Foundations
Foundations
Here's a look at documents from U.S. foundations
Featured Stories
Hispanic Access' Statement on EPA's Repeal of Endangerment Finding
WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 -- The Hispanic Access Foundation issued the following news release:* * *
Hispanic Access' Statement on EPA's Repeal of Endangerment Finding
On February 12, 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rescinded the agency's Endangerment Finding, which established that carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases pose risks to public health and welfare for current and future generations and contribute to climate change. In response, Maite Arce, president and CEO of Hispanic Access Foundation, issued the following statement:
"The decision to repeal the Endangerment ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 -- The Hispanic Access Foundation issued the following news release: * * * Hispanic Access' Statement on EPA's Repeal of Endangerment Finding On February 12, 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rescinded the agency's Endangerment Finding, which established that carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases pose risks to public health and welfare for current and future generations and contribute to climate change. In response, Maite Arce, president and CEO of Hispanic Access Foundation, issued the following statement: "The decision to repeal the EndangermentFinding raises serious concerns about the health and well-being of communities across the country. For more than a decade, this finding has provided a science-based framework to help protect families, workers, and children from harmful air pollution and climate-related health risks.
"Many Latino communities face higher levels of exposure to air pollution due to longstanding infrastructure, land-use decisions, and regulatory gaps that have placed major pollution sources near homes, schools, and workplaces. These conditions contribute to higher rates of respiratory illnesses, including asthma, and highlight the importance of maintaining strong, evidence-based air quality protections.
"The Endangerment Finding has served as a critical foundation for addressingclimate pollution under the Clean Air Act, grounded in extensive scientific research and public input. Its repeal introduces uncertainty into efforts to address pollution that affects public health, economic stability, and environmental well-being nationwide.
"Hispanic Access Foundation remains committed to working alongside communities, partner and policymakers to advance science-informed and community-centered environmental safeguards. Our focus is on ensuring that all people--today and in the future--can breathe clean air, live in healthy environments, and share in a resilient and sustainable future."
The Endangerment Finding, issued in 2009 after decades of scientific research and public review, has served as the legal basis for federal actions to limit emissions from vehicles, power plants, and oil and gas development. Its repeal significantly limits the EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gas pollution under the Clean Air Act.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hispanicaccess.org/news-resources/news-releases/item/3530-hispanic-access-statement-on-epa-s-repeal-of-endangerment-finding
FFRF Castigates EPA's Orwellian Attempt to 'Repeal' Climate Science
MADISON, Wisconsin, Feb. 14 [Category: Religion] -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation posted the following news release on Feb. 13, 2026:* * *
FFRF castigates EPA's Orwellian attempt to 'repeal' climate science
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is decrying the Trump administration's recent anti-science action that will erase the scientific foundation for federal climate protections.
The White House has ordered a repeal of the Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 Endangerment Finding, which recognizes a basic scientific reality: Carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases endanger ... Show Full Article MADISON, Wisconsin, Feb. 14 [Category: Religion] -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation posted the following news release on Feb. 13, 2026: * * * FFRF castigates EPA's Orwellian attempt to 'repeal' climate science The Freedom From Religion Foundation is decrying the Trump administration's recent anti-science action that will erase the scientific foundation for federal climate protections. The White House has ordered a repeal of the Environmental Protection Agency's 2009 Endangerment Finding, which recognizes a basic scientific reality: Carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases endangerhuman health and welfare. This determination triggered the EPA's duty under the Clean Air Act to regulate pollutants that "cause or contribute to" dangerous air pollution -- until now.
"You cannot repeal a fact," says FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. "No administration, no matter how hostile to science, can nullify atmospheric chemistry or legislate away the laws of physics. Greenhouse gases trap heat -- whether politicians acknowledge it or not."
By revoking this finding, the administration is not merely revising policy; it is attempting to nullify the overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is real, human-caused and already inflicting catastrophic harm. In an Orwellian maneuver, the agency charged with protecting our environment has declared that a documented public health threat no longer legally "exists."
Rescinding the Endangerment Finding strips the EPA of its core authority to address greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, power plants and other major polluters. It dismantles the legal backbone of climate regulation and signals open season for fossil fuel interests while communities across the country endure intensifying heat waves, stronger hurricanes, worsening wildfires, rising seas and climate-driven disease.
The Clean Air Act directs the EPA to regulate emissions from new motor vehicles that "cause or contribute to" air pollution that endangers public health or welfare. The repealed finding faithfully applied that mandate. The administration's new position, which attempts to exclude pollutants that endanger people "only indirectly," contradicts the statute's plain language and decades of settled law, including the Supreme Court's recognition in Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gases fall within the act's scope.
Greenhouse gases do not cease trapping heat because a presidential administration wishes them away. As the EPA's own website has long explained, these gases thicken the Earth's atmospheric blanket, intensifying warming regardless of how "well-mixed" they are in the atmosphere. The physics of climate change is not subject to executive revision.
The repeal also leans on fringe and cherry-picked claims that elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide is not a serious threat and that isolated environmental anecdotes undermine decades of peer-reviewed research. Meanwhile, the scientific evidence of harm has only grown stronger. Researchers can now attribute specific extreme weather events, ecosystem collapses and public health crises directly to rising greenhouse gas concentrations.
This action aligns directly with the Christian nationalist, anti-science agenda outlined in Project 2025, which seeks to gut environmental protections, dismantle climate initiatives and subordinate evidence-based policymaking to ideological goals. Trump's former EPA Chief of Staff Mandy Gunasekara helped write the climate section of the guiding document for Project 2025 and was a driving force behind this change, along with Christian nationalist Russell Vought.
Nonreligious Americans, who now make up roughly one-third of the U.S. adult population, overwhelmingly accept the scientific consensus on climate change. Pew Research has found that 90 percent of atheists acknowledge the reality of human-caused climate change, the highest percentage of any religious or nonreligious group. The "Nones" understand that this is our only world while evangelicals are apt to deny reality.
"The only afterlife that should concern us is leaving our descendants and planet a secure and pleasant future," says Gaylor. "By repealing the Endangerment Finding, this administration is willfully sabotaging that future. It is choosing short-term corporate gain over long-term human survival -- and condemning our children and grandchildren to escalating climate chaos, preventable suffering and irreversible environmental loss."
All Americans rely on the EPA's regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. Clean air, a stable climate and a livable planet are not partisan luxuries. They are prerequisites for public health, economic stability and intergenerational justice. By repealing the Endangerment Finding, the Trump administration has abandoned the EPA's core mission and placed ideology above evidence. The government cannot repeal atmospheric chemistry by decree. It cannot vote away thermodynamics. And it cannot wish rising seas, burning forests and intensifying storms out of existence.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation calls on Congress, the courts and the American public to reject this reckless repudiation of science and to restore the EPA's obligation to protect the health and welfare of present and future generations before it's too late.
* * *
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to defending the constitutional principle of separation between state and church and educating the public on matters relating to nontheism. With about 42,000 members, FFRF is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists, agnostics and humanists) in North America. For more information, visit ffrf.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://ffrf.org/news/releases/ffrf-castigates-epas-orwellian-attempt-to-repeal-climate-science/
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: Public Pension Debt Should Be Scrutinized Like Other Types of Government Debt
LOS ANGELES, California, Feb. 13 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on Feb. 12, 2026, by senior fellow Rod Crane:* * *
Public pension debt should be scrutinized like other types of government debt
Without comprehensive pension debt reform, states face continued financial pressures and diminished flexibility for future budgets.
*
Pension liabilities are retirement obligations contractually promised to public workers. In any sense of the word, an unfunded pension liability is a debt, yet it is not treated the same as other government obligations. State and local governments ... Show Full Article LOS ANGELES, California, Feb. 13 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on Feb. 12, 2026, by senior fellow Rod Crane: * * * Public pension debt should be scrutinized like other types of government debt Without comprehensive pension debt reform, states face continued financial pressures and diminished flexibility for future budgets. * Pension liabilities are retirement obligations contractually promised to public workers. In any sense of the word, an unfunded pension liability is a debt, yet it is not treated the same as other government obligations. State and local governmentshave long engaged in the practice of issuing various types of debt instruments to finance infrastructure and other public endeavors. But, despite holding the power to levy taxes, these governments aren't always able to repay those obligations.
The Panic of 1837 was a U.S. financial crisis that collapsed credit and commodity prices and triggered bank failures. During the seven-year period of economic depression that followed, several states defaulted on infrastructure bonds. In the 1920s and 1930s, Arkansas borrowed for highway construction but defaulted in 1933 during the Great Depression. These and other defaults led states to widely adopt constitutional and statutory limits on the issuance of general obligation (GO) debt, protecting both present and future taxpayers from fiscal imprudence.
Many public policy makers do not understand that public pension liabilities are not legally treated as general obligation-type debt and are not subject to the safeguards restricting GO debt undertakings. In some states, these pension obligations have even stronger claims on the full-faith and credit of the state than GO debt.
The lack of general obligation debt type safeguards constraining public pension liabilities has significant implications on the financial risk position of state and local governments, which currently have issued about $4.9 trillion in long-term debt. About $1.5 trillion of that, or 32%, is attributable to unfunded public pension liabilities--that is, the gap between currently held assets and the total estimated cost of public employee pension liabilities.
Therefore, it is important for policymakers to understand the policy rationale for general obligation debt limits and why public pension obligations in many states can be more serious than GO debt. Fortunately, there are ways to reclaim fiscal control, including new-tier reforms.
Distinguishing between general obligation debt and special obligation debt
General obligation debt is the gold standard of state borrowing. It is what most people picture when they think of "government debt." GO debt is comprised of bonds backed by a state's "full faith and credit" and unlimited taxing power. A state must legally commit its full taxing power to meet the obligation. This means the state is obligated to raise taxes or reallocate general revenues if necessary to cover general obligation debt liabilities.
Often issued via voter-approved bonds, GO debt funds are essential for long-term capital projects like schools, roads, and hospitals. Repayment draws from general revenues (such as sales and income taxes), making it a sacred pledge binding future taxpayers.
Special obligation debt, by contrast, is "limited obligation" financing, secured by specific revenue streams (such as tolls and utility fees) rather than general taxes. Examples include revenue bonds for water systems or lease-revenue bonds for buildings. Without taxing authority, special debt cannot burden the general fund, which generally isolates the risk to project-specific cash flows.
The distinction is important: GO debt's impact on all taxpayers demands higher levels of scrutiny and constraint; special debt's narrow scope and limited funding sources allow more unrestricted use. As a result, state laws (constitutional and/or statutory) commonly impose rigid caps on GO debt--typically 5-15% of assessed valuation or voter approval requirements--to prevent fiscal recklessness. These limits serve four policy imperatives:
1. Taxpayer Protection: GO debt commits all future revenues, risking hikes or service cuts. California's Proposition 13 (1978) capped GO at 1.25% of property values, shielding homeowners from spirals like pre-1930s defaults.
2. Intergenerational Equity: Limits ensure current voters don't mortgage future generations. New York's Article VII caps GO at $0 without a referendum, forcing accountability.
3. Fiscal Discipline: Caps curb pork-barrel spending. Texas limits GO to 5% of property values, prioritizing pay-as-you-go infrastructure.
4. Credit Stability: Rating agencies reward low GO burdens with better credit ratings. Higher GO burdens result in lower credit ratings and higher borrowing costs.
Comparing general obligation, special obligation, and unfunded pension liabilities
According to Reason Foundation's GovFinance Dashboard 2025, states, cities, counties, and school districts carry $4.9 trillion in total long-term liabilities, which are obligations due in more than a year. The bonds, loans, and notes category--which includes general oblication debt and special obligation debt--makes up about 41% of all state and local government debt. About 32% consists of unfunded pension obligations ($1.5 trillion) and about 20% ($970 billion) in net other post-employment benefits (OPEB)--mostly unfunded retiree health liabilities.
In many states, public pension liabilities are worse than GO debt
Unfunded pension liabilities represent the gap between a public pension plan's promised benefits and the assets set aside to pay them. Such liabilities are not typically classified as traditional "debt" in the same legal category as GO or special obligation debt because they arise from contractual obligations to employees rather than formal borrowing.
But while these liabilities may not be formally called debt, in many states, they mimic--and in some cases even exceed--GO's full faith and credit claim on general revenues. This has largely occurred because of various court decisions interpreting public pension benefits as unique contract rights that cannot be reduced or changed for current workers, even for their future employment periods or under state or local bankruptcy. Workers should receive the pension benefits they've already earned, but these court decisions go further and interpret varying statutory or constitutional provisions as creating an inviolable contract to provide the pension plan benefits existing at the time of hire without any impairment, even for future service (e.g., 'the California Rule').
The California Rule comes from a court decision holding that pension benefits cannot be "impaired," interpreted to mean that a benefit promised to a government employee upon hire must continue to be offered for the duration of that employment. This ruling has faced legal scrutiny, with the argument that courts are interfering with the state's law-making power by protecting not-yet-earned future benefits as if they were in a contract. The California Rule remains extremely relevant and a matter of ongoing legal discussion, as several states have seen similar rulings (Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Washington).
These priority rights to accrue pension benefits for future employment go well beyond federal ERISA law, which only protects benefits accrued to the present but not for future potential accruals.
States have GO-like pension liabilities, and they represent similar fiscal burdens on state resources
Five factors affect how much public pension liabilities resemble or exceed the burden of general obligation debt:
1. Legal Enforceability: The level pension benefits are protected by the state's constitution or statute.
2. Judicial Precedent: The level of protection with which courts have treated pension obligations as contractual or enforceable, including future benefit accruals.
3. Full Faith and Credit Implicitly Exists: The fiscal expectation that the state will pay, even without a formal GO pledge.
4. Budgetary Priority: The extent to which pension payments are prioritized like debt service in budgets.
5. Credit Rating Treatment: Whether rating agencies treat public pension liabilities as equivalent to bonded debt in risk analysis.
Since the above factors vary, in some states, public pension debt is prioritized similarly to general obligation debt. In others, pension promises exceed the level of priority given to GO debt. Using the GovFinance Dashboard, we compared selected states with stronger GO-like treatment (e.g., constitutional protections) to levels of net pension liabilities per capita.
* * *
GO Debt-Like Category ... Pension Benefit Protection Level ... Select States ... Net Pension Liability per Capita ... Moody's Credit Rating
Strongest GO-Like (Constitutional +Judicial) ... Highest: Inviolable contract; full taxing power pledge ... Illinois
New Jersey
Connecticut ... $17,786
$10,601
$12,997 ... A2
Aa3
Aa2
Moderate GO-Like (Statutory + Judicial) ... Medium: Contractual rights but modifiable with offsets ... Kentucky
California
Mississippi ... $7,790
$6,796
$3,847 ... Aa2
Aa2
Aa2
Weakest GO-Like (Common-Law/Statutory Only) ... Lowest: Greater flexibility for benefit adjustment ... Wisconsin
South Dakota
Tennessee ... $1,159
-$13
$450 ... Aa1
Aaa
Aaa
* * *
Source: Moody's Ratings 2025 from various sources.
While a formal 50-state statistical analysis was not conducted and the states shown vary in terms of protections of future benefit accruals, this small sample shows a pattern: Of those included, the states that have the strongest legal constraints on changing public pension benefits tend to be in a worse position with regard to per capita net pension liability levels and lower credit ratings. The result is significantly higher borrowing costs--sometimes as much as 100 basis points for 10-year bonds.
Mitigating pension benefit inflexibility
While public workers should receive the pension benefits that they've already earned, overly rigid pension benefit protections limit the ability of state and local governments to engage in needed reforms to pension benefits and funding mechanisms, locking in potentially unsustainable pension promises despite market downturns, underfunding, or demographic and workforce shifts. This creates a feedback loop: Benefits accrue without adjustments, liabilities balloon, and states must divert larger portions of the general fund to amortize shortfalls. In contrast, states with more flexible structures can implement reforms (such as new tiers, hybrid plans, and contribution hikes) for future benefits, leading to lower relative liabilities.
States can take steps to mitigate public pension unfunded liabilities and inflexibility by taking pragmatic steps:
* New Tiers for New Hires with Reserved Rights: The new tier should reserve the right to make changes to yet-to-be earned retirement benefits in the future. This will avoid otherwise applicable constitutional or contractual impairment issues. An example is the 2011 Rhode Island pension reform, which created a new hybrid Defined Benefit/Defined Contribution plan for new hires.
* Defined Contribution (DC) Plans: A DC plan would help reduce the future growth of pension liabilities for new hires. An example is the action taken by Utah in 2010 to mandate a DC/hybrid plan for new hires.
* Move to Full Actuarial Funding: Implement full annual actuarially determined contribution rates with more conservative/less risky actuarial assumptions - particularly investment return/discount rates and shorter-term amortization schedules. This may raise current pension funding costs, but it will increase intergenerational equity.
* Challenge Overbroad Judicially Defined Protections: Seek to overturn existing judicial decisions regarding the inviolability of pension contracts even for future service. If successful, it will create flexibility in managing pension liabilities for future service while protecting already accrued benefits.
General obligation and other bonded debts have long been subject to robust safeguards and rigorous oversight, whereas unfunded pension liabilities have not, despite the fact that unfunded pension liabilities can pose an even more severe risk to state fiscal stability.
The key distinctions between general obligation debt and special obligation debt highlight why strict controls are essential for obligations that directly impact present and future taxpayers. Without comprehensive reform, including new-tier pension strategies and enhanced fiscal discipline, states face continued financial pressures and diminished flexibility for future budgets. Prioritizing prudent management of both general obligation debt and public pension liabilities is crucial to safeguarding taxpayer interests and preserving long-term fiscal health.
Stay in Touch with Our Pension Experts
Reason Foundation's Pension Integrity Project has helped policymakers in states like Arizona, Colorado, Michigan, and Montana implement substantive pension reforms. Our monthly newsletter highlights the latest actuarial analysis and policy insights from our team.
Email Address(Required)
* * *
Rod Crane is a senior fellow at Reason Foundation's Pension Integrity Project.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/public-pension-debt-should-be-scrutinized-like-other-types-of-government-debt/
PAN Opens Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma Copay Fund
WASHINGTON, Feb. 13 -- The PAN Foundation issued the following news on Feb. 12, 2026:* * *
PAN opens diffuse large B-cell lymphoma copay fund
Today, the PAN Foundation opened a financial assistance copay program designed to help with out-of-pocket medication costs for eligible patients living with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
PAN's diffuse large B-cell lymphoma copay assistance program provides a grant of $3,200 for out-of-pocket expenses for covered medications. If patients need more assistance within the same 12-month period and the fund is open, they can apply for additional funding, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Feb. 13 -- The PAN Foundation issued the following news on Feb. 12, 2026: * * * PAN opens diffuse large B-cell lymphoma copay fund Today, the PAN Foundation opened a financial assistance copay program designed to help with out-of-pocket medication costs for eligible patients living with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). PAN's diffuse large B-cell lymphoma copay assistance program provides a grant of $3,200 for out-of-pocket expenses for covered medications. If patients need more assistance within the same 12-month period and the fund is open, they can apply for additional funding,receiving up to $6,400 total per year.
DLBCL is the main subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Lymphoma occurs when lymphocytes grow and multiply uncontrollably. Malignant lymphocytes can travel to many parts of the body, including the lymph nodes, spleen, bone marrow, blood, or other organs. According to the Lymphoma Research Foundation, DLBCL is the most common form of NHL, accounting for around 22 percent of newly diagnosed cases of B-cell NHL in the United States.
"Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is a fast-growing cancer that can place a high financial burden on the patient and their family," said Kevin L. Hagan, PAN's President and CEO. "Due to our generous donors, this new fund allows us to help lift that burden off the patient, so they can focus on what really matters."
Eligibility requirements
To get copay assistance for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, patients must:
* Be receiving treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma
* Reside and receive treatment in the United States or U.S. territories (U.S. citizenship is not a requirement)
* Have insurance that covers the qualifying medication or product
* Take a medication or product listed on PAN's comprehensive list of covered medications
* Have a household income that falls at or below 500 percent of the federal poverty level
Check eligibility (https://www.panfoundation.org/disease-funds/diffuse-large-b-cell-lymphoma/)
How to apply
We encourage you to apply online through the PAN portal (https://panapply.org/), but if you prefer to apply by phone, call us at 1-866-316-7263 Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. ET.
Healthcare professionals can apply online through the PAN portal or by phone on behalf of their patients.
Other patient support services at PAN
Sign up for FundFinder
Developed by the PAN Foundation, FundFinder is a free website that helps you track more than 200 patient assistance funds from nine charitable organizations. You can sign up for free email or text alerts when a disease assistance fund you're interested in opens at PAN or another organization. Learn more and sign up today.
Get the information you need about clinical trials
Whether you have questions about the clinical trial process or need help using our trial finder to explore nearby options, our warm and knowledgeable ComPANion Access Navigators are just a phone call away. They can help you with general clinical trial education, answer your questions, equip you with conversation starters, assist you in finding trials, and help you sign up for trial alerts. Call us at 1-855-329-5969 Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. ET. You can also learn more about clinical trials by visiting our clinical trials education hub.
Apply for a transportation grant
PAN grant recipients may also qualify for transportation assistance to allow them to get to and from activities that improve their overall health outcomes, including healthcare services, social connections and support, and more. If the fund is closed, we encourage you to join the wait list to be notified when the fund re-opens.
* * *
About the PAN Foundation
As a leading charitable foundation and healthcare advocacy organization, the PAN Foundation is dedicated to accelerating access to treatment for those who need it most and empowering patients on their healthcare journeys. We provide critical financial assistance for treatment costs, advocate for policy solutions that expand access to care, and deliver education on complex topics--all driven by our belief that everyone deserves access to affordable, equitable healthcare.
Since 2004, our financial assistance programs have helped more than 1.3 million people to start or stay on life-changing treatment. In addition, we've achieved major policy victories that increase access to care, mobilized patient advocates to call for change, and educated people nationwide on critical healthcare-related topics. We're committed to working towards a future where equitable health outcomes are a reality for all. Learn more at panfoundation.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.panfoundation.org/pan-opens-diffuse-large-b-cell-lymphoma-copay-fund/
NFWF Announces $3 Million in Grants Through the Southeast Aquatics Fund
WASHINGTON, Feb. 13 -- The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation posted the following news release on Feb. 12, 2026:* * *
NFWF Announces $3 Million in Grants through the Southeast Aquatics Fund
Eight projects will benefit freshwater species by improving water quality
*
The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) today announced $3 million in grants to restore aquatic habitats to benefit native freshwater species in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and Tennessee. The grants will leverage $1.9 million in matching contributions for a total conservation impact of $4.9 million.
The ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Feb. 13 -- The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation posted the following news release on Feb. 12, 2026: * * * NFWF Announces $3 Million in Grants through the Southeast Aquatics Fund Eight projects will benefit freshwater species by improving water quality * The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) today announced $3 million in grants to restore aquatic habitats to benefit native freshwater species in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and Tennessee. The grants will leverage $1.9 million in matching contributions for a total conservation impact of $4.9 million. Thegrants were competitively awarded through the Southeast Aquatics Fund, a public-private partnership, with funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Altria and Southern Company.
"The Southeast is home to some of the most biodiverse rivers and streams in the world," said Jeff Trandahl, executive director and CEO of NFWF. "The grants announced today will advance the voluntary conservation of an incredible array of aquatic species, while also ensuring that landowners have options and resources needed to improve management of the forests, streams and other wildlife habitats under their stewardship."
The eight grants announced today will employ a variety of conservation strategies to restore and enhance extraordinarily biodiverse freshwater habitat. Partners will work with agricultural and forest landowners to implement novel approaches to freshwater habitat restoration, resulting in improved water quality, increased water quantity and improved connectivity for fish. The supported projects will benefit aquatic species such as the trispot darter, Alabama rainbow mussel and other imperiled aquatic species, as well as popular game fish such as brook trout.
"Clean rivers and streams are vital to the Southeast's fish, wildlife, and communities," said Mike Oetker, regional director for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "By working hand-in-hand with landowners and local partners, we're improving water quality and restoring habitat in ways that benefit people and wildlife. Together, we are helping ensure a legacy of voluntary conservation on working lands for generations to come."
Freshwater mussels have seen steep declines across Southern watersheds. One project in this year's slate will significantly contribute to the recovery of villosa mussels, a longstanding goal of the Southeast Aquatics Fund, by reducing sedimentation to improve water quality. The project will help propagate and stock endemic mussels and monitor response of mussels and fish to habitat restoration to inform how aquatic conservation can work in similar watersheds.
"We are proud of our 22-year partnership with NFWF including the work accomplished because of the Southeast Aquatics Fund," said Jesalyn McCurry, voluntary conservation manager, Southern Company. "Advancing the cutting edge of aquatic conservation in important places matters. It's exciting to see such great progress."
Three projects in this year's slate advance a unique partnership between NFWF, the U.S. Forest Service, and the state foresters of Alabama, Florida and Mississippi. Using RESTORE Council funding, these projects improve water quality in the Gulf through sustainable forest management practices.
One project resulting from this partnership will improve the ecological function of the swamps of Florida's Panhandle. Another project in Mississippi will open opportunities for partnership with the timber industry, which includes some of the South's largest landowners. Another project in that state will use nature-based solutions to restore stream banks and improve water quality.
"The Southeast Aquatics Fund represents an enduring partnership that continues to promote healthy forests, and conserve aquatic habitats throughout the South. Our Southern forests support incredible biodiversity and provide clean and abundant drinking water for communities spanning the entire region," said Regional Forester Ken Arney, USDA Forest Service. "Partnerships positively impact our conservation efforts across forests and waters."
A number of projects in the slate support technical assistance for landowners to improve instream habitat conditions along with improved soil health, benefiting a variety of aquatic species that are sensitive to elevated levels of nutrients and sediment. These voluntary practices will be implemented on over 240,000 acres, and will include rotational grazing, fence installation and forest management.
"NRCS is proud of its decades-long work with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to protect the natural vitality of the Southeast," said NRCS Chief Aubrey J.D. Bettencourt. "We are building on this legacy, leveraging our combined technical expertise and funding to accelerate critical conservation work through these eight new projects that will help improve water quality, restore streams and remove aquatic barriers, supporting native freshwater species across Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi and Tennessee."
Launched in 2017, the Southeast Aquatics Fund supports voluntary watershed-based restoration and improved management to improve aquatic systems and secure populations of native freshwater aquatic species. Including this year's grants, the program has awarded $22.2 million to 69 conservation projects.
A complete list of the 2025 grants made through the Southeast Aquatics Fund is available here (https://www.nfwf.org/sites/default/files/2026-02/nfwf-se-aquatics-20260212-gs.pdf).
* * *
About the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) works with partners to foster sustainable and impactful conservation solutions so that people and nature thrive together. Chartered by Congress in 1984, NFWF has grown to become the nation's largest conservation foundation. Since its founding, NFWF has funded more than 23,300 projects that have generated a total conservation impact of more than $11.3 billion. Learn more at nfwf.org.
* * *
About the Natural Resources Conservation Service
For 90 years, NRCS has helped farmers, ranchers and forestland owners make investments in their operations and local communities to improve the quality of our air, water, soil, and wildlife habitat. NRCS uses the latest science and technology to help keep working lands working, boost agricultural economies, and increase the competitiveness of American agriculture. NRCS provides one-on-one, personalized advice and financial assistance and works with producers to help them reach their goals through voluntary, incentive-based conservation programs. For more information, visit nrcs.usda.gov.
* * *
About the U.S. Forest Service
The mission of the USDA Forest Service is, "To sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations." The Forest Service manages 193 million acres of forest lands with tribal governments, state and private landowners, and maintains the largest forest research organization in the world.
* * *
About the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is to work with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. We are both a leader and trusted partner in fish and wildlife conservation, known for our scientific excellence, stewardship of lands and natural resources, dedicated professionals, and commitment to public service. For more information on our work and the people who make it happen, visit fws.gov.
* * *
About Altria Group
Altria Group is a Fortune 200 company located in Richmond Va. Altria's tobacco companies include some of the most enduring names in American business including Philip Morris USA, the maker of Marlboro cigarettes, and U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company, the maker of Copenhagen and Skoal. Altria complements its total tobacco platform with ownership of Ste. Michelle Wine Estates, a collection of distinctive wine estates, and significant equity investment in Anheuser-Busch InBev, the world's largest brewer.
* * *
About Southern Company
Southern Company (NYSE: SO) is a leading energy provider serving 9 million customers across the Southeast and beyond through its family of companies. Providing clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy with excellent service is our mission. The company has electric operating companies in three states, natural gas distribution companies in four states, a competitive generation company, a leading distributed energy solutions provider with national capabilities, a fiber optics network and telecommunications services. Through an industry-leading commitment to innovation, resilience and sustainability, we are taking action to meet customers' and communities' needs while advancing our goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Our uncompromising values ensure we put the needs of those we serve at the center of everything we do and are the key to our sustained success. We are transforming energy into economic, environmental and social progress for tomorrow. Our corporate culture has been recognized by a variety of organizations, earning the company awards and recognitions that reflect Our Values and dedication to service. To learn more, visit www.southerncompany.com.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.nfwf.org/media-center/press-releases/nfwf-announces-3-million-grants-through-southeast-aquatics-fund
Ignorant and Dangerous: AFC Statement on Trump Admin's Feb. 2026 HIV, STI Prevention Cuts
CHICAGO, Illinois, Feb. 13 -- The AIDS Foundation of Chicago issued the following statement on Feb. 12, 2026, by President and CEO John Peller:* * *
Ignorant and Dangerous: AFC Statement on Trump Admin's Feb. 2026 HIV, STI Prevention Cuts
The Trump administration recently canceled over $100 million in public health, STI and HIV prevention grant funding to Illinois as political retribution. AIDS Foundation Chicago calls upon our community to demand the Trump administration reinstate these funds. We are thankful to the Illinois Attorney General's office for filing suit and standing up to Trump's ... Show Full Article CHICAGO, Illinois, Feb. 13 -- The AIDS Foundation of Chicago issued the following statement on Feb. 12, 2026, by President and CEO John Peller: * * * Ignorant and Dangerous: AFC Statement on Trump Admin's Feb. 2026 HIV, STI Prevention Cuts The Trump administration recently canceled over $100 million in public health, STI and HIV prevention grant funding to Illinois as political retribution. AIDS Foundation Chicago calls upon our community to demand the Trump administration reinstate these funds. We are thankful to the Illinois Attorney General's office for filing suit and standing up to Trump'slatest attack on the HIV sector and LGBTQ, Black, and Latine Illinoisians. We are also thankful to the Democratic members of the Illinois Congressional Delegation who have signed onto a letter to the Trump administration opposing the cuts.
The number of people newly diagnosed with HIV in Chicago is increasing. Now is not the time to cut HIV prevention and treatment funds. Cutting funding for prevention means people won't get tested, won't learn about or start PrEP, and won't be able to protect themselves against HIV. It costs more to treat a person living with HIV than it does to prevent HIV - so we know these grant cancellations are not about saving money, despite what the administration may say.
Defunding HIV prevention, research, surveillance and basic public health does not impact all communities equally. It is a disinvestment in LGBTQ+, Black, and Latine communities, and a continuation of this administration's racist, homophobic and transphobic agenda.
HIV and STIs, like all viruses, know no borders. Canceling public health grants for political retribution is ignorant and dangerous. Trump must be stopped - he is putting all our health at risk.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.aidschicago.org/ignorant-and-dangerous-afc-statement-on-trump-admins-feb-2026-hiv-sti-prevention-cuts/
Foundation for Economic Education Posts Commentary: EU's Wine Package
DETROIT, Michigan, Feb. 13 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary on Feb. 12, 2026, by Claudia Ascensao Nunes, Portuguese writer and political commentator:* * *
The EU's Wine Package
The cost of central planning.
*
After decades of subsidizing expansion, Brussels is now paying to destroy vineyards, without fixing the distortions it created.
The European Union is paying to uproot vineyards. The new Wine Package, proposed in March 2025 with a provisional agreement reached in December 2025, proposes among several measures, the possibility of using EU funds ... Show Full Article DETROIT, Michigan, Feb. 13 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary on Feb. 12, 2026, by Claudia Ascensao Nunes, Portuguese writer and political commentator: * * * The EU's Wine Package The cost of central planning. * After decades of subsidizing expansion, Brussels is now paying to destroy vineyards, without fixing the distortions it created. The European Union is paying to uproot vineyards. The new Wine Package, proposed in March 2025 with a provisional agreement reached in December 2025, proposes among several measures, the possibility of using EU fundsfor the voluntary destruction of productive vines, which represents the most visible sign of a market distortion created by decades of intervention from Brussels.
Successive policies supporting the wine sector progressively disconnected production from market signals. The result was a growing imbalance, marked by persistent surpluses and, later, by subsidies aimed at vineyard removal itself. It is within this context that the European Union now presents the Wine Package, yet another regulation which claims to solve a problem that previous policies helped to create.
When the Common Agricultural Policy was established, it was quickly determined that one of its core objectives would be the protection of farmers, ensuring stable incomes and food security. In the wine sector, this logic translated into strong interventionism aimed at expanding and stabilizing production.
For decades, Brussels subsidized vineyard planting, protected minimum prices, and absorbed producers' economic risk, disconnecting production decisions from signals of demand. Producing more ceased to be an economic choice and became a politically safe decision.
This approach created a structural market distortion. As wine consumption began to decline across Europe for demographic, cultural, and economic reasons, the artificially incentivized productive structure remained intact and unable to adjust.
It was in this context that, during the 1980s and 1990s, the first major shock occurred, known as the wine lake: massive wine surpluses with no outlet. Even then, Brussels treated this episode as an isolated and temporary phenomenon, ignoring the fact that it was the direct consequence of existing policies. By persisting with the same strategies, the problem ceased to be episodic and became structural.
In the early 2000s, the European Union was finally forced to recognize that the wine crisis was not temporary. However, instead of removing production incentives and restoring the market's adjustment function, it opted for a new form of intervention: subsidizing the voluntary uprooting of vineyards. The decision to destroy productive capacity ceased to be economic and became administrative, decreed from the European political center, with profound effects across several countries.
This model, presented as temporary, set a dangerous precedent. Rather than allowing less viable producers to exit the market through prices and economic choice, the state began paying for withdrawal, subsidizing the costs of adjustment and normalizing the idea that the correction of public policy errors should be financed with more public money.
This policy did not solve the underlying problem. It merely reduced cultivated area temporarily, while leaving intact the regulatory architecture which had created the initial distortion. The sector became trapped in a cycle of incentivized expansion, predictable crisis, and administrative correction.
It is within this framework that the Wine Package emerges as the European Union's latest set of measures for the wine sector. The package relies on an administratively planned reduction of supply through financial incentives for vineyard uprooting, complemented by regulatory adjustments, temporary support measures, and crisis management instruments. Instead of allowing the market to adjust to declining consumption, Brussels once again opts for the destruction of productive capacity as a policy tool. Although the package includes support measures and environmental framing, its central axis remains the administrative reduction of supply.
The impact of these decisions is not marginal. The European wine sector represents a significant share of the European Union's economy, sustaining approximately 2.9 million direct and indirect jobs and contributing more than Euros130 billion to EU GDP.
The effects of this policy vary significantly by territory, but its uniform and uncritical application ignores distinct realities, such as Bordeaux in France and the Douro in Portugal.
Bordeaux faces a genuine surplus problem. In November 2025, France announced a national aid package of Euros130 million specifically for the permanent uprooting of vineyards in vulnerable regions like Bordeaux.
The Douro does not. This region has historically focused on exports, value creation, and production control. Even so, it will be forced to bear the consequences of yet another one-size-fits-all regulation. Where no imbalance previously existed, one will now be introduced.
In the Douro, the consequences of the Wine Package extend far beyond reduced production. Vineyard uprooting destroys irreversible agricultural capital, weakens small producers, and accelerates the abandonment of a territory where viticulture is often the only viable economic activity. Unlike regions characterized by structural surpluses, the Douro does not face a problem of excessive production, but rather one of regulatory pressure and rising costs. Applying a uniform policy to this reality amounts to importing a crisis which did not previously exist, undermining the economic, social, and landscape sustainability of one of Europe's most emblematic wine regions.
The European Union continues to insist on the same error which led the wine sector to this point. The systematic replacement of market adjustment with administrative decision-making does not correct distortions; it entrenches them. The solution lies in restoring producers' and regions' capacity to adapt, respecting regional diversity and the principle of subsidiarity. As long as Brussels continues to manage wine as a centralized technical problem, it will continue to create crises where none previously existed.
* * *
Claudia Ascensao Nunes is a Portuguese writer and political commentator. She is the President of Ladies of Liberty Alliance - Portugal and a columnist featured in both national and international publications. Claudia collaborates with Young Voices and focuses on economic freedom, European policy, and transatlantic cooperation. She has over 20,000 followers on X (formerly Twitter), where she shares insights on politics, liberalism, and cultural issues.
* * *
Original text here: https://fee.org/articles/the-eus-wine-package/