Sign up today

Sign up today
Softphone APP for Android &IOS

RG Richardson Communications News

I am a business economist with interests in international trade worldwide through politics, money, banking and VOIP Communications. The author of RG Richardson City Guides has over 300 guides, including restaurants and finance.

eComTechnology Posts

Residents, Experts Rally Against Massive Gas Plant on Sensitive N.B. Isthmus

Residents, Experts Rally Against Massive Gas Plant on Sensitive N.B. Isthmus About 80 people gathered in the basement of a church in Midgic,...

Harvard funding fight to be felt beyond campus

 

Harvard

MediaNews Group/Boston Herald/Getty Images

The Trump administration’s plan to freeze $2.2 billion in multiyear federal funding for Harvard and its request that the IRS begin revoking the university’s tax-exempt status herald a financial fallout far beyond the school’s famed yard.

The moves came after Harvard refused to accept sweeping demands from the White House to scrap DEI programs and overhaul academic hiring, teaching, and admissions—changes the administration says are meant to address antisemitism on campus.

Trimming the ivy

The funding freeze mostly targets research grants out of a total $9 billion Harvard was set to receive—a major cash source, given that federal dollars covered 16% of the university’s operating budget last year. Meanwhile, being tax-exempt frees the university from paying taxes on earnings and allows donors to get deductions for their donations.

The economic reach of the university graduating people who can say they “went to college just outside Boston” extends well beyond its campus:

  • Harvard is the fourth-largest employer in Massachusetts, with over 18,700 people on its payroll as of 2023.
  • The Department of Education says the freeze hasn’t impacted Harvard’s teaching hospitals. But some Harvard-affiliated researchers studying medical disorders and biotech advances like human organ chips were sent stop-work orders shortly after the freeze, the Harvard Crimson reported.
  • The overall stakes are high for more than a single metro area. Experts highlight that the university research system is a cornerstone of the US innovation pipeline and a vital driver of economic growth, since campus science often has commercial and national defense applications.

But isn’t Harvard loaded? Harvard is the world’s wealthiest university, but its $53 billion endowment isn’t the bottomless piggy bank it seems. About 70% of the endowment funds are earmarked for specific programs by donors and cannot legally be used for unrelated purposes. But 20% is unrestricted and can plug budget holes. And if the administration succeeds in yanking Harvard’s tax-exemption—which would likely entail a lengthy legal fight—the school could owe taxes on that endowment and its large real estate holdings.

Harvard is the first to push back…but several other prestigious universities, including Columbia, which did agree to meet some of the administration’s demands, as well as Northwestern, UPenn, and Cornell, have had federal funding suspended recently, hampering research and student financial aid.—SK

Whistleblower details how DOGE may have taken sensitive NLRB data : NPR

Whistleblower details how DOGE may have taken sensitive NLRB data : NPR
Transcript

The DOGE team may have taken data related to union organizing and labor complaints and hid its tracks, according to a whistleblower.

Charlotte Gomez for NPR

In the first days of March, a team of advisers from President Trump's new Department of Government Efficiency initiative arrived at the Southeast Washington, D.C., headquarters of the National Labor Relations Board.

The small, independent federal agency investigates and adjudicates complaints about unfair labor practices. It stores reams of potentially sensitive data, from confidential information about employees who want to form unions to proprietary business information.

The DOGE employees, who are effectively led by White House adviser and billionaire tech CEO Elon Musk, appeared to have their sights set on accessing the NLRB's internal systems. They've said their unit's overall mission is to review agency data for compliance with the new administration's policies and to cut costs and maximize efficiency.

But according to an official whistleblower disclosure shared with Congress and other federal overseers that was obtained by NPR, subsequent interviews with the whistleblower and records of internal communications, technical staff members were alarmed about what DOGE engineers did when they were granted access, particularly when those staffers noticed a spike in data leaving the agency. It's possible that the data included sensitive information on unions, ongoing legal cases and corporate secrets — data that four labor law experts tell NPR should almost never leave the NLRB and that has nothing to do with making the government more efficient or cutting spending.

Meanwhile, according to the disclosure and records of internal communications, members of the DOGE team asked that their activities not be logged on the system and then appeared to try to cover their tracks behind them, turning off monitoring tools and manually deleting records of their access — evasive behavior that several cybersecurity experts interviewed by NPR compared to what criminal or state-sponsored hackers might do.

White House senior adviser Elon Musk walks to the White House after landing in Marine One with President Trump on March 9.

White House senior adviser Elon Musk walks to the White House after landing in Marine One with President Trump on March 9.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

The employees grew concerned that the NLRB's confidential data could be exposed, particularly after they started detecting suspicious log-in attempts from an IP address in Russia, according to the disclosure. Eventually, the disclosure continued, the IT department launched a formal review of what it deemed a serious, ongoing security breach or potentially illegal removal of personally identifiable information. The whistleblower believes that the suspicious activity warrants further investigation by agencies with more resources, like the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency or the FBI.

Federal Liberals surging in B.C. in ways not seen since Trudeau-mania: poll - Greater Victoria News

Federal Liberals surging in B.C. in ways not seen since Trudeau-mania: poll - Greater Victoria News
Once dominated by the federal New Democrats, the southern tip of Vancouver Island could see spots of federal Liberal red, while its northern parts could turn federal Conservative blue
250407-bpd-carney-richmond-rally5
Liberal Party of Canada Leader Mark Carney speaks to a packed ballroom at the Sheraton Vancouver Airport Hotel in Richmond on Monday, April 7. It was his second day in B.C., and second rally in the province.

Federal Liberal Leader Mark Carney may have left B.C. after a two-day swing, including a stop in Richmond Monday night, but a poll released Tuesday points to solidifying strength in Canada's most western province not seen since the Trudeau-mania of the late 1960s.

The Research Co. poll shows the federal Liberals (44 per cent) leading the federal Conservatives under Pierre Poilievre by six points in B.C. Nationally, the federal Liberals are leading the Conservatives 44 per cent to 36 per cent.

"We have to go back to 1968 to have a level of support for the Liberals similar to what they have right now," Mario Canseco, president of Research Co., said. "In the first Trudeau-mania election, they got 42 per cent of the vote in B.C. They are at 44 per cent, so it's historic."

Canseco added that the current support for the federal Liberals puts them ahead of their 2015 showing when they won 35 per cent of the popular vote and picked up seats in areas that had not voted for the federal Liberals in decades, such as Kelowna. 

"(The) explanation is essentially the collapse of the NDP vote across the country and that includes British Columbia," Canseco said. "They are in the single digits everywhere." 

Nationally, the federal New Democrats are polling at eight per cent, equal to their level of support in British Columbia. That means that New Democrats are on pace to win less than half of their popular vote (17 per cent) in 2021. 

Canseco said some New Democratic voters are going to the Conservatives. "But many of them are going to the Liberals and it raises the question about the viability of some long-term incumbents," he said. 

New Democrats held 24 seats at dissolution, with 12 of those in British Columbia, including five seats on Vancouver Island. A sixth New Democrat MP -- Randall Garrison -- retired before dissolution. Four incumbents (Lisa Marie Barron, Laurel Collins, Gord Johns and Alistair MacGregor) are running again in their Vancouver Island ridings, while Rachel Blaney won't be running in North Island-Powell River. 

Carney Sunday campaigned in Collins' riding of Victoria, then made an environmental announcement in Saanich-Gulf Islands, the riding of long-time federal Green MP Elizabeth.

Historically, federal Liberals have done well in Metro Vancouver with federal Conservatives and federal New Democrats competing against each other in parts of the province, including Vancouver Island. 

Canseco said Carney is fishing in NDP and Green waters because the Liberals sense an opportunity to have a massive majority government based on their large and growing leads in Ontario and Quebec. 

"It would be rare to see pockets of (federal Liberal red) on (Vancouver Island), but if you start to see this trend of the vote for the NDP dropping and the vote for the Liberals rising, you could see some red," he said. "But it also raises the question of an interesting strategic voting decision, particularly in the north (of Vancouver Island)."

If New Democratic support in the northern half of Vancouver Island drops with the federal Liberals gaining, federal Conservatives, including controversial candidate Aaron Gunn, could end up as winners, he said. 

In other words, surging Liberals could actually benefit federal Conservatives on northern Vancouver Island by taking away support for New Democrats. "I think that is a real possibility in the north," Canseco said. 

Conservatives, for their part, have identified Vancouver Island, along with parts of B.C.'s interior for pick-ups and incumbent federal New Democrats on northern Vancouver Island, in other words, appear in trouble, according to available polls. Their incumbency, in other words, might make no difference, just as it did not make any difference for the former B.C. United MLAs who ran as independents during last year's provincial election. 

"I think that's a good analogy," he said. He added that in Ontario, New Democrats finished with more seats than the provincial Liberals, even though they won fewer votes, because of their local connections. "But this one (election) is different, because it is ultimately a referendum on Trump," he said. 

This point shines through when looking at the issues most important to voters. According to the survey, three-in-ten likely voters (31 per cent, up one per cent) think Canada-U.S. relations to be the most important issue facing the country. Far fewer choose the economy and jobs (19 per cent, minus one per cent), housing, homelessness and poverty (18 per cent, up one per cent), health care (11 per cent, up two) and immigration (five per cent, minus two per cent).

Canseco said these figures play to Carney's strengths, especially among Canadians 55 years and older. Among that age cohort, 40 per cent consider U.S.-Canada relations the most important issue. The issue becomes less important for younger voters, with whom Conservatives are still connecting, Canseco said. 

"But you can't win with that group," he said. "You need to be able to bridge the gap with (voters 55 years and older)," Canseco said. He added that Conservatives tried to do that to a degree with his promise to increase the annual limit on contributions to the tax-free savings account, but only for funds invested in Canadian companies.

"But this group (55 years and older) is completely galvanized by the Trump thing, Canada-U.S. relations and the effect it will have on the economy and jobs," Canseco said. He added that Poilievre needs to discuss what the country would look like if he were Trump's rival. "That is also part of what changed things," he said. "It was fairly easy for Poilievre to go out there and say, 'Justin Trudeau is not respect. This is why we are being called the 51st state." 

But Trump's tone toward Canada has changed since Carney has become prime minister by replacing Trudeau as federal Liberal leader. "He (Poilievre) can't say, 'well, Carney is not respected.'" 

Notwithstanding on Guard for Thee

 

Notwithstanding on Guard for Thee

The Prime Minister will use a never-before invoked power to overrule the Supreme Court and strip Canadians of a constitutional right. Sounds pretty scary, if you say it like that. But is that what Pierre Poilievre is actually promising to do? I’m Jacob Boon and welcome back to The Run.

The Conservative Leader has promised to bring back legislation to impose consecutive life sentences — not concurrent — for those who commit multiple murders.

It was an idea that Poilievre’s mentor, Stephen Harper, introduced when prime minister, only for it to be shot down by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2022.

The ruling of R. v. Bissonnette found that life in prison without the possibility of parole for extended periods violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ protection against cruel and unusual punishments.

But in a candid and upfront campaign promise, Poilievre says he’ll bypass the courts if elected by invoking the notwithstanding clause. If so, he’ll become the first Canadian prime minister to use the controversial get-out-of-the-Charter-free card that allows governments to override court rulings for a five-year period.

Over on his Substack, political scientist Jared Wesley says this bold manoeuvre raises two serious questions for Canadians: 1. Is consecutive life sentences for multiple murders a justified goal for our society? 2. Is achieving that goal worth overriding a Charter right?

“As citizens, we can (and should) argue over the moral weight of life sentences, the role of rehabilitation, and the meaning of dignity. We can (and should) discuss whether Parliament should be allowed to override rights in this instance. That’s our duty when we are called upon to do so.”

Poilievre’s supporters will say this is what the clause was designed to do. Critics will say this is a slippery slope for eroding the Charter. But whatever you believe, Wesley argues, Poilievre isn’t hiding what he’s going to do. He’s asking Canadians to choose.

“This is not authoritarianism. It’s constitutional democracy,” says Wesley. “Poilievre is not attempting to suppress debate. He’s igniting it.”

Parents Sue Trump Administration for Allegedly Sabotaging Education Department’s Civil Rights Division

Parents Sue Trump Administration for Allegedly Sabotaging Education Department’s Civil Rights Division

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Saying the Trump administration is sabotaging civil rights enforcement by the Department of Education, a federal lawsuit filed Friday morning seeks to stop the president and Secretary Linda McMahon from carrying out the mass firing of civil rights investigators and lawyers.

Two parents and the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, a national disability rights group, jointly filed the lawsuit. It alleges that decimating the department’s Office for Civil Rights will leave the agency unable to handle the public’s complaints of discrimination at school. That, they said, would violate the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The complaint comes three days after the Education Department notified about 1,300 employees — including the entire staff in seven of the 12 regional civil rights offices — that they are being fired, and the day after a group of 21 Democratic attorneys general sued McMahon and the president. That lawsuit alleges the Trump administration does not have the authority to circumvent Congress to effectively shutter the department.

The complaint filed on Friday argues that the “OCR has abdicated its responsibility to enforce civil rights protections” and that the administration has made a “decision to sabotage” the Education Department’s civil rights functions. That, the lawsuit alleges, overrides Congress’ authority. It names the Education Department, McMahon and the acting head of OCR, Craig Trainor.

“Through a series of press releases, policy statements, and executive orders, the administration has made clear its contempt for the civil rights of marginalized students,” the lawsuit says.

The parents’ lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. It asks the court to declare the “decimation” of the OCR unlawful and seeks an injunction to compel the office to “process OCR complaints promptly and equitably.”

A Department of Education spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But the department has said it would still meet its legal obligations.

The lawsuit brought by the attorneys general was filed in federal court in Massachusetts. It alleges the firings are “so severe and extreme that it incapacitates components of the Department responsible for performing functions mandated by statute.” It cites the closing of the seven regional OCR outposts as an example.

Each year, the OCR investigates thousands of allegations of discrimination in schools based on disability, race and gender and is one of the federal government’s largest civil rights units. At last count there were about 550 OCR employees; at least 243 union-represented employees were laid off Tuesday.

The administration plans to close OCR locations in Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco. Offices will remain in Atlanta, Denver, Kansas City, Seattle and Washington, D.C.

The lawsuit brought by the parents and advocacy group reveals concerns by students and families who have pending complaints that, under President Donald Trump, are not being investigated. There also are concerns that new complaints won’t get investigated if they don’t fall under one of the president’s priorities: curbing antisemitism, ending participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports and combating alleged discrimination against white students.

After Trump was inaugurated on Jan. 20, the administration implemented a monthlong freeze on the agency’s civil rights work. Although OCR investigators were prohibited from working on their assigned discrimination cases, the Trump administration launched a new “End DEI Portal” meant only to collect complaints about diversity, equity and inclusion in schools. It has said it is trying to shrink the size of government, including the Education Department, which Trump has called a “big con job.”

Trump’s actions so far have led many to wonder “if there is a real and meaningful complaint investigation process existing at the moment,” said Johnathan Smith, an attorney at the National Center for Youth Law, which represents the plaintiffs. Smith is a former deputy assistant attorney general in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division.

“They are putting the thumb on the scale of who the winners and losers are before they do the investigation, and that is deeply problematic from a law enforcement perspective,” Smith said.

The lawsuit is perhaps the most substantive legal effort to require the Education Department to enforce civil rights since 1970, when the NAACP sued the agency for allowing segregation to continue. That lawsuit resulted in repeated overhauling of the OCR and 20 years of judicial oversight, with the goal of ensuring that the division fairly investigated and enforced discrimination claims.

Students and families turn to the OCR after they feel their concerns have not been addressed by their schools or colleges. Both individuals named as plaintiffs in the lawsuit are parents of students whose civil rights complaints were being investigated — until Trump took office.

One of the plaintiffs, Alabama parent Nikki S. Carter, has three students and is an advocate for students with disabilities in her community. Carter is Black. According to the lawsuit, Carter filed a complaint with OCR in 2022 alleging discrimination on the basis of race after her children’s school district, the Demopolis City Schools, twice banned Carter from school district property.

When reached by ProPublica, the district superintendent said he’s not aware of the lawsuit or the civil rights complaint and could not comment; he is new to the district.

The district has said it barred Carter after a confrontation with a white staff member. But Carter has said that a white parent who had a similar confrontation wasn’t banned, leading her to believe that the district punished her because of her advocacy. She said it prevented her from attending parent-teacher conferences and other school events.

The other parent, identified by the initials A.W., filed a complaint with OCR alleging their child’s school failed to respond properly to sexual assault and harassment by a classmate.

Investigations of both families’ discrimination complaints have stopped under the new OCR leadership, according to the lawsuit.

The IRS is barely auditing anymore

 

IRS building

Tom Williams/Getty Images

The government’s gimme-money department has shrunk so much that it’s struggling to get up and work. IRS audits are at a record low and could plunge even further following President Trump’s cuts, the New York Times reported yesterday.

According to NYT’s analysis of federal data:

  • Audit rates for personal income taxes fell from ~1% (about 1 in every 100 tax returns) in 2010 to just 0.36% in 2023 (roughly 1 in 300).
  • The audit rate fell below 0.5% in 2020 for the first time on record.
  • The IRS has collected only $4.5 billion from 2019 personal audits so far, down from $11 billion from audits of 2010 returns—and there have been “steep declines” in corporate audits, too.

Why? The IRS cut more than 20% of its 95,000-person workforce between 2010 and 2019, leaving burdened workers with less room for time-consuming high-income audits, which can recoup $100,000+ from a single flawed tax return.

Auditing could get worse: DOGE is planning on cutting 18,000+ IRS workers, which would cost the government $6.8 billion in lost tax revenue next year, according to Yale’s nonpartisan Budget Lab. As many as 5,000 IRS employees have already accepted buyouts.

Also…the White House announced yesterday that the IRS will start sharing undocumented taxpayers’ information with ICE, which reportedly could violate federal privacy laws. DOGE is also seeking to widen access to taxpayer info, Wired reported this weekend.—ML