• Police seek suspects in deadly birthday party shooting
  • Lawmakers launch inquires into U.S. boat strike
  • Nov. 29, 2025, 10:07 PM EST / Updated Nov. 30, 2025,…
  • Mark Kelly says troops ‘can tell’ what orders…

Be that!

contact@bethat.ne.com

 

Be That ! Menu   ≡ ╳
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics Politics
☰

Be that!

Nov. 11, 2025, 1:31 PM ESTBy Sahil KapurWASHINGTON — Senate Republicans say they’re open to extending a pot of Affordable Care Act funds that will expire at the end of the year — but only if Democrats acquiesce to stricter abortion restrictions on insurance plans.The demand presents a significant hurdle to reaching a bipartisan deal to extend ACA funding designed to avoid major premium hikes next year for more than 20 million Americans, as Democrats are adamant that existing abortion guardrails under Obamacare are sufficient.If the funds are not extended by the end of the year, some people insured under Obamacare could see their bills rise by thousands of dollars per month, raising concerns that millions will choose to go uninsured.Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said there will be a negotiation about an extension after the government reopens. He said one condition will be stricter rules pertaining to the Hyde amendment, which bars federal funding from being used for abortion.Senate Democrats only got a ‘pink promise’ on health care subsidies, says House Democrat08:00To satisfy Democratic demands to comply with the Hyde amendment when the first law passed in 2010, Obamacare does not allow federal funds to cover abortions. Some states allow people insured under Obamacare to access abortion coverage using state or other funding. Republicans want to change that.“That’s what we’re going to negotiate,” Thune told reporters before the Senate passed the bill to end the government shutdown. “A one-year extension along the lines of what [Democrats] are suggesting, and without Hyde protections — there’s just not even, doesn’t even get close.”Thune’s demand for more stringent abortion limits on Obamacare money is backed by colleagues, including Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.C., an outspoken proponent of extending the ACA funds, as well as Sens. Steve Daines, R-Mont., and Mike Lee, R-Utah.Rounds warned that “you won’t get any” Republican votes to extend the money without more stringent abortion limitations.“That’s the message that we shared with a lot of our Democratic colleagues is you can’t do it under your existing framework, and you’re never going to get any Republican votes. Because we believe strongly taxpayer dollars should not go to fund abortions,” he said. “They have a different point of view, but it’s pretty clear that Republicans are solid on that particular issue.”But Democrats say there’s no way they’ll agree to that.Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., responded with a flat “no” when asked if there’s any way Democrats agree to stricter abortion limitations in order to extend the ACA funds.“It’s a nonstarter,” Shaheen told NBC News, pointing to existing guardrails on abortion funding built into the ACA. “It’s not an issue. We already dealt with that issue.”Other Democrats share her opposition to changing those rules.Behind the push is a pressure campaign by Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, an influential group fighting to ban abortion in the U.S., to condition Republican support for ACA funding on tougher abortion restrictions.“Since Democrat offers to pass a ‘clean’ extension of these ACA subsidies would extend funding of elective abortion coverage through Obamacare, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America strongly opposes and will score against any such offers — even for one year,” SBA President Marjorie Dannenfelser told senators in a letter dated Nov. 7 and shared with NBC News. “A vote for this extension is a vote for abortion coverage. Votes will be scored, and double-weighted, in each member’s profile on SBA Pro-Life America’s National Pro-Life Scorecard.”Katie Keith, a Georgetown Law professor and founding director of its Center for Health Policy and the Law, said existing law bans any federal funds from flowing to abortion care through ACA plans, including the premium tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments, consistent with the Hyde amendment.States have the option to create separate revenue streams where enrollees can pay a surcharge to gain abortion coverage through their plans. 25 states ban abortion coverage through ACA marketplaces entirely. The rest are split between requiring it through additional state funding or deferring to insurers.Still, even for states that allow ACA plans to cover abortion, “there are strict segregation requirements,” Keith said. “Since the law was enacted, no federal funds flow toward abortion care.”She said the same rule applies to Medicaid funding.“What critics of the current policy are arguing is they want Hyde plus-plus. This goes far beyond what Hyde requires,” she added. “It’s not about federal funds flowing toward the care, it’s about federal funds flowing toward coverage, even if it’s financed separately. … They want to knock out abortion coverage fully.”And if the SBA proposal becomes law, it would create a serious conflict with the dozen blue states that use their own funds to permit abortion coverage through the ACA marketplaces.“It could knock out federal subsidies for coverage altogether in those states if those funds cannot flow,” said Keith, who worked a stint in the Biden administration before returning to Georgetown.Daines, who sits on the Finance Committee that oversees health policy, said additional Hyde protections have “got to be in there, absolutely” — in any ACA deal.“We’ve got the language for it, the Hyde language,” he said. “Hyde has been a longstanding principle here of not allowing the federal taxpayers to be used for abortion.”Shaheen, a moderate Democrat who is not seeking re-election next year, is the author of a permanent ACA funding extension. She also helped craft the deal to reopen the government. She said she’s open to other reforms to the enhanced ACA tax credits, such as income-based limits, but going beyond existing abortion limitations is a red line.Other Democrats take a similar view.“I don’t think you’re going to get Democratic votes talking about abortion,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. “But there are conversations you can have about the structure of the subsidies once you get into a negotiation. I’ve heard their concerns about income caps and no-premium plans.”Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, said the GOP’s abortion demand seems like a smokescreen to disguise the party’s unwillingness to continue that money, which was first passed during the Covid pandemic in 2021 and extended the following year. The subsidies limit premiums to 8.5% of an enrollee’s income.“At that point, they’re just unserious about extending the ACA [funds],” he said. “Once they get into restrictions on abortion, everyone knows what that means. It means that they would like to say they’re for extending ACA, but that they don’t have the votes to do it right now.”Schatz indicated that President Donald Trump, who softened his position on abortion during the 2024 campaign and said it should be left up to states, can steer his party to a viable solution.“This is solved in 10 seconds if Donald Trump wants it solved,” Schatz said.Sahil KapurSahil Kapur is a senior national political reporter for NBC News.Frank Thorp V and Scott Wong contributed.

admin - Latest News - November 11, 2025
admin
14 views 20 secs 0 Comments




WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans say they’re open to extending a pot of Affordable Care Act funds that will expire at the end of the year — but only if Democrats acquiesce to stricter abortion restrictions on insurance plans



Source link

TAGS:
PREVIOUS
Nov. 11, 2025, 12:52 PM ESTBy Mirna Alsharif, Austin Mullen and Aria BendixBaby formula maker ByHeart is recalling all of its products amid an outbreak of infant botulism likely tied to its powdered formula.Since August, 15 cases have been reported across 12 states, nearly all among babies between 16 days and around 5 months old, according to the Food and Drug Administration.After the FDA announced Saturday that it was investigating the outbreak and its link to ByHeart’s organic Whole Nutrition Infant Formula, the company recalled two lots of the product. ByHeart then expanded the recall Tuesday to include all batches of the formula, both in cans and “anywhere packs” — small, sealed pouches.”The safety and well‑being of every infant who uses our formula is, and always will be, our highest priority,” ByHeart’s co-founder and president, Mia Funt, said in a statement. “This nationwide recall reflects our commitment to protecting babies and giving families clear, actionable information. Alongside this recall, we are conducting a comprehensive investigation to do our part to get the answers parents expect and deserve.”Infant botulism arises when babies ingest food contaminated with Clostridium botulinum bacteria, which produce a toxin that affects the body’s nervous system. The infection can cause constipation, poor feeding, loss of head control and difficulty swallowing. Untreated, it can ultimately lead to paralysis and death, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. No deaths have been reported in the current outbreak.The FDA said Tuesday that 84 infants nationwide have received treatment for infant botulism since Aug. 1. Of that total, the agency is investigating 15 cases with “suspected or confirmed infant botulism and confirmed exposure to Byheart Whole Nutrition infant formula.” All of those infants were hospitalized.”This information shows that ByHeart brand formula is disproportionately represented among sick infants in this outbreak, especially given that ByHeart represents an estimated 1% of all infant formula sales in the United States,” the FDA said in an update Tuesday. “Investigations remain ongoing but have not identified any other infant formula brands or shared exposures that pose a risk to infants.”The cases linked to ByHeart formula have been reported in Arizona, California, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas and Washington, according to the FDA. The agency instructed parents and caregivers to immediately stop using any ByHeart infant formula products and keep a close eye on children who consumed it recently, as botulism can take weeks to develop. If a child does not develop symptoms within 30 days, the agency says to throw the formula away. If a child does develop symptoms, however, the FDA advises that parents or caregivers hold on to the product for testing. Children who consumed ByHeart formula and are exhibiting possible botulism symptoms should receive immediate medical attention. The New York City-based company said it has invited the FDA and other public health agencies to test unopened cans of its formula to “provide reliable evidence that will help bring clarity to families who are understandably concerned, as currently, no U.S. or imported formula is required to be tested for Clostridium botulinum.”The California Public Health Department was first to report the observed increase in infant botulism cases among babies who consumed ByHeart formula. “As the FDA and CDPH continue their investigations, we stand ready to partner with them at every step, providing full access to our facilities and unopened cans, without restriction,” ByHeart said in an open letter issued Tuesday.Most recalls of infant formula in the past few years have occurred because of potential contamination with a different type of bacteria, Cronobacter sakazakii, which can also be life-threatening in infants. In 2022, Abbott Nutrition, one of the country’s top formula producers, recalled several brands of powdered infant formula after complaints of bacterial infections in infants who consumed the products. The recall contributed to a national formula shortage in 2022.The CDC later determined that Cronobacter infections may have contributed to the deaths of two infants in Ohio but was not able to definitively link the illnesses to contamination at an Abbott facility. Abbott said at the time that there was “no evidence” to demonstrate a link.Mirna AlsharifMirna Alsharif is a breaking news reporter for NBC News.Austin MullenAria BendixAria Bendix is the breaking health reporter for NBC News Digital.
NEXT
Trump says Marjorie Taylor Greene 'has lost her way'
Related Post
November 13, 2025
Nov. 13, 2025, 12:00 PM ESTBy Doha MadaniAriana Grande was rushed by a man ahead of the premiere of “Wicked: For Good” in Singapore on Thursday, appearing frightened as co-star Cynthia Erivo and security rushed to intervene. The man who rushed Grande, Johnson Wen, posted the video to his own Instagram account where he thanked Grande for “letting” him jump on to the carpet. Wen has an Instagram account under the name Pyjama Man man where he posts about rushing concert stages and sporting events. But it did not appear that Grande was aware of the situation in the video, looking scared as the man ran towards her and put his arm around her while she stood beside her “Wicked” co-star Michelle Yeoh. Cynthia Erivo, the film’s co-headliner, immediately jumped into action across the two women and tried to pry Wen off of Grande as security moved toward them. Yeoh also appeared to put her arms around Grande to pull her away from the man. Videos posted by others online showed that Erivo seemed to move positions on the carpet to ensure Grande walked in between her and Yeoh.Representatives for the “Wicked” film franchise did not immediately respond to a request for comment. “Wicked” For Good” is being released by Universal Pictures, which is owned by NBCUniversal, the parent company of NBC News. Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande discuss upcoming ‘Wicked: For Good’01:44Fans of Grande offered a fierce defense of the singer in the comments of Wen’s Instagram video, with some describing it as an assault on Grande. Commenters also called on others to report the man’s account.Some of Grande’s fans pointed out that the singer has experienced prior trauma at events, referencing the 2017 bombing of her concert in Manchester where 22 people were killed. Grande, who says she’s always dealt with anxiety, told British Vogue in 2018 that she dealt with symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder after the attack. “After all the trauma Ari has been through, this is beyond disrespectful,” one commenter wrote. “Not just to her, but to the cast and to all the fans. It’s literally infuriating. You should be ashamed.”Wen has posted videos of himself crashing concert stages, including at Katy Perry and The Weeknd shows, as well as rushing the fields at sporting events. In a message to NBC News, Wen described himself as a “mega fan” of Grande and that he was “happy” to meet her.”I dreamed about meeting her and now my dreams became true,” he wrote. He did not respond to a request for comment on the backlash he’s facing online or that he might have scared Grande through his actions. Doha MadaniDoha Madani is a senior breaking news reporter for NBC News. Pronouns: she/her.
November 6, 2025
Why does a seahorse emoji confuse ChatGPT?
November 25, 2025
Thai woman found alive in coffin before cremation
October 21, 2025
Oct. 21, 2025, 12:50 PM EDTBy Alexander SmithLONDON — Prince Andrew may have given up his titles, but the questions about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein haven’t given up on him — or Britain’s embattled royal family.Seemingly every day, damaging new reports emerge about Andrew, 65, his friendship with the late pedophile financier, and allegations the prince had sex with trafficked Epstein victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre when she was 17, which he denies.In her posthumous memoir “Nobody’s Girl” released Tuesday, Giuffre, who died by suicide in April at age 41, said Andrew acted as though having sex with her “was his birthright.” Andrew, who in February 2022 reached a legal settlement with Giuffre after she filed a civil case against him in a New York court, has repeatedly denied having met her.’Nobody’s Girl’ by Virginia Giuffre on display at a bookshop in London on Tuesday.Ming Yeung / Getty ImagesBut the rolling scandal refuses to go away, and has the potential to inflict further damage on a monarchy whose popularity continues to dwindle after the death of the widely beloved Queen Elizabeth II in 2022. King Charles III has sought to insulate “the Firm” from the cloud over his younger brother. Andrew said in a statement last week that with Charles’ “agreement,” he would “no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me,” including Duke of York.But there are still unanswered questions about what the palace knew, and when, with calls from lawmakers and others for the royals to oust Andrew entirely.“The deep and wide support for the queen meant the family was able to better weather all the controversies that could emerge — and this is a bad one,” said Craig Prescott, who teaches law at Royal Holloway, University of London and specializes on the constitutional and political role of the monarchy.“These specific allegations are, of course, extraordinarily damaging in the first place, but they also run counter to some of the causes that members of the royal family take up,” he said.Jeffrey Epstein in 2017.New York State Sex Offender Registry via AP fileFriday’s agreement for Andrew to relinquish his titles came after emails published in documents for a court case not involving the prince showed he had been in contact with Epstein for longer than he previously admitted.That “makes him look, in black and white, a liar,” NBC News’ royal contributor Daisy McAndrew told “TODAY” on Sunday. “And so how can you trust anything else he says?”Then Sunday, London’s Metropolitan Police said it was investigating reports that Andrew had asked one of its officers to dig up dirt on Giuffre. A Buckingham Palace official told NBC News these reports should be “examined in the appropriate way.”Virginia Giuffre (then Roberts) with Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell at Prince Andrew’s London home, in a photo released with court documents.Monday brought two further revelations: First that Andrew had not paid rent on his Royal Lodge residence for 20 years, revealed in a Freedom of Information request by The Times newspaper to the Crown Estate, which handles royal finances. Neither Andrew nor Buckingham Palace have responded to the report.Then came the publication of Giuffre’s posthumous memoir.She wrote that she had sex with the prince on three occasions, including an “orgy” involving “eight other young girls” who “appeared to be under the age of 18 and didn’t really speak English.”She then suffered three weeks of “irregular bleeding,” before waking up in a “pool of blood” and being taken to hospital by Epstein, she wrote. Epstein, who died by suicide in jail in 2019 shortly after he was arrested on federal sex trafficking charges, later told her she had suffered a miscarriage, and she suspected him of conspiring with the doctor to keep it quiet, Giuffre said.On seeing a photo of Andrew and Epstein walking in New York’s Central Park in 2010 — after Epstein was convicted of soliciting prostitution of someone under the age of 18 — Giuffre wrote she was “revolted to see two of my abusers together, out for a stroll.” But “mostly I was amazed that a member of the Royal Family would be stupid enough to appear in public with Epstein.”Andrew has previously denied these allegations, saying that he has “no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.” In his statement announcing the relinquishment of his titles, he said, “I vigorously deny the accusations against me.”Virginia Giuffre, center, leaves federal court in New York on Aug. 27, 2019.Jeenah Moon / Bloomberg via Getty Images fileThe civil sex abuse lawsuit brought by Giuffre against Andrew was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum.Though Buckingham Palace routinely says it does not speak for the prince, Andrew has enjoyed a prominent role at some recent royal events, including the queen’s funeral.Some lawmakers are demanding that Andrew be formally stripped of his titles by an act of Parliament — a rare foray into regal matters by Britain’s supposedly separate government.The last time this happened was in 1917, when Parliament used the Titles Deprivation Act to strip German members of the British royal family of their titles during World War I.That’s not without risks, according to Prescott at Royal Holloway.”If you have legislation removing the dukedom from Prince Andrew, might a cheeky MP want to table an amendment and remove the dukedom of Sussex from Prince Harry?” he said.The government indicated it does not support this. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said Monday that while “our thoughts have to be with the victims of Jeffrey Epstein, these “are matters for the royal family.”The nuclear option would involve the king himself using something called “Letters Patent” to strip Andrew of his designation as prince.In doing so, the palace must weigh distancing itself from Andrew with ensuring the blowback from any further censure does not do even more damage to an institution that requires public buy-in.“It’s true that the monarchy isn’t voted in,” Prescott said. “But if the public mood shifted and people no longer wanted to have the monarchy, then you imagine that politics would follow.”Alexander SmithAlexander Smith is a senior reporter for NBC News Digital based in London.Mahalia Dobson, Max Taylor and Jackson Peck contributed.
Comments are closed.
Scroll To Top
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics
© Copyright 2025 - Be That ! . All Rights Reserved