Latest news with #ManhattanProject
The Hill
7 hours ago
- Business
- The Hill
Collins, Hawley — two key holdouts — will support advancing GOP megabill
Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), two key holdouts, said Saturday that they will vote to advance the Senate's version of President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' citing changes made to the text unveiled by GOP leaders on Friday. Collins said she will vote for the motion to proceed to the legislation out of deference to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), but warned that she still has significant concerns with the legislation and will propose several amendments to change it. 'I am planning to vote for the motion to proceed. Generally, I give deference to the majority leader's power to bring bills to the Senate floor. Does not in any way predict how I'm going to vote on final passage,' she said. 'That's going to depend on whether the bill is substantially changed,' she said. 'There are some very good changes that have been made in the latest version but I want to see further changes and I will be filing a number of amendments.' Collins vote on the procedural motion is crucial as two conservatives, Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) say they won't vote for the legislation as it now stands. Thune scored another big victory when Hawley, who had sounded the alarm over hundreds of billions of dollars in federal Medicaid cuts, told reporters that he will vote for the motion to proceed to the bill and will also support final passage of the 940-page Senate version of the legislation, which leaders unveiled Friday night. Hawley said that changes to the legislation will result in significantly more federal Medicaid funding for Missouri over the next four years. He also cited $1 billion in funding for Missourians suffering from radiation exposure related to the nuclear weapons development in the 1940s during Manhattan Project as reasons for his yes vote. 'With the delay in the provider tax framework that we were able to get and with the changes to the rural hospital fund, Missouri's Medicaid dollars will actually increase over the next four years,' he said. 'We will get more money, Medicaid funding, over baseline until 2030. Any changes to our provider framework in Missouri will not take place until the next decade,' he said. He noted that GOP leaders agreed to increase a rural hospital relief fund from $15 billion to $25 billion and changed the funding formula to provide more federal funds to his home state. He also said that the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act funding he requested is 'fully here and fully intact.' 'That will mean major new dollars flowing to the state of Missouri, expansion of health care for the people of Missouri. On that basis, I'm going to vote yes on this bill,' he said. Senate Republicans control 53 seats and can afford only three defections in their caucus and still pass the bill. If the motion to proceed clears a simple majority threshold, the chamber would debate the bill before moving to a 'vote-a-rama,' during which unlimited amendments can be brought to the floor, before a final vote.
The Mainichi
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Mainichi
Editorial: Trump's comparison of Iran attack to WWII atomic bombings irresponsible
U.S. President Donald Trump recently justified his country's attacks on nuclear facilities in Iran by likening them to the atomic bombings of Japan in 1945. His statement cannot be overlooked. He should face the reality of the atomic bombings and change his perception. Trump made the remarks during a visit to the Netherlands, stating, "I don't want to use an example of Hiroshima, I don't want to use an example of Nagasaki, but that was essentially the same thing. That ended that war." The atomic bombings by the U.S. military during World War II destroyed two cities and claimed the lives of over 200,000 people. Even today many people continue to suffer from the aftereffects of exposure to radiation from the bombings. Could President Trump not imagine how his words would hurt the feelings of A-bomb survivors? The atomic bombings are not past tragedies that the American president should reference lightly. Trump has previously hailed the development of nuclear weapons as a "remarkable feat," stating that the Manhattan Project "helped end World War II." Forming the background to this stance is justification of the bombings grounded in the view they ended the war and saved many American soldiers' lives. Trump seems to share this view. But the overwhelming support for the bombings at the time has waned, with public opinion divided and criticism growing. Trump's remarks put a damper on this shift in American sentiment. Nuclear weapons are inhumane weapons of mass destruction. Former U.S. President Barack Obama, who called for "a world without nuclear weapons," acknowledged that the United States has a "moral responsibility" to act toward that goal. If the U.S. is to mention the atomic bombings, it must be at a time when it is expressing its resolve to eliminate nuclear weapons. Instead, Trump's comments risk increasing the threat of nuclear proliferation. It would not be surprising if some countries took Trump's comments as expressing the U.S. stance that it would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons in order to bring an end to conflict. This could lead to Iran not giving up on developing nuclear weapons, and North Korea accelerating its development of them. There is also a risk of escalating arms races involving Russia and China. Meanwhile, the Japanese government's response is difficult to understand. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi avoided commenting directly, stating, "The evaluation of historical events should be discussed by experts." The concept of "peace through strength" that Trump wields is dangerous because the use of nuclear weapons could become a concrete option. Even if Japan is protected by the "U.S. nuclear umbrella," it must underscore the inhumanity of nuclear weapons and continue to urge the U.S. not to use them. That is its responsibility as a nation that has experienced atomic bombings in warfare.
Politico
2 days ago
- Business
- Politico
Energy secretary's dreams collide with Trump's cuts
Energy Secretary Chris Wright has big plans for technologies like advanced nuclear reactors and geothermal energy — but they could be hobbled by the Trump administration's proposed budget cuts to national labs. As Brian Dabbs and I write today, Wright has vowed to 'make it vastly easier to build power plants in the United States.' The secretary is pushing for the Department of Energy's 17 labs, which have been central to energy research since the Manhattan Project during World War II, to help jumpstart the administration's 'energy dominance' agenda. The Idaho National Laboratory, for example, announced results this week of a first-of-its-kind test to lower the amount of waste produced by reactors. Wright has also publicly supported lab research on nuclear fusion, a potential zero-carbon form of electricity that involves the same reaction powering the sun. Here comes the White HouseBut President Donald Trump's proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 would slash the budget of the National Energy Technology Laboratory — which supports fossil fuel research — by 32 percent and cut fusion programs at multiple labs, including Argonne, Brookhaven and Idaho. 'As much as the secretary is talking about how excited he is about fusion, the budget they proposed cut it,' said Andrew Holland, CEO of the Fusion Industry Association. Wind, solar, electric vehicles and building efficiency research would also be cut sharply under Trump's plan, a shift that analysts say could slow development of those technologies. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado would see some of the sharpest cuts overall, with funding declining by more than 56 percent from current levels under Trump's plan. DOE says many programs are being reorganized. The budget plan would shuffle funding for administration priorities such as geothermal, increasing it at NREL while reducing it at Lawrence Berkeley and Sandia labs. Wright pushes onWright is backing higher levels of funding than Trump proposed for artificial intelligence and fusion. Speaking at the National Energy Technology Laboratory on Wednesday, he also signaled that his plan to build data centers on federal land — including multiple national labs — could include installing new nuclear power. 'You will see data centers built on national lab property,' he said. 'You also will see next-generation nuclear reactors tested' on federal lands sometime next year, he added. The data center plan could become Wright's biggest footprint on the labs. The department told POLITICO's E&E News this week it is weighing next steps after receiving hundreds of comments on the proposal in May. Industry insiders say the department appears to be looking for 'combined packages' that involve building data centers with co-located power plants or other sources of electricity. It's Thursday — thank you for tuning in to POLITICO's Power Switch. I'm your host, Christa Marshall. Arianna will be back soon! Power Switch is brought to you by the journalists behind E&E News and POLITICO Energy. Send your tips, comments, questions to cmarshall@ Today in POLITICO Energy's podcast: Zack Colman breaks down Trump's wildfire prevention strategy. Power Centers Get used to the heatThe heat dome that shattered record high temperatures in the eastern U.S. is part of weather patterns that are becoming more common because of climate change, Chelsea Harvey writes. Scientists raised the issue in a recent study, saying that such long-lasting weather patterns will bring both heatwaves and heavy rainfall. The study says rapid warming in the Arctic could be the cause. Oil's water problemTo help oil and gas companies dispose of polluted water, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting reuse of that wastewater — a concern for environmentalists, but an EPA program that could garner support in oil-producing states, Miranda Willson writes. The goal is to allow the chemical-laden, super-salty brine to be substantially cleaned and reused for power generation, water-guzzling data centers and irrigating range land. Reusing the water could address a major industry challenge and help ease crippling drought in parts of Texas and New Mexico, two of the nation's most prolific oil-producing states. Western water plan on the tableState negotiators in Western states struggling with how to share the drought-ravaged Colorado River say they could be close to breaking free from gridlock. The Interior Department has warned that missing a November deadline could force the federal government to impose its own solutions, Jennifer Yachnin writes. Members of the Upper Colorado River Commission — which represents Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — are weighing a new method of sharing the waterway. The Lower Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada proposed a new formula based on actual flows from the prior three years. In Other News Phone a friend: Trump officials have pushed European Union leaders to scale back major climate laws at the behest of the oil industry. A new hope: The Trump administration's support for oil and gas has renewed hope in Nikiski, a southern Alaska town that is the epicenter of the long-planned Alaska LNG project. Hot source for coolness: A neighborhood outside of Austin, Texas, is using geothermal energy to heat and cool its houses and buildings, which the developer says saves residents up to $2,000 a year on their utility bills. Subscriber Zone A showcase of some of our best subscriber content. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz accused environmental groups of working with China on climate lawsuits targeting fossil fuels. Tariffs and tax credit uncertainty could send grid storage installations plunging by 29 percent next year, according to a new report. The Center for Biological Diversity sued the Trump administration to find out which power plants have asked for exemptions to the Clean Air Act. The first-ever global climate conference missing officials from the U.S. wrapped up on Thursday with no clear signs that any nation was ready to fill the vacuum left by Washington. That's it for today, folks! Thanks for reading.
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE No nation should dictate who can and cannot have the bomb - Peter Hitchens attacks America's nuclear hypocrisy on new Mail podcast
Atomic powers like the US employ a lot of 'bilge' to justify their nuclear arsenals while condemning other nations who seek the same deterrent, Peter Hitchens tells Sarah Vine on the latest episode of the Mail's Alas Vine & Hitchens podcast. The acclaimed broadcaster argued that misinformation about the Manhattan Project and America's initial motivations for pursuing an atomic bomb provides an all-too-convenient explanation for why some nations are allowed nukes and others are not. While not a 'fantasist' who believes global nuclear disarmament is possible, Hitchens said that the disputes over who can possess nuclear weapons raise questions about whether any country should have access to them. Hitchens said: 'It has been very interesting to watch the US try to explain why Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapons, whereas it should. 'Apparently, no one cares that Israel, Pakistan and North Korea have them. You have to wonder what the logic is behind saying who can and cannot have them, apart from who's already got them, and who's biggest. 'We have an elaborate justification for nuclear weapons in our minds. During the Cold War, I was a fairly strong Nato enthusiast because it seemed logical that it was ridiculous for us to give up ours while allowing the USSR to keep theirs. Peter Hitchens: 'The argument that we dropped the bomb on Japan, and that's why they surrendered - is certainly not true.' Listen here 'But since then, it has been nagging at me – should they exist at all? Should any country be allowed to have them?' Hitchens said much of the justification for nuclear weapons stems from the end of the Second World War – specifically the perceived success of the strikes against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which led to Japan's surrender. He explained: 'There is a wonderful museum at Los Alamos in New Mexico, where the bomb was originally developed – it has this tremendous display inside, which made the same argument over and over again. 'The argument is the bomb saved possibly millions of lives in 1945. That we dropped the bomb on Japan, and they surrendered. The trouble is, it's certainly not true. 'It was Stalin's decision to invade Manchuria that forced a surrender. The Japanese were terrified of a Russian revenge for everything they had done to them since 1904. 'The other justification for developing the bomb was that Hitler would get it first – Nazi scientists were nowhere near a nuclear weapon. It's complete fantasy. 'The West has dodged a big moral question with these justifications. In which case, why do we have it at all?' The ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East prove that nuclear weapons don't deter conflict as was once assumed, Hitchens contended. He added that nuclear weapons actually enable lower-level conflicts by creating a framework where conventional wars can rage without escalating to total destruction, leaving thousands dead. 'So-called conventional weapons are now of such horrifying power,' Hitchens began. 'Look at these Bunker Busters – my point being that nuclear weapons, rather than preventing war, have increasingly permitted lower-level conflicts to take place. 'Who would have thought that a war involving the Russian army could take place in Europe after the invention of nuclear weapons? Yet, here we are.' Speaking specifically about Iran, Hitchens reminded listeners that Israel had acted dishonestly with its own nuclear programme in the 1960s. He said: 'The reason we're in this mess in the Middle East is because the Israelis don't trust the Iranians, the Iranians don't trust the Israelis and the Americans certainly don't trust the Iranians. 'But, when the Israelis built their bomb – they weren't very public about it themselves. It only came out because an Israeli official got drunk at a cocktail party and blabbed to an American diplomat.'
Miami Herald
4 days ago
- Science
- Miami Herald
Home owned by Stanford scientist linked to Manhattan Project lists in CA. See it
A stunning Dutch Colonial that was built in the early 1900s has landed on the real estate market in Silicon Valley, California. Only thing is, it was there before Silicon Valley was even a concept. Listed for $5.5 million, the six-bedroom, three-bathroom home sits hidden in Los Altos Hills. It has a phenomenal history that includes the retired sea captain who built it and a physicist named Wolfgang who bought it in 1951. U.S. Marine Captain Fred M. Munger built the home between 1902-1907 and opted for the Dutch Colonial style, which happened to be a 'rarity in the region.' The house was built as his summer home before the city had electricity, a news release about the listing said. Later on, a scientist named Wolfgang Panofsky, who was a consultant for the Manhattan Project during World War II bought it with his wife, Adele Panofsky, who was a notable educator. The two got the house when they accepted a position at Stanford University. The Manhattan Project was a secret program that created the first atomic weapons during WWII. The project was successful with the U.S. creating the weapons before Germany, pushing the world into the nuclear age. The home served as a hot spot for other intellectuals, such as 'Nobel laureates, global scientists, and cultural icons like Frank Oppenheimer (the brother of J. Robert Oppenheimer),' the release said. Now, the home is on the market and still has managed to maintain its old world charm, the listing on Illuminate Properties says. It comes with a plethora of high-end features, per the listing, including: Hardwood floorsPorchFormal dining roomOfficeWood staircaseViewsClawfoot tubEnclosed porchBalcony The listing is held by Patrice Horvath. Los Altos Hills is about a 40-mile drive southeast from San Francisco.
