Subterms
The House voted 217 to 215 to approve a budget resolution, a key step toward passing much of President Trump’s legislative agenda. All but one Republican voted “yes.” Tuesday’s vote Total 217 0 217 215 214 1 Did not vote 1 1 0 The resolution, which will also need to pass the Senate to move […] More
The attacks in southern Syria are part of a new policy aimed at protecting what Israel calls its “security zone” in the region. Syria’s new government has condemned that policy.The Israeli military said it had struck sites in southern Syria on Tuesday, just hours after the new Syrian leadership demanded that Israel withdraw from territory it has seized since the fall of the Assad regime.The attacks were aimed at “military targets in southern Syria, including headquarters and sites containing weapons,” the Israeli military said in a statement. It added, “The presence of military assets and forces in the southern part of Syria constitutes a threat” to Israeli citizens.Israel Katz, the Israeli defense minister, said in a statement late on Tuesday that the attacks were part of a “new policy” of ensuring a “demilitarized southern Syria.” He added that “any attempt” by either Syrian forces or militant groups to establish a presence in what Israel has deemed its “security zone” in the region “will be met with fire.”That policy was announced by Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, on Sunday in a speech demanding “the complete demilitarization” of southern Syria. The speech and Israel’s actions drew the condemnation of Syria’s new government on Tuesday.The country’s interim president, Ahmed al-Shara, presided over a national unity conference on Tuesday that was intended to build consensus around the nation’s political and economic future. It concluded with a statement decrying Israeli incursions in Syria and rejecting “the provocative statements of the Israeli prime minister.”Syria’s new government said Israel was violating Syria’s sovereignty and a longstanding agreement, and called on the international community to pressure Israel “to stop the aggression.”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
The case of Mr. Syed, who has spent decades in prison for the murder of his high school girlfriend, was chronicled in the hit podcast “Serial.”The Baltimore City state’s attorney announced on Tuesday that his office would withdraw a motion to vacate the conviction against Adnan Syed, who has spent decades in prison while fighting charges that he had killed his high school girlfriend, Hae Min Lee.Mr. Syed’s case was chronicled in the hit podcast “Serial,” which presented new evidence and led to a swell of interest in the case. The previous Baltimore prosecutor had asked a judge to overturn the conviction in 2022, citing issues with initial evidence and other possible suspects.Though the charges against Mr. Syed were dropped that year, his conviction was later reinstated and Maryland’s highest court ordered a redo of the hearing that freed him.In a statement, the Baltimore City state’s attorney, Ivan J. Bates, said that his office had determined that the motion to vacate the conviction by his predecessor contained “falsehoods and misleading statements.”“I did not make this decision lightly, but it is necessary to preserve the credibility of our office and maintain public trust in the justice system,” Mr. Bates said.The release of “Serial” in 2014 raised doubts about the facts around the case. The podcast was downloaded more than 100 million times in its first year and brought national public attention to Mr. Syed’s case. (In 2020, The New York Times Company bought Serial Productions, the company behind the podcast.)This is a developing story. More
Investigators believe the smoke was caused by a moving train striking an object on the tracks, officials said.Sixteen people were hospitalized on Tuesday after a subway train hit an object on the tracks at an Upper Manhattan station, causing a fire that filled the station with smoke, according to fire and transit officials.A total of 18 people sustained what fire officials described as minor injuries. Two declined medical attention, officials said. The conditions of those who were hospitalized were not immediately clear Tuesday night.The episode occurred shortly before 1 p.m. at the 191st Street station at St. Nicholas Avenue in the Fort George neighborhood, officials said. The fire was brought under control within an hour, they said.Service was temporarily suspended on the No. 1 line between 145th and Dyckman Streets as a result of the fire, according to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.By Tuesday evening, workers had replaced a rail damaged by the fire, and trains were running in both directions with delays, officials said.The 191st Street station is 173 feet, or roughly 17 stories, below St. Nicholas Avenue, making it the deepest station in New York City’s subway system. Riders enter and exit via either elevators to St. Nicholas or a 1,000-foot-long tunnel that runs to Broadway. More
More than 700 National Park Service employees have submitted resignations as part of Elon Musk’s “fork in the road” offer, according to an internal agency memo that critics of the plan said would diminish staffing ahead of the busy summer tourism season.The news of the resignations comes after a decision earlier this month at the Department of Interior to fire more than 1,000 full-time national park employees. According to the new memo sent on Tuesday and viewed by The New York Times, the additional 700 workers who agreed to the resignation plan would not be permitted to work after March 7.The staffing cuts have sparked a public outcry. Conservationists, outdoor enthusiasts and park rangers have warned that the reductions threaten to leave hundreds of national parks understaffed during the busy summer season, and already are causing some parks to reduce hours, cancel tours and close visitor centers.The national park job losses are part of a chaotic effort by President Trump to delete thousands of federal jobs. Adding to the confusion, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has said the park service also plans to rehire thousands of workers — albeit as temporary, summer positions.“The National Park Service is hiring seasonal workers to continue enhancing the visitor experience as we embrace new opportunities for optimization and innovation in work force management,” Elizabeth Peace, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, said in a statement.“We are focused on ensuring that every visitor has the chance to explore and connect with the incredible, iconic spaces of our national parks,” she said.Kristen Brengel, the senior vice president of government affairs at the National Parks Conservation Association, a nonprofit group, has said the temporary positions are not a substitute for the employees with years of full-time experience now lost to the park system.She also noted that about 2,000 prospective seasonal employees had their job offers rescinded when Mr. Trump, during his first days in office, imposed a hiring freeze across the government. That freeze compromised the ability to accelerate the process of rehiring those people.During the warm-weather months, as many as 325 million people visit the nation’s 63 national parks and hundreds of historic sites and other attractions managed by the park service.Federal workers received the Trump administration’s resignation offer in an email last month entitled “A Fork in the Road.” Under the offer, employees who accepted it would leave their jobs, but continue getting paid through September — and those who did not accept it risked being fired. According to the Office of Personnel Management, about 75,000 workers across the government have accepted the offer. More
The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said on Tuesday that the Trump administration would start handpicking which media outlets were allowed to participate in the presidential pool, the small, rotating group of journalists who relay the president’s day-to-day activities to the public.The change announced by Ms. Leavitt breaks decades of precedent. The White House Correspondents’ Association, a group representing journalists who cover the administration, has long determined on its own which reporters would participate in the daily pool.Because presidents often hold events in smaller settings like the Oval Office, where not every reporter who covers the president can fit, the pool format has long been used to ensure that journalists accurately record a president’s comments. The reporters who witness the events distribute a series of “pool reports” to a wider group of journalists, including hundreds of news outlets that cover his daily activities and remarks.The pool is most often made up of journalists from organizations like CNN, Reuters, The Associated Press, ABC News, Fox News and The New York Times.Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, speaking to reporters in the briefing room this month.Eric Lee/The New York TimesMs. Leavitt said that the new policy was intended to allow “new media” outlets — such as digital sites, streaming services and podcasts — “to share in this awesome responsibility.”The White House Correspondents’ Association rebuked the move in a blistering statement.“This move tears at the independence of a free press in the United States,” Eugene Daniels, the president of the association, wrote. “It suggests the government will choose the journalists who cover the president. In a free country, leaders must not be able to choose their own press corps.”The association said that it had been given no warning of Ms. Leavitt’s announcement and that there had been no prior discussions about it with the White House. “The W.H.C.A. will never stop advocating for comprehensive access, full transparency and the right of the American public to read, listen to and watch reports from the White House, delivered without fear or favor,” Mr. Daniels wrote.The Trump administration recently added a “new media” seat in the White House briefing room. The seat has been occupied by some journalists who strive for accuracy and fairness, such as reporters at Axios and Semafor, and by partisan figures who are sympathetic to the Trump administration, such as the podcast host Sage Steele.“Legacy media outlets who been here for years will still participate in the pool, but new voices are going to be welcomed in as well,” Ms. Leavitt said at Tuesday’s press briefing.Ms. Leavitt did not provide specific details of how the plan might work, but it would allow President Trump and his aides to handpick which reporters and media personalities were granted the ability to ask him questions and observe his behavior at specific events.Ms. Leavitt put a different spin on it. “By deciding which outlets make up the limited press pool on a day-to-day basis, the White House will be restoring power back to the American people,” she said. More
In a new executive order, President Trump will reaffirm his commitment to one of his favorite health care policies of his first term: His push to make the prices paid for medical services more public and transparent.Mr. Trump will sign the order on Tuesday afternoon, according to a White House official. After years of halfhearted compliance from hospitals and insurance companies with the previous policies, Mr. Trump is signaling a more aggressive approach to enforcing the rules and making pricing data accessible to patients, the official said.Health care prices have historically been shrouded in secrecy, negotiated in private between doctors, hospitals, drug companies and the insurance companies that pay their bills. The parties in those negotiations have fought hard to keep those numbers out of public view, saying that confidentiality is key to their bargaining process. Economics literature — which relied heavily on a study of Danish concrete prices in the 1990s — has suggested that making them public could actually backfire, by increasing health care prices.But with two major rules issued jointly by the departments of Health and Human Services, Treasury and Labor during his first term, Mr. Trump tried to force the industry to become more transparent. One rule required hospitals to publish the prices they charged to various insurers for a set of common services. Another required insurance companies to publish a more comprehensive listing of the prices they had negotiated with various health care providers.Industry compliance has been grudging, slow and marked by extensive litigation. After the rules became final in 2021, many hospitals simply declined to publish the required lists. Others tried to make their price information hard to find. The Wall Street Journal reported that several had inserted code into their web pages listing prices that made the pages impossible to find using an internet search engine.Nevertheless, the requirement did provide new information to researchers, employers and some patients about the nature of health care prices — and their wide and often inexplicable variation. The policy has so far not delivered on one of Mr. Trump’s key promises from his last term, that price transparency would significantly drive down health care costs. Health care prices have continued to rise.The new executive order will task H.H.S., Treasury and Labor with considering new ways to expand the reach of current initiatives, but it does not call for much in the way of specific new policy. Any meaningful new transparency initiative would require regulatory action or legislation, or both. But the signing of the new order does suggest that Mr. Trump has not forgotten about this priority, which he often referred to in his first term as “bigger than health care itself.” More
More from our inbox:Advice for Democrats: ‘Go Home and Listen’Lab Discoveries LostBuy Back Pennies and NickelsRe-evaluating Movies Andrew Kravchenko/Associated PressTo the Editor:Re “At Home and Abroad, Mourning Lives Lost Over Three Long Years” (news article, Feb. 25):Feb. 24 marked the third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I am inspired by, and my heart breaks for, the brave and noble Ukrainians. I wish my president were more like President Volodymyr Zelensky.Alison FordOssining, N.Y.To the Editor:Re “Dueling U.N. Resolutions on Ukraine Highlight Fissures Between the U.S. and Europe” (news article, Feb. 25):If the United States’ joining Russia to vote against a United Nations resolution to condemn Russia’s war against Ukraine isn’t giving aid and comfort to our enemy, I don’t know what is. Shame on us all.Eileen MitchellLewes, Del.To the Editor:Republicans, historically the party for a strong U.S. foreign policy and an understanding of who our democratic allies are, now remain silent.As President Trump embraces Vladimir Putin, widely suspected of being a killer of political rivals and journalists, and calls President Volodymyr Zelensky a dictator, our Republican senators and representatives should understand that their silence is more than acquiescence.It should be construed as supporting our current path. So when things go wrong, as they inevitably do when you cut deals with bad actors, don’t you dare pretend you were not a part of this abhorrent change in direction in U.S. policy.Steve ReichShort Hills, N.J.To the Editor:Re “Ukraine Nears a Deal to Give U.S. a Share of Its Mineral Wealth” (news article, nytimes.com, Feb. 24):I want to register my objection to the United States’ “mineral rights” demand to Ukraine. Further, any treaty granting our nation such rights must be approved by Congress, which I hope will show a shred of dignity and ensure that it at least gives Ukraine protection and sovereignty in return.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
