Gin Blossoms to push for patients' rights in pre-Congressional Baseball Game concert
The alternative rockers behind '90s hits such as 'Hey Jealousy' and 'Til I Hear it From You' will take to the stage at the Bullpen in Washington just before first pitch between Democrats and Republicans at Congress's annual charity baseball competition on June 11 at Nationals Park.
'It'll be nice to play this show. It's a good event and it's a worthy cause,' Jesse Valenzuela, the Gin Blossoms' guitarist and singer, said in an interview this week with ITK.
The band is performing on behalf of the nonprofit organization, Power to the Patients, which describes itself as a 'bipartisan movement to strengthen healthcare price transparency rules that will protect patients and unleash choice and competition to lower costs.'
'It's sort of a common-sense issue that they really want to get some sort of transparency on medical bills to people so that they don't wind up getting sick and going bankrupt trying to pay all the bills,' Valenzuela said.
The 63-year-old songwriter mentioned his mother, who just celebrated a birthday this week: 'She's in her eighties, so she has health issues and concerns. And sometimes it can be difficult for people when there's more bill than she suspected, being on a fixed income.'
'We all make our way through these things, but sometimes, for some people, it can be catastrophic,' the 'Follow You Down' musician said.
Power to the Patients has brought a star-studded lineup to the nation's capital over the years to advocate for healthcare price transparency and legislation, including rapper Fat Joe, Foo Fighters and Everclear, among others.
A limited number of free tickets to the pre-Congressional Baseball Game festivities are available to the public through the Power to the Patients' website.
Valenzuela, who's getting ready to hit the road as part of a nationwide tour this summer with Blues Traveler and the Spin Doctors, said he suspects the Gin Blossoms have some fans in Congress.
'I bet there are a few,' he said with a laugh.
'We're certainly of the right age.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
12 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democrats bow to nuclear-energy reality — but the left won't give up their delusions
The Biden-era climate-activist class may be the last to accept that there's no clean energy future without nuclear power. At least some politicians — even in the bluest corridors — are conceding. Reliably progressive New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has instructed the state's public power authority to build no less than one gigawatt of advanced nuclear power. Her announcement came just weeks after President Donald Trump issued a series of executive orders to bring back America's nuclear-energy dominance. Site assessments, private-sector partnerships and labor support are already in motion. Hochul and Trump come from opposite political universes, but both understand that nuclear delivers what wind and solar never will. It's the only zero-emission energy source that can power today's energy requirements reliably at scale. Modern life depends on uninterrupted electricity — AI computing, chip manufacturing, electric vehicles and data centers can't run on 'weather permitting' power. Storage for excess energy from wind and solar resources is still too expensive. Sunlight and wind are still too unreliable. Nuclear is the only clean option that runs 24/7. Trump's directives reflect that reality: They speed up permitting timelines, reauthorize shuttered reactors, rebuild domestic uranium supply chains and fast-track next-generation reactors for military bases and AI infrastructure. The goal is 300 gigawatts of new capacity by 2050, ensuring that nuclear power is the center of American competitiveness and security. Hochul, for her part, recognizes that New York can't meet its electrification targets without nuclear, either. The state's phase-out of fossil fuels has created demand spikes the current grid can't handle, made worse by the premature shutdown of plants like Indian Point in Westchester. She may never admit it publicly, but her plan rests entirely on the foundation Trump laid over the past months. His leadership — combined with streamlined Nuclear Regulatory Commission reviews, rebuilt supply chains and rising bipartisan support — cleared the way. But while some Democrats have begun to evolve, the institutional climate-activist left has not. Groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Sierra Club and the Nuclear Threat Initiative have cycled millions of dollars through projects meant to thwart nuclear power. They reflexively oppose every new reactor proposal, every licensing reform and every effort to restore fuel production on American soil. UCS has spent years pushing climate litigation to 'hold bad actors accountable' for 'climate change,' recover 'damages' and 'limit future climate harms,' while taking money from far-left donors like the Tides Foundation and the Energy Foundation — which has longstanding links to the Chinese Communist Party. Edwin Lyman, a UCS director and frequent critic of nuclear power, has shockingly urged the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission to disobey Trump's executive orders. The Sierra Club, once a conservationist group, now donates millions almost exclusively to Democratic campaigns, and supported President Joe Biden's push to ban gas stoves. NTI, co-founded by CNN's Ted Turner and run by former President Barack Obama's energy secretary, is bankrolled by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Arabella Advisors' dark-money network. These groups are increasingly out of sync with global science, public opinion — and now, even the Democratic officials they once helped elect. They portray themselves as scientific, civic-minded watchdogs, but their only function is to spend millions injecting a radical, unpopular left-wing agenda into American politics, one that benefits America's adversaries more than the environment. The rest of the world is advancing its nuclear energy capabilities: China is developing small, modular reactors to export globally, while Russia is financing nuclear plants across Africa and Eastern Europe. These countries are not paralyzed by activist lawsuits or donor-driven campaigns, so they are free to invest in the most powerful tool available to cut emissions and expand growth. Finally, thanks to an increasing groundswell of support, so is the United States. The future of energy is nuclear, whether the climate lobby likes it or not. America is fortunate to have a president who understands this fact and is willing to lead. The alternative is to let out-of-touch donor-backed litigators and left-wing dark money behemoths dictate US nuclear policy, just as they did in the Biden White House. The country can't afford that kind of nostalgia. Steve Forbes is chairman and editor -n- chief of Forbes Media.
Boston Globe
12 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Edwin Feulner, ‘Heritage Foundation's George Washington,' dies at 83
Weyrich went on to found several other conservative groups. Dr. Feulner ran Heritage from 1977 to 2013, and he became interim head again for a brief period in 2017. Two years ago, during a 50th anniversary celebration at Mount Vernon, the organization's current president, Kevin Roberts, called Dr. Feulner 'the Heritage Foundation's George Washington.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up As Dr. Feulner described it, the foundational principles of Heritage included 'free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional values and a strong national defense,' The New York Times reported in 2018. Advertisement The group was in the news during the last presidential election, when Kamala Harris and other Democrats argued that a Heritage document called Project 2025 would become a shadow agenda for Donald Trump's second term. Trump strenuously sought to dissociate himself from the nearly 900-page list of policies, which included doctrinaire right-wing positions on such politically delicate subjects as abortion. Advertisement What rarely came up during the public debate is how Project 2025 belonged to a long tradition of striking success that Heritage has enjoyed in shaping Republican presidential administrations. The document was the latest iteration of the Mandate for Leadership, a wish list for new presidents that Heritage has habitually issued around election cycles since Ronald Reagan took power in 1981. Dr. Feulner explained how the tradition got started in Project 2025's afterword, which he wrote, titled 'Onward!' In the fall of 1979, senior officials of the Nixon and Ford administrations, William E. Simon and Jack Eckerd, told Dr. Feulner that, upon assuming office, they had received no practical guidance on how to institute conservative policies on issues such as free markets, government size, and national security. They added that their briefings came from liberal predecessors or career civil servants who favored the status quo. Dr. Feulner and others at Heritage were early supporters of Reagan's. Long before Reagan beat Jimmy Carter in the 1980 election, Heritage decided to spend $250,000 to put together a guidebook for a Reagan presidency. The result, weighing in at 1,093 pages, was distributed by Reagan at his first Cabinet meeting, Ed Meese, later Reagan's attorney general, told the Times in 2018. Dr. Feulner described the document to The Washington Post in 1983 as 'the nuts and bolts of how you make the kind of changes that philosophers and academics have been talking about.' Heritage soon reported that about 60 percent of its suggestions had been acted on by the new administration in its first year in power. The foundation was generally a booster of Republicans, but it also saw its mandate as condemning Republicans when they failed to live up to principle. Advertisement In 1987, after Reagan signed an arms control agreement with the Soviet Union and praised reforms undertaken by Mikhail Gorbachev, Dr. Feulner told the Times that conservatives felt 'Ronald Reagan walked away from them in the end.' He was harsher still on George H.W. Bush, whose tax increases constituted a cardinal sin. Meese discovered what inducements were possible by staying loyal to the cause. After Reagan's second term, Meese joined Heritage as a fellow making an annual salary of $400,000. Soon after George W. Bush assumed office, Dr. Feulner dispensed the ultimate praise. 'More Reaganite than the Reagan administration,' he told the Times. He added that he and Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, spoke a couple times a week. A new measure of the power of the Heritage Foundation came in 2013, when Jim DeMint, a Republican senator from South Carolina, resigned in order to succeed Dr. Feulner. 'There's no question in my mind that I have more influence now on public policy than I did as an individual senator,' he told National Public Radio in 2013. DeMint was associated with the Tea Party, which Heritage had helped to finance and organize. During the 2016 presidential campaign, as other members of the Republican establishment turned against Trump, DeMint pursued a collaborative relationship with the campaign. When Trump won, Dr. Feulner became head of domestic policy for the incoming president's transition team. Heritage was ready with a database of thousands of loyal conservatives to appoint to political offices. 'By betting long odds on Trump, he succeeded,' Daniel Drezner, then a columnist at The Washington Post, wrote of DeMint. 'Heritage has easily been the most influential think tank in the Trump era.' Advertisement In 2017, during a White House dinner for grassroots leaders of the conservative movement, Dr. Feulner was the only think tank official invited — and he sat next to Trump. 'In some respects, Trump the nonpolitician has an incredible advantage, even over Ronald Reagan,' Dr. Feulner told the Times in 2018. Reagan 'knew there were certain things government couldn't do,' he added. Trump, on the other hand, has had a different mentality: 'Hell, why can't we do that? Let's try it.' Edwin John Feulner Jr. was born in Chicago on Aug. 12, 1941. His father was a self-made success in real estate, getting a college degree in night school and later helping to develop downtown Chicago. His mother, Helen (Franzen) Feulner, doted on Eddie, the eldest son, as her favorite, his three younger sisters later told Lee Edwards, author of 'Leading the Way: The Story of Ed Feulner and the Heritage Foundation,' a biography. He grew up saying grace before meals and serving as an altar boy at a local Catholic church. In 1963, he earned a bachelor's degree in English and business from Regis University, a Jesuit institution in Denver. While there, he experienced an ideological awakening while reading Russell Kirk's book 'The Conservative Mind' and Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn's 'Liberty or Equality.' In his spare time in Washington, he studied by correspondence for a doctorate in political science from the University of Edinburgh. He earned the degree in 1981. As a young man, he was an aide to two Republican members of the House of Representatives: Melvin Laird, from Wisconsin, and Philip Crane, from Illinois. Advertisement The Heritage Foundation was launched by a $260,000 donation from beer baron Joseph Coors. His seed money for Heritage was 'arguably the most consequential that's ever been spent in the world of public policy,' John J. Miller wrote in a remembrance for The Wall Street Journal in 2003. Richard Mellon Scaife, a banking and oil scion, became another major early donor. But wary of charges that Heritage was a tool of a few rich men, Dr. Feulner built a substantial membership list with the help of Richard Viguerie, a conservative marketer. By 1984, The Washington Post described Heritage's annual budget of over $10 million as 'the biggest of any think tank in Washington, left or right.' In 2023, its revenue was $101 million. The Times reported that Dr. Feulner's 2010 salary was $1,098,612. In 2005, The Washington Post found that Heritage swerved from criticizing the government of Malaysia to praising it around the time that a Hong Kong consulting firm cofounded by Dr. Feulner and advised by his wife, Linda, began representing Malaysian companies. In a statement, the Heritage Foundation denied that its reports were influenced by Feulner family business interests or any other external factor. Dr. Feulner's survivors include his wife; his children, Edwin III and Emily V. Lown; and several grandchildren. Flush with power in 1984, Dr. Feulner told the Times about the value of political irrelevance. 'The years in the wilderness gave us the time to work out challenges to the prevailing orthodoxy,' he said. He saw 'intellectual ferment' happening on the left — new ideas, new institutional energy. 'Now we are in the mainstream,' he cautioned, 'and we will suffer for that like the liberals before us.' Advertisement This article originally appeared in
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
We can't win the fight to end HIV if we cut funding and access to medication
The fight to end HIV in our lifetimes just received a game-changing innovation. In June, the FDA approved Yeztugo (lenacapavir), a groundbreaking HIV prevention treatment that requires just two injections per year — and scored 99 percent effectiveness in trials. This monumental scientific breakthrough is poised to transform the lives of people who have found it hard to keep up with daily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis, providing an option that fits better into their everyday lives. But as exciting as this development is, it could be undermined by the Trump administration's proposal to cut nearly $1 billion from federal HIV prevention programs. Innovations like lenacapavir could be a key tool to ending the epidemic, but only if we have the resources and policy to deliver it directly to those who need them most. Although lenacapavir's efficacy is groundbreaking, access remains another story. With a price tag hovering around $28,000 a year, this medication risks being out of reach for the very communities who need it most. We're still waiting to see how programs managed by Gilead Sciences, which developed the treatments, and the broader insurance markets will step up. And it's not just the cost of the drug itself. It's the labs, the provider visits, the follow-ups — each one a potential roadblock for someone trying to stay safe. Federal leadership is essential to ensuring this new HIV prevention tool reaches the communities who need it most. This includes updating clinical guidelines, funding support services and supporting the infrastructure that makes access possible. Unfortunately, the Trump administration and the Republican majorities in Congress are putting access to lifesaving innovations at risk. The administration's attacks on HIV prevention, including its proposals to eliminate the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's HIV budget and efforts to dismantle public health systems, threaten progress. The Republican budget reconciliation bill that President Trump signed over the July 4 weekend includes deep cuts to Medicaid — the largest payer for HIV care in the U.S. Without strong federal investment and coordination, expanding access to new tools and ending the HIV epidemic is at serious risk. Despite the real strides we have made in HIV prevention, those of us in the lesbian, gay, and transgender community — especially non-white Southerners in rural areas or navigating poverty — know that not every prevention strategy reaches us, works for us, or is built with us in mind. Our realities demand options that reflect the full truth of who we are and how we live. Lenacapavir offers real, powerful hope, but let's be clear: Science alone won't save us. What will make the difference is equitable and intentional policies that center our communities and a public health infrastructure that doesn't leave us behind. These numbers don't shift on their own. Yes, we have made progress over time. But the hard truth is that Black Americans still account for 43 percent of all new HIV diagnoses in the U.S., despite being just 13 percent of the population. The data is even more stark for Black transgender women: 44 percent are living with HIV, and their lifetime risk remains unacceptably high. And we cannot ignore the geography of this epidemic. The South accounts for 52 percent of all new HIV diagnoses in the U.S. That's not a coincidence — it is the result of systemic failures: limited access to healthcare, persistent stigma, lack of comprehensive sex education and the absence of strong non-discrimination protections. These barriers don't just prevent care — they trap people in cycles where prevention tools are out of reach. Among gay and bisexual Black men, the risk of contracting HIV is still 50 percent over a lifetime. Prevention tools like pre-exposure prophylaxis and lenacapavir hold promise, but they only matter if people can actually access them, without fear, shame or coercion. Ending this epidemic means creating environments where people are safe to make informed choices about their own health. The fight to end the HIV epidemic is not just about what happens in labs — it's about how we make these innovations real for our communities. Science is doing its part. Now is the time to urge Congress to reject any cuts to CDC HIV prevention efforts and to fully fund the HIV response. We have the tools to end this epidemic, but not if we dismantle the very systems our communities rely on to survive. The promise of lenacapavir, and the hope it represents, is too great to let fall through the cracks of policy neglect. The question is, will we make the choice to ensure that this breakthrough reaches all of us? Science has given us the tools. Now, we must ensure that everyone has the opportunity to use them.
