LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

FREDERICTON — Nearly seven years after the New Brunswick government went to the Supreme Court to prevent the free movement of alcohol across the country, Premier Susan Holt says the tariff war with the United States is forcing the province to rethink its approach to trade.

Holt’s government is set to table legislation soon that would allow New Brunswick companies to sell alcohol directly to consumers in other provinces, and permit New Brunswickers to transport spirits across provincial boundaries, she said.

“New Brunswickers want to enjoy B.C. wines the same way folks in B.C. want to enjoy New Brunswick craft breweries,” the premier said in a recent interview.

“So, I think we have to break down the things that have prevented us from sharing the things that we’re great at.”

New Brunswick’s government wasn’t always so keen to see alcohol move freely across boundaries. In April 2018, the province won its case in Supreme Court against a man fined $300 for buying beer in Quebec and bringing it home to New Brunswick. The country’s highest court ruled that provinces can make laws to address particular conditions and priorities within their borders — even if those laws may incidentally restrict the movement of goods.

But now, facing punishing tariffs from United States President Donald Trump, Holt said New Brunswick can’t afford to keep its trade barriers up. Alcohol, she said, is just one of many products she’d like to see move more freely across the country.

If Canada reduces barriers to interprovincial trade, she said, “the estimate we’ve seen at a national level is around … a four per cent bump to economic activity.”

“So I hope we would see something similar here in New Brunswick.”

The looming tariffs are not just influencing New Brunswick’s legislation on trade, it’s upending the budget, which is scheduled to be tabled next week — and which is her government’s first since winning the October election.

Preparing the budget has been tricky because Trump’s tariff policy is still largely unclear: he imposed tariffs of 25 per cent on almost all Canadian imports in March — with a lower 10 per cent levy on Canadian energy — only to delay the implementation of the duties until April. Trump also said that on Wednesday he would tariff Canadian steel and aluminum 25 per cent; but for a few hours on Tuesday he had raised the tariffs on those two products to 50 per cent.

Last week, Canada imposed 25 per cent tariffs on $30 billion in goods imported from the U.S., and said it would slap duties on an additional $125 billion of goods “should the U.S. continue to apply unjustified tariffs on Canada.”

All the uncertainty, Holt said, has made it “exceptionally difficult” to balance the budget. “Anybody who looked at the situation in November, as soon as Trump opened his mouth about tariffs, watched investment and employment dry up .… The reality is that we’re facing a deficit,” she said.

“We’re trying to balance what is in the best interest of New Brunswickers for the long term. What can we manage? Because we need to measure twice and cut once.”

If Trump makes good on his threat to impose 25 per cent across-the-board tariffs on Canadian goods, then New Brunswick is projected to have a drop in revenue of 30 per cent, she said.

The province’s top exports are petroleum products, including home heating oil and fuels to much of the Eastern seaboard. Other important exports include seafood, forestry and agricultural products. About $12 billion of goods crosses the border from New Brunswick to Maine every year, she said.

And with an anticipated drop in revenue, the premier said hard choices need to be made. But Holt said her main promise in last year’s election campaign to resurrect the flailing health-care system will be maintained. Those promises included opening at least 30 clinics across the province over three years.

“The budget makes a clear priority of transforming primary care, making sure that we have the tools we need, the information systems we need to get every New Brunswicker and every health-care professional their health information to deliver them better care,” she said.

“So we are not compromising on that promise in the face of tariffs. But we need to do both. It’s a balancing act, right?”

While she is dealing with the mental callisthenics of a mercurial American president, Holt is working to ensure the government finds other markets that share “similar values and similar economic structures” to diversify trade.

New Brunswick boasts not just petroleum, lumber and lobster but also much-valued mineral resources that are in high demand around the world, she said. “We have unique deposits of minerals in New Brunswick that could generate good-paying jobs and opportunity.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 12, 2025.

Hina Alam, The Canadian Press


JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — When Missouri’s attorney general says he’ll seize Chinese-owned assets to force China to pay a $24.5 billion award won by the state in a lawsuit over COVID-19, the threat might be more important than actually collecting any money.

Similarly, when Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey sued Starbucks last month, alleging that the coffee shop chain with a white male CEO discriminated against white men in hiring, the point might have been less about winning in court than the fight itself. He’s attacking the diversity, equity and inclusion programs that liberals have championed and his Democratic counterparts have supported.

Over the past decade, state attorneys general have become increasingly visible for suing presidential administrations of the opposite political party and pursuing policy goals through warnings and public demand letters. They are not only their states’ top law enforcement officials but now also chief advocates for a variety of causes — and few seem as busy at it as Bailey.

“If you’re suing everybody, why not China?” said Benjamin Wittes, the editor-in-chief of the nonprofit Brookings Institution’s Lawfare publication.

Lower-profile offices become focused on national politics

For decades, attorneys general promised to fight crime by advocating tougher criminal sentences and defending convictions in serious cases while enforcing consumer protection laws and ousting the occasional errant local official.

They still do, but lawsuits and threats of lawsuits over national issues now get far more attention. Attorneys general argue that they’ve been pushed into it by presidents and federal agency heads.

North Dakota’s Drew Wrigley, a Republican, said environmental rules pursued under President Joe Biden compelled agricultural and energy-producing states like his to ask courts to force the Democratic administration to “respect appropriate constitutional and legal boundaries.”

“The Biden administration routinely abused executive authority, and regularly exercised power that Congress did not give them,” Wrigley said. “Our court victories have been victories for the rule of law in this nation.”

The shift started in the 1990s, when 46 attorneys general banded together to sue tobacco companies. A settlement led to annual payments to states exceeding $165 billion as of 2024.

“That was really what gave AGs the experience to realize that they could make a major difference on the national level, even if the executive branch and even if Congress didn’t act,” said Paul Nolette, a Marquette University political scientist.

Later, with Democrat Barack Obama in the White House, Republican attorneys general filed legal challenges against his administration. Democratic AGs did the same during Republican President Donald Trump’s first term.

“As the United States has become much more polarized, that’s been matched by the politicization of the attorney general’s office,” said Drury University political scientist Daniel Ponder.

Lawsuits may be derided but they reap political benefits

Critics deride such tactics as grandstanding, but attorneys general have incentives to pursue them.

In 2022, Democratic Attorney General Josh Shapiro won the Pennsylvania governor’s race after touting more than 20 legal challenges to Trump administration actions, and he was a leading contender for his party’s 2024 vice presidential nomination.

Kansas Republican Kris Kobach lost races for governor in 2018 and the U.S. Senate in 2020 but resurrected his political career in 2022 by winning the attorney general’s race after promising to spend each breakfast thinking about potential lawsuits against the Biden administration.

Bailey’s two predecessors in Missouri, both Republicans, won U.S. Senate seats: Eric Schmitt in 2022 and Josh Hawley in 2018. Bailey’s own headline-grabbing work helped him get an audience before Trump as a potential U.S. attorney general appointee, although ultimately he didn’t get the job.

He defended Missouri’s lawsuit against China — filed by Schmitt, his predecessor, and inherited by Bailey — by pointing to the result, though Wittes and other experts believe it will be difficult to seize assets and collect money from China. Missouri claimed that China hoarded personal protective equipment during the pandemic, harming the state.

“This historic victory is a significant first step in holding wrongdoers accountable,” Bailey said.

Missouri has had plenty of targets besides China

Of course, China is far from Missouri’s only target.

Bailey has threatened private gyms over bathroom policies, demanded that public schools ban drag shows and sued New York state, claiming that Trump’s 2024 hush money criminal trial was “overt meddling” in the election that limited Missouri voters’ information.

Bailey was in office less than three weeks in January 2023 when he joined a multistate lawsuit against the Biden administration over immigration policy, and the next day, he was challenging a policy allowing 401(k) managers to use environmental, social and governance principles in their investing. Missouri kept joining lawsuits against Biden’s administration: four over immigration policy, three over efforts to forgive college student loan debt, two over environmental rules, two over gun safety initiatives and two over transgender rights measures.

Even after Biden left the White House, Bailey wasn’t done with him.

In a Facebook post last week, Bailey called for the Trump administration to investigate Biden’s mental fitness late in his term and whether it undercut the “legality of executive orders, pardons, and all other actions issued in his name.”

Suing Starbucks: Diversity goals as alleged discrimination

Bailey’s lawsuit against Starbucks came weeks after Trump ordered an end to the federal government’s DEI programs.

The lawsuit alleges the company’s DEI programs are pretexts for quotas limiting the number of white, male employees, resulting in a “more female and less white” workforce since 2020, when CEO Brian Niccol, who is white, took over. Bailey argues that Starbucks practices, including actions against managers who don’t meet DEI goals, violate state and federal laws against making employment decisions based on race or sex.

“I have a responsibility to protect Missourians from a company that actively engages in systemic race and sex discrimination,” Bailey said.

Starbucks did not respond to a request for comment and has until April 7 to file its response to the lawsuit.

“Even if these suits are ultimately unsuccessful, they can have other effects in terms of changing behavior on the part of the defendants, in some cases delaying policy for a long time,” Marquette’s Nolette said.

___

Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas. Associated Press writer Jack Dura also contributed reporting from Bismarck, North Dakota.

Summer Ballentine And John Hanna, The Associated Press


As the Trump administration moves to dismantle the Education Department, officials have suggested other agencies could take over its major responsibilities: civil rights enforcement to the Justice Department, perhaps; student loans to Treasury or Commerce; oversight of student disability rights to Health and Human Services.

Less clear is what could happen with a more lofty part of its mission — promoting equal access for students in an American education system that is fundamentally unequal.

The department has cut its workforce in half, including a layoff of 1,300 people announced Tuesday. President Donald Trump pledged during his campaign to eliminate the department entirely, calling it wasteful and infiltrated by leftists.

Without the department, advocates worry the federal government would not look out in the same way for poor students, those still learning English, disabled students and racial and ethnic minorities.

“Gutting the agency that is charged to ensure equal access to education for every child is only going to create an underclass of students,” said Weadé James, senior director of K-12 education policy for the Center for American Progress, a think tank that advocates for racial equity policies and increased investment in public schools.

The equity goal of the Education Department, which was founded in 1980, emerged partly from the anti-poverty and civil rights movements of the 1960s and 1970s. The act creating the department described its mission, in part, as: “To strengthen the Federal commitment to ensuring access to equal educational opportunity for every individual.”

If new Education Secretary Linda McMahon really does work herself “out of a job,” as Trump has said he wants, the government will lose a bully pulpit to draw attention to the nation’s challenges and evangelize solutions, said Michael Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank that advocates for more rigorous academic standards and accountability for public schools.

But Petrilli doubts that significantly paring back the department — if not completely eliminating it — will be “noticeable in the real world.”

Test scores continue to show many school children are struggling academically. The latest national tests showed one-third of eighth grade students missing fundamental skills in reading, and a widening gap between the highest-performing and lower-performing students. That’s the justification McMahon and other Trump allies have used for dismantling the department and sending its funding directly to states to spend.

Far from perfect, the department has offered a valuable “north star” for schools, said Wil Del Pilar, senior vice president of EdTrust, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that advocates for educational equity. It is the role of the department to institute guardrails, investments and protections “that support equal outcomes for students,” he said.

Trump has said he wants to return all control of schools to states.

The biggest question for many is what happens to the billions of dollars sent to run public schools every year, such as Title I funding, which supports schools in communities with high concentrations of poverty.

Educating low-income children, students learning English and those with disabilities often costs more because it requires specialized teaching or smaller class sizes. Districts without a strong tax base to fund schools often struggle to meet these students’ needs, which Congress recognized by authorizing the money.

McMahon has said she wants to send the money directly to states, with fewer restrictions. Some have worried that without guardrails or federal oversight, states will use the money to advance their own priorities in ways that potentially entrench inequality.

If the funding is distributed to states as block grants, it’s potentially a “way to defund public education,” said Del Pilar. Block grants allow politicians to “direct funds as they see fit, and that could be away from schools,” he said.

Students in Mississippi, South Dakota, Arkansas, Montana and Alaska could be affected the most if rules or oversight changes for how states spend this money. During the 2021-2022 school year, these states relied on federal aid for at least 20% of school funding, according to government data.

The agency traditionally has worked on behalf of disadvantaged students through its Office for Civil Rights, with an emphasis defending the rights of students with disabilities and students facing harassment tied to their skin color. Under the Trump administration, the agency has prioritized allegations of antisemitism.

While some advocates worry about the pivot in priorities, some attorneys say they had given up on recommending parents pursue complaints with the Office for Civil Rights, which they perceived as understaffed and too slow to provide relief.

Well before Trump was sworn in for a second term, the system moved slowly, but it has now gotten even worse, said A. Kelly Neal, a special education attorney in Macon, Georgia.

“Usually they were a little bit more responsive,” Neal said. “It may not have been the response you wanted. But at least they tried to pretend they were doing something.”

She said she would have no problem if the Department of Justice took on enforcement of these cases.

As part of a crackdown on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, the Trump administration last month ended the contract for the Equity Assistance Center-South, a technical assistance program for Southern school districts still operating under federal desegregation orders. On Tuesday, the Southern Education Foundation appealed the decision to cancel its contract to run the center.

The attempt to close these such centers abdicates the government’s responsibility to “help school districts address educational inequities and provide greater education opportunities for our students,” said Raymond Pierce, Southern Education Foundation’s president and chief executive officer.

___

Associated Press writer Heather Hollingsworth contributed to this report.

___

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Bianca Vázquez Toness, The Associated Press


NEW YORK (AP) — A Manhattan federal court hearing is scheduled Wednesday in a suit challenging the detention of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate student that the Trump Administration is trying to deport over his participation in pro-Palestinian protests at the school.

Immigration enforcement agents arrested Khalil, a permanent U.S. resident, in New York on Saturday and he has been moved to an immigration detention center in Louisiana.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman has ordered that the 30-year-old not be deported while the court considers the legal challenge brought by his lawyers, who are seeking to have Khalil brought back to New York and released under supervision. They argue the government is unlawfully retaliating against him for his speech.

A joint filing for Khalil’s lawyers and the government ahead of Wednesday’s hearing said the government intends to argue that the Southern District of New York is not the proper venue for the case.

Columbia University became the center of a pro-Palestinian protest movement that swept across college campuses nationwide last year, with more than 2,000 people were arrested in demonstrations.

President Donald Trump has heralded Khalil’s arrest as the first “of many to come,” vowing on social media to deport students he described as engaging in “pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic, anti-American activity.”

Khalil, who acted as a spokesperson for Columbia protesters, has not been charged with a crime. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday the administration had moved to deport him under a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act that gives the secretary of state the power to deport a non-citizen on foreign policy grounds.

Civil rights groups and Khalil’s attorneys say the government is unconstitutionally using its immigration-control powers to stop him from speaking out.

Khalil finished his requirements for a Columbia master’s degree in December. Born in Syria, he is a grandson of Palestinians who were forced to leave their homeland, his lawyers said in a legal filing.

He is married to a U.S. citizen, who is expecting their first child.

The Associated Press




WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump in recent days has dismissed fears of a recession and brushed aside the stock market sell-off, going so far as to say, “You can’t really watch the stock market.” That’s a new message from a leader who has frequently pointed to the market’s ups and downs as a reflection of himself and his activities, even when he was not in power.

Over the last year, while President Joe Biden was in office, Trump took credit for stock market rallies as a vote of confidence in his electoral prospects. When the market dipped, he blamed Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. And he predicted that if Democrats won the 2024 presidential election, the stock market would have crashed.

A look at some of Trump’s observations on the stock market over the last year:

Jan. 29, 2024, on Truth Social

“THIS IS THE TRUMP STOCK MARKET BECAUSE MY POLLS AGAINST BIDEN ARE SO GOOD THAT INVESTORS ARE PROJECTING THAT I WILL WIN, AND THAT WILL DRIVE THE MARKET UP — EVERYTHING ELSE IS TERRIBLE (WATCH THE MIDDLE EAST!), AND RECORD SETTING INFLATION HAS ALREADY TAKEN ITS TOLL. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN”

March 12, 2024, on Truth Social

“High Interest Rates and Inflation are choking our great middle class, and ALL, our Economy is bad, and our Stock Market is rising only because Polls are strongly indicating that we will WIN the Presidential Election of 2024.”

April 25, 2024, on his way into court for his criminal trial in New York

“The stock market is, in a sense, crashing. The numbers are very bad. This is Bidenomics. It’s catching up with him. It’s lucky that it’s catching up before he leaves office as opposed to after he leaves office.”

May 15, 2024, on Truth Social

“Thank you to Scott Bessent, one of the Great Prognosticators on Wall Street! There are many people that are saying that the only reason the Stock Market is high is because I am leading in all of the Polls, and if I don’t win, we will have a CRASH of similar proportions to 1929. I agree, but let’s hope we don’t have to worry about that!”

May 18, 2024, at an NRA event in Dallas, Texas:

“We are a nation whose stock market’s continued success is contingent on MAGA winning the next election.”

July 16, 2024, on Truth Social

“Dow Jones UP 742 based on the fact that the Market expects a TRUMP WIN in November! Nice compliment — Thank you!”

Aug. 4, 2024, on Truth Social

“STOCK MARKETS CRASHING. I TOLD YOU SO!!! KAMALA DOESN’T HAVE A CLUE. BIDEN IS SOUND ASLEEP. ALL CAUSED BY INEPT U.S. LEADERSHIP!”

Aug. 14, 2024, at a rally in Asheville, North Carolina

“If Harris wins this election, the result will be a Kamala economic crash, a 1929-style depression. 1929. When I win the election, we will immediately begin a brand new Trump economic boom. It’ll be a boom. We’re going to turn this country around so fast. Many people say that they only reason the stock market is up is because people think I am going to win.”

Oct. 29, 2024, during a rally in Allentown, Pennsylvania

“You want to see a market crash? If we lost this election, I think the market would go down the tubes.”

Nov. 4, 2024, at a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan

Trump started praising Bessent and said: “You know what his theory is? The stock market is the only sign of life, and it’s only going up because everyone thinks Trump is going to win the election. And others, too. Others, too. I’m seeing it a lot. I think they’re following your lead. But I appreciate that confidence.”

Nov. 14, 2024, at a Mar-a-Lago gala in Florida:

“We had three or four of the highest — I guess, almost every single day, we set new records in the stock market. We set new records economically.”

Trump, in comments directed at House Speaker Mike Johnson, then said: “Mr. Speaker, I think it’s important, maybe you should pass a bill, you have to start my term from Nov. 5, OK, or Nov. 6, if you want. Nov. 5 because the market has gone through the roof. Enthusiasm has doubled.”

Dec. 12, 2024, in an interview with CNBC at the New York Stock Exchange:

Trump was asked by host Jim Cramer whether it’s still the case that stock market indexes were a good barometer of his performance.

“Well, I think I’ve always said, you know, to me, stock market is very — all of it, you know, all of it together, it’s very important. It’s an honor to be here in New York Stock Exchange. I sort of joked that I actually bought the building across the street because the stock exchange was here. It’s a big deal.”

Dec. 16, 2024, during a news conference at Mar-a-Lago

Trump was asked whether he is concerned that his tariffs might hurt the stock market.

“Make our country rich. Tariffs will make our country rich,” Trump responded.

Jan. 7, 2025, during a news conference at Mar-a-Lago

“Since my election, the stock market has set records. The S&P 500 index has broken above 6,000 points for the first time ever, never even close.”

Jan. 19, 2025. at a rally in Washington, D.C.

“Everyone is calling it the — I don’t want to say this. It’s too braggadocious, but we’ll say it anyway, the Trump effect. It’s you. You’re the effect. Since the election, the stock market has surged, and small business optimism has soared, a record 41 points to a 39-year high.”

Feb. 19, 2025, at an investment conference in Miami Beach

“I think the stock market is going to be great. In other words, we will rapidly grow our economy by dramatically shrinking the federal government.”

Feb. 21, 2025, speaking to the nation’s governors at the White House

“When we turned over the reins, the stock market was higher than just previous to COVID coming in, which was an amazing achievement.”

March 4, 2025, in a joint address to Congress

Having sparked a North American trade war and with the S&P 500 losing all of its post-election gains, Trump said in his speech to Congress: “Tariffs are about making America rich again and making America great again, and it’s happening and it will happen rather quickly. There’ll be a little disturbance, but we’re OK with that. It won’t be much.”

March 9, 2025, in a taped interview on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures”

After a week of wild swings on Wall Street over uncertainty about his tariffs, Trump was asked whether he was expecting a recession in 2025. He said: “I hate to predict things like that. There is a period of transition because what we’re doing is very big. We’re bringing wealth back to America. That’s a big thing.” He added, “It takes a little time. It takes a little time. But I think it should be great for us.”

Elsewhere in the interview, when Trump was asked about the market going down: “You can’t really watch the stock market. … You can’t go by that. You have to do what’s right.”

March 9, 2025, to reporters on Air Force One

When asked about his hesitation during the “Sunday Morning Futures” interview before answering the recession question, Trump said: “I tell you what, of course you hesitate. Who knows? All I know is this: We’re going to take in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs, and we’re going to become so rich you’re not going to know where to spend all that money. I’m telling you, you just watch.”

March 11, 2025, to reporters at the White House

Trump was asked about the market after a selloff Monday and more trembling on the markets Tuesday. “Markets are going to go up and they’re going to go down. We have to rebuild our country,” he said.

In response to a question about whether his tariffs caused the turmoil in the markets, Trump said: “Biden gave us a horrible economy. He gave us horrible inflation. And I think the market was going to go very, very bad. If anything, I have a lot of very smart people, friends of mine, and great businessmen. They’re not investing because of what I’ve done.”

On whether he thinks there will be a recession: “I don’t see it at all. I think this country’s going to boom. But as I said, I can do it the easy way or the hard way. The hard way to do it is exactly what I’m doing, but the results are going to be 20 times greater. Remember, Trump is always right.”

Michelle L. Price, The Associated Press



The Trump administration is halting a $1 billion program that helps preserve affordable housing, threatening projects that keep tens of thousands of units livable for low-income Americans, according to a document obtained by The Associated Press.

The action is part of a slew of cuts and funding freezes at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, largely at the direction of President Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, that have rattled the affordable-housing industry.

Preserving these units gets less attention than ribbon-cuttings, but it’s a centerpiece of efforts to address the nation’s housing crisis. Hundreds of thousands of low-rent apartments, many of them aging and in need of urgent repair, are at risk of being yanked out from under poor Americans.

The program has already awarded the money to projects that would upgrade at least 25,000 affordable units across the country, and details of how it will be wound down remain unclear.

A spokesperson for HUD did not respond to repeated requests for comment. But an internal document reviewed by the AP said that the program is being “terminated” at the direction of DOGE. Two HUD workers, who have knowledge of the program and spoke to the AP on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal, confirmed the directive to shutter it.

On it’s face, the over $1 billion Green and Resilient Retrofit Program, passed by Congress in 2022, is intended for energy-efficiency improvements. It is distributed in grants and loans to owners of affordable housing in need of updating, including replacing or repairing heating and cooling systems, leaky roofs, aging insulation or windows, or undertaking floodproofing.

But the money plays a much larger role in preserving affordable units.

Projects that use the funds are required to keep their buildings affordable for up to 25 years. The money is also leveraged to pull in other investments for major repairs and renovations needed to keep the buildings livable.

It’s like building a Jenga tower, where one of the program’s grants or loans — which range from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars — is a bottom block and each new block is another investment, experts said.

This money “was essential in order for the project to come together,” said Mike Essian, vice president at American Community Developers, Inc., which received funding for several affordable housing projects. “Projects will fail and these are projects that are already difficult to finance.”

The news has been a jolt to Al Hase and Joan Starr, tenants in an apartment building in Vancouver, Washington, full of other low-income seniors with few or no other options — most of whom live on less than $33,000 a year.

The 170-unit Smith Tower Apartments, built in the 1960s, is in need of updates, including it’s first building-wide sprinkler system. The $10 million award was a financial kickstart for its nearly $100 million project, and is cited in applications for other investments.

The potential loss “seriously jeopardizes our ability to be able to provide an upgrade to the current systems,” said Greg Franks, president of the property’s management company, adding that the work is “needed to sustain the livability of this building based on its age, and to keep it viable for another 60 years.”

“We are depending on that $10 million,” he said.

So, too, are Hase and Starr, a retired couple in their 70s who have lived there for 16 years.

They fill their balcony with geraniums and petunias, count the eagles at a nearby park and live off of meager Social Security incomes. They learned about the potential funding loss in a letter from the apartment’s management company.

“It’s kinda terrifying, it’s almost like getting news from a doctor that something’s going to take your life in six months or a year,” Hase told the AP in a phone call.

“We’re from an era where the wages weren’t there, so our Social Security …” he said, pausing. “Sucks,” pitched in Starr.

“If I’d been born a rich man,” he said. Starr added: “We’re just regular people.”

“And we’re the lucky ones because we’ve got two social securities coming in,” she said.

But being lucky ones still doesn’t count for much in today’s rental market. “Prices keep going up, I’ve looked, and there’s no way,” she said.

“It’s the difference between living and not being able to live,” he said.

HUD’s lack of communication about the program’s future sent organizations in search of contingency plans, though roughly two dozen projects will still get funding, one HUD employee told the AP. The rest are in limbo.

“If these funds aren’t reinstated, we will certainly seek other funding to fill that gap. The reality is that will take time and will inevitably make the project more expensive,” Travis Phillips of the Housing Development Center said of funding for Smith Tower.

It’s the position several hundred other affordable-housing projects now find themselves in across 42 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.

“In all honesty,” said Michelle Arevalos, Smith Tower’s administrator, “if this building were not here, a lot of our folks actually probably would be homeless.”

___

Bedayn is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

Jesse Bedayn, The Associated Press

















MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Candidates in a race that will determine ideological control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court will square off Wednesday in their only scheduled debate before the April 1 election.

The contest, which has caught the attention of presidential adviser Elon Musk, will be a litmus test early in President Donald Trump’s term in a key presidential swing state. Control of the court is on the line as it faces cases over abortion and reproductive rights, the strength of public sector unions, voting rules and congressional district boundaries.

The race pits Waukesha County Circuit Judge Brad Schimel, a former Republican attorney general, against Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford, who is backed by Democrats and is running in her first statewide race.

Here is a look at some of the key issues:

Abortion rights

Crawford is backed by Planned Parenthood and represented the group in a pair of abortion-related cases when she was an attorney in private practice. She supports abortion rights and has said the U.S. Supreme Court was wrong to overturn Roe v. Wade. Much of her campaign against Schimel has focused on his past opposition to abortion, including when he was attorney general.

Schimel, who is supported by anti-abortion groups, has said he believes that an 1849 state law banning abortions is still “valid” and that there is no right to an abortion under the state constitution. He was also criticized by Crawford and current justices on the court after he said the liberal majority was ” driven by their emotions ” on a pending abortion case.

Both candidates have repeatedly said their personal views on abortion would not affect how they would rule.

Union rights and the state’s voter ID law

As an attorney, Crawford sued in an attempt to overturn the state’s law that effectively ended collective bargaining for public workers. That law, known as Act 10, was the centerpiece of former Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s tenure and made Wisconsin the center of the national debate over union rights.

A Dane County judge last year ruled that the bulk of the law was unconstitutional, and an appeal of that ruling is expected to come before the state Supreme Court.

When Schimel was attorney general, he said he would defend Act 10 and opposed having its restrictions also applied to police and firefighter unions, which were exempt from the law.

Crawford also sued to overturn the state’s voter ID law, but lost. A measure on the April 1 ballot would enshrine that law in the state constitution — an attempt by Republicans to make it more difficult to undo.

Testing of sexual assault evidence

Whether Schimel did enough as attorney general to clear the state’s backlog of untested sexual assault evidence has been a central attack from Crawford and her allies.

Schimel took more than two years to test about 4,000 kits sitting unanalyzed on police department and hospital shelves. He has said that the state Justice Department needed time to inventory the kits and struggled to find private labs to test them because labs were overwhelmed with untested kits from other states.

In 2014, the state Justice Department learned of about 6,800 sexual assault evidence kits that had not been tested. Wisconsin cleared its backlog of untested kits in 2019, the year after Schimel left office.

Both candidates say the other is weak on crime

Many of the television ads in the race have focused on specific cases Crawford and Schimel have handled as judges, with both sides claiming the other is weak on crime.

Schimel previously worked as the Waukesha County district attorney and has racked up endorsements from law enforcement officials, including a majority of the state’s county sheriffs, the Wisconsin Fraternal Order of Police and the Milwaukee Police Association.

Crawford worked as a prosecutor for the attorney general’s office under a Democrat and has the backing of the sheriffs of Milwaukee and Dane counties, as well as dozens of judges from around the state.

Control of the court attracts big donations

The winner will determine whether the court remains under majority control of liberal justices as it has since 2023, or whether it will flip back to conservative control as it had been for 15 years prior to that.

The race has become nationalized thanks to groups funded by Musk that have spent more than $8 million in support of Schimel. Crawford also has benefitted from donations from prominent national Democrats such as philanthropist George Soros and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, but they haven’t kept pace with Musk’s spending.

Donald Trump Jr. and political activist Charlie Kirk plan to co-host a town hall on Monday in Wisconsin that’s being billed as a get-out-the vote effort for Schimel.

Scott Bauer, The Associated Press


DENVER (AP) — A woman who was part of a group charged with setting a cross on fire in front of a defaced campaign sign for a candidate who became Colorado Springs’ first Black mayor pleaded guilty on Tuesday in what authorities say was a hoax.

Deanna West, one of three people indicted in the 2023 incident, pleaded guilty in Denver federal court to one count of being part of a conspiracy to set the fire and then spread false information about it in the run-up to the election of Mayor Yemi Mobolade.

In exchange, prosecutors said they would drop an additional charge related to setting the fire.

Prosecutors say that after staging the cross burning, a photo and video of it were sent to media and civic organizations making it seem like an attack on Mobolade.

Prosecutors didn’t explain why West and the two others charged, Derrick Bernard and Ashley Blackcloud, staged the hoax.

But lawyers for Bernard and Blackcloud said in court filings that the government’s evidence shows they were trying to help Mobolade win by generating outrage. They argued that the actions were a kind of political theater, which they say is free speech protected by the First Amendment.

Both are asking for charges against their clients to be dropped because they say no one was threatened by the cross set on fire in the middle of the night, which no one other than the defendants apparently saw.

According to the indictment, Bernard communicated with Mobolade before the cross-burning on April 23, 2023, and after Mobolade won election in a May 6, 2023, runoff election.

About a week before the cross-burning, Bernard told the then-candidate in a Facebook message that he was, “mobilizing my squadron in defense and for the final push. Black ops style big brother. The klan cannot be allowed to run this city again.”

They spoke for about five minutes on the telephone three days after the incident.

Mobolade has denied having any knowledge, warning or involvement in the crime.

A city spokesperson, Vanessa Zink, on Tuesday referred a reporter to a video statement that Mobalde posted on social media in December, shortly after the three were indicted. In it, the mayor said he knew Bernard as a “local media personality.”

Mobalde also showed a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice saying he had been identified as a victim or potential victim during the investigation into the cross burning. He said he willingly provided all communications sought by investigators.

Colleen Slevin, The Associated Press


WINNIPEG — The Manitoba government has put forward a bill aimed at cracking down on election disinformation.

If passed into law, the bill would expand existing prohibitions on disseminating false information about candidates and impersonating election officials.

It would also ban intentionally misleading information, in the time leading up to an election, about voter eligibility, the conduct of elections officials and the people who provide ballots and vote-counting machines.

There is also a provision banning so-called “deep fakes” — altered electronic images — aimed at affecting election results.

Justice Minister Matt Wiebe says the bill is based on a report last year by the head of Elections Manitoba and is aimed at keeping up with new technologies.

The bill would also expand the number of days for advance polls and, on election day, allow voters to cast their ballot at any returning office in the province.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 11, 2025

Steve Lambert, The Canadian Press


OTTAWA — Liberal Leader Mark Carney is hoping to be sworn in as Canada’s 24th prime minister by the end of the week but there are some logistical hurdles like security clearances for senior members of his transition team that must happen first.

Carney won a landslide victory to take the helm of the Liberals from Justin Trudeau on Sunday night but he isn’t yet the prime minister.

He is already taking some meetings to prepare for that eventuality — meeting the Liberal caucus Monday and sitting down with Canada’s U.S. ambassador Kirsten Hillman and Chief of Defence Staff Jennie Carignan today.

But his swearing in ceremony at Rideau Hall has not yet been scheduled and Carney says he won’t take part in any formal discussions with U.S. President Donald Trump over tariffs until after that ceremony takes place.

Carney’s spokespeople will only say that they hope that happens before the end of the week.

A senior aide in Trudeau’s office says there are some operational requirements of the transition that are still just getting started.

The source, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the internal government operations, told The Canadian Press Tuesday that Marco Mendicino, the Toronto MP and former cabinet minister tapped by Carney to be his transition team chief of staff, met for an hour Tuesday afternoon with existing staff in Trudeau’s office.

It was the first discussion between Carney’s team and Trudeau’s office staff since Sunday’s leadership convention.

There are more than 100 people employed at the PMO, from senior political advisers to people in charge of appointments, travel and issues management.

Tuesday’s meeting included Cyndi Jenkins, who was a chief of staff to Health Minister Mark Holland and is now assisting Mendicino in the transition.

The source said while Trudeau and Carney are from the same party, the two teams are treating the changeover as a whole new administration. That means for at least a month Trudeau’s staff have been packing their offices, removing personal effects like photographs and archiving emails and documents as required.

Now they are in a wait-and-see mode, as it is expected that Carney’s incoming leadership will keep many of the existing staff in place at least through the caretaker mode of an election campaign since it would be difficult to replace them that quickly.

Obtaining proper security clearances for the new people Carney is bringing in will take some time, as those clearances can often take up to two weeks or longer.

Carney is widely expected to call an election before Parliament resumes on March 24 and cannot do that until he has been sworn in.

Carney is not officially joining tariff discussions but did weigh in on social media Tuesday, blasting Trump after the U.S. president moved to double the tariffs on steel and aluminum set to take effect Wednesday. Carney called the move to increase them to 50 per cent — which Trump later reversed back to 25 per cent — “an attack on Canadian workers, families and businesses.”

“My government will ensure our response has maximum impact in the US and minimal impact here in Canada, while supporting the workers impacted,” he said. “My government will keep our tariffs on until the Americans show us respect and make credible, reliable commitments to free and fair trade.”

During the daily White House press briefing Tuesday, Trump’s press secretary Karoline Leavittt said that Trump has not spoken to Carney yet, but “his phone is always open” to world leaders who wish to speak with the president.

Carney also met with Kevin Brosseau, the former Mountie tapped by Trudeau to be Canada’s “fentanyl czar” overseeing efforts to end the smuggling of fentanyl across into the United States. Trump has repeatedly cited fentanyl and migrants as the reasons for tariffs against Canada, despite overwhelming evidence of the very low numbers of each crossing the northern border into the U.S. illegally.

Following his meeting with Carignan, Carney said his government will meet the two per cent NATO spending target by 2030, modernize Norad and strengthen Canada’s presence in the Arctic.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 11, 2025.

The Canadian Press