticut: Insights from the DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey
By Carter Shannon, Nat Markey, Nora Hodgson, Samantha Lydell, Andrew Carr, and Mark Abraham, DataHaven About this Report Approximately 1 in 5 men aged 18–64 in Connecticut have experienced incarceration at some point in their lives. This population includes people who have been held in a local jail for a single night and those who have served lengthy prison sentences, and it cuts across race, age, geography, and socioeconomic background in ways that reflect broader structural inequities in the criminal legal system. Yet across nearly every indicator of wellbeing, formerly incarcerated people in Connecticut face significant disparities compared to those without an incarceration history. This report explores data on the experiences of formerly incarcerated men in Connecticut from the DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey (DCWS). The DCWS illuminates significant gaps in economic wellbeing, physical health, mental health, and social support between men with and without incarceration histories in Connecticut. The survey also reveals worse self-reported outcomes for formerly incarcerated people across a range of quality-of-life indicators, with disparities that are often most severe among those who have been incarcerated more than once. These disparities do not arise by chance. They are shaped by a policy landscape that erects lasting barriers to housing, employment, and healthcare for people leaving incarceration, as well as by the physical and psychological toll of incarceration itself. This report is being written in the political context of federal funding cuts to social programs and proposed rollbacks to Medicaid eligibility, changes that will disproportionately impact people with incarceration histories, who are more likely to rely on public health coverage and other safety net supports.
Trump admin axes ties to dozens of progressive groups in 'direct opposition' to mission: 'Decisive action'
The Interior Department is cutting 43 partnerships and over $4 million in funding for groups tied to DEI, environmental justice and immigration.
MetroPlusHealth Guides Essential Plan Members Through Upcoming Coverage Changes
MetroPlusHealth, New York City’s high‑quality, affordable health plan, is actively supporting members affected by upcoming federal funding changes to the
Oklahoma County leaders discussing Behavioral Health Care Center funding
Work continues on a behavioral health care center that is meant to help keep Oklahomans out of jail, and county leaders are considering moving some funds around to cover a project related to the facility.
Stein makes new Helene federal funding request, billions lower than last ask
North Carolina's governor is in Washington on Wednesday meeting with members of Congress to push for new federal money for Helene recovery.
Jedify raises $24M to help companies arm AI agents with context on their business
The funding round was led by Norwest, with participation S Capital VC, Cerca Partners, and Oceans Ventures. Snowflake Ventures also participated as a strategic investor.
Scientists, higher ed alarmed by federal 'power grab' over research funding
The Trump administration has proposed regulations to control billions of dollars in federal research funding, which it says will reduce "fraud and abuse." Scientists in Massachusetts and beyond say they could set back research in the U.S. by decades.
New OMB rule could break science in the United States
The drug that saved your mother. The treatment your doctor recommended. The clinical trial that bought someone you love more time. None of it was inevitable. It required a system built to operate outside politics and sustained over decades, because science doesn’t operate on the timeline of a politician. That system is now under direct threat. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed a new rule to regulate all federal grants, not just science, but housing, education, defense, NASA and everything in between, that would fundamentally change how research is conducted in the United States. There have been a lot of fires in the past 16 months, and if everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency. But this is a very big deal. These rules would strip away the independence that has kept science from becoming a political tool. The good news is there’s still something we can all do. How the grant system was designed to work When I was a new faculty member, I was full of millions of ideas, so I sat down and wrote an NIH proposal. I worked on it for months and thought it was so good. Then I sent it to my mentor. It came back covered in comments. Places where my reasoning wasn’t as airtight as I’d thought, methods that could be stronger, gaps in my thinking that I had been too close to the work to see. It stung, as honest feedback always does, but peer review almost always makes the work better. In fact, it’s the backbone of how American science has functioned for generations. At NIH, submitted proposals go to a panel of scientists who have experience in the field. These are the people who can read research methods and spot their weaknesses, who understand when an experiment is designed well and when it isn’t. Applications are scored rigorously, and often only the top 3-20% of proposals receive funding. The people making funding decisions are required to justify them based on these reviews. To be clear: this is not a perfect system, and good science still goes unfunded more often than any of us would like due to limited resources. There is also criticism that peer review may undervalue bold ideas that are risky but could have high payoffs. But the peer review system is nonetheless a meaningful part of the grant selection process. While thoughtful and careful changes could improve the system, the changes being proposed by OMB will not make things better. The rule that could change everything Through this OMB proposal, the system that helps decide what gets funded is being dismantled. There are many troubling elements buried in this proposal, but three provisions stand out in particular. Each would be damaging alone. Together, they would change what kind of science gets done in America, and who it serves. 1. Political appointees would decide which science gets funded, and peer review would be explicitly sidelined or ignored. The guidelines your doctor follows, the standards that determine what’s in your air and water, the drugs that get approved for your family: all of it starts with a funding decision. Right now, that decision is made by scientists who can evaluate whether the work is actually sound and whether it could move the needle forward. Under this proposal, funding decisions could be made by political appointees. The careful, expertise-driven review process that shapes grant funding would be effectively sidelined. That means that a poorly designed study could get funded simply because someone in a political office liked the sound of it, while rigorous, important work doesn’t get funded because it no longer aligns with the administration’s priorities. In other words, critical work that benefits all of us could now be missed just because it has become politically inconvenient. 2. Grants could be canceled at any point, without warning, in the middle of ongoing work. Say your tax dollars have been paying for a cancer study for two years. The grant was awarded for five years, so the team is mid-experiment. There are three additional years’ worth of answers that could change how the disease is treated for hundreds of thousands of people. With this new rule, the federal government could cancel the remaining funding tomorrow, walk away from the commitment it made with your money, and have no legal obligation to finish what it started. This is a huge waste of money. There are rarely other sources of funding for this work, which means the team, the graduate students, postdocs, and research staff who have dedicated years of their careers to this project could lose their jobs. Patients who have contributed their time to studies may not see it turn into useful learnings for others. Every hour of work already completed could result in nothing useful. Science can take decades to get to tangible outcomes. It needs a stable funding system to flourish. 3. Researchers would have a harder time communicating their findings without pre-approval from the federal government. There is a saying from Sir Mark Walport: “Science isn’t finished until it’s communicated.” Science is no use to anyone if it is kept locked away in the labs that produced the data. The proposed rule could make communicating research findings harder in a number of ways: Make it harder for scientists to widely share their findings in scientific journals. Publication costs, including journal fees that allow for broad public access, could not be paid for by federal funds which is often how scientists pay these costs. Restrict researchers from engaging publicly about how their findings should inform policy or public health guidelines. This would restrict scientists from doing the work that transforms years of lab work into decisions that actually affect people’s lives. Make it harder for scientists to attend conferences. Conferences would now need to be approved by the federal agency at the time of grant award. This disadvantages conferences or publications that are not politically aligned. Conferences are a key way in which scientists learn about work happening in their field so they can collaborate and build on each other’s findings. What good is science with a muzzle? The long-term impact These changes could (and hopefully would) be reversed under the next administration. But by then, damage has been done. Once projects are halted or denied funding by political appointees, people leave their science careers for other paths or even leave the country to do their amazing science elsewhere. You cannot pause a scientific study the way you pause a subscription you decided isn’t useful anymore. You cannot freeze a research team that depends on salaries to feed their families, causing a scramble for replacement funding that, in most cases, simply does not exist. When the money stops, everything stops, and all the work in progress and its potential are lost. Despite all of the language about reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, this new proposed rule increases the administrative burden tremendously. Every researcher watching this unfold will make a rational decision: don’t start anything that will take a decade to finish. This includes not building a team around funding that could vanish, or asking the big questions that need patience and stability to answer. The most consequential science, the kind that produces the treatments and the breakthroughs that reach your doctor’s office twenty years from now, is exactly the science that would be abandoned first. This is still a proposal, so we can all do something Some worry this rule is already a done deal. But by law, OMB is required to open a public comment period. Those comments matter because they inform members of Congress, they can be used in litigation, and they create a public record. So here’s what you can do: Submit a public comment. The public comment period on this proposed change is open until July 13. Anyone can submit a comment, and OMB is required to respond to substantial ones. Each comment must be different to count as distinct; identical comments will be counted only once. Comment as an individual, not on behalf of your organization. Here’s a full resource to help you, with useful examples, but in general: Share a story about how science or federal funding has benefitted you or is involved in your work. Are you or someone you loved a cancer survivor? Do you know someone with Alzheimer’s? Have you received NIH/NSF or other federal funding? All of these can be stories you use to highlight why you care. Explain why you’re worried about these proposed changes. You can use the wording found here or in other resources to help you. Ask them to withdraw this proposed rule. Contact your elected representatives. Congress allocates money to federal agencies to spend, and it has oversight of how that process works. You can let your representatives know this proposed change concerns you and ask them to intervene. There are levers they can push that can help at this moment. Let others know why federal funding matters. This isn’t just about science, but ALL federal grants, including for education systems, defense projects, and more. The process, including the importance of federal funding, is invisible to many. We can all make it more visible by sharing how science benefits us and why we value it. You can also share this article, or any of the resources linked here, to help spread awareness! Bottom line We are quickly losing ground in scientific research in the U.S. More changes, like the proposed rule by OMB, would decimate our ability to conduct research here, leaving us all worse off: fewer treatments for pancreatic cancer, less research on pollution impacts, fewer answers for patients with rare disease, and more unaddressed health needs. The impact will be very real for all of us, regardless of where we stand politically. Using our voices for science is more important than ever. Love, LM Big thanks to Dr. Megan Ranney for reading this over and providing brilliant insights, as always. Dr. Liz Marnik, PhD, is Executive Director of The Evidence Collective at YLE and a science communicator and immunologist working at the intersection of public trust, science, and public health. You can find her on Substack, LinkedIn, Instagram and Threads. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “Translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
U.K. Needs to Take More Risks to Retain Startups, Business Secretary Says
The government has taken stakes in startups like Kraken, Wayve and Oxford Quantum Circuits in recent weeks, in a bid to prevent them from moving out of the country to look for funding.