Riley supporting loan forgiveness for volunteer first responders
Riley announced his co-sponsorship of the Helping Emergency Responders Overcome Emergency Situations, or HEROES, Act. The initiative is a bipartisan bill that would extend eligibility for the federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness program to include volunteer firefighters and emergency medical responders.
'If you've put on the gear and answered the call, you shouldn't be buried in debt,' said Riley. 'The HEROES Act gives volunteer firefighters the respect they've earned by making their service count toward student loan forgiveness. They don't do it for the money—they do it because they love their communities and want to keep their neighbors safe.'
According to Riley, the HEROES Act would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to recognize the service of unpaid emergency responders as qualifying public service under the PSLF program, making them eligible for federal student loan forgiveness after ten years of service and qualifying payments.
Riley supporting loan forgiveness for volunteer first responders
P. East Trading Corp recalls Salted Smoked Split Herring
'It Ain't Necessarily So' discusses American Black history
A mix of sun and showers today
News 34 Pizza Week returns
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
Hamilton Spectator
a day ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Ford to change parks law for Wasaga Beach redevelopment
The Ford government is proposing legislative changes to the Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act to remove more than three per cent of Wasaga Beach Provincial Park from protection and transfer the land to the Town of Wasaga Beach and the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Gaming for development. Under the current Act , removing more than 50 hectares or one per cent of a provincial park requires a study, a report and approval by the Ontario Legislature. Experts say to enable this land transfer — which would remove more than 60 hectares — the province would first need to eliminate that key safeguard from the Act. Tim Gray, executive director of Environmental Defence, warns this change would make it easier for the province to quietly remove sections of parks without public scrutiny and could open the door to privatizing protected lands across Ontario. 'If that clause is repealed, the cabinet could quietly remove parts of any provincial park in Ontario whenever they want without the public knowing and without the legislature voting on it,' Gray said. In its public posting, the government mentioned an amendment to the Act but did not clarify which section would be changed. Canada's National Observer reached out to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks for clarification but did not receive a response in time for publication. The Ford government has previously introduced dozens of legislative changes to fast-track resource development and enable the transfer of environmentally protected public land to private interests, such as the Greenbelt land swap, the Ontario Place redevelopment and the proposed Dresden landfill. While the province says the Wasaga Beach move is intended to boost tourism, environmental advocates are raising alarms about both the local impact and the broader precedent. Gray said this fits a wider pattern under the Ford government: shifting public lands to private hands by rewriting laws. The lands being targeted include ecologically sensitive sand dunes, wetlands and nesting habitat for the endangered piping plover . Tony Morris, conservation director at Ontario Nature, says transferring these areas to the town puts both wildlife and long-standing conservation efforts at risk. Morris said Ontario Parks has managed the area for decades, restoring dunes and protecting habitat. Under town ownership, those protections could disappear. Without the Provincial Parks Act in place, Morris says the town would not be required to manage the land for ecological health. He questioned why the transfer is even needed, noting Wasaga Beach is already Ontario's most-visited provincial park. 'There's not a lot of information on why this is necessary. What's the business case?' Morris said. Both Environmental Defence and Ontario Nature plan to submit formal comments to the Ford government and notify the federal environment minister about risks to the piping plover — a federally protected species. Earlier this year, the Ford government announced a $38 million investment to build 'Destination Wasaga' — a tourism project that includes revitalizing Nancy Island, upgrading roads and transferring part of the provincial park to the town. The province says the goal is to boost tourism, support jobs and grow the local economy. The proposed changes do not say whether the transferred lands will be sold to private developers. In an email response, Brian Smith, mayor of the Town of Wasaga Beach, confirmed the town is seeking about 60 hectares as part of the proposed transfer from Wasaga Beach Provincial Park. Smith says the land is not being given to private developers but to the municipality, with the condition that the beach remains public. 'The plan is to collaborate with the province to reimagine the large swath of crumbling, paved parking lot at Beach Area 1,' Smith said. 'The Town and citizens of Wasaga Beach wouldn't have it any other way.' Smith said the goal is to create a sustainable, four-season waterfront destination focused on eco-tourism and public access. The town will work with ecologists, urban designers and the community to ensure shoreline areas — including dunes and piping plover habitat — are protected, he added. The Town has recently pursued redevelopment at Beach Area One, including selling several pieces of public beachfront land for millions to a private developer. On its website , the town says it is actively seeking 'a visionary partner to help reimagine our waterfront into a globally recognized destination.' It adds: 'The right partner will help us set a new benchmark for sustainable urban design.' Gray said that pattern suggests the new parkland would likely follow the same path. 'There's no guarantee these parklands won't be next,' he said. Ontario Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner says Ford is once again removing important protections, just like with Bill 5 — this time putting provincial parks at risk. 'He's doing it all to benefit wealthy insiders and putting the rest of provincial parks under threat,' Schreiner said. 'Ontario parks belong to the people, not wealthy Ford-connected insiders.' He urged the public to push back before more damage is done. 'Our parks are home to species at risk, vital wetlands and ecological features that protect nearby communities from flooding and extreme weather,' Schreiner said in a statement. 'They are also cherished spaces where Ontario families can camp, hike, swim, paddle and connect with each other and nature.' The proposed changes still need to be voted on at Queen's Park, but that won't happen until the legislature returns in late October. Gray is urging people to act now by contacting their MPPs and pushing back. He says provincial parks belong to the people of Ontario and should remain protected. 'It is appalling that the current government is trying to give away big parts of our most popular park and make it easy to give more park land away in the future,' Gray said. 'These beachfront lands on Georgian Bay are worth millions of dollars and owned by the people of Ontario. They should never be a gift to well-connected developers.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
New York Times
2 days ago
- New York Times
SCORE Act advances through committee, moving college sports reform closer to House floor
A bill that would help regulate college sports and how athletes are compensated by schools made it through a House committee on Wednesday — a notable step on the way to it conceivably being put to a vote — while public criticism of the potential legislation also mounted. After years of lobbying for help from Congress by college sports leaders, the SCORE Act is the first bill to move through committees in either chamber. The House Energy and Commerce committee and the Committee on Education and the Workforce both approved the bill with only Republican votes and no Democratic support. Advertisement That clears the way for the bill to go to the floor of the House for a vote, but the soonest that could happen is in the fall Congressional session starting in September, with summer recess looming. Before either hearing was held, attorneys general from Florida, Ohio, New York, Tennessee and the District of Columbia sent a letter to six committee chairs and ranking members of Congress, detailing their strong opposition to the bill. 'The SCORE Act is a misguided effort that will enshrine in federal law the arbitrary and biased authority of the NCAA at its worst,' the letter said. The proposed legislation from seven Republican and two Democratic sponsors prevents athletes from obtaining employment status and mirrors many of the terms of the recent House v. NCAA settlement. It would officially end most administrative restrictions on athletes' name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation, but it allows schools and conferences to establish what is and isn't permissible. Should it pass, it would override current NIL laws, which vary from state to state, and grant antitrust protections to the NCAA and conferences. Critics say the bill is too deferential to the NCAA and power conferences, who have led the efforts to push for a federal law. Even if the SCORE Act passes a House vote on partisan lines with Republicans in control, it faces a much higher bar in the Senate. The bill would need 60 votes to pass in the Senate, including seven Democrats. One of those Democrats, Sen. Maria Cantwell, has already voiced opposition to the SCORE Act, calling it the 'national championship of all heists.' The players' associations of several professional sports leagues also came out with a joint statement, encouraging lawmakers to reject the bill. Big West commissioner Dan Butterly wrote in a letter to Rep. Michael Baumgartner (D-Wash.), another SCORE Act critic, that too many of the bill's provisions are skewed toward what would work for schools in the wealthiest conferences rather than the majority of Division I schools. Advertisement 'Institutions within The Big West are proud to offer meaningful educational and competitive experiences to student-athletes. But without financial safeguards, structural flexibility and inclusive policymaking, reforms like the SCORE Act may unintentionally harm the very programs they seek to protect,' Butterly wrote. As written, the SCORE Act probably has little chance of garnering enough support to pass the Senate, if it gets there. Still, the progress is meaningful. For the first time, lawmakers have prioritized the need to help college sports sort out its issues enough for a bill to be debated in committee and possibly sent to the full body for consideration. The next notable step out of Washington on college sports could be coming from the executive branch. President Donald Trump has signaled his interest in getting involved in the issue, possibly by forming a commission to search for solutions or by signing an executive order. A draft of 'Saving College Sports,' obtained by The Athletic, directs the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board to address the debate over the employment status of college athletes. It also calls for members of Trump's cabinet and other political officials to pursue policy and protections in a number of other areas related to college sports, including rules that could be challenged by antitrust complaints and continued opportunity for scholarships and roster spots, along with preventing 'unqualified or unscrupulous agents from representing athletes.' — Stewart Mandel and Justin Williams contributed reporting.
Business Upturn
3 days ago
- Business Upturn
EnerGeo Alliance Testified in Support of the Modernization of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
Washington D.C., U.S., July 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Today, Forrest Burkholder, EnerGeo Alliance's Board of Directors Vice Chair and President and CEO of SAExploration, testified on behalf of EnerGeo Alliance during the Legislative hearing including Rep. Begich Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) Discussion Draft Bill. Burkholder, in his testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee – Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries, highlighted the absolute necessity of modernizing and revising the MMPA, and applauded Representative Begich's efforts in this direction: 'America and the world continue to need energy; the majority of energy comes from the earth, and Geosciences are the primary source of information that enables responsible production', he said. 'Of critical importance is the permitting process; despite –or precisely because of its importance, the process is a point of heightened vulnerability for the geoscience industry. Permitting of exploration is often stalled in regulatory reviews without clear timelines and is a favored entry point for activists seeking to block American energy development. Whether that's petroleum, natural gas, or even alternative energy.' Alaska is one of the areas where, despite responsible operations by the industry, issued permits for exploration activities have been stalled for multiple years due to unexplained delays. This uncertainty has a direct impact on local communities, the state's, and the nation's economic well-being and energy security. Over the past years, the MMPA and other environmental laws, created to provide better protections for the environment, have been exploited by activists to hinder energy development projects: 'The MMPA was intended to provide better protections for marine mammals from human activities that can cause direct physical harm to them – a goal that has largely been realized. Decades of regulation and litigation have caused the MMPA to be interpreted far more expansively than Congress intended and exposed significant flaws in the plain language of the Act.' 'As with many laws, we don't always know the problems until we've operated under them.', continued Burkholder. 'We've learned that for some people it's easy to exploit the ambiguities in existing regulations governing the potential 'take' of these activities. Activists have discovered that those ambiguities create opportunities for regulatory sabotage that can freeze agency activity and undermine all the best intentions of honest regulators.' Rep. Begich's Draft Bill represents an opportunity to fix these issues: 'By setting reasonable deadlines in the application process, removing unnecessary duplication between the MMPA and ESA, along with removing or defining terms, Congress can ensure the agencies are accountable to existing statutory timelines and prevent future misapplication of the statute so that it can function as originally intended.' 'Fixing these problems would increase permitting efficiency, decrease uncertainty, and ultimately benefit all stakeholders, the implementing agencies, and most importantly, marine mammals. It would prevent abuse of the law and facilitate greater geoscience investment and American energy independence.', concluded Burkholder. ### About EnerGeo Alliance Founded in 1971, EnerGeo Alliance is the global trade alliance for the energy geoscience industry, the intersection where earth science and energy meet. We represent the geoscience companies, innovators, and energy developers that use earth science to discover, develop, and deliver energy to our world. Together, we are Making Energy Possible. Disclaimer: The above press release comes to you under an arrangement with GlobeNewswire. Business Upturn takes no editorial responsibility for the same. Ahmedabad Plane Crash
