Aurelia Butler

More stories

  • 138 Shares199 Views

    in Elections

    Medically Assisted Dying Closer to Legalization After Vote by UK Lawmakers

    British lawmakers on Friday confirmed their support for assisted suicide for some terminally ill people, after months of scrutiny that followed an initial vote last year.British lawmakers on Friday approved plans to introduce medically assisted dying for terminally ill patients in England and Wales, advancing what would be one of the biggest social changes seen in Britain in decades.After a debate that was at times emotive and fraught but remained respectful in tone, legislators supported the proposal by a vote of 314 to 291.The vote on Friday was the second time lawmakers have approved the idea of medically assisted dying, after an initial vote in November of last year that was followed by months of scrutiny and debate in parliamentary committees. The issue has provoked deep division in and beyond the British Parliament.The bill passed by just 23 votes on Friday, significantly lower than last year, when the majority was 55. That may reflect concerns recently expressed by some medical professionals and organizations about the practicality of the legislation.The bill now goes to the unelected second chamber of the Parliament, the House of Lords. While the Lords can amend legislation, the fact that the bill has the support of elected lawmakers means that it is very likely to become law.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    After a Fire, Rebuilding the National Museum of Brazil

    Years after a devastating fire, Brazil is slowly rebuilding an institution dedicated to the country’s cultural heritage.This personal reflection is part of a series called The Big Ideas, in which writers respond to a single question: What is history? You can read more by visiting The Big Ideas series page.Steel beams hanging in the air,twisted by the intense heat.Shattered glass scattered across the floor,melted by the flames.Iron intertwined in all directions,exposed by collapses.Walls blackened by soot,resulting from the burning of a country’s memory …I wrote these lines shortly after Sept. 2, 2018. It is a day I will never forget.That day, the National Museum of Brazil in Rio de Janeiro was devastated by an intense fire. For those of us who work in Brazil’s cultural sector, the fire was the realization of our worst nightmare. The tragedy did not come without warning. The risks the museum faced were well-known. The lack of proper maintenance was obvious throughout the building. Along with my fellow museum officials, I frequently pushed government officials for more resources, but these efforts were not successful.If I had to choose one building in Brazil that should be protected and preserved, it would be the museum, and not just because of its collections. The site is connected to many notable moments in Brazil’s history. Since 1892, the museum has been housed in the former royal palace. The building was home to the Portuguese royal family after they fled to Rio de Janeiro to escape Napoleon. After Brazil’s independence, it was the residence of Brazil’s emperor.The museum, which was founded on June 6, 1818, by King John VI of Portugal, is Brazil’s first scientific institution. Before the fire, the museum contained over 20 million items, including unpublished documents from Empress Maria Leopoldina, ethnographic objects from Indigenous Brazilians, significant specimens of the country’s biodiversity, fossils and rare minerals. The blaze destroyed about 85 percent of the museum’s collection.The interior of the National Museum of Brazil following the fire in 2018. Many in Brazil blamed the fire on funding cuts and a lack of proper building maintenance.Diogo VasconcellosIn the aftermath, one of the hardest moments for me was paradoxically also one of the most inspiring. The day after the fire, while smoke was still everywhere, a large group of people, including some high school students, approached the remains of the museum. For security reasons, the police did not let them get close to the building. After some tense negotiations, the group was allowed to do what they came for: The members formed a human chain and embraced the remains of an institution that — in reality — belongs to them, the public. When I remember this scene, it is hard to hold back my tears. We, the guardians of their cultural heritage and history, failed them.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Elections

    Large Oil Producers Around the Persian Gulf Ramp Up Exports

    Saudi Arabia and other oil states are rushing to load tankers in case the Israel-Iran fighting spreads to export installations.As fighting between Israel and Iran intensifies, the major oil producers around the Persian Gulf, including Saudi Arabia, have been racing to load tankers with exports, possibly as a hedge against future disruption.These increases are occurring despite jumps in insurance costs and shipping rates and hazards like jamming of navigation systems.Analysts say that these producers are preparing for the possibility that fighting could spread to oil export installations, which have been largely spared so far, or that shipping could be disrupted through the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow passageway from the Persian Gulf through which a large portion of both oil and liquefied natural gas travel.“They want to make sure that they reduce the risks,” said Homayoun Falakshahi, head of crude oil analysis at Kpler, a research firm. “That means export as much as possible, as soon as possible.”Kpler estimated that Saudi Arabia’s oil exports had increased 16 percent through mid-June from the same period in May.Other producers in the region like the United Arab Emirates and Iraq have boosted shipments around 10 percent, Mr. Falakshahi said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 175 Shares109 Views

    in Elections

    Summer Reading Contest, Week 3: What Got Your Attention in The Times This Week?

    To participate, submit your response here by June 27 at 9 a.m. Eastern. This week’s winners will be announced by July 8.Welcome to the third week of our 16th Annual Summer Reading Contest.Every week for 10 weeks this summer we’re asking students “What got your attention in The New York Times this week? Why?” To participate in Week 3, choose something to read, watch or listen to in The Times and submit a response that answers those questions by 9 a.m. Eastern on June 27.You can choose anything that was published in the print paper or on nytimes.com in 2025, including articles, photos, essays, videos, podcasts or graphics. We hope you’ll click around to find your own great pieces, but we also know that not everyone who participates has a Times subscription so, each week, you’ll find dozens of free links to interesting articles, features and multimedia below.Students are invited to submit responses in the form of a 1,500-character (about 250 words) comment OR a 90-second video. Please see the requirements for each type of response below and read the full rules and guidelines in our contest announcement before making your submissions.Your responses will be read by New York Times journalists and staff, as well as educators from around the world. We’ll choose at least one favorite answer to feature on our site each week. Winners from Week 3 will be announced by July 8.Here’s how to participate:1. Choose a New York Times piece.2. Whatever caught your eye, tell us about it in writing or video.3. Submit your response here by June 27 at 9 a.m. Eastern.1. Choose a New York Times piece.What did you read, watch or listen to in The Times this week? You can respond to anything that was published online at nytimes.com, including in The Athletic, or in the print paper in 2025, but, if you don’t have a subscription, here are some stories you can access through this page for free:This week you may have read front-page news articles, like:After an Israeli airstrike in Tehran on Wednesday. The conflict began on Friday, when Israel launched a surprise attack on dozens of targets inside Iran.Arash Khamooshi for The New York TimesSummer Reading Contest Written Submission Form, Week 3 More

  • 138 Shares149 Views

    in Elections

    A Way for People With Low Credit Scores to Raise Them

    A new study finds that tenants who pay their rent on time can see “significant increases” if the payments are reported to credit bureaus.People who pay their rent on time can establish credit scores or significantly raise low scores if the payments are reported to credit bureaus, new research found.A study published this month by the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C., looked at two groups of tenants recruited in 2021 and 2022. The members of one group began having their rent payments reported to credit bureaus immediately after signing up to participate in a program offered by their properties. The members of the other group had their rent reporting delayed by four months.The study found that rent reporting leads to “large, statistically significant increases” in the likelihood of having a score and of having at least a “near prime” score — a minimum of 601 on a scale of 300 to 850.The research was the first rigorous, randomized study of “positive” rent reporting, said Brett Theodos, a senior fellow at the institute and an author of the study, which enrolled 269 participants in affordable housing programs in five states and Washington. In positive rent reporting, only payments made on time are supplied to credit bureaus.The study used VantageScore, a competitor to the widely used FICO score. VantageScore, which uses a scale similar to FICO’s but assigns different weights to certain factors, was founded by the three big credit bureaus: TransUnion, Equifax and Experian.Still, some consumer advocates remain wary of rent reporting, saying it may pose risks to vulnerable renters.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares149 Views

    in Elections

    You Only Get Married a Few Times. Why Not Go All Out?

    As the Jeff Bezos-Lauren Sánchez nuptials approach, a look at how second weddings went from low-key to lavish. They were one of the world’s most famous couples, their future sealed when he renounced his throne for her and she renounced her husband for him. But so much disapproval surrounded the audacious affair between King Edward VIII of England and the American socialite Wallis Simpson that their eventual marriage, before a handful of guests in France in 1937, felt more like a perp walk than a wedding.“It was a sad little service,” Lady Alexandra Metcalfe, a wedding guest known as “Baba Blackshirt” because of her reputed Nazi sympathies, wrote in her journal. “It could be nothing but pitiable and tragic to see a King of England of only six months ago, an idolized King, married under these circumstances.”It seems quaint to remember the days when second weddings were typically quiet and modest affairs, especially after a bit of adultery. Perhaps there was a sense that everyone was allowed just one public spectacle-style wedding in a lifetime. Maybe it was considered indecorous to declare “til death do us part” once again, when death had clearly not parted you the first time you said it.That’s why former monarchs fled to France and commoners had small, tasteful celebrations, perhaps at City Hall, the brides wearing outfits like “a gray suit and a pillbox hat,” as the high-end event planner Bryan Rafanelli described it in an interview.In contrast, let us consider the 2025 version of a royal wedding: the forthcoming marriage in Venice between Jeff Bezos, the billionaire king of Amazon, and the ex-TV host and helicopter pilot Lauren Sánchez. Having entered public consciousness when their racy texts were leaked to the tabloids during their previous marriages, their relationship — buoyed and insulated by Mr. Bezos’ estimated $228 billion fortune — has always had the feel of an extended P.D.A. victory lap.Depending on what you read, the wedding will cost $15 million, or $20 million. Or maybe it will be scaled back to under $10 million because of the couple’s supposed decision to be “less ‘Marie Antoinette’” after the Blue Origin spaceflight this spring featuring Ms. Sánchez and a group of her famous female friends. The 11-minute mission suffered from a bit of a P.R. problem when the women donned sexy space outfits, discussed their extraterrestrial makeup routines and, in the case of Katy Perry, declared the intention to “put the ‘ass’ in astronaut.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares169 Views

    in Elections

    The Markets Are Balancing on a Knife’s Edge

    The world has been anything but peaceful, but you wouldn’t know that from looking at the markets.The calm in the markets has been unnerving.You might think the world has been enjoying a season so tranquil that the stock, bond and currency markets have fallen asleep.Yet the world has been anything but peaceful lately, whether in the United States, Ukraine or the Persian Gulf. And the Federal Reserve gave the markets another reason for concern on Wednesday when it held interest rates steady. Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, said that the economy faced the risks of both higher inflation and stagnating economic growth, but that the central bank needed more evidence before it could decide where the greatest dangers lay.“Right now, it’s a forecast in a foggy time,” he said. Even more than usual, the path ahead isn’t clear. Still, there was barely any reaction in market prices. Nor has anything else seriously disrupted major markets.That’s noteworthy, when you consider the crises that are looming: the highest tariffs in decades; a contentious crackdown on immigration and a swelling budget deficit in the United States; and, in the Middle East, an escalating war between Israel and Iran that could sharply reduce global oil supplies.This isn’t to say all markets have been entirely placid. The price of oil has oscillated since Israel launched a barrage of air attacks on Iran last Friday, setting off a new, heightened stage of conflict between the two longtime adversaries. President Trump has warned Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that the United States might intervene directly, saying, “Our patience is wearing thin.” The start of a much bigger war, with the United States joining the Israeli effort to eliminate Iran as a potential nuclear threat, would undoubtedly wake the markets from their apparent slumber.High StakesThe economic risks in the Persian Gulf are enormous. If Iran were desperate enough, in addition to targeting U.S. forces in the region it could throttle the oil supplies that pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Shipping through the strait encompasses one quarter of “total global seaborne oil trade,” according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and protecting that oil route has been a preoccupation of U.S. military planners since the days of the shah of Iran, who was deposed in 1979.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares199 Views

    in Elections

    Appeals Court Lets Trump Keep Control of California National Guard in L.A.

    A panel rejected a lower-court’s finding that it was likely illegal for President Trump to use state troops to protect immigration agents from protests.A federal appeals court on Thursday cleared the way for President Trump to keep using the National Guard to respond to immigration protests in Los Angeles, declaring that a judge in San Francisco erred last week when he ordered Mr. Trump to return control of the troops to Gov. Gavin Newsom of California.In a unanimous, 38-page ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the conditions in Los Angeles were sufficient for Mr. Trump to decide that he needed to take federal control of California’s National Guard and deploy it to ensure that federal immigration laws would be enforced.The panel — made up of two appointees of Mr. Trump and one of former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. — rejected a lower-court judge’s conclusion that the protests were so unruly that they could trigger a rarely-used law that Mr. Trump invoked when he claimed the power to federalize the National Guard over Mr. Newsom’s objections.“Affording appropriate deference to the President’s determination, we conclude that he likely acted within his authority in federalizing the National Guard,” the court wrote, in an unsigned opinion on behalf of the entire panel.The ruling was not a surprise. During a 65-minute hearing on Tuesday, the panel’s questions and statements had telegraphed that all three judges — Mark J. Bennett, Eric D. Miller and Jennifer Sung — were inclined to let Mr. Trump keep controlling the Guard for now, while litigation continues to play out over California’s challenge to his move.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More