ToR to Banakacherla denied because of BRS fight: Harish Rao
Responding to comments made by the CM during a PowerPoint presentation on the project earlier in the day, Harish said that it was the BRS that woke up the Congress from its deep slumber. He claimed that the ToR for Banakacherla had been rejected because of the fight of the BRS.
He said the BRS had to remind Revanth that Telangana had a rightful share even in surplus waters of the Godavari and Krishna. But Revanth said that he would be satisfied with 1,000 tmcft in Godavari and 500 tmcft in Krishna river waters, Harish added.
The Siddipet MLA wondered why Revanth had still not demanded an Apex Council meeting. 'Why are you silent on this? What is preventing you from confronting the Centre or Andhra Pradesh?' Harish asked the CM.
The former irrigation minister wondered if Revanth was just doing whatever his political guru and Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu wanted.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
20 minutes ago
- Mint
America's ominous new halt on weapons to Ukraine
In recent weeks Ukraine has endured some of the most intense drone and missile bombardments since the start of Russia's full-on invasion three years ago. There could scarcely be a worse time for America to halt the delivery of precious air-defence equipment. Yet Ukrainian officials say that on the night of June 30th-July 1st the Pentagon turned back cargo planes delivering supplies of air-defence interceptors and other arms to European bases, from where they would be taken overland to Ukraine. Precisely which weapons have been halted, for how long and why remains murky. The Pentagon gave no details. But several reports said they included Patriot air-defence interceptors. The Wall Street Journal added that they included Stinger surface-to-air missiles, air-to-air missiles, Hellfire air-to-ground missiles, surface-to-surface rockets and artillery rounds. The Pentagon said the pause was intended to enable a general review of weapons deliveries to promote an end to the war in Ukraine 'while also preserving US military readiness and defense priorities.' Sean Parnell, the Pentagon spokesman, added: 'We can't give weapons to everybody all around the world. We have to look out for America and defending our homeland and our troops around the world.' Officials said the review was global, and any pause could ultimately be reversed. Ukrainian officials say that, in fact, all shipments of American weapons, including shells and spare parts, have been halted, a contention that American officials deny. The Pentagon presents the interruption as a limited and temporary action. But Ukrainian officials suspect a more concerted effort by the Trump administration to squeeze political concessions out of Ukraine, as it did in early March when it briefly stopped arms deliveries and intelligence co-operation after an infamous televised bust-up between Donald Trump and Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky. More recently, though, relations between Messrs Trump and Zelensky appeared to improve as Ukraine accepted American calls for an immediate ceasefire and Russia dragged out the process in the hope of making more gains on the ground. At the NATO summit in The Hague last week, Mr Trump seemed willing to find more Patriot interceptors for Ukraine, though he acknowledged supplies were tight. Whatever the precise situation, it seems clear that American support for Ukraine is ebbing. Mr Trump has not made any new commitments of weapons to help it since his return to office in January (tens of billions of dollars authorised by Congress last year remain uncommitted). Nor has the Republican-dominated Congress allocated new funds. There is no money for Ukraine in the 'big beautiful bill' making its way through Congress. Officials said the already small amounts for Ukraine in the regular Pentagon budget would be cut further under the budget request for fiscal year 2026, though they gave no details. The administration is allowing the supplemental funds approved by Congress last year, and the pipeline of arms pumped up at the end of Joe Biden's term, to drain away without replenishment. American support has come mainly in two forms: Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) under which the Pentagon has rushed weapons to Ukraine from its own stocks; and Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), a slower process whereby America has ordered weapons for Ukraine from manufacturers. The Trump administration has made no PDA announcements since coming to office in January, but weapons ordered under USAI had been expected to keep flowing until late 2028, according to calculations by Mark Cancian and Chris Park of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (see chart). If these supplies are now being interrupted, that would mark an even more abrupt end to American support than feared. The Pentagon has long fretted about the impact of the Ukraine war on its supply of weapons. Reports say Pentagon officials have been circulating memos since early this year expressing concern about low stocks. The decision to halt the shipments is believed to be driven by Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's under-secretary for policy, who has long advocated shifting America's military resources from Europe and the Middle East to concentrate on Asia and the rivalry with China. According to reports, he has overseen a review of Pentagon munitions stockpiles, amid worries that artillery shells, air-defence weapons and precision munitions had fallen dangerously low. Mr Trump promised to end the Ukraine war on his first day in office. Nearly six months on he seems no closer to securing even a ceasefire despite friendly calls with Vladimir Putin, Russia's president. Though Russia is the aggressor, and the recalcitrant party, Ukraine is the easier side for America to coerce given its heavy reliance on Western support. Ukraine has built up its arms industry, not least in drones. European countries already provide more weapons to Ukraine than America does and, as they raise defence spending, have promised to help make up the shortfall as America withdraws support. But they, too, are woefully short of air-defence weapons and the Patriot system has proven itself particularly effective against ballistic and other missiles. Ukraine's front lines seem unlikely to collapse in the coming months, though Russia is making incremental gains. Nevertheless, Ukraine faces a grim reckoning: the fewer weapons it receives, the more people and territory it will lose.
The Hindu
25 minutes ago
- The Hindu
India's concerns shared with U.S. Senator over proposed 500% tariff on Russian oil buyers: Jaishankar
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar suggested that India has shared its concerns with U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham over his bill proposing a 500% tariff on nations buying oil from Russia. 'I think our concerns and our interests in energy security have been made conversant to him,' Dr. Jaishankar said while replying to a media query in Washington D.C. on Wednesday (July 2, 2025). A legislation proposed by Graham calls for imposing 500% tariffs on nations buying oil from Russia if Moscow refuses to participate in peace negotiations with Ukraine. Dr. Jaishankar said that the Indian Embassy and officials have been in touch with Graham over the issue while adding that 'we'll then have to cross that bridge when we come to it, if we come to it.' Dr. Jaishankar added that any development happening in the U.S. Congress is of interest to India 'if it impacts our interest or could impact our interest'. Hectic parleys are underway between officials of India and the U.S. in Washington on the proposed interim trade agreement between the two countries. While India is seeking greater market access for its labour-intensive goods, the U.S. wants duty concessions for its agricultural products. The Indian team, headed by special secretary in the Department of Commerce Rajesh Agrawal, is in Washington for negotiations.
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
'We Don't Need No Education': Trump Freezes $7 Billion in School Funds Over ‘Radical Left' Review
We don't need no education (Image generated by AI) 'We don't need no education, we don't need no thought control…' Pink Floyd's 1979 anthem was a scathing critique of rigid schooling systems. But in 2025 America, its chorus has taken on a new, unintended meaning. As schools scramble to prepare for a new academic year, the Trump administration has abruptly withheld nearly $7 billion in federal funding, plunging teachers, parents, and nonprofits into chaos. The money, approved by Congress and signed into law by President Trump himself in March, was meant to fund after-school programs, English-language learning, migrant education, and teacher development. Instead, a last-minute notice to state education agencies declared the funds 'under review', with no timeline for release. Here are five key points to understand what happened and why it matters: 1. What was withheld? At stake is $6–7 billion covering six major federal grant programs critical to educational equity: 21st Century Community Learning Centers, the nation's only federal after-school and summer program, supporting millions of low-income students with safe environments, homework help, and enrichment activities. Title II teacher training grants, used to improve teaching quality and professional development. English-language learning (ELL) support, enabling immigrant and multilingual students to keep pace. Migrant education programs, helping children of farmworkers and food industry labourers remain on grade level despite frequent moves. Academic enrichment and mental health support, including STEM initiatives, college counselling, and mental wellness services. For example, in rural Madison County, Alabama, the CARE Center has halted all student registration and hiring. 'We cannot register children. We cannot purchase materials and supplies. We cannot hire staff or contractors to provide the programming and safety for those children,' said executive director Andrea Bridges. 2. How did it happen? The Education Department notified states just before the scheduled July 1 distribution that the funds were frozen for a 'programmatic review.' While briefings cited a 'change in Administrations,' further clarification came from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Despite these funds having been signed into law by Trump in March, the administration is now demanding a review to ensure spending aligns with its ideological goals, effectively bypassing the congressional appropriation process and injecting financial uncertainty into school district planning. 3. Who is affected? The freeze's impacts are immediate and nationwide: Nonprofits are suspending after-school programs, leaving working parents scrambling to arrange childcare in states like Alabama and Ohio. School districts are delaying hiring decisions, risking teacher shortages and overcrowded classrooms in the coming semester. Community centres fear staff layoffs, especially in migrant education programs that support children of seasonal agricultural workers. Francisco Garcia, executive director of the Interstate Migrant Education Council, warned the move could devastate children whose parents move frequently to harvest America's food supply. 'These are the families that put food on America's tables,' he said. 'If they don't have support for their children, it's going to impact the agricultural community, the dairy community – I don't think folks making the decisions get that. ' Rebecca Kelley of the YMCA of Greater Cincinnati echoed these concerns. 'Low-income families need this kind of backbone support. The freeze just makes our families and children pawns in some political battle,' she said. 4. Why is Trump doing it? According to the OMB, the administration is investigating whether school districts have used federal grants to fund a 'radical leftwing agenda.' This includes: Scholarships for undocumented immigrant students. LGBTQ-inclusive programs and events, such as 'queer resistance in the arts.' No final decisions have been made yet, but education advocates see the move as part of Trump's broader ideological drive to reshape federal spending in line with his priorities, regardless of legal appropriations. Frederick M. Hess, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, noted: 'The president's priorities, whether Republican or Democrat, do not trump the law of the land. These funds have been authorised and appropriated by Congress.' 5. What is the bigger picture? The funding freeze is not merely a bureaucratic pause. It reflects a deliberate effort to test executive power against Congress. Key context: The administration is testing the boundaries of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, a law designed to prevent presidents from unilaterally overturning congressional spending decisions. Trump's 2026 budget proposal eliminates these six grant programs entirely, as part of a broader $12 billion cut to the Education Department, consolidating them into a single block grant with reduced funding and state discretion. The Education Department under Trump has already moved to cancel billions in K-12 grants and contracts and has sought to halve its workforce. Democratic lawmakers warn the freeze may be illegal, with multiple lawsuits expected. Representative Bobby Scott of Virginia said: 'This Administration's plan to deny states resources previously allocated to them and refusal to distribute the funds as allocated by Congress violates the law.' The bottom line Pink Floyd may have railed against oppressive schools in 1979, but in 2025 America, it is not the students rebelling against teachers – it is the government pulling the plug on education itself. As schools brace for a new year, teachers face layoffs, nonprofits suspend essential services, and parents scramble to protect their children's futures, the message from Washington feels eerily clear: 'We don't need no education.' Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
