More stories

  • in

    ‘S.N.L.’: Toasting Moms and Toasted Trump Appointees

    Cecily Strong returns as Jeanine Pirro, Walt Goggins shows off his clogging, and a dope new pope appears in the 50th season’s penultimate episode.If you’re going to celebrate the election of a new pope, you might as well have some sacramental wine, too.Cecily Strong returned to “Saturday Night Live” in a guest appearance to reprise her role as the Fox News personality Jeanine Pirro — and to douse Colin Jost, her former Weekend Update desk mate, in alcohol. Alcohol that emanated directly from her own mouth.How the opening sketch of this weekend’s “S.N.L.” broadcast (which was hosted by Walton Goggins and featured the musical guest Arcade Fire) arrived at this place will take a moment to explain.The sketch began with what looked like a traditional Mother’s Day tribute, with the cast members Kenan Thompson, Bowen Yang and Marcello Hernández singing an affectionate serenade to their real-life moms, who joined them onstage.But no: This was just a setup for James Austin Johnson to enter the scene as President Trump, holding forth in free-association style on the past week’s news.“There’s a new pope from Chicago,” Johnson said, noting the Roman Catholic Church’s selection of Robert Francis Prevost, who took the name Pope Leo XIV.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

  • in

    This Mother’s Day, lets talk about why birth rates are really declining | Katrina vanden Heuvel

    Mother’s Day is here, and while Donald Trump may seem an unlikely celebrant of the occasion, his administration has recently floated several proposals to incentivize motherhood – or, more accurately, giving birth. There’s the $5,000 “baby bonus” for every American mother, free classes educating women on their menstrual cycles and a National Medal of Motherhood for moms who have at least six children. (Want to guess which regime also awarded such a medal?)As usual, the president has offered ridiculous solutions to a very real problem. He’s certainly right that every American should be able to afford to raise children, and that programs like social security depend on stable demographics. But of course, every other action he has taken to undermine gender equality would suggest that this sudden interest in the wellbeing of mothers is less than sincere. That’s exactly why progressives have an opening to break up what the Republican party believes to be its ideological monopoly on pro-family policies.The roots of the fertility crisis engage the bread-and-butter issues that have long been the domain of Democrats. US birthrates have hit a record low not because the nation has become “almost pathologically anti-child”, as JD Vance asserted to the New York Times. Instead, surveys have shown that would-be parents want to own a home, repay student debt and have money for childcare before starting a family. Yet the average age of a homebuyer has climbed to 56, almost double what it was 40 years ago. And 43% of young people currently carry student debt, compared with 28% in 1993. The problem isn’t lack of interest – it’s too much interest being paid on record high loans.But most of the Trump administration’s floated fixes are unoriginal swipes from the undemocratic leaders they admire. In 2017, Vladimir Putin declared a “Decade of Childhood in Russia”, an innocent name for a program that calls for everything from defending so-called family values to encouraging conjugal trysts during workplace coffee breaks to censoring “childfree propaganda”. Meanwhile, Viktor Orbán has dedicated 5% of Hungary’s GDP to pronatalist policies, which include nationalized IVF services and lifetime tax exemptions for mothers with three children. These men are carrying on an authoritarian tradition begun by the original strongman, Benito Mussolini, whose “Battle for Births” portended literal battles that decreased Europe’s population by 20 million people.That’s why those who really care about real solutions would be wise to start offering their own plans, and, in fact, some already have. What the Trump administration didn’t plagiarize from autocrats, they took from progressives, which is why “baby bonuses” sounds an awful lot like the “baby bonds” proposed in 2021 by Senators Tammy Baldwin and Cory Booker and Representative Ayanna Pressley. The legislation would put $1,000 in a savings account at birth for every American child. The Biden-era American Rescue Plan also almost doubled the child tax credit, which nearly halved the child poverty rate. Though making that expansion permanent received bipartisan support, it was ultimately killed by the centrist triangulating of Joe Manchin.Four years later, Democrats have the chance to embrace a genuinely progressive agenda that doubles as a pro-family platform. Bernie Sanders has long called for cancelling all student debt, Elizabeth Warren has campaigned for universal childcare, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was among the first politicians on Capitol Hill to offer three months of paid parental leave to her entire staff. The Congressional Progressive caucus has also called for a whole raft of policies that would lower the cost of living, from expanding Medicaid to investing $250bn in affordable housing. They understand that real relief will come not from handing out medals but from having the mettle to fight for working families.Still, even if Democrats manage a progressive populist revival not seen since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, it probably wouldn’t be enough to lift birthrates. In social democracies like Finland and Sweden – which offer 13 months of paid parental leave and cover 90% of preschool costs, respectively – fertility remains below replacement levels.Does that indicate the problem may be more fundamental? One sociologist, Dr Karen Benjamin Guzzo, has attributed this dilemma to apprehension: “People really need to feel confident about the future.” But whether it’s 60% of young people feeling very worried about the climate crisis, or 80% of new mothers feeling lonely, or 90% of voters feeling that American politics is broken, the state of the world doesn’t seem too conducive to domestic bliss. The right’s response to this anxiety is embodied by Elon Musk, who keeps siring children with women he meets on X to create a “legion-level” brood “before the apocalypse”.To help avert said apocalypse, what should be on offer are authentically family-friendly policies that benefit parents and non-parents alike. In doing so, there’s a chance to persuade Americans that the next generation still might have a brighter future than the last. Or, at the very least, that progressives have a more compelling vision for American families than the one whose budget is about to take billions from children’s education, food and healthcare.It’s one thing to incentivize giving birth. Americans deserve leaders who will fight for those kids after they’re born.

    Katrina vanden Heuvel is editorial director and publisher of the Nation. She is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and has contributed to the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times More

  • in

    My Mother and I Bond Over Ignoring Mother’s Day

    We never celebrated Mother’s Day when I was growing up. Both my parents came from families that considered the holiday to be phony pageantry that was more about putting money in the pocket of Big Florist than it was about showing love and respect for our elders. I can’t remember ever really acknowledging the occasion as a child; it just wasn’t part of our family culture.When I became a mother myself, it never occurred to me to honor the day. Fighting hoards of my fellow New Yorkers for an overpriced brunch reservation is my personal hell. Even the idea of being the center of my family’s special attention is somewhat mortifying to me; I’m not a big birthday person for this reason, either.Of course, I love it when my daughters make me cards for any reason — I’m not that much of a jerk. While I acknowledge that the day is painful for many people who have lost or are estranged from their mothers, I don’t think we should get rid of the occasion; many find joy in it. It is just not for me.The woman credited with creating our modern notion of Mother’s Day would likely agree with my family’s salty spirit. According to the Smithsonian’s blog, Anna Jarvis lobbied for a national Mother’s Day in the early 1900s to honor her mother, Ann Jarvis. Ann spent her entire life working to promote peace, unity and public health — most of Ann’s dozen children “died from diseases such as diphtheria or measles, which were common during her day in the Appalachian area of Virginia,” and so she devoted her life to the hygiene of her community. (Ann is probably rolling over in her grave right now as measles and whooping cough surge.)A further irony: Anna was so appalled at the commercialization of the holiday she championed that she later tried to get Mother’s Day canceled. She ultimately “died penniless in a sanitarium where her bills were paid by the same greeting card companies and florists she despised,” according to the Smithsonian.I shared the Jarvises’ story with my mother, who was not surprised. “Anything which can be commercialized will ultimately be corrupted,” she texted me. The only family holidays we really get into are Passover and Thanksgiving, because they are just about getting together over a big meal. I don’t know how you’d tart up Passover — plague-themed stemware? As for Thanksgiving, my mother put it well: “no one profits except the turkey farmers.”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

  • in

    First Official Photo of Princess Catherine Since Surgery Is Released by Royal Palace

    Amid rampant rumors on social media about the condition of the princess, Kensington Palace issued the picture to mark Mother’s Day in Britain but provided no details on her condition.Nearly two months after undergoing abdominal surgery, Catherine, the princess of Wales, appeared in an official photograph, released on Sunday by Kensington Palace to mark Mother’s Day in Britain.Catherine, who posed with her three children, George, Charlotte and Louis, has not been seen in public since before she entered the hospital on Jan. 16, provoking a swirl of increasingly far-fetched rumors on social media about her condition.The image of a smiling Catherine, surrounded by her family, will most likely quiet what had become an extraordinary distraction for the British royal family, which is also dealing with a cancer diagnosis for King Charles III. But it did not completely dispel the questions about the 42-year-old princess.Kensington Palace, where Catherine and her husband, Prince William, have their offices, did not release any new details on her condition or convalescence. It said the photograph was taken by William this past week in Windsor, where the family lives in Adelaide Cottage, on the grounds of Windsor Castle.In a post on social media accompanying the photograph, Catherine said, “Thank you for your kind wishes and continued support over the last two months. Wishing everyone a Happy Mother’s Day.”Last week, a grainy paparazzi shot of Catherine, riding in a car driven by her mother, was posted on the American celebrity gossip site TMZ. British newspapers and broadcasters reported widely on the photograph, but did not publish it, honoring the palace’s appeal that she be allowed to recuperate in private.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