Mayawati reviews BSP's expansion in seven states
She also expressed concern over the growing religious frenzy and violence over language and caste issues, demanding protection for residents of other states working in the financial capital, Mumbai.
Referring to the recent violence against non-Marathi speakers in Mumbai, Mayawati called upon the state and Central governments to provide security to all.
'Mumbai is the financial capital of the country, and people from all states have a link with it,' she said.
Referring to the language row, Mayawati said that such dangerous tendencies are rooted in the narrow politics of religion, region, caste and language that try to overshadow patriotism and love for the country.
The BSP chief also urged state governments to pay special attention to important issues of public interest like inflation, poverty, unemployment, illiteracy and health, along with law and order.
Earlier, Mayawati took progress reports from different state units and reviewed the progress on the formation of organisation committees as instructed during the party's special meeting in Lucknow on March 2.
The meeting on Sunday was also attended by the Central Coordinator and In-charge for all these states, former MP Rajaram and Atar Singh Rao, former MLC, along with senior office-bearers of state units.
Mayawati issued instructions to pay attention to the shortcomings in strengthening the state units and carry forward the message of self-respect and self-esteem of Baba Saheb Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar.
The BSP chief also directed party workers to maintain the Ambedkarite and humanitarian character of the party and improve the lives of crores of Dalits, tribals, other backward classes and minorities.
The former UP Chief Minister also encouraged party workers to serve the disadvantaged so that they are empowered socially, politically and economically as suggested by the Constitution.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
15 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Over 20 states sue Trump over $6.8 billion frozen funds for after-school, summer programmes
More than 20 states have sued US President Donald Trump over the freezing of about $6.8 billion in funding for after-school, summer programmes and other programmes. The states have argued that the Donald Trump administration has violated the US Constitution by not considering Congress's sole authority over spending. (Bloomberg) Attorney generals or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island. They argued that the US department of education and the office of management (OMB) and Budget brought chaos to schools across America by freezing funding for six programmes approved by Congress. North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson told ABC News, "This is plainly against the law." He went on to explain from a legal standpoint that this is "against the Constitution, against the Impoundment Act. This is not a hard case". According to the Impoundment Control Act, 1947, Congress must note and review the executive branch withholdings of budget authority. This requires the President to report any such withholdings to Congress. ALSO READ | 20 US states sue Trump administration over sharing of medical aid data with deportation officials While the Trump administration has been going after Ivy League universities head-on, freezing millions and billions of dollars in funding, the freeze also extended to the money used to support migrant farm workers and their childrens' education, recruitment and training of teachers, English proficiency learning and academic enrichment, besides the after-school and summer programmes. The lawsuit filed against Trump said that his administration was legally required to release the funds to the states by July 1, Reuters reported. Instead, the education department notified them on June 30 that the funds would not be released under those programmes as per the deadline, citing the change in administration as its reason. At the time, an OMB spokesperson reportedly said, "ongoing programmatic review" of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to "subsidize a radical leftwing agenda." The department also raised objections to the grant money being used to support scholarship for immigrant students and LGBTQ-themed lessons. The Democratic-led states said that the freeze has resulted in cancellations of summer school and after-school programmes and the halting of other initiatives, with little time for schools to fill in the gaps in their budget. ALSO READ | Trump administration sues California over transgender athletes in schools The states have argued that the Trump administration has violated the US Constitution by not considering Congress's sole authority over spending and went against the federal administrative law by freezing funds without any logical explanation. They also said that the administration failed to abide by the Impoundment Control Act, which prevents the executive branch from single-handedly refusing to spend funds approved by Congress unless certain procedures are followed. Jackson further told ABC News, "If the courts don't act promptly, the consequences will be dire." He warned that districts face the threat of immediate harm as the school year is nearing. The North Carolina Attorney General said that the massive effect of the pause could also result in the firing of about 1,000 educators in the district. "Everybody knows when it comes to juvenile crime, you want a safe place for teenagers to be able to go, to be able to keep them out of trouble," Jackson said, adding that elimination of after-school programmes across the US has never been considered a "good idea". ALSO READ | 12 states sue Donald Trump administration in trade court to stop tariff policy Alabama State Superintendent of Education Eric Mackey said that this will affect the students with the "greatest need". He told ABC News, "The loss of funding for those rural, poor, high poverty school districts, is just going to be, you know, more fuel for the fire that makes it more difficult to educate children in those communities." Christy Gleason, executive director of Save the Children Action Network, which provides after-school programming for 41 schools in rural areas of Washington and across the South, where the school year is set to begin as soon as August, said, "Time is of the essence." "It's not too late to make a decision, so the kids who really need this still have it," she added.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC agrees to hear plea against UP govt's decision to merge primary schools
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a plea challenging the Uttar Pradesh govt's decision to merge over 100 primary schools with low student enrolment. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi agreed to list the matter in the week after advocate Pradeep Yadav, appearing for petitioner Taiyyab Khan Salmani, sought an urgent hearing. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Yadav said over hundreds of government schools would be shut and thousands of primary students would be out of school, being forced to study in neighbhouring schools, if the government order of June 16 was not stayed. He said the state govt's order was challenged before the high court but it dismissed the pleas on July 7. Justice Kant said though a policy decision, it was ready to examine the issue if government schools were being shut. The plea said on June 16, the additional chief secretary of state's Basic Shiksha Department issued an order directing for taking steps for pairing of the schools managed under the supervision and control of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari and owned by the state government. "Consequent to which on dated June 24, 2025 the actual list of the schools which are being paired being 105 in numbers has been issued," the plea said. The high court dismissed the petitions on July 7 without considering the true facts and circumstances of the case that the said merger order will directly affect and destroy the already vulnerable education system in the state, it added. The petitioner argued that the policy decision was arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 21A of the Constitution as it offended the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the rules framed by the state government. The plea referred to Rule 4(1)(a) and said it was incumbent for the state government to establish a school with respect to children from Class 1 to 5 in the habitation where there was no school within a distance of a kilometer and the habitation having a population of at least 300 people.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Reunion or reunification?
The show of strength and unity between Uddhav Thackeray and Raj Thackeray on July 5 has rekindled hopes of their reunification among the cadre of their respective parties — the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) and the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena. The estranged cousins, who had not shared a dais for nearly two decades, came together to address a joint 'victory rally' in Mumbai. They celebrated the government's rollback of two orders making Hindi the third language in primary schools in Maharashtra. The government's revocation is being perceived as a victory for the 'Marathi manoos'. However, the big question remains: will the two cousins reunite on the political front as brand Thackeray at a time when regional parties feel threatened by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)? And if they do, what will that mean for the politics of Maharashtra, especially for Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, who leads the Shiv Sena? Mr. Uddhav Thackeray's party continues to face an exodus after the split of the Shiv Sena in 2022. The former Chief Minister has publicly expressed his desire for a political reunification with his cousin. However, Mr. Raj Thackeray has maintained a stoic silence and has asked his party leadership to resist from expressing their opinions on the matter. The suspense, ahead of the crucial Mumbai municipal corporation elections, continues. In April, the Maharashtra government introduced a three-language policy in primary education; it issued another order in June. These were largely perceived as an attempt to impose Hindi on the State. What began as an agitation against this policy has turned into a window of opportunity for the reunification of the Thackeray cousins. Mr. Uddhav Thackeray and Mr. Raj Thackeray's parties had publicly split 19 years ago. The two leaders have since led separate regional parties. When they came together at the joint victory rally at Mumbai's NSCI Dome on July 5, cadre from both parties watched with excitement. For them, it seemed like a step towards a long-cherished dream of seeing the cousins together again. Their hopes went up further when Mr. Uddhav Thackeray, amid loud cheers, said, 'We have come together to stay together.' This led to speculation that the two parties will come together for the local body elections. The Shiv Sena (UBT), which is struggling to keep its flock together, is anxious that fence-sitters may ditch it before the municipal elections. The Sena has traditionally controlled Mumbai's civic body, which is the richest corporation in the country. The diminished strength of the Shiv Sena (UBT) after Mr. Shinde's exit, the changed demography of the island city, and continuing exodus from the party are some of Mr. Uddhav Thackeray's key concerns. Mr. Raj Thackeray has his own set of woes. He has been leading a regional party with limited electoral gains so far. As he frequently changes his political stance, the public perceives him as unpredictable, which has not helped his cause. Mr. Shinde's party is hoping that the cousins will not patch up. Mr. Shinde has kept the communication window with Mr. Raj Thackeray open to the extent that his party cadre do not attack the MNS even as they relentlessly target Mr. Uddhav Thackeray. The BJP is aware that Mr. Shinde will suffer a body blow if the Thackeray cousins come together. Leaders of both the Shiv Sena (UBT) and the MNS claim that the move could be a game-changer and could impact the BJP negatively as well. So far, Mr. Raj Thackeray and Mr. Uddhav Thackeray have been fighting separately on Hindutva-related issues and Marathi pride. Amid the BJP's Hindutva appeal, the Thackeray cousins have stood for regional chauvinism. 'We are Hindus, not Hindis,' Raj Thackeray said, as a pitch against the 'Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan' plank of the BJP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. He has warned against national integration through homogenisation and has batted for a separate cultural and linguistic identity for Maharashtra. At the same time, Mr. Raj Thackeray has categorically stated that he came together with his cousin only for the cause of Marathi. MNS leaders say the show of strength is limited only to that issue, and that Mr. Raj Thackeray has not yet made up his mind on whether it should translate into something more. Political pundits say that if the cousins reunite and assert their political capital, they will both stand to gain.
