Photos show how extreme heat is affecting parts of Europe
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
21 minutes ago
- Reuters
USAID cuts may cause over 14 million additional deaths by 2030, study says
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) - Deep funding cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development and its potential dismantling could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, according to research published, opens new tab in The Lancet medical journal on Monday. President Donald Trump's administration, since taking office in January, has made funding cuts to USAID and its aid programs worldwide in what the U.S. government says is part of its broader plan to remove wasteful spending. Human rights experts and advocates have warned against the cuts. USAID funding has had a crucial role in improving global health, primarily directed toward low and middle-income countries, particularly African nations, according to the study. The study estimated that over the past two decades, USAID-funded programs have prevented more than 91 million deaths globally, including 30 million deaths among children. Projections suggest that ongoing deep funding cuts - combined with the potential dismantling of the agency - could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, including 4.5 million deaths among children younger than 5 years, the study in The Lancet said. Washington is the world's largest humanitarian aid donor, amounting to at least 38% of all contributions recorded by the United Nations. It disbursed $61 billion in foreign assistance last year, just over half of it via USAID, according to government data, opens new tab. "Our estimates show that, unless the abrupt funding cuts announced and implemented in the first half of 2025 are reversed, a staggering number of avoidable deaths could occur by 2030," the study said. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in March the Trump administration canceled over 80% of all programs at USAID following a six-week review. The remaining approximately 1,000 programs, he said, would now be administered "more effectively" under the U.S. State Department and in consultation with Congress.
The Guardian
37 minutes ago
- The Guardian
EPA employees sign ‘declaration of dissent' over agency moves under Trump
A group of Environmental Protection Agency employees on Monday published a declaration of dissent from the agency's policies under the Trump administration, saying they 'undermine the EPA mission of protecting human health and the environment'. More than 170 EPA employees put their names to the document, with about 100 more signing anonymously out of fear of retaliation, according to Jeremy Berg, a former editor-in-chief of Science magazine who is not an EPA employee but was among non-EPA scientists or academics to also sign. The latter figure includes 20 Nobel laureates. The letter represents rare public criticism from agency employees who could face blowback for speaking out against a weakening of funding and federal support for climate, environmental and health science. Scientists at the National Institutes of Health made a similar move earlier in June. 'Since the Agency's founding in 1970, EPA has accomplished [its] mission by leveraging science, funding, and expert staff in service to the American people. Today, we stand together in dissent against the current administration's focus on harmful deregulation, mischaracterization of previous EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise,' the letter read. Agency spokespeople did not immediately respond on Monday to messages seeking comment. 'I'm really sad. This agency, that was a superhero for me in my youth, we're not living up to our ideals under this administration. And I really want us to,' said Amelia Hertzberg, an environmental protection specialist at the EPA who has been on administrative leave since February from the office of environmental justice and external civil rights, while the administration works to close down her department. Hertzberg's work focused on the most vulnerable groups affected by pollution: pregnant and nursing people, young children and babies, the elderly, people with pre-existing and chronic health conditions and people living in communities exposed to higher levels of pollution. That was not supposed to be controversial, but it had become so in this political climate, she said. 'Americans should be able to drink their water and breathe their air without being poisoned. And if they aren't, then our government is failing,' she said. Berg, who also directed the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at NIH from 2003-2011, said the dissent was not motivated by partisan criticism. He said the employees hoped it would help the EPA get back to the mission for which it was established – which 'only matters if you breathe air and drink water'. The letter outlines what the EPA employees see as five main concerns: undermining public trust; ignoring scientific consensus to benefit polluters; reversing the EPA's progress in America's most vulnerable communities; dismantling the office of research and development; and promoting a culture of fear, forcing staff to choose between their livelihood and wellbeing. Under Lee Zeldin, the agency's administrator, the EPA has cut funding for environmental improvements in minority communities, vowed to roll back federal regulations that lower air pollution in national parks and tribal reservations, wants to undo a ban on a type of asbestos and proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Zeldin began reorganizing the EPA's research and development office as part of his push to slash their budget and gut their study of climate change and environmental justice. And he is seeking to roll back pollution rules that an Associated Press examination found were estimated to save 30,000 lives and $275bn every year. 'People are going to die,' said Carol Greider, a Nobel laureate and professor of molecular and cellular biology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who also signed the letter. She described last week's east coast heatwave as evidence of the ways people are feeling the effects of climate change. 'And if we don't have scientists at the EPA to understand how what we do that goes into the air affects our health, more people are going to die,' she added. Berg said the declarations of dissent from both the NIH and EPA employees are noteworthy because they represent scientists speaking out as their careers are on the line. Even non-agency employees have to consider whether the government will withdraw research funding. Greider, asked about fears of repercussions or retaliation, said she was 'living the repercussions of everything'. She regularly meets with graduate students who are worried about pursuing scientific careers as labs lose funding. She said it was a long-term problem if we are not supporting the next generation of scientists: 'That's decades worth of loss.'
BBC News
44 minutes ago
- BBC News
Trans troops in US military 'in survival mode' as ban on serving kicks in
After 17 years in the US Army, Maj Kara Corcoran, 39, was preparing to graduate from an elite military leadership there was a days before the ceremony, Kara was told that she would need to conform to male regulations, which meant wearing male uniform and cutting the long blonde hair she had grown since she told the Army she identified as a woman in directive had come from the Pentagon, and filtered down through her chain of command at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas."Nothing about me is a man, but we're going to force me into male regs just so I can walk across the stage with my peers," she said in the hours leading up to the ceremony. "It's not my choice to cut my hair. I'm doing it because I have to."Kara is one of several thousand transgender people affected by a ban, announced by President Trump in January, that prevents them from serving in any job in the US military.A previous ban in his first term focused on new recruits and allowed some exceptions, particularly for those already serving. The 2025 policy removes virtually all of the figures say there are about 4,200 transgender service members in the US armed forces, however other estimates are much higher, at about 10,000. The new policy states that a history or diagnosis of gender dysphoria - where a person feels their gender differs from their sex registered at birth - is "incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service".An executive order outlined President Trump's position that "the Armed Forces have been afflicted with radical gender ideology" and that the policy would ensure staff were "free of medical conditions or physical defects that may reasonably be expected to require excessive time lost from duty for necessary treatment or hospitalization".The order also stated that "a man's assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood, is not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member".A Gallup poll in February this year suggested that 58% of Americans "favor allowing openly transgender men and women to serve in the US military, but support has declined from 71% in 2019 and 66% in 2021".Critics have called the ban discriminatory and legal challenges have been filed from serving transgender officers and human rights February, the BBC has followed the lives of Maj Kara Corcoran and an officer in the Navy, Lt Rae Timberlake, as they navigate the uncertainty of their military careers. They have shared their thoughts and feelings in a personal capacity, not as spokespeople for the US military or other colleagues. A career in question Kara has spent most of her adult life in the US Army. Her combat deployments included time in Afghanistan where she was both a platoon leader and a company commander, when she was living as a man, before she transitioned. Since then, she says she has legally changed her name and gender and uses female people were disqualified from all jobs in the military until 2016, but over the past decade, as governments have changed, US policy has flip-flopped. 2016: Obama lifts ban on trans people serving, allowing them access to funding through the military for gender-related treatment2017: Trump announces ban on trans people serving, citing medical costs and potential disruptions2021: Biden signs order restoring the right of trans people to serve2025: Trump announces new ban and bases are told to initiate separation proceedings against personnel with gender dysphoria "For a long time, I stayed silent," says Kara. When she joined up in 2008, women were not allowed in combat positions married a woman and had children, although the relationship broke down and ended as she grappled with her came out as a transgender woman in 2018 and began her hormonal and surgical transition. She says she had the support of her commanding officers, who were still working to the previous set of guidelines, despite Trump's 2017 ban. She tells the BBC that the transition improved her ability to serve."It's made me more focused, more resilient," she says. "There's a common misconception that transitioning is a liability. For me, it's been the opposite." Now, with Trump's latest policy in effect, Kara has been told that unless she leaves voluntarily, she may be forced out of the service against her will through a process called involuntary separation happens when someone is discharged and they do not choose to leave of their own accord. It can affect any service member, not just people in combat well as losing their jobs, people can also potentially lose benefits, such as pensions, healthcare and disability Department of Defense said that if someone went involuntarily they may get half what they would get if they left voluntarily - the difference could be tens of thousands of this, Maj Kara Corcoran says she does not want to walk away."I'm not going to get voluntarily separated," she says. "I'll go through the involuntary separation and what that looks like and how horrific they want to make that for me and other service members." 'The single dumbest phrase in military history' Others such as former US Navy Seal, Carl Higbie, support Trump's ban, though. Carl now hosts a TV show on the conservative network believes that transgender people are not fit for service in the US military, arguing that gender dysphoria may require ongoing medical care and accommodations that could affect deployability."You can't take Ritalin [which is used to treat ADHD] or certain types of prescription medications and be an eligible service member in combat. Why should you be on hormone therapy, which we know has sometimes emotional effects?" he asked if he thought that biological women, who may be on other medications containing hormones, such as treatment for the menopause, are fit to serve in the armed forces, he said: "I think there are certain times where we should be more concerned about killing bad guys than making sure that we have gender quotas on a combat operation." Listen to Inside the US trans military ban on BBC Sounds The ban on transgender service members is part of a broader shift in US military policy - Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, a Trump appointee and former army officer, has moved to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion programmes."I think the single dumbest phrase in military history is 'our diversity is our strength'," Hegseth said at a Pentagon event in in April, he posted on X that he "proudly ended" the Women, Peace and Security programme, an initiative to invite more women and girls to be part of conflict resolution. He called it a distraction from the core task of "war-fighting". A family on the brink of change Many had seen the policy shift coming. In the early hours of 6 November, when Donald Trump secured his victory in the 2024 US presidential election, Lt Rae Timberlake made a decision.A non-binary navy officer, Rae joined the Navy aged 17 and has served aboard the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and in the Middle falls under the trans umbrella because, although they were registered female at birth, they identify as neither male nor female and use they/them says that coming out as non-binary in 2020 and transitioning brought clarity to their identity. "The moment I heard the word 'non-binary', I knew it fit," they told the with the 2024 Trump victory, Rae felt the clock was ticking on their career. They requested to transfer from their West Coast base, to a base closer to family in the east, who could give them support. Rae, their wife and daughter moved in the middle of a school term, in the anticipation that a possible separation from the Navy was imminent."It felt like the safest move for us, in case I was forced to leave the service," says add that they weren't surprised by President Donald Trump's executive order in January, or a memorandum from the Department of Defense the following memo specified that military bases must identify service members diagnosed with or exhibiting symptoms of gender dysphoria. The final deadlines to come forward voluntarily were eventually set as 6 June for active-duty personnel and 7 July for reserve and National Guard May, the Department of Defense said 1,000 service personnel had self-identified as trans, but there has been no update of the number since military has 30 days from a deadline to start involuntary separation memo includes a provision for people to be considered for a waiver on a case-by-case basis. There are a few conditions including that staff must have "never attempted to transition to any sex other than their sex". By the time the memorandum was published, Rae had taken a new post in Maryland, and the family was adjusting to their new home."Watching Rae lose their career, it's painful," their wife, Lindsay, says. "We're in survival mode. We haven't had time to connect as a family. We just keep making hard choices."For Rae, the emotional cost has been high. They have decided they want more control over the future, so have requested to retire from the Navy, and believe that in doing so have self-identified for voluntary separation. The application hasn't been accepted yet, but Rae believes it will expect the financial implications to be substantial. Without completing 20 years of service, Rae says they will likely forfeit eligibility for a military pension. They estimate pension payments could have added up to about $2.5m (£1.8m) over the course of their retirement. A legal and political battle While the Department of Defense says the ban will maintain consistent medical and readiness standards across the forces, opponents, argue that the policy targets a vulnerable group lawsuits have been filed challenging its one high-profile ruling, a federal judge blocked the ban temporarily, citing concerns over its constitutionality and suggesting it discriminated based on gender identity. However, in April, the Supreme Court lifted the injunction, allowing the policy to move forward while litigation legal back-and-forth has left transgender service members in limbo. Rae has found job hunting in the civilian sector tough. "I applied for a position that had over 800 applicants in one day," they say, adding that civilian life will offer less security than the Navy. "It's competitive and daunting out there."But they say the next chapter is about not feeling "under threat for who I am". Looking ahead Kara didn't self-identify by the 6 June deadline, so is waiting to see if the military flags her for separation - the 30-day window means that should happen by 6 July. She will see what unfolds from US Department of Defense declined to give a statement to the BBC but pointed to previous statements saying it was committed to treating all service members impacted by the policy with dignity and respect. A US defence official said that "characterization of service will be honorable except where the Service member's record otherwise warrants a lower characterization".For now Kara remains at her base in Fort Leavenworth but is prepared to leave with little notice if she has to. She has turned her car into a mobile home with a chunky power bank, cooking equipment, and a fold-out mattress. "On top I've got an eight-gallon water tank. I fill it up, pump it with an air compressor, and I can take a shower out in the wild. At least I have somewhere to live."When she graduated from the leadership programme with distinction, after complying with male uniform and grooming standards, she said it "meant a lot, but how I had to do it felt like erasing my identity"."This is about people who've dedicated their lives to service, now being told they're no longer fit, not because of performance, but because of who they are."
