New Mexico downwinders now eligible for compensation from RECA
'We know that this is a crack in the dam,' said Tina Cordova, Co-Founder and Executive Director of Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium.
It's been a long-awaited move; the federal government is extending a hand of assistance to downwinders of nuclear sites in New Mexico. 'This is the 80th year since the bomb was detonated at Trinity, so the people of New Mexico have essentially been waiting 80 years for this acknowledgment and this assistance,' Cordova said.
New Mexico Democrats call on Congress to reinstate Radiation Exposure Compensation Act
Though people are excited about the win, some are torn on how it came about. Inside President Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' is a provision that expands who is eligible for the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or RECA for short, and extends it until the end of 2028.
'We have a lot of work to do,' Cordova explained. 'We know the time frame they've gave us is limited, and we know our fight in Congress is not over.'
It's the largest expansion of the act to date and is the first time New Mexico has ever made the list. It also increases the compensation amount up to $100,000. The provision covers leukemia claims related to the Trinity test in New Mexico. Uranium miners who worked from 1942 and 1990 are also covered. If a family member has already passed, the family can apply on their behalf.
Indigenous group heads to DC to fight for radiation compensation
'There is no amount of money that will ever, ever make up for our losses,' Cordova said.
Though the win is a rallying cry for advocates, downwinders are concerned about the Medicare and Medicaid cuts from the 'Big, Beautiful Bill.' Health surveys conducted among people affected near nuclear test sites show that a good portion are on one of the two health care plans, but could now lose them.
'We'll take the win,' Cordova added. 'We will not stop working on this, though. There's more to come.'
The expansion also included Utah, Idaho, and northern Arizona.
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
Newsweek
16 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Democrat Ro Khanna Demands Vote To Release Full Jeffrey Epstein Files
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Representative Ro Khanna (D‑CA) has announced plans to force a vote in the House of Representatives demanding the full, unredacted release of all documents related to disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In a post on X, formerly Twitter, Khanna said he will introduce an amendment this week that would require the House Speaker to bring the measure to a roll-call vote, putting every member of Congress on the record. Newsweek contacted Khanna's team via email and House Speaker Mike Johnson via online form for comment outside of usual working hours on Sunday. The Context As reported by Newsweek, Epstein, who died in prison six years ago while facing sex trafficking charges, had maintained close ties with numerous high-profile figures around the world. Though his death was officially ruled a suicide, speculation has persisted for years that he may have been murdered to prevent the release of a so-called "client list," a roster some believe could implicate prominent political figures, including President Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton, and the U.K.'s Prince Andrew. After being accused of sexual abuse connected to the Epstein scandal, Prince Andrew denied all accusations against him and resigned from royal duties in 2020. Clinton maintains that he did not have any contact with Epstein after the financier was accused of sex crimes, and never visited his now-infamous private island of Little St. James in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The controversy was reignited last month when billionaire Elon Musk alleged, in a since-deleted social media post, that the government had withheld Epstein-related records because "Trump is in the Epstein files." The president dismissed the claim, saying he "had nothing to do with it," but it sparked further interest in the government's records. Trump has denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein, although they were known to have interacted in social and professional circles in the early 2000s. The former president distanced himself from Epstein after the financier admitted soliciting prostitution from a minor in Florida and was sentenced to 18 months in prison in June, 2008. During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump pledged to make Epstein-related files public. A partial release occurred in February, overseen by Attorney General Pam Bondi. But earlier this week, both Trump and Bondi announced that their investigation had turned up "no incriminating 'client list,'" prompting sharp criticism from Democrats, and even backlash from some of Trump's own MAGA supporters who had anticipated deeper revelations. A memo, first reported by Axios, said investigators found "no incriminating 'client list'" and "no credible evidence ... that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals." It also said video footage from the Manhattan jail where Epstein was being held when he died supported a medical examiner's finding that he had died by suicide. In a TruthSocial post on Saturday, Trump urged others to "not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about." Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) questions witnesses during a roundtable discussion on Supreme Court Ethics conducted by Democrats of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building on June 11, 2024 in... Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) questions witnesses during a roundtable discussion on Supreme Court Ethics conducted by Democrats of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building on June 11, 2024 in Washington, D.C. MoreforWhat To Know Late Saturday, Khanna posted to his X account: "Why are the Epstein files still hidden? Who are the rich & powerful being protected? On Tuesday, I'm introducing an amendment to force a vote demanding the FULL Epstein files be released to the public. The Speaker must call a vote & put every Congress member on record." The post has since had over 432k views. Khanna's initiative is seen as a way to hold both Congress and the Justice Department accountable, especially as the Department of Justice (DOJ), led by Trump-appointed officials, including Bondi, recently reversed its previous commitment to release more documents. The move is also politically strategic. If Khanna's proposal is accepted, it would force a House vote on releasing the full Epstein files, allowing the public to see how each representative stands on the matter, with many praising it as a savvy political move that puts pressure on those trying to avoid scrutiny. This comes after months of mounting bipartisan frustration. Though Democrats have led the charge, some Republican voices have also joined the call for full transparency. However, the Justice Department's decision to halt further disclosures has renewed criticism that the agency is protecting politically sensitive figures. Earlier this month, congressional Democrats, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin, called for the release of any documents mentioning Trump. What People Are Saying In response to criticism of his proposal on X, Khanna said: "This is about transparency and restoring trust, not partisan politics. The public outcry is apparent. The files should be fully released and can be done so consistent with DOJ principles of protecting victims and the innocent." What Happens Next Even if the measure fails, Khanna's supporters argue it will create a clear public record—either the files will be released, or voters will know exactly who stood in the way. With trust in government transparency at stake, the coming vote could mark a pivotal moment in the long-running Epstein saga.
Associated Press
42 minutes ago
- Associated Press
'Beautiful' or 'Ugly,' Trump's big bill shapes the battle for House control in 2026 midterms
WASHINGTON (AP) — Debate over President Donald Trump's sweeping budget-and-policy package is over on Capitol Hill. Now the argument goes national. From the Central Valley of California to Midwestern battlegrounds and suburban districts of the northeast, the new law already is shaping the 2026 midterm battle for control of the House of Representatives. The outcome will set the tone for Trump's final two years in the Oval Office. Democrats need a net gain of three House seats to break the GOP's chokehold on Washington and reestablish a power center to counter Trump. There's added pressure to flip the House given that midterm Senate contests are concentrated in Republican-leaning states, making it harder for Democrats to reclaim that chamber. As Republicans see it, they've now delivered broad tax cuts, an unprecedented investment in immigration enforcement and new restraints on social safety net programs. Democrats see a law that rolls back health insurance access and raises costs for middle-class Americans while cutting taxes mostly for the rich, curtailing green energy initiatives and restricting some workers' organizing rights. 'It represents the broken promise they made to the American people,' said Rep. Suzan DelBene, a Washington Democrat who chairs the party's House campaign arm. 'We're going to continue to hold Republicans accountable for this vote.' Parties gear up for a fight Whether voters see it that way will be determined on a district-by-district level, but the battle will be more intense in some places than others. Among the 435 House districts, only 69 contests were decided by less than 10 percentage points in the 2024 general election. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has so far identified 26 Democratic-held seats it must defend vigorously, along with 34 GOP-held seats it believes could be ripe to flip. Republicans' campaign arm, the National Republican Congressional Committee, has so far listed 18 GOP incumbents as priorities, plus two districts opened by retirements. There are a historically low number of so-called crossover districts: Only 13 Democrats represent districts Trump carried in 2024, while just three Republicans serve districts Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris carried. Both committees are busy recruiting challengers and open-seat candidates and more retirements could come, so the competitive map will evolve. Still, there are clusters of districts guaranteed to influence the national result. California, despite its clear lean to Democrats statewide, has at least nine House districts expected to be up for grabs: three in the Central Valley and six in southern California. Six are held by Democrats, three by the GOP. Pennsylvania features four districts that have been among the closest national House races for several consecutive cycles. They include a suburban Philadelphia seat represented by Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, one of just two House Republicans to vote against Trump's bill and one of the three GOP lawmakers from a district Harris won. Fitzpatrick cited the Medicaid cuts. Vice President JD Vance plans on Wednesday to be in Republican Rep. Rob Bresnahan's northwest Pennsylvania district to tout the GOP package. Bresnahan's seat is a top Democratic target. Iowa and Wisconsin, meanwhile, feature four contiguous GOP-held districts in farm-heavy regions where voters could be swayed by fallout from Trump's tariffs. Democrats fight to define the GOP Beyond bumper-sticker labels – Trump's preferred 'Big Beautiful Bill' versus Democrats' 'Big Ugly Bill' retort – the 900-page law is, in fact, an array of policies with varying impact. Democrats hammer Medicaid and food assistance cuts, some timed to take full effect only after the 2026 midterms, along with Republicans' refusal to extend tax credits to some people who obtained health insurance through the Affordable Care Act. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law; 3 million more would not qualify for food stamps, also known as SNAP benefits. 'Folks will die here in Louisiana and in other parts of the country,' House Minority Leader Jeffries warned last week during a town hall in Republican Speaker Mike Johnson's home state of Louisiana. Jeffries singled out vulnerable Republicans like California Rep. David Valadao, who represents a heavily agricultural Central Valley district where more than half the population is eligible for the joint state-federal insurance program. California allows immigrants with legal status and those who are undocumented to qualify for Medicaid, so not all Medicaid recipients are voters. But the program helps finance the overall health care system, including nursing homes and hospitals. Republicans highlight the law's tightened work requirements for Medicaid enrollees. They argue it's a popular provision that will strengthen the program. 'I voted for this bill because it does preserve the Medicaid program for its intended recipients — children, pregnant women, the disabled, and elderly,' Valadao said. 'I know how important the program is for my constituents.' Republicans hope voter s see lower taxes The law includes $4.5 trillion in tax cuts. It makes permanent existing rates and brackets approved during Trump's first term. Republicans and their allies have hammered vulnerable Democrats for 'raising costs' on American households by opposing the bill. GOP campaign aides point to the popularity of individual provisions: boosting the $2,000 child tax credit to $2,200 (some families at lower income levels would not get the full credit), new deductions on tip and overtime income and auto loans; and a new deduction for older adults earning less than $75,000 a year. 'Everyone will have more take home pay. They'll have more jobs and opportunity,' Johnson said in a Fox News Sunday interview. 'The economy will be doing better and we'll be able to point to that as the obvious result of what we did.' Democrats note that the biggest beneficiaries of Trump's tax code are wealthy Americans and corporations. Pairing that with safety net cuts, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz concluded, 'The cruelty is the point.' Immigration, meanwhile, was Trump's strongest issue in 2024. NRCC aides say that will continue with the new law's investments in immigration enforcement. Democrats believe the Trump administration has overplayed its hand with its push for mass deportation. Playing the Trump card The president is a titanic variable. Democrats point to 2018, when they notched a 40-seat net gain in House seats to take control away from the GOP. This year, Democrats have enjoyed a double-digit swing in special elections around the country when compared to 2024 presidential results. Similar trends emerged in 2017 after Trump's 2016 victory. Democrats say that reflects voter discontent with Trump once he's actually in charge. Republicans answer that Trump's job approval remains higher at this point than in 2017. But the GOP's effort is further complicated by ongoing realignments: Since Trump's emergence, Democrats have gained affluent white voters -– like those in suburban swing districts -– while Trump has drawn more working-class voters across racial and ethnic groups. But Republicans face a stiffer challenge of replicating Trump's coalition in a midterm election without him on the ballot. Democrats, meanwhile, must corral voters who are not a threat to vote for Republicans but could stay home. Jeffries said he's determined not to let that happen. 'We're going to do everything we can until we end this national nightmare.' —- Cooper reported from Phoenix. Brook reported from New Orleans. Associated Press reporters Michael Blood in Los Angeles and Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, contributed.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Seniors get a tax break in Trump's megabill, but many will still pay taxes on Social Security benefits. Here's the real deal
Senior citizens are getting a tax break in President Donald Trump's sweeping tax and spending cuts package, but it's not the one the president promised on the campaign trail last year. Congressional Republicans could not eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits in their megabill because it would not have been allowed under the process GOP lawmakers were using to pass the legislation in the Senate without Democratic support. (That hasn't stopped Trump and administration officials from claiming at times that the 'big, beautiful bill' did get rid of taxes on benefits.) Instead, the package gives senior citizens an additional $6,000 deduction on their federal income taxes between 2025 and 2028. Joint filers get twice that amount. The benefit begins to phase out for single taxpayers earning more than $75,000 and married couples earning $150,000. Individuals who earn more than $175,000 and couples earning more than $250,000 don't qualify. The beefed-up deduction will benefit fewer than half of older Americans, according to a recent analysis by the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. And it provides a smaller tax break, on average, for certain taxpayers than the elimination of taxes on Social Security benefits would have. 'On average, it's a modest reduction for older adults,' said Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the center. 'The winners here are upper-middle-income people. People who could get nothing are very high-income people and very low-income people.' Those who will benefit the most are seniors earning between roughly $80,000 and $130,000. The provision will reduce their taxes by $1,100, on average, or about 1% of their after-tax income, according to the analysis. This group would have received a tax break of about $1,300 had Congress eliminated taxes on Social Security benefits. 'It's certainly a noticeable benefit,' Tom O'Saben, director of tax content and government relations at the National Association of Tax Professionals, said of the enhanced deduction. 'It will represent a savings, but not to the degree that senior citizens may have been expecting had they been able to exclude all their Social Security benefits from taxation.' Higher-income households won't benefit from the deduction because they earn too much to qualify, while lower-income taxpayers don't pay federal income taxes already because they earn less than the standard deduction, which was $33,200 for a married couple prior to the bill's passage. The Trump administration estimates two-thirds of recipients are already exempt. But higher-income taxpayers would have gotten a heftier tax break had Trump's campaign promise been included in the legislation. Still, there are people who could benefit from the deduction who would not have been helped by the elimination of taxes on Social Security benefits – namely senior citizens who have yet to start collecting the monthly payments. Conversely, Social Security recipients who are younger than 65 will not benefit from the deduction but would have received a tax break had taxes on benefits been eliminated. Most senior citizens who receive Social Security benefits will still continue paying at least some taxes on those benefits, albeit a smaller amount, the analysis found. The center expects about 29 million households will owe taxes on their benefits, down from about 31.2 million. What's more, even though the GOP package did not eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits, the increased deduction will still indirectly hurt the finances of the program, as well as of Medicare, since the measure will reduce income taxes paid on the benefits. The levy on Social Security benefits is funneled into its trust fund and the Medicare Part A hospital insurance trust fund. The package is expected to speed up the insolvency of both trust funds to 2032, from 2033, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. At least some senior citizens remain confused about what's in the bill, said Larry Gray, partner at AGC CPA in Rolla, Missouri. Just last week, he had a casual conversation with several older Americans who thought that they would not have to pay taxes on their Social Security benefits. The confusion stems in part from the Trump administration and Capitol Hill's messaging about the package, which at times includes references to giving senior citizens a break on their Social Security benefits. Shortly after Congress approved the bill in early July, the Social Security Administration sent an email to many Americans noting that the bill significantly reduces the tax burden on benefits. Earlier that week, the White House posted an article on its website titled 'No Tax on Social Security is a Reality in the One Big Beautiful Bill.' Gray fears that scammers will try to take advantage of the confusion to prey on senior citizens. He is urging the Internal Revenue Service to set the record straight. 'This is a very simple tweak,' Gray said of the enhanced deduction.
