Energy Department to Gut Funding for Solar and Wind Projects
The cuts, which would take money away from projects budgeted for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30, focus on solar and wind projects, as well as state and local assistance for low-income families, according to an Energy Department document reviewed by The New York Times and Democratic lawmakers in Washington. Critics argue that the moves are illegal because Congress had previously approved the funding for specific projects.
In a joint statement about the funding changes, ranking Democrats on the Senate and House energy subcommittees called it a 'reckless decision' and demanded the agency immediately reverse its action. They argued that the moves would harm efforts to strengthen U.S. energy independence and drive up costs for all consumers.
'This outrageous, unlawful decision by the Trump administration is a direct attack on our energy independence and American families' ability to afford their monthly energy bill,' wrote Senator Patty Murray, Democrat from Washington, and Representative Marcy Kaptur, an Ohio Democrat. 'This isn't a bureaucratic misstep — it's a deliberate, partisan effort to sabotage bipartisan law and redirect funding.'
In response to inquiries about the cuts, an Energy Department spokeswoman said in a statement that the agency is working to 'instill a culture of transparence, performance and common sense.'
'The Department of Energy is working to advance its critical mission of unleashing affordable, reliable and secure energy for all Americans while increasing efficiency and promoting better stewardship of taxpayer dollars,' the spokeswoman said. The new funding levels 'help ensure that the Department accomplishes its critical mission for the American people.'
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
3 Dividend Stocks to Hold for the Next 20 Years
Key Points General Mills is offering a historically high yield backed by a powerful and diversified food business. PepsiCo is a Dividend King with a high yield and iconic global brands. Hershey makes an affordable luxury that people will be willing to pay up for. 10 stocks we like better than PepsiCo › Remember one thing when you consider consumer staples makers: You "need" the products they sell. That's particularly true when it comes to food-focused consumer staples companies like General Mills (NYSE: GIS), PepsiCo (NASDAQ: PEP), and Hershey (NYSE: HSY). Here's why each one of these dividend stocks is worth buying and holding for 20 years, or more, right now. 1. General Mills is shifting with the times General Mills makes food products like cereal, snack bars, pet food, and baking products. It owns a collection of brand names that you likely know well, including Blue Buffalo and Cheerios. The brands and products it sells are staples in grocery stores and in consumer cupboards. It's highly unlikely that General Mills will suddenly go out of business anytime soon. That said, right now the company is facing some headwinds. Consumer buying habits are shifting, and some buyers are pulling back on spending. That has left General Mills' financial results weak. Sales and earnings fell year over year in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025. The company's fiscal 2026 outlook was a bit weak, too. But management is doing what it can to adjust, including changing formulations to match current trends, adjusting its brand and product portfolio, and trying to keep a lid on costs. These are the right moves and, in time, they will likely lead to General Mills getting back on track. It always has in the past. While General Mills' stock is out of favor, you can buy it at an attractive 4.8% yield. That's near the highest levels in the company's history. If you like income and think long term, General Mills should probably be on your buy list today. 2. PepsiCo has industry-leading brands General Mills is a good company with industry-leading brands, but PepsiCo's brands stand out even more. It's the No. 2 beverage company and the No. 1 salty snack maker. It also makes packaged food products that compete with companies like General Mills. The problem for PepsiCo is that customer tastes are shifting, and it is out of step with its customers. The company is working on the issue -- it recently bought a Mexican-American food business and a probiotic beverage company. Both are more in line with current trends. Sure, PepsiCo's recent financial results aren't that great, and they lag those of its closest peers. It's OK -- that happens even to well-run businesses. PepsiCo didn't achieve Dividend King status by accident, and it has muddled through hard times before. It's highly likely that it will do so again. In the meantime, you can collect a historically high 3.9% dividend yield. If the dividend history here is any guide, you'll end up a long-term winner if you're willing to step in while the rest of Wall Street is selling. 3. Hershey's cocoa problem makes it hard to love Hershey is the most difficult story to appreciate here for two reasons. First, while it makes food, the most important product it sells is chocolate. That's not a necessity, even though people love the affordable indulgence. Second, the biggest headwind for the business is a shocking rise in the price of cocoa, a key ingredient in chocolate. Cocoa comes from trees, so it could take some time before high prices lead to changes in the industry. That's why investors have sold Hershey stock hard, leading to a historically high 2.9% dividend yield. Just how bad is it? Despite increasing prices and the expectation of sales growth in 2025, Hershey is projecting rising costs to lead to a roughly mid-30% drop in earnings in 2025. And given the nature of cocoa, the pain could linger for a bit. There's a good reason why investors are negative on the stock. But if you can stomach some near-term uncertainty, the long-term picture is likely to be continued and growing demand for the affordable luxuries that Hershey sells. You need and want what they make It is hard to suggest that chocolate, soda, or cereal are life necessities. You can certainly eat and drink other things. But these consumer staples giants have long delivered the food items that people want to buy. That will be just as true in one year as it is in 10 years or 20 years. The headwinds they face today aren't likely to change anything about the nature of these businesses, even if the companies do need to adjust to better align with current trends. The truth is that they've all done that many times before. Given the historically high yields on offer from General Mills, PepsiCo, and Hershey, buying and holding for decades is probably a good call for even the most conservative dividend investors today. Do the experts think PepsiCo is a buy right now? The Motley Fool's expert analyst team, drawing on years of investing experience and deep analysis of thousands of stocks, leverages our proprietary Moneyball AI investing database to uncover top opportunities. They've just revealed their to buy now — did PepsiCo make the list? When our Stock Advisor analyst team has a stock recommendation, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is up 1,036% vs. just 181% for the S&P — that is beating the market by 855.09%!* Imagine if you were a Stock Advisor member when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $625,254!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,090,257!* The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025 Reuben Gregg Brewer has positions in General Mills, Hershey, and PepsiCo. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Hershey. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 3 Dividend Stocks to Hold for the Next 20 Years was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says he 'had to' move nuclear submarines after 'threat'
STORY: :: Trump says he 'had to' move nuclear submarines after a 'threat' from Russian ex-leader Dmitry Medvedev :: August 1, 2025 :: Washington, D.C. Security analysts called Trump's move a rhetorical escalation with Moscow, but not necessarily a military one, given that the United States already has nuclear-powered submarines that are deployed and capable of striking Russia. Medvedev on Thursday said Trump should remember that Moscow possessed Soviet-era nuclear strike capabilities of last resort, after Trump had told Medvedev to "watch his words." He did not specify what he meant by "nuclear submarines." Submarines may be nuclear-powered, or armed with nuclear missiles. It is extremely rare for the U.S. military to discuss the deployment and location of U.S. submarines given their sensitive mission in nuclear deterrence. The U.S. Navy declined comment. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
3 Reasons Stablecoins Are Still a Risky Investment Choice
Key Points Stablecoins are gaining a lot of attention as an alternative to U.S. dollars. But a lot of those coins aren't actually backed by U.S. dollars. They're also not designed to beat inflation or the market over the long term. 10 stocks we like better than Tether › Stablecoins are gaining a lot of attention as an alternative to traditional cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum. These coins, which are usually pegged to real-world assets like fiat currencies or gold, are designed to generate stable long-term returns. The most popular stablecoins are Tether (CRYPTO: USDT), USD Coin (CRYPTO: USDC), DAI (CRYPTO: DAI), TrueUSD (CRYPTO: TUSD), and PayPal USD (CRYPTO: PYUSD), all of which are pegged to the U.S. dollar. The issuers of these stablecoins back up their coins with their own reserves of cash, cash equivalents, and other assets. These USD-backed stablecoins try to keep their price at $1. They can be held without a bank account, help people protect their savings in countries with currency devaluation issues, and facilitate faster and cheaper cross-border transfers than U.S. dollars. USD stablecoins are also widely used in decentralized finance (DeFi) apps to pay out rewards, establish collateral for loans, and trade assets without a conversion to a fiat currency. They can act as a bridge currency to help crypto traders quickly switch between volatile assets. These stablecoins might initially seem a lot safer than other cryptocurrencies, but they're not risk-free investments. Let's review the three risks for stablecoins you should be aware of. 1. Not all stablecoins are backed by real-world assets Most USD-collateralized stablecoins like Tether and gold-backed stablecoins like Tether Gold (CRYPTO: XAUT) are pegged to physical assets. Tether holds a mix of cash, U.S. Treasuries, precious metals, and other cash equivalents. Tether Gold directly holds gold reserves. But there are two other types of stablecoins that are pegged to much riskier assets: crypto-collateralized coins, which are pegged to other cryptocurrencies; and algorithmic coins, which rely on automated computer programs to control the supply and keep their prices stable. For example, DAI is a crypto-collateralized coin that holds a mix of Ether, Tether, Wrapped Bitcoin, and Lido Staked Ether instead of actual U.S. dollars or Treasuries. By only holding cryptocurrencies, it doesn't rely on any custodian banks to hold fiat currencies. But it's not fully decentralized, since it's still holding a lot of Tether (which is backed by actual U.S. dollars), and a crypto crash could reduce the value of its collateral and weaken its peg to the U.S dollar. Many algorithmic stablecoins, like TerraUSD, crashed when their automated programs couldn't stay pegged to the U.S. dollar. Yet some smaller stablecoins are still trying to stay pegged with their own algorithms. If those opaque algorithms fail, those smaller stablecoins could quickly fizzle out if they're not backed by other assets. Therefore, investors shouldn't assume all stablecoins are "stable" because they've been holding steady at $1. Instead, they should see what these issuers are actually holding as their collateral, and whether they can be trusted to stay firmly pegged to the U.S. dollar. 2. They're exposed to regulatory headwinds Many stablecoins have sprouted up during the past few years, but they could be cut down by much tighter government regulations in the near future. Those regulators could scrutinize their underlying reserves and usage in cross-border remittances. They might even ban the riskier algorithmic stablecoins. Those government regulators could also consider stablecoins to be a threat to central banks, and use tighter licensing, auditing, or reporting requirements to subdue their growth. That oversight would undermine the usefulness of stablecoins as an alternative to U.S. dollars. 3. They aren't designed to beat inflation Most traditional investments, like stocks, are aimed at beating inflation. For example, the S&P 500 has generated an average annual return of 10% since its inception in 1957. In that context, stablecoins aren't good long-term investments because they're designed to merely match the value of the U.S. dollar -- which will inevitably decline over the long term. So for capital preservation, you would be better off parking your cash in a risk-free CD or T-bill that pays a 4% to 5% yield instead. The only way for stablecoins to beat inflation is if they're lent out on other crypto platforms to earn interest. Those platforms still pay double-digit annual percentage yields, but you're taking on a lot of counterparty risk for that yield. Several of those platforms -- including Celsius, Voyager, and BlockFi -- collapsed in 2022 and wiped out their lenders' stablecoins. Should you buy stablecoins right now? Stablecoins might be a viable way to preserve your capital, execute fast and cheap cross-border transfers, and smoothly invest in crypto platforms or apps. But they're not inflation-beating investments and they face a lot of risks that won't affect the U.S. dollar. Investors should clearly evaluate those risks before jumping on the bandwagon. Should you buy stock in Tether right now? Before you buy stock in Tether, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Tether wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $625,254!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,090,257!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,036% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 181% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025 Leo Sun has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin and Ethereum. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 3 Reasons Stablecoins Are Still a Risky Investment Choice was originally published by The Motley Fool
