A Department of Interior decision to allow tribal-owned corporations in Alaska to receive stimulus funding intended for tribes has exposed a rift in Native American communities and led to resignation calls for Interior’s head of Indian affairs.

Congress set aside $8 billion in the coronavirus stimulus package for tribal governments, but a form to apply for the assistance asks applicants to list either their total tribal population or their number of shareholders, a nod to the numerous corporations established by Alaskan tribes.

That has incensed some tribes in the Lower 48 who say the funds should not be routed to the many Native-owned oil businesses in Alaska, but should go to tribes responsible for providing direct services to their members.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Great Plains Tribal Chairmen’s Association, which represents tribes in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Iowa, are calling for the resignation of Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Tara Sweeney, saying she will directly benefit if the corporations receive stimulus funding.

Sweeney is an Alaska Native and former vice president with the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, a for-profit company with tribal shareholders that makes money primarily from oil and timber.

“Charged with a large public trust, she unfairly sought to divert emergency Tribal Government resources to state-chartered, for-profit corporations owned by Alaska Native shareholders, including her and her family,” wrote Harold Frazier, chairman of the group.

“She is clearly an interested party — she’s a corporate shareholder and former Vice President of the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. She is conflicted,” he added. “Sweeney must be removed.”

Interior has rejected calls for Sweeney’s resignation.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Assistant Secretary Sweeney is committed to supporting all American Indians and Alaska Natives, and to suggest she has personal motives or that she is attempting to divert funds away from American Indians is completely false,” the department said in a statement.

Tribes aren’t the only ones concerned that the money is being improperly rerouted.

Sen. Tom UdallThomas (Tom) Stewart UdallWith corporations vying for tribal stimulus, some call for resignation of head of Indian Affairs Senate Democrats propose ,000 hazard-pay plan for essential workers Democrats ask EPA, Interior to pause rulemaking amid coronavirus MORE (D-N.M.), vice chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, said Congress intended for the funds to flow only to government entities “so that they can continue essential government services.”

“Non-governmental tribal entities may well warrant relief under other CARES Act programs, but this funding in this title was intended for Tribal governments and should not be diverted,” Udall wrote to Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinOn The Money: Small business loan program out of money | Lawmakers at impasse over new funds | Senate adjourns for week with no deal | Trump to leave decision on reopening economies with governors With corporations vying for tribal stimulus, some call for resignation of head of Indian Affairs Trump says he’s open to attaching other items to small business funding MORE and Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, using the acronym for the stimulus legislation.

It is not uncommon for tribes to own businesses like casinos outright, which provide funding for tribal governments. But while Alaska Native corporations have tribal members as shareholders, those funds do not typically go into tribal coffers.

The IRS has started to issue coronavirus rebates to tens of millions of people, but faces challenges in getting the payments to everyone.

Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinOn The Money: Small business loan program out of money | Lawmakers at impasse over new funds | Senate adjourns for week with no deal | Trump to leave decision on reopening economies with governors With corporations vying for tribal stimulus, some call for resignation of head of Indian Affairs Trump says he’s open to attaching other items to small business funding MORE said Wednesday that more than 80 million Americans have already received their payments via direct deposit. But millions of people who haven’t previously given the IRS their bank information, or who may not typically file tax returns, are still waiting.

The IRS has taken steps in recent days to help facilitate getting the payments to people, but challenges remain in getting the payments to every eligible taxpayer in a prompt fashion. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Challenges include ensuring that low-income people get their payments and addressing the concerns of taxpayers who are struggling to use IRS web tools or who say they have not yet received their payments or received incorrect payment amounts.

“The easy part is the direct deposit payments, and the IRS deserves high grades for what they’ve done so far,” said Mark Everson, vice chairman of alliantgroup, who served as IRS commissioner from 2003 to 2007. “Now, it gets more complicated.

“The most difficult part will be getting the money to the people who are entitled to it but whom the service doesn’t have current addresses or banking information,” he added.

Legislation that President TrumpDonald John TrumpMichael Cohen to be released early from prison amid coronavirus pandemic: report Biden assembling White House transition team Top Republicans call on Trump to fund WHO pending director-general’s resignation MORE signed in late March created a program for one-time direct payments to most Americans, in an effort to help people cover their expenses amid the coronavirus pandemic. 

Individuals with income under $75,000 and married couples with income under $150,000 can receive the full amounts of $1,200 per adult and $500 per child. The payment amounts phase out above those income levels and are zero for individuals making more than $99,000 and married couples without children making more than $198,000.

The IRS has started to issue payments to taxpayers who provided the agency with their direct-deposit information on their 2018 or 2019 tax returns, and is expected to start sending paper checks next week. Policymakers have been encouraging people to provide their bank account information to the IRS, because people are expected to get their rebates faster if they can get them through direct deposit than if they have to wait for a mailed paper check.

ADVERTISEMENT

Millions of people have not previously provided their bank account information to the IRS, and reaching all of those people poses challenges.

The IRS’s in-house watchdog, National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins, wrote on her organization’s website Wednesday that in 2019, only 59 percent of taxpayers received refunds via direct deposit.

“While I expect the IRS will successfully deliver the Economic Impact Payments to most eligible taxpayers, many taxpayers will likely experience difficulties in obtaining their payments,” Collins wrote.

The IRS has made a series of announcements that aimed at helping people receive their payments, and helping them get their payments faster.

The agency has launched two web tools in recent days. One, called, “Non-filers: Enter Payment Info Here,” allows people who are not typically required to file tax returns to provide basic information to the IRS in order to receive their payments. The second, called “Get My Payment,” allows people who have not previously provided the IRS with direct-deposit information to do so, and allows people to track the status of their payments.

But questions remain about how effective the IRS’s efforts will be and whether the agency will send the correct payment amount at the correct location to everyone who is eligible. There are also questions about whether everyone who is eligible for payments will be aware of what actions, if any, they need to take in order to receive their rebates.

The Get My Payment tool launched on Wednesday, and lawmakers reported hearing from constituents who were having problems using it.

As people were clamoring to use the tool, some experienced delays in accessing it. The IRS said in a statement Wednesday that when website volume is too high, people are briefly sent to an online “waiting room,” but that their tool didn’t crash.

The IRS also said that people who are receiving a message that their payment status is not available may be seeing such a message if they’re not eligible for a payment, are required to file a tax return but haven’t done so, recently provided the IRS with their information via the non-filers tool or receive certain government benefits. The agency also said that as of Wednesday afternoon, 9.8 million people have received information about their payment through the tool, and 1.6 million people have provided the IRS with their direct-deposit information.

The IRS’s tools don’t perform every function taxpayers may want them to. For example, the Get My Payment tool does not allow people to change bank account information that is already on file with the IRS. A Frequently Asked Questions document from the agency said that if a person’s bank account has been closed since he or she filed a tax return, the bank will reject the deposit and the IRS will mail the taxpayer a check.

There have also been news reports of taxpayers expressing concerns about their payment amount, such as parents who said they got payments that did not reflect the fact that they have children or people who received payments for their deceased spouses. A Treasury spokeswoman said the department is aware of the issues and are looking into them.

Beyond hiccups with the IRS’s online applications and concerns about the potential for other glitches, tax-policy experts said that a key challenge will be for the IRS to get payments to all non-filers who are eligible. Non-filers are typically low-income, and tax experts said that many of these people may not have reliable internet access that they can use to learn about the rebates and provide the IRS with any necessary information.

ADVERTISEMENT

The IRS on Wednesday announced that recipients of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) — a program that provides benefits to elderly, blind and disabled people with little-to-no income — will automatically get $1,200 payments without having to file tax returns. The agency previously announced that recipients of Social Security and railroad retirement benefits will also automatically get payments. 

Lawmakers and tax professionals also want the IRS to automatically issue rebates to non-filers who receive benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs. If non-filers aren’t able to receive the payments automatically, they will have to use the IRS’s non-filers web tool to get their rebate.

Janet Holtzblatt, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said that non-filers who aren’t in regular contact with federal or state agencies could be particularly challenging to reach and educate about the payments.

“They’re going to be a tough group to contact,” she said.

Groups that work with low-income and older Americans say they have been working to educate people and determine how best to reach out to them.

“We’re constantly trying to update and refresh the information we share, not just with our members but anyone who visits our website,” said Cristina Martin Firvida, vice president of government affairs at the AARP.

 

Funding for a popular loan program to help small business stay afloat during the coronavirus pandemic is nearing depletion and could be exhausted by the end of Wednesday or midday Thursday.

The Small Business Administration has helped issue 1.3 million loans totaling $305 billion through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) as of Wednesday evening, putting the program on track to hit its $349 billion limit before Friday.

The Small Business Administration (SBA) has backed loans averaging almost $240,000 each.

ADVERTISEMENT

The lending facility was implemented as part of the $2.2 trillion coronavirus relief package President TrumpDonald John TrumpRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Warren: If Biden asked me to be VP, I would say yes NFL considers playing in empty stadiums with 2020 season set to start in September: report MORE signed into law March 27.

After a flood of applications overwhelmed banks and credit unions across the U.S., industry advocates have urged Congress to quickly replenish PPP funding before another backlog of applications piles up.

Richard Hunt, president of the Consumer Bankers Association, told reporters during a Wednesday call that lenders would need roughly $1 trillion to satisfy demand for PPP loans.

Hunt also argued that efforts to steer funding toward specific communities and demographics could “slow down” the rescue lending program to the peril of small businesses.

“Lenders, banks should not be given preferential treatment, depending on their asset size or the communities they serve,” he said. “We need speed. So if Congress would just pass what we call a clean bill so we can get more money out to small businesses. that would be ideal.”

Administration officials and congressional leaders are scrambling to add more funding.

ADVERTISEMENT

Senate Democratic Leader Charles SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis SchumerStacey Abrams throws support behind vote-by-mail efforts Former MSNBC host explains why UBI is a ventilator for U.S. economy in a crisis Hispanic Caucus demands protections for agricultural workers in next coronavirus bill MORE (N.Y.) and Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Business loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal On The Money: Small business lending funds nearly depleted | Trump says White House to release guidelines on relaxing social distancing Thursday | Fed’s efforts on coronavirus raise eyebrows MORE spoke again Wednesday in hopes of reaching a deal to provide an additional $250 billion for the program, as well as at least $250 billion for hospitals and state governments.

Senate and House Democratic staff were scheduled to speak with Treasury officials later in the day.

Democrats say a deal must set aside SBA loans for women- and minority-owned businesses in underserved urban, rural and tribal communities.

They say the $250 billion for the small business lending program must be paired with $100 billion in new funding for hospitals and $150 billion in new money for state and local governments facing budgetary short falls because of the pandemic.

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Democratic rep pushes for eligibility for coronavirus lending programs to be extended to chambers of commerce Business loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal MORE (D-Calif.), who is working closely with Schumer, issued a statement Wednesday afternoon reiterating Democrats’ demands.

“Democrats know that in order for the Paycheck Protection Program to succeed, it must work for everyone. That is why we have been asking for the administration to work with us to help: the underbanked small businesses and others who are struggling to access the PPP; desperate state and local governments; hospitals on the front lines of the epidemic,” she said in the statement.

“As has been clear since last week, Republicans’ bill which fails to address these critical issues cannot get unanimous consent in the House,” she said.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Business loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal Trump threatens to adjourn both chambers of Congress MORE (R-Ky.) last week asked for unanimous consent to pass a clean $250 billion infusion of funding for the small-business lending program but Senate Democrats objected, citing the need for hospitals and state and local governments to also receive more money.

Niv Elis contributed.

Updated at 5:07 p.m.

 

More than 180 organizations across the country urged Congress to pass $500 billion in unrestricted aid to state, territory and local governments in a letter sent Monday.

The Economic Policy Institute, among other organizations, sent the letter to leadership in the House and Senate. The letter says the first three coronavirus stimulus bills “included vital resources” but fell “far short of what is needed to hold state, local, territorial, and tribal budgets harmless against the enormity of the crisis.”

The groups point out that many states are required to balance their budgets in their constitutions, unlike the federal government. These requirements are likely to drive these governments to make massive cuts if the federal government does not help, the letter said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“As revenues decline because of lower incomes and reduced spending, state and local governments face serious fiscal constraints, often leading to budget cuts that further depress demand in the economy,” the letter reads. 

Several state and local governments have already announced efforts to balance their budgets. Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) proposed an across-the-board 20 percent budget cut, while Arkansas’s revenue decline is estimated to amount to double the state’s reserves, according to the letter. 

“When the economy is ready to restart, these budget shortfalls will lead to large drags on the recovery if Congress does not act quickly,” the letter says. “During the Great Recession, such budget gaps and the resulting cuts severely hampered the economic recovery.”

The organizations call for congressional leaders to implement a payroll guarantee approach that the U.K., Denmark and the Netherlands have put in place, with the federal government paying 90 percent of all payroll costs for employers affected by the containment efforts.  

The groups also request more investments in unemployment insurance, another direct cash payment, stronger worker protections, and full funding for testing, treatment and personal protective equipment.

Congress has passed three stimulus bills thus far, including a $2.2 trillion stimulus package. Lawmakers from both parties have said they need a fourth stimulus bill to address the pandemic, but they have been disputing an “interim” request for more small-business funding for a program under the third bill.

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiMore than 180 groups urge Congress to pass 0 billion in unrestricted aid to state, local governments Overnight Health Care: Trump fires back at critics during briefing | Trump claims he has authority on when to reopen states | Governors form groups to discuss plans | Fauci offers support to Trump | House delays return On The Money: Trump claims he has power to decide when to reopen states | Governors forming groups to discuss reopening | Senate caught in standoff over relief bill MORE (D-Calif.) has said she wants to have a bill ready to vote on by the end of April.

Click Here: gold coast suns 2019 guernsey

President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate committee to investigate origin of, response to coronavirus pandemic Amash teases possibility of third-party presidential bid Overnight Health Care: Trump fires back at critics during briefing | Trump claims he has authority on when to reopen states | Governors form groups to discuss plans | Fauci offers support to Trump | House delays return MORE on Monday suggested the historic deal he helped broker between major oil producing nations will lead to further production cuts worldwide.

Oil producing countries finalized an agreement Sunday evening to reduce global oil production by just under 10 million barrels a day for May and June, a nearly 10 percent drop in production.

The deal between members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and other major producers like Russia, known as OPEC+, puts an end to a trade dispute that began when Saudi Arabia and Russia flooded the market with excess oil at a time when demand was plummeting due to the coronavirus pandemic.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Having been involved in the negotiations, to put it mildly, the number that OPEC+ is looking to cut is 20 Million Barrels a day, not the 10 Million that is generally being reported. If anything near this happens, and the World gets back to business from the Covid 19,” Trump tweeted Monday morning.

The White House declined to provide additional context for Trump’s tweet.

Experts say the 9.7 million barrel a day cut won’t be enough to offset the 30 percent decline in prices, though market forces are likely to drive production even lower.

While the finalized deal leaves little hope of an official 20 million barrel a day reduction like the one Trump referenced in his tweet, other nations outside the oil-producing cartel have said their production totals will drop, meaning global output could decline beyond what was outlined in Sunday’s deal.

“The historic agreement that we saw over the weekend, from OPEC and OPEC+ is roughly 10 million barrels. But that is, in fact, only half of the story,” Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette told Fox Business on Monday morning.

ADVERTISEMENT

“There are over 100 countries that produce oil all around the world, and what we’ll see is production declining over the next few months as the world deals with this COVID-19 pandemic. So, when you add up all of the production cuts around the world, we’re going to much closer to 20 million barrels per day coming off the market.”

An analysis by IHS Markit found that global production could decline by as much as 14 million barrels a day as the U.S., Canada and other countries cut production in response to prices that fell from $53 a barrel in February to a low of $22 a barrel in March.

Within the U.S., oil production is expected to decline by half a million barrels of oil a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, a figure that could grow to 700,000 next year.

But even the 10 million barrel per day drop is a massive one — twice the size of the deal cut in the 2008-2009 financial crisis.

Trump even promised to reduce U.S. production — despite lacking any legal authority to do so — in an attempt to help clinch the deal.

The OPEC+ deal was initially stalled by Mexico over the weekend. Repeated calls between Trump and Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, as well as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Russian President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinWill the OPEC agreement work and, if so, how long will it last? Trump hopes for bigger oil cuts stemming from historic deal The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – States seek plans for economic revival; feds talk ‘hope’ MORE, helped finalize the agreement.

“The United States will help Mexico along, and they’ll reimburse us sometime at a later date when they’re prepared to do so,” Trump told reporters Friday of the U.S. offering to reduce production by some 250,000 to 300,000 barrels a day in order to help reach the 400,000 barrel a day reduction being asked of Mexico.

The bulk of the cuts are being absorbed by Saudi Arabia and Russia, who will each cut production by 2.5 million barrels per day.

“What could not have been imagined is that Donald Trump, who has been a critic of OPEC for years, is the one who put it together. Of all the deals he’s done in his life, this has to be the biggest and most complex,” IHS Markit Vice Chairman Daniel Yergin said in a statement on the close of the deal.

Americans stranded abroad are accusing airlines of overcharging on repatriation flights, as desperate citizens shell out thousands of dollars for a one-way ticket home.

The flight costs are adding financial stress to travelers who are already attempting to leave countries that have closed their borders and imposed strict lockdowns due to the coronavirus.

Citizens are asking the State Department to waive the airfares, but the agency is beginning to shift its strategy toward putting commercial airlines in charge of remaining repatriation efforts, providing little government oversight of the cost to consumers.

ADVERTISEMENT

Nonprofit groups working to help repatriate Americans say tickets are hundreds and in some cases thousands of dollars more expensive than early price quotes.

Deepti Singh Suri, a self-employed yoga teacher from the Chicago area, said she has signed a promissory note with the State Department to repay the U.S. government more than $1,900 for her repatriation flight back home from India. But she’s unsure if she’ll be reimbursed for the canceled roundtrip ticket she initially booked.

“I’m only one person — my total expenses are maybe around $3,000 — but there are other families who are four or five [people]. It’s going to take a big hit,” she said.

Airlines say their tickets reflect the cost of operation, with high prices often stemming from the fact that at least one leg involves flying a plane with no passengers.

State Department-chartered repatriation flights — which typically operate as a response to natural disasters or military conflict – have guidelines to ensure airfares are consistent with the cost of a full-fare economy flight.

The State Department has largely taken responsibility for repatriating American travelers — more than 60,000 from more than 100 countries since Jan. 29 – who were stranded abroad amid short-notice border closures.

All travelers are required to sign a promissory note to repay the U.S. government. Some are told the cost upfront, while others are expecting a future invoice for an unspecified amount.

ADVERTISEMENT

More than 1,900 people have signed an online petition asking for the State Department to waive repatriation fees.

“It is expected that the repatriation cost could be upward of $2000 or more per person,” the petition description reads, adding that many citizens “can’t even afford to pay during this time of crisis and wonder how our government could even be asking so much money to cover the expenses.”

Stranded and repatriated travelers are hoping Congress will act quickly on a bipartisan bill introduced last month by Reps. Chris SmithChristopher (Chris) Henry SmithStranded Americans accuse airlines of price gouging Lawmakers propose waiving travel fees for coronavirus evacuations abroad Cheese, wine importers reeling from Trump trade fight MORE (R-N.J.) and Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) that directs the State Department to cover the costs for repatriation flights.

But that’s unlikely as Congress postpones normal legislative sessions until next month at the earliest.

“It is my hope that this bill’s introduction moves the State Department to take steps on its own to remedy this problem,” Velázquez wrote in an email to The Hill.

The State Department is beginning to shift its operations toward having stranded Americans book flights directly with airline carriers for repatriation, putting the financial burden on the traveler upfront.

A State Department official told The Hill on Tuesday that the agency has found “commercial rescue, passenger-paid charter model” one of the most “essential” options in helping with repatriation efforts, but ticket pricing is at the discretion of the airline.

“While we remain in constant contact with our private sector partners, ultimately, private airlines set their own prices,” the person said. “The prices the carriers charge are commercial decisions that factor in the costs associated with operating non-standard flights as well as the risk each airline is assuming in arranging these flights. Travelers are free to decide themselves whether to purchase.”  

Charter flights for repatriation efforts can be a tricky calculation.

Short-haul flights from the Caribbean cost around $400 for citizens returning to the U.S., and long-haul flights from South America cost about $800.

Baseline expenses for charter flights include fuel, crew, maintenance and any taxes or fees charged by foreign governments and airport authorities. Each ticket price is then calculated by the sum total divided by the number of seats.

But airlines say those prices can increase based on third-party operators.

An official for LATAM, a Chilean-based airline, said while the company has worked with travel agencies to facilitate repatriation, it is “not responsible for the marketing, pricing or ticketing of said charter flights.”

American Airlines, which ran repatriation flights for the State Department, said it regularly capped ticket prices to keep the cost low for stranded travelers.

Valerie Edmondson Bolaños, who is founder of the nonprofit Warrior Angels Rescue and working to repatriate Americans in Peru, said she had received quotes from multiple airlines for a Lima to Miami flight with prices ranging from $590 to a little more than $700 per passenger.

In other instances, a $1,000 ticket could be halved if the return leg of the trip was filled with Peruvians flying from the U.S. to Peru.

Bolaños shared her itinerary with the State Department and offered to cover costs, but the agency went with alternative plans.

She is now working to gain permission from the Peruvian government to run repatriation flights for at least 356 people remaining in the country, especially for those who say they can’t afford a ticket.

While the State Department has helped repatriate more than 6,800 Americans from Peru, it has started directing any remaining U.S. citizens to book directly with Eastern Airlines, a small U.S.-based carrier.

The airline’s website shows a one-way ticket from Lima to Miami costing between $2,000 and $2,500.

“We recognize that the price of these flights is higher than the pre-COVID-19 market price,” the U.S. Embassy Peru wrote on its website Tuesday, and instructed travelers to apply for emergency repatriation loan assistance to help with costs. 

ADVERTISEMENT

An official for Eastern Airlines said the lowest base fare for the Lima flight departing on Tuesday is $1,697 plus taxes, which also reflects the plane flying empty from the U.S. to Peru.

“Eastern Airlines is proud to partner with the State Department and various Embassies in South and Central America to bring home as many Americans as possible and reunite them with their families,” the person wrote in an email to The Hill.

The official added that the airline is preparing to absorb the cost if all 240 seats are not filled.

The coronavirus pandemic has put airline travel in an unprecedented situation, with airlines struggling to stay afloat — receiving a $25 billion bailout from Congress — and passengers both domestically and internationally fighting to recoup lost travel expenses.

Democratic senators on March 31 urged the CEOs of 11 major U.S. airlines to issue cash refunds for travelers over canceled flights and provide an “affordable price” for repatriation flights.

The Department of Transportation has the power to investigate unfair or deceptive practices by airline carriers. A DOT official referred an inquiry by The Hill to the State Department.

But lawmakers say they are watching how airlines treat Americans during this crisis, and they’re urging carriers to work with the State Department.

The top lawmakers on the House Foreign Affairs Committee last week called on American, Delta and United Airlines to “participate to the fullest extent possible” with the State Department in ongoing repatriation efforts.

The Small Business Administration (SBA) warned Wednesday night that it soon will no longer be able to extend loans to small businesses as negotiations between Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Business loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal On The Money: Small business lending funds nearly depleted | Trump says White House to release guidelines on relaxing social distancing Thursday | Fed’s efforts on coronavirus raise eyebrows MORE and Senate Democratic Leader Charles SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis SchumerStacey Abrams throws support behind vote-by-mail efforts Former MSNBC host explains why UBI is a ventilator for U.S. economy in a crisis Hispanic Caucus demands protections for agricultural workers in next coronavirus bill MORE (N.Y.) failed to produce a deal.

The SBA announced that as of 9 p.m. Wednesday, there had been more than 1.5 million small-business loan applications approved totaling more than $324 billion with more than 4,900 lending institutions participating in the program. 

Congress appropriated $349 billion for the program last month, which leaves only $25 billion to apply to additional loans, an amount that is expected to be used up sometime Thursday.

ADVERTISEMENT

The talks between Mnuchin and Schumer will continue into Thursday when the Senate is scheduled to meet in the afternoon for a pro forma session.

Senators could at that time pass an agreement to provide an extra $250 billion for the popular Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and $250 billion for hospitals and state and local governments, which Democrats are demanding — but it would require all 100 of them to agree.

Mnuchin and SBA administrator Jovita Carranza issued a statement Wednesday evening warning that funding for the program that provides forgivable loans to employers who keep workers on payroll is about to run out, and that no additional loans will be extended until Congress acts. 

“By law, the SBA will not be able to issue new loan approvals once the programs experience a lapse in appropriations,” Mnuchin and Carranza said in a joint statement issued shortly before 9 p.m.

“We urge Congress to appropriate additional funds for the Paycheck Protection Program — a critical and overwhelmingly bipartisan program — at which point we will once again be able to process loan applications, issue loan numbers, and protect millions more paychecks,” they added.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Business loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal Trump threatens to adjourn both chambers of Congress MORE (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin Owen McCarthyRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Democratic rep pushes for eligibility for coronavirus lending programs to be extended to chambers of commerce Business loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal MORE (R-Calif.) also issued a statement before 9 p.m. Wednesday warning the funding for the small-business lending program would run out “in a matter of hours.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Once the agency has backed $349 billion in loans “it will have to stop accepting applications for job-saving loans,” the GOP leaders warned.

“Democrats have spent days blocking emergency funding for Americans’ paychecks and now the bipartisan program has run dry,” they said.

A senior Democratic aide said Schumer and House Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiRepublicans go on attack as loans for small businesses start to run out Democratic rep pushes for eligibility for coronavirus lending programs to be extended to chambers of commerce Business loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal MORE‘s (D-Calif.) staff spoke with Mnuchin and Treasury’s staff Wednesday and have agreed to continue talks Thursday.

That gives negotiators only a few hours to reach a deal before a ceremonial pro forma session scheduled for 3 p.m. If nothing is agreed to by then, talks will likely extend into next week, and small businesses will be turned away from submitting applications over the next few days.

However, even if Mnuchin and Schumer agree to a deal, it could be tough to get all 53 Republican senators to agree to give unanimous consent for a $500 billion package. If a single senator objected, the package could be blocked until the full Senate convenes again, which is not scheduled to happen before May 4. 

McConnell last week attempted to pass by unanimous consent on the Senate floor a clean $251 billion appropriation to extend SBA’s lending capacity but Democrats objected. They said that at least $60 billion in small-business lending needed to be set aside for women-, minority- and veteran-owned businesses in underserved urban, rural and tribal areas.

They also called for the SBA funding to be paired with $100 billion for hospitals and $150 billion for state governments. 

“It has been stunning to watch our Democratic colleagues treat emergency funding for Americans’ paychecks like a Republican priority which they need to be goaded into supporting,” McConnell and McCarthy wrote in their statement. “Funding a bipartisan program should not be a partisan issue. The notion that crucial help for working people is not appealing enough to Democrats without other additions sends a strange message about their priorities.”

The Republican leaders showed no sign of being ready to accept Schumer’s and Pelosi’s demands for additional funding for hospitals and state governments.

“The cost of continued Democratic obstruction will be pink slips and shuttered businesses,” they said. “We hope Democrats see reason soon and finally heed Republicans’ repeated calls for a funding bill that can quickly earn unanimous consent from all 100 senators and become law.”

Pelosi in an interview with CNN’s Jake TapperJacob (Jake) Paul TapperBusiness loan funds almost exhausted as Schumer, Mnuchin wrestle over deal Fauci offers support for Trump Trump shares tweet from supporter calling for Fauci to be fired MORE on Wednesday blamed Republicans for being unreasonable. 

She said that many small-business owners, especially those without strong pre-existing relationships with banks, are having trouble getting money. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“Why would they want to cut that whole layer of people, mostly women, minority-owned businesses, Native American, rural America, veterans, all participating in those initiatives? And so we’re just saying we can’t allow the billions, hundreds of billions of dollars, being spent to fight the horror of the coronavirus and the impact on our economy, to further harden the disparity, the lack of access to credit for so many in the small business community,” she said.

The American Bankers Association (ABA) issued a statement Wednesday evening urging Congress “to appropriate additional federal funds as soon as possible given the potential economic damage to small businesses and their millions of employees.”

“We again call on lawmakers to approve additional funding expeditiously so American banks can continue to provide this important financial lifeline to small businesses and help put the nation on the path to recovery,” said ABA president Rob Nichols.

Alex Gangitano contributed. 

Updated: 10:41 p.m.

By ANDREW HOWARD/Cronkite News

ANNAPOLIS, MD – In a different year, Sen. Martha McSally might not have been on a stage at the U.S. Naval Academy telling college officials that they need to step up and do their part to end sexual assaults on their campuses.

That was before this year, when the Arizona Republican shared a secret she had kept for years, the fact that she was raped by a superior officer while serving in the Air Force.

After making that announcement last month during a hearing on sexual assault in the military, McSally has worked hard for solutions to the problem – successfully pushing for a Pentagon task force to study the problem, and addressing Thursday’s summit of college and military academy officials.

READ MORE FROM CRONKITE NEWS

“I didn’t plan on doing this, but I didn’t plan on getting raped either,” McSally said to an audience of about 100 officials from campuses across the country who gathered in Annapolis for two-days of talks about the problem of assaults on campus.

McSally said she speaks out now because it’s important for victims to be able to see someone else who has gone what they’re going through. And during a 45-minute keynote address, she challenged university and service academy leaders to take a new look at sexual assault at their institutions, focusing specifically on how the culture contributes to the problem.

“Tomorrow is Friday night,” McSally said. “It’s your responsibility to make sure that doesn’t happen at your university this weekend.”

Military officials and university leaders echoed the call for a change in campus culture. Army Secretary Mark Esper said there is “absolutely no room for sexual harassment or assault in America’s institutions of higher learning.”

“We can and we must do better,” said Esper, calling for an environment “free of fear and retaliation” for those who come forward.

Esper called on the university officials to join him and the other service secretaries in a statement of commitment that would have them share data, discuss “environmental factors” that contribute to harassment and assault, and create a network to communicate on the subject.

Navy Secretary Richard Spencer said that he was happy the event was being held, but not “happy to be here.”

“I’m frustrated to be here,” Spencer said. “I’m concerned about the ongoing scores of sexual assault and sexual harassment. We have to do something about this, and we have to something now.”

While there is still much to be done, McSally said she has been pleased with the military’s response since she came forward last month with the story of her rape.

“These guys have sprung into action,” she said of the task force that was appointed shortly after she wrote to Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan about the issue.

“The Pentagon often doesn’t move fast because they are a big bureaucracy, but on this issue, they have been extremely responsive.”

The letter followed the March 6 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on sexual assaults in the military where McSally told her story of being raped by a superior officer while in the Air Force.

Pausing briefly to compose herself at that hearing, she said she did not come forward because she was not confident the Air Force would handle her case. When she did report the incident, she was “horrified” at the way it was handled, saying she felt like “the system was raping me all over again.” The attack and follow-up almost drove her out of the Air Force, she said.

Despite that, McSally said at the time that she believes investigations of assaults within the ranks should stay within the chain of command, opposing suggestions by some senators that an independent investigation should take place.

Her defense of the military is not total, however: McSally called on the service academies to look at their policies, which may cause problems in the schools that could spread to the military as a whole.

She said the service academies “put these teenagers in a pressure cooker,” and then put 20-year-olds in charge of younger students. She said that “maybe you have got to do something different” to ensure there is the right culture and oversight.

“Why not take a fresh look at it?” she asked after the event. “I know there’s a lot of people focused on tradition because that’s the way we’ve always done it, but let’s set them up for success.”

She said after the event Thursday that the Pentagon task force is already making progress, but she will keep the pressure on. She added that “they’ve brought together a high-level group” and she will be meeting with them next week.

McSally said she plans to stay at the forefront of the battle because she wants leaders to “put a human face” on what their goals are going forward.

“It’s to do everything you can,” she said. “Every single day to make sure that there isn’t another young man or young woman who has a sexual assault happen to them at your university or at your military.”

For more stories from Cronkite News, visit cronkitenews.azpbs.org.

TAMPA, FL — A historic dredging project has created new opportunities for Port Tampa Bay and its environmental partners to protect shoreline birds in Hillsborough Bay.

Every year, thousands of protected and rare birds flock to port-owned bird sanctuaries: two 500-acre “spoil” islands created by dredge materials from harbor management operations. The spoil islands serve as a substitute home for shoreline birds displaced from coastal beaches because of human activity.

Port Tampa Bay, Audubon Florida, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Commission work to protect thousands of birds that nest on these dredge disposal islands.

This year, dredge work at the Big Bend Channel created approximately 100 acres of enhanced habitat including sandy beach which will provide new attractive nesting and roosting areas.

“In our long-standing commitment to the environment, we have strived to be a leader in best practices and policy,” said Port Tampa Bay President and CEO Paul Anderson. “We will do everything we can to engage our key partners to protect our local wildlife.”

The Big Bend Channel expansion construction began last October and finished earlier this month. Environmental engineers unloaded 3.4 million cubic yards of dredged materials to create large flat sand/shell expanses and adjacent interior shoreline that will enhance the protected nesting habitat for generations to come.

Click Here: new zealand rugby team jerseys

“It created a bird paradise,” said U.S. Army Corps of Engineers spokesman Andy Cummings.

The spoil islands, called “2D” and 3D,” located in Hillsborough Bay just south of MacDill Air Force Base are designated “no trespassing” areas. The Big Bend Channel Expansion project created new nesting opportunities for many species of rare birds that frequent “3D,”

“I have never seen so much viable nesting produced in one dredging job,” said Lorraine Margeson, a bird monitor and subcontractor for the Army Corps of Engineers. “3D is home to one of the biggest mixed colonial nesting islands in the state.”

Depositing dredge material on the islands both makes the shipping channels safe for the passage of large ships and also creates a prime nesting habitat for terns, skimmers, oystercatchers and gulls. Thousands of birds nest successfully inside the 40-foot dike, which protects them from viewing and impact from the public.

“The birds choose these deposition sites as a good spot to lay their eggs and raise their chicks, especially as the islands are protected from disturbance and surrounded by the bait-fish rich waters of Tampa Bay” said Audubon Sanctuary manager Mark Rachal.

Birds that nest in these areas are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as well as the Florida Threatened and Endangered Species Act of 1977. The annual bird nesting season began April 1 and runs through Aug. 31.

En France, les femmes disposent d’un large choix de méthodes contraceptives. Quelles sont les méthodes les plus utilisées, quels sont critères de choix, quel est leur niveau de satisfaction et de connaissances? L’enquête “Les femmes et leur contraception“ réalisée par Kantar Health pour le laboratoire Gedeon Ritcher France explore ces questions et montre notamment que la place du patch est restreinte.

Si le patch contraceptif est peu cité, les utilisatrices se déclarent très satisfaites.

L’éventail de méthodes contraceptives en France est très large : contraception à court terme (

la pilule), à moyen terme (

le patch et l’

anneau), à long terme (le

stérilet et

l’implant) et les contraceptions occasionnelles (le

préservatif ou la

contraception d’urgence). L’objectif de cette enquête conduite en France auprès de 800 femmes âgées de 18 à 40 ans était d’identifier leur perception concernant leur moyen de

contraception actuel, les éléments de satisfaction mais aussi d’analyser l’image qu’elles ont du patch et de l’anneau contraceptifs.Pilule et stérilet, les moyens les plus utilisésInterrogées sur leur connaissance des moyens contraceptifs, les femmes citent spontanément la pilule (95 %), le stérilet (72 %), l’implant (43 %), le patch (21 %) et l’anneau (12 %). Parmi ces femmes, 54 % utilisent régulièrement une contraception et parmi elles, 7 sur 10 utilisent la pilule, 1 sur 5 le stérilet, moins d’une sur 10 l’implant et loin derrière, 1 sur 100 le patch et autant l’anneau.Pour choisir leur méthode contraceptive, les femmes interrogées citent comme critères principaux l’efficacité, la tolérance à long terme et court terme, l’adaptation à leur mode de vie et le mode d’administration. De façon surprenante, sur l’ensemble des critères, les femmes considèrent que le stérilet est la meilleure méthode mais elles ne sont qu’une sur cinq à l’utiliser.Une opinion ambigüe des utilisatrices de la piluleBien que confiantes à 80 %, les utilisatrices de la pilule contraceptive expriment une certaine méfiance notamment en ce qui concerne la contrainte des prises, l’imprégnation hormonale ou encore le risque d’oubli. Ainsi, 36 % des femmes ont pris leur pilule avec au moins 12 heures de retard et près d’un tiers ont oublié au moins un comprimé au cours de leur dernier cycle. Du coup, 65 % des utilisatrices actuelles de cette méthode contraceptive sont inquiètes à l’idée d’oublier leur pilule.Le patch et l’anneau : les utilisatrices satisfaitesLe patch et l’anneau ne sont que très peu cités spontanément par les femmes interrogées, et celles qui ne les utilisent pas expriment certaines craintes : peur du décollement pour le patch, manque de discrétion, sentiment qu’il ne s’agit pas d’un médicament… En revanche, les utilisatrices sont très satisfaites : elles notent l’efficacité à moyen terme à 9,3 sur 10, leur tolérance et leur adaptation au mode de vie à 8,8 et l’autonomie qu’elles permettent à 8,7. Ces scores sont meilleurs que ceux obtenus avec les utilisatrices de la pilule. Comme l’explique une femme : “c’est génial, je n’ai pas à y penser, je le pose une fois par semaine et c’est terminé“.Selon Stéphane Jacquemet, chargé d’enseignement à la Faculté de Psychologie Sciences de l’éducation de l’Université de Genève, Suisse, ces résultats montrent que “la palette de contraceptifs est très large et que le choix doit correspondre aux besoins et au mode de vie de chaque femme, avec un choix éclairé par une décision partagée avec son médecin“. Et d’ajouter : “plus qu’un prescripteur, le médecin est un promoteur de la contraception adaptée par le dialogue“.Dr Jesus CardenasSource : Conférence de presse du 17 mars 2016 organisée par LJ COM pour le laboratoire Gedeon Ritcher France. Les femmes et leur contraception. Ce qu’elles en pensent, ce qu’elles attendent.Click Here: Maori All Blacks Store