Featured Stories
Jamestown Foundation Issues Commentary: Turkiye's Black Sea Diplomacy Faces Russian Roadblocks
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on Sept. 25, 2026, in the foundation's Eurasia Daily Monitor:
* * *
Turkiye's Black Sea Diplomacy Faces Russian Roadblocks
Sam Jones| Mamie Powers | Panorama
Executive Summary:
* Turkiye is intensifying its diplomatic efforts to mediate peace between Russia and Ukraine as strikes in the Black Sea continue and civilian vessels get pulled into the crossfire.
* Ukraine has expressed willingness to revive the Black Sea Grain Initiative, but signals from Moscow dim the prospects of a new deal despite Turkish efforts.
*
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The Jamestown Foundation issued the following commentary on Sept. 25, 2026, in the foundation's Eurasia Daily Monitor:
* * *
Turkiye's Black Sea Diplomacy Faces Russian Roadblocks
Sam Jones| Mamie Powers | Panorama
Executive Summary:
* Turkiye is intensifying its diplomatic efforts to mediate peace between Russia and Ukraine as strikes in the Black Sea continue and civilian vessels get pulled into the crossfire.
* Ukraine has expressed willingness to revive the Black Sea Grain Initiative, but signals from Moscow dim the prospects of a new deal despite Turkish efforts.
*Moscow appears to be hardening its negotiating position ahead of the winter months as strikes on vessels carrying agricultural goods in the Black Sea threaten food shortages and attacks on energy infrastructure from both Russia and Ukraine show no sign of letting up.
-
Signals from Moscow dim the prospects of a renewed Black Sea Grain Initiative despite Turkish efforts. Russian and Ukrainian strikes on Black Sea ports, loading terminals, and ships are disrupting food exports and the global grain supply, and they have struck civilian vessels from other countries (United Nations, July 27; Anadolu Ajansi, August 29; Euromaidan, September 25). Turkiye controls the Turkish Straits, the sole maritime passage between the Black and Mediterranean seas, under the authority granted by the 1936 Montreux Convention (see Black Sea Battleground, May 10, 2022). Ankara has positioned itself as a mediator in much of Russia's war against Ukraine (see EDM, September 11, 12, 2023, April 1, May 19, 2025). As strikes on the Black Sea intensify, Ankara is seeking a larger role in this mediation, but success depends on Russia and Ukraine being willing to negotiate.
Turkiye has called for calm in the Black Sea since the early days of the war (see Black Sea Battleground, October 12, 2022). Russia, Ukraine, Turkiye, and the United Nations launched the Black Sea Grain Initiative in July 2022, lifting Russia's blockade on Ukrainian agricultural exports (see EDM, September 13, 2022). Russia and Ukraine together make up almost 30 percent of global wheat exports (Euronews, August 19). Under the initiative, Russia allowed merchant ships to pass through the Black Sea. On July 17, 2023, Russia unilaterally suspended the Black Sea Grain Initiative, which was followed by drone and missile strikes on Ukrainian ports. This created a re-imposition of a total naval blockade on Ukraine in the Black Sea (see EDM, July 26, 27, 31, 2023). After suspending the Black Sea Grain Initiative, Russia showed little interest in following through with Turkiye's involvement as a mediator in the war (see EDM, September 11, 12, 2023).
Since June, Ankara has renewed its efforts to mediate Black Sea security. On September 17, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan stated that Ankara has "recently intensified its diplomatic efforts" to negotiate with Russia and Ukraine over the Black Sea (Turkish Directorate of Communications, September 17). Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan echoed this sentiment following a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly on September 23. He stated, "It is necessary to take steps regarding the safety of navigation in the Black Sea, that there can be no explanation for the attack on commercial ships, and that we expect responsible behavior from the parties" (Turkish Directorate of Communications, September 23).
Russia has reacted coolly to Turkiye's diplomatic overtures. Fidan visited Moscow from June 15-17, where he met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss Black Sea security. There, Fidan stressed to Lavrov that current actions in the Black Sea threaten Turkiye's regional security (The Insider, July 16). During the meeting with Putin, he confirmed Turkiye's readiness to host peace talks between Russia and Ukraine (President of Russia, June 17; Interfax, June 18). He then visited Kyiv on July 16, where he again urged both sides to ensure energy security and safe navigation in the Black Sea to protect global grain supplies (Turkiye Today, July 16).
On August 8, Fidan said that Turkiye had sent a proposal to Russia and Ukraine that would end attacks on civilian ships in the Black Sea (Daily Sabah, August 8). On August 31--ahead of a planned September 1 meeting between Putin and Erdogan--Fidan said Ankara remained in contact with both Moscow and Kyiv and was seeking to establish conditions for an arrangement similar to the Black Sea Grain Initiative (Daily Sabah, August 31).
Conditions in the Black Sea were the main topic of Putin and Erdogan's meeting (Interfax, September 1). After the meeting, Erdogan stressed the need for a mechanism to ensure safe shipping in the Black Sea, saying, "We are seeing the grain crisis re-emerge" (President of Turkiye, September 2). Ankara has continued to emphasize that a major part of its engagement with both Moscow and Kyiv is to ensure the safety of civilian shipping, trade routes, and energy infrastructure in the Black Sea amid the war (Newsweek, September 25).
Speaking to reporters at the UN General Assembly on September 23, Erdogan stated, "The issue of security in the Black Sea is very important for both us and our region. The Black Sea is not, should never be, a front of this war" (TRT Haber, September 24). Fidan, on September 15 during a press conference in Baku, stated that the spread of Russia's war against Ukraine in the Black Sea was "not an acceptable situation" as the lives of Turkish citizens and the operations of Turkish companies are at risk (Turkiye Today, September 15). In a September 19 conversation with reporters, Fidan described Turkiye's mediation efforts as an outside perspective offering moral or other points of view. He explained that countries and mediators that "focus on results rather than looking for credit" are more effective (NTV, September 19). In an interview with Newsweek published on September 25, Erdogan stated, "Turkiye's priority is to prevent the war from turning into a conflict that draws in other countries." He asserted that Turkiye's membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and its ability to maintain direct contact with Putin allow Turkiye to act as a mediator (Newsweek, September 25).
Ukraine has recently appeared at least rhetorically open to Turkiye's diplomatic efforts, saying the next steps are up to Russia. Following a meeting with Erdogan on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy wrote on X, "We discussed security in the Black Sea, first and foremost how to ensure the operation of the maritime export corridor ... What is needed is simply Russia's readiness to stop its terrorist strikes on our infrastructure, so that Ukraine can reciprocally halt its long-range responses" (X/@ZelenskyyUa, September 23). He echoed this sentiment on September 25 after discussions with leaders of Egypt, India, Turkiye, and various Middle Eastern countries, saying there were proposals for a reciprocal ceasefire in the Black Sea so goods can be delivered without problems (RBC-Ukraine, September 25).
Ukrainian officials have said Kyiv would agree to a deal similar to the Black Sea Grain Initiative. They worry, however, that Russia will keep asking for more, with additional demands unrelated to grain, and that such a deal would be difficult to reach because Russia abandoned the original initiative in 2023 (Middle East Eye, September 24). Ukrainian Energy Minister Denys Shmyhal said Ukraine is ready for a ceasefire that would also include protecting energy infrastructure alongside security in the Black Sea, especially as winter approaches and Black Sea strikes put food security at risk and strikes on energy infrastructure from both Russia and Ukraine continue (RBC-Ukraine, September 24).
Commentary from Moscow points to a hardening negotiating position ahead of the winter months. At a September 1 press conference in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, Putin acknowledged that Ukraine's 40-day summer strike campaign inflicted real damage, estimating the total economic costs at around 1 percent of Russia's gross domestic product (GDP). He stressed, however, that the situation was not critical and that Russia would retaliate against Ukraine's "most sensitive economic sectors" (President of Russia, September 1). Putin's statements underscore that Moscow views its Black Sea blockade as a political weapon against Kyiv.
He argued that a prolonged blockade will lead to three cumulative problems for Ukraine. First, a foreign exchange crisis; second, a budget crisis; and third, a banking crisis. Moscow sees current diplomatic efforts for a moratorium on Black Sea strikes as only benefiting Ukraine; as Putin contends, "That is precisely why they have gone running to all our friends--to the Arab states, not just one but several; to our Indian friends; and to a few others, including Turkiye--with the same plea" (President of Russia, September 1).
Influential foreign policy commentators have put forward similar arguments. For example, in an August interview, Dmitry Trenin, president of the journal Russia in Global Affairs, implied that the 2022 Black Sea grain deal was a gift from Moscow. He then argued that Russia's current strikes against Ukraine's Black Sea infrastructure will force the West to "face the question of whether to take risks for itself or agree to the Russian formula for peace" (Russia in Global Affairs, August 17). Russian political scientist Dmitry Suslov also argued in Russia in Global Affairs that Ukraine "may not survive the winter" due to Russia's Black Sea blockade. He believes the West will seek de-escalation in this area but that "Russia, of course, will not agree to such a partial truce." Any comprehensive settlement, he continued, will now involve "even greater concessions from Ukraine than the Anchorage agreements" (Russia in Global Affairs, September 23). In a September 24 front-page article in Moskovskiy Komsomolets--one of Russia's most widely read newspapers--columnist Mikhail Rostovskiy opined that only continued war awaits Russia, calling a surge in Western diplomatic efforts "white noise." Instead of engaging in talks, he argued, Russia should prepare "for an even tougher and bloodier phase of the Ukrainian conflict this winter" because Ukraine and Europe are "not ready to accept Russia's main demands" (Moskovskiy Komsomolets, September 24).
Military-affiliated Telegram channels have spread similar messages. Since August, the most popular war propaganda channels have been claiming that Russia's strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure and blockade of the Black Sea will lead to a collapse of Ukraine's economy. They often put forth the narrative that Ukraine will not adhere to an energy ceasefire and will only use it to prepare for more strikes against Russian infrastructure.
The channel "Rybar," for example, argues that negotiations should not discuss stopping strikes against Ukrainian energy and port infrastructure. The channel has continuously posted that Russia will only consider negotiations once Ukraine's economic and political systems are destroyed, so that "it no longer poses a threat" (Telegram/@rybar, September 8, 15, 23). The channel "Two Majors" warns the West that the conflict will make economic activity in the Black Sea prohibitively expensive, and that the Russian Armed Forces will not limit its strikes to only Ukrainian vessels, saying, "We do not care which flag the ship is sailing under" (Telegram/@dva_majors, September 19, 23).
All dismiss the prospects of a new grain deal. The channel "Legitimate" says the Kremlin opposes negotiating a Black Sea truce with Zelenskyy and will agree only to a final, "full-fledged peace" deal--a euphemism for removing Zelenskyy (Telegram/@legitimniy, August 19). The channel argues against engaging with Turkiye's attempts to negotiate a second Black Sea grain deal, because "Zelenskyy successfully disrupted the first agreement when it was profitable for him" and "this time it will be the same" (Telegram/@legitimniy, August 8). The Kremlin-aligned foreign policy commentator Sergei Poletaev has similarly reasoned against a ceasefire at the frontline or a pause on infrastructure strikes, asserting that Ukraine will use a ceasefire to "fight for Crimea" (Telegram/@vatfor, September 23).
The official Kremlin line has grown more assertive. On September 24 at the UN General Assembly in New York, Dmitry Polyansky, Russia's Permanent Representative to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), displayed no desire to ease tensions in the Black Sea, proclaiming the "Kyiv regime and its Western sponsors, who supply it with the tools to commit crimes, bear full responsibility for the armed escalation and aggravation of the transport and logistics situation in the Azov-Black Sea area" (RIA Novosti, September 24). He then argued that the 2022 Black Sea Grain Initiative was used by the West to supply weapons to Ukraine. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov added to this sentiment, calling attempts to revive the Black Sea Grain Initiative "completely unacceptable and unrealistic" (RIA Novosti, September 24).
Russian commentary unambiguously rejects negotiations and expands the scope for escalation, potentially even beyond Ukraine (see EDM, July 23, September 14). NATO's frontline states have increasingly come under rhetorical attack. For example, Moscow has closely followed the Lithuanian parliament's decision to remove the constitutional ban on stationing nuclear weapons and foreign military bases on the country's territory (LRT.lt, September 22). On September 11, Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov called the plan a "serious escalation" and stated that if nuclear weapons get deployed to Lithuania, then "the territory of this country will also be targeted by our nuclear weapons" (Interfax, September 11).
On September 25, shortly following the vote by Lithuania's parliament, an article was published by Russia's state-run news agency, RIA Novosti, titled, "Another Special Military Operation Awaits Russia. It Will be Short." The article was written by regular contributor Alexander Nosovich--who the investigative center "Dossier" has linked to the Russian Presidential Administration and Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) (Dossier, November 25, 2020). In the article, Nosovich compares Lithuania to Ukraine and threatens the country with a nuclear strike, saying:
It is about what means can be used. And since our opponents are the first to turn the conversation to the nuclear threat, Russia can even afford to forgo a ground contingent ... The solution is not just fast, but lightning fast.[1]
Russia is committed to a path of escalation heading into the winter. Reading into Moscow's statements, it becomes clear that the Kremlin sees its blockade of the Black Sea and strikes on Ukrainian port and energy infrastructure as points of political leverage. Ukraine's increasing ability to strike deep inside Russia has also changed the Kremlin's calculus. Moscow is now unlikely to take any small de-escalatory steps unless Ukraine is forced to refrain from striking inside Russia--a demand Kyiv understandably views as asymmetrically benefiting Moscow. Zelenskyy has vowed to press on with the campaign if Russia refuses to negotiate (Ukrainska Pravda, August 24; Kyiv Post, September 24). Whether Turkiye's diplomatic efforts will make a difference is yet to be seen.
Note:
[1] RIA Novosti has since removed the article, with a note now saying that it "did not correspond to the opinion of the editorial board, the editorial policy, and the state policy of the Russian Federation." The article's link, which currently shows that message, can be viewed here (https://ria.ru/20260925/svo-2120099059.html). The original article can be read in full on the Internet Archive here (https://web.archive.org/web/20260925073359/https://ria.ru/20260925/svo-2120099059.html).
* * *
Original text here: https://jamestown.org/turkiyes-black-sea-diplomacy-faces-russian-roadblocks/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Hudson Institute Issues Commentary: AI and the Growing Threat to Taiwan
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, posted the following commentary to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Sep 24, 2026
Wall Street Journal
AI and the Growing Threat to Taiwan
China's drive to dominate the technology and the island nation is the biggest threat humanity faces.
Mike Gallagher
-
The year is 2028, and America faces economic Armageddon.
Frontier artificial-intelligence development has been halted and data-center construction frozen while the market is in free fall.
America's
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, posted the following commentary to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Sep 24, 2026
Wall Street Journal
AI and the Growing Threat to Taiwan
China's drive to dominate the technology and the island nation is the biggest threat humanity faces.
Mike Gallagher
-
The year is 2028, and America faces economic Armageddon.
Frontier artificial-intelligence development has been halted and data-center construction frozen while the market is in free fall.
America'sleading AI labs didn't decide to "pace the frontier." Instead the Chinese Communist Party paced the frontier for them: Beijing moved on Taiwan, the critical vulnerability in the U.S.-aligned AI supply chain, first through a blockade, then by invasion.
Read in the Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com/opinion/ai-and-the-growing-threat-to-taiwan-277b48c9?mod=commentary_article_pos3).
* * *
Mike Gallagher is a distinguished fellow at Hudson Institute. He is also head of defense at Palantir Technologies.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hudson.org/foreign-policy/ai-growing-threat-taiwan-mike-gallagher
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: So, Candidates, How Will You Close the State Government's $5.5 Billion Budget Deficit?
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, Sept. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
So, candidates, how will you close the state government's $5.5 billion budget deficit?
Written by John Phelan | September 25, 2026
Back in June, Minnesota Management & Budget (MMB) released its end of session "General Fund Balance Analysis" with forecasts for the current budget biennium (FY 2026-27) and the next (FY 2028-29). These are the last estimates we will get before the elections in November.
It
... Show Full Article
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, Sept. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
So, candidates, how will you close the state government's $5.5 billion budget deficit?
Written by John Phelan | September 25, 2026
Back in June, Minnesota Management & Budget (MMB) released its end of session "General Fund Balance Analysis" with forecasts for the current budget biennium (FY 2026-27) and the next (FY 2028-29). These are the last estimates we will get before the elections in November.
Itshows that Minnesota's state government is forecast to spend ("Total Expenditures & Transfers") more than it collects in revenue ("Subtotal Current Resources") in every single year from 2026 to 2029 for a cumulative deficit of $5.5 billion.
Figure 1: Minnesota state government spending and revenues, billions
Source: Minnesota Management & Budget and Center of the American Experiment
This is nothing new, Minnesota's state government has been running a deficit since 2024 after the "historic" 2023 trifecta blew the state's budget up, but we ought to be hearing more from the candidates on the campaign trail about how they intend to close this gap, as they must. The question is especially pertinent given the DFL's proposals to add more than $5 billion annually in fresh spending on top of this.
Will we see higher taxes? Will we see spending cuts? Will we see some combination of the two? These are questions Minnesota's dogged newshounds with their inexhaustible reservoirs of curiosity will, no doubt, be pestering the candidates with this vote harvesting season.
* * *
John Phelan is an Economist at the Center of the American Experiment. john.phelan@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/so-candidates-how-will-you-close-the-state-governments-5-5-billion-budget-deficit/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: How Much Would Universal Childcare Cost Minnesota Taxpayers?
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, Sept. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
How much would universal childcare cost Minnesota taxpayers?
Written by Martha Njolomole | September 25, 2026
In 2025, New Mexico became the first U.S. state to offer universal childcare. In Minnesota, the DFL could push for a similar policy during the 2027 legislative session. To illustrate what this could specifically mean for taxpayers, I estimate the program's cost.
Ultimately, total costs depend
... Show Full Article
MINNETONKA, Minnesota, Sept. 26 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary:
* * *
How much would universal childcare cost Minnesota taxpayers?
Written by Martha Njolomole | September 25, 2026
In 2025, New Mexico became the first U.S. state to offer universal childcare. In Minnesota, the DFL could push for a similar policy during the 2027 legislative session. To illustrate what this could specifically mean for taxpayers, I estimate the program's cost.
Ultimately, total costs dependon several factors, such as overall enrollment and type of care arrangement. However, even under the most conservative assumptions, universal childcare would cost at least $1.7 billion a year for kids under 5. Under a larger Nordic-style program, costs exceed $3 billion a year. Including wrap-around care for school- age kids, Minnesota could spend over $6 billion a year.
Cost estimates: Children under 5
Nordic countries are generally the worldwide model for universal childcare. According to data published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) -- a coalition of several developed countries, including the U.S. -- in 2023, Nordic countries enrolled over 90 percent of all children between 3 and 5 in early childhood education programs. Among younger children, slightly over half participated in daycare programs.
To achieve a Nordic-style universal program, Minnesota would have to fund at least 70 percent of all children.
There were 321,515 children under 5 in Minnesota in 2025, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Excluding the 9,739 children enrolled in federally funded Head Start leaves 311,776 in need of state funding. At a 70 percent take-up rate, 218,243 would enroll in Minnesota's universal childcare program.
According to ChildCare Aware, center-based care costs an average of $18,235 per child under 5. Licensed centers account for 69 percent of all childcare slots in the state. Home-based care costs $9,464 per child and accounts for 31 percent of all capacity. Splitting total enrollment between these two types of care results in an annual cost of $3.4 billion. If childcare becomes more institutionalized and all children enroll in a center-like setting -- which has been a goal of some advocates -- costs would rise to $4 billion a year.
Universal childcare cost estimates (Table)
Historically, parents of younger children have preferred informal care arrangements. This, coupled with a shortage of slots, could translate into lower enrollment rates, similar to those seen in some developed countries and other U.S. programs.
For instance, New Mexico's no-cost childcare enrolled an estimated 45,736 children up to age 13 this year. This is slightly under 15 percent of all eligible children. Kids under 5 made up more than half of total enrollment, but only 27 percent of eligible children in that age group are receiving assistance.
Across the OECD, 85 percent of children aged 3 to 5 are in daycare. Only 21 percent of younger children participate in early education programs.
Accordingly, studies that have modelled the cost of a universal childcare program in the U.S. have utilized low take-up rates. A 2021 study by Penn Wharton Budget Model, for example, assumes a 49 percent take-up rate for 3- and 4-year-olds. For children under 3 -- where shortages are most evident -- the take-up rate is 23 percent.
Because New Mexico's program is new, and peak enrollment is yet to be observed, I use assumptions from the Penn Wharton model to estimate costs under different conditions. Assuming a 36 percent take-up rate (the average of 49 and 23), about 112,239 children enroll in Minnesota's universal childcare program.
Splitting children between home and center-based care results in a total annual cost of $1.7 billion. Costs rise to $2 billion if children exclusively utilize center-based care.
Penn Wharton Budget Model assumptions (Table)
Cost estimates: children between 5 and 13
School-age children only require childcare before or after school and during the summer holiday. Childcare for school-age children is also generally cheaper due to less stringent child-to-staff ratios. Nevertheless, extending the program to children aged 6 to 13 more than triples the eligible population, adding billions to the program's cost.
Assuming a 70 percent enrollment, Minnesota would need to fund over 450,000 school-age children. If this group utilizes half as many weeks of childcare per year as younger kids (26 weeks out of 52), it adds an extra $2.8 billion to the program. Assuming a 36 percent take-up rate, 235,576 children enroll, for an annual cost of $1.4 billion.
For center-only care, the school-age population would add $1.7 billion to the program, assuming a 36 percent take-up rate. On the high end, they would add $3.2 billion, assuming a 70 percent take-up rate.
Cost estimates for school-age children (Table)
Even oil- and gas-rich New Mexico can't make the math work
Altogether, a universal program open to all children up to 13 would cost between $3.1 billion and $6.2 billion a year, eating up 9 to 17 percent of the entire state budget. Funding it would require potentially over ten times what the state currently spends on childcare, and trigger massive, damaging tax hikes, especially since the state is already running on a multi-billion structural deficit.
But even states with deeper pockets cannot make universal childcare work.
New Mexico, for instance, is awash with cash given its booming oil and gas industry. In theory, this makes it among the few states that should be able to absorb the costs of an expansive childcare program. Yet the state has not escaped the fiscal difficulties associated with such an undertaking.
As of August this year, two state officials have filed lawsuits alleging they were fired for pointing out that the program was running up to $83 million over budget. Furthermore, an estimate released by the state's Legislative Finance Committee shows universal childcare could exceed $800 million a year at its peak -- nearly $400 million above its initial projection.
According to the Pew Research Center,
- in her 2027 budget, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) also asked lawmakers to raise general fund support for the ECECD, which will manage the universal child care program, to more than $465 million. That would have been a 54% increase from the previous year. Ultimately, the Legislature approved an 8% increase in general funding for a total of $326 million
This suggests that oil and gas trust funds won't be enough to maintain the program. At the same time, general fund support is limited, putting the program's future on shaky ground.
Even more telling, lawmakers know that the program's price tag could balloon. So, they included guardrails to strip away its "universally free" status when fiscal pressures rise. Specifically,
- if inflation rises, the price of oil falls below a certain threshold, or demand for child care exceeds the availability of funds, the state will have the option of adding co-pays for families making over 600% of the federal poverty level.
If New Mexico can't escape the math on universal childcare, Minnesota certainly won't either.
* * *
Martha Njolomole is an Economist at Center of the American Experiment. martha.njolomole@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/how-much-would-universal-childcare-cost-minnesota-taxpayers/
[Category: ThinkTank]
America First Policy Institute Issues Letter to Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman, Ranking Member
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 (TNSletter) -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following letter to Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and Ranking Member Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont:
* * *
Here is the text of the letter:
September 22, 2026
The Honorable Bill Cassidy, M.D.
Chairman
U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Honorable
-
Bernie Sanders
Ranking Member
U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
-
Dear Chairman Cassidy, Ranking Member Sanders, and Members of
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 (TNSletter) -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following letter to Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and Ranking Member Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont:
* * *
Here is the text of the letter:
September 22, 2026
The Honorable Bill Cassidy, M.D.
Chairman
U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Honorable
-
Bernie Sanders
Ranking Member
U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
-
Dear Chairman Cassidy, Ranking Member Sanders, and Members ofthe Committee:
On behalf of the America First Women's Initiative and women in healthcare across the country, we write to express our strong support for the nomination of Dr. Heidi Overton to serve as Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The FDA requires a leader who demonstrates deep medical knowledge with respect for clinical evidence and the courage to challenge a system that often prioritizes institutional interests over patients. Dr. Overton brings that rare combination of clinical training, policy experience, and principled conviction.
Board-certified in public health and general preventive medicine, she earned her medical degree at the University of New Mexico, completed general surgery training at Johns Hopkins, and holds a Ph.D. in clinical investigation from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. This background has given her a clear-eyed understanding of how research, clinical practice, and federal policy ultimately influence the trajectories of individual patients.
Dr. Overton has also demonstrated the judgment required to lead a large policy-leading agency. She previously served with fiduciary and voting responsibility on the University of New Mexico Board of Regents, overseeing both the university and its health system. She later served as a White House Fellow, Chief Policy Officer of the America First Policy Institute, and Deputy Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council. In each of these roles, she navigated complex institutions and translated policy ideas into tangible implementation that put patients first and corporate interests to the side.
Throughout her career, she has consistently sought solutions that resulted in more choices and more information in the hands of Americans. She fought for hospital price transparency so that families could know the true cost of care before receiving a bill. She developed effective policy solutions to combat fentanyl poisoning and expand access to lifesaving naloxone. She has also posed significant inquiries about the removal of safeguards around chemical abortion and the risks of prescribing these drugs without an in-person medical evaluation.
These issues are at the highest priority for women physicians as we often treat patients who suffer when informed consent is treated as an inconvenience. Women deserve honest, complete information about the medications prescribed to them. Parents deserve a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their children. When legacy medicine points toward overprescription before prevention, doctors need an FDA that follows the evidence, prioritizes transparency, and will revisit long-held assumptions when new data emerges.
Dr. Overton has shown she will ask difficult questions even when doing so could result in tension with medical elites. That bravery is desperately needed at the FDA, the agency overseeing products that touch nearly every American family. Its commissioner must be prepared to withstand pressure from the pharmaceutical industry and political activists. Dr. Overton possesses both the medical expertise to evaluate the science and the resolve to act in a way that follows evidence and empowers patients.
We urge the Committee to rapidly advance Dr. Heidi Overton's nomination and the full Senate to confirm her as Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.
Sincerely,
The Healthcare Professionals of the America First Women's Initiative
Dr. Terri DeNeui, DNP, APRN, ACNP-BC, Founder/Chief Science and Education Officer, Evexias Health Solutions
Dr. Cassie Smith, MD, Founder, Modern Endocrine
Dr. Amy Lungren, MD, FACOG, Vice Chairman, OB/GYN Committee, Presbyterian Hospital Flower Mound
Dr. Taylor Brashear PT, DPT, MBA, NCS, Senior Director, Medical Education & Training Events
Dr. Julie Hinman, NP, DNP, FNP-C, AFMCP
Family Nurse Practitioner, Soal Wellness Holly Woodlee, MSN, APRN, FNP-C
Family Nurse Practitioner, Evexias Health Solutions
Lara Lovell, MSN, APRN, FNP-BC, Family Nurse Practitioner, Evexias Health Solutions
Nicole Taylor, APRN, FNP-BC, Family Nurse Practitioner, Evexias Health Solutions
Alayna Powers, MSN, APRN, FNP-C, Family Nurse Practitioner, Evexias Health Solutions
Samantha Pailes, MSN, APRN, ANP-BC, Family Nurse Practitioner, Evexias Health Solutions
Tricia Lawler, MSN, APRN, FNP-C, Family Nurse Practitioner, Evexias Health Solutions
Mary Ann Butler, APRN, ANP-C, MSN, RN, Founder, WellnessFirm
Lacey Meeks, FNP-BC, Family Nurse Practitioner, Farwell Family Healthcare
* * *
Original text and footnotes here: https://americafirstpolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Overton_Support_Letter_Womens_Healthcare_v4-1.pdf
News Release here: https://americafirstpolicy.com/issues/afpi-coalitions-release-letters-supporting-dr-heidi-overtons-nomination-ahead-of-fda-confirmation-hearing/
[Category: ThinkTank]
America First Policy Institute Issues Commentary to American Greatness: How UN Ambassador Waltz Is Making the UN Great Again
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Sept. 25, 2026, to American Greatness:
* * *
How UN Ambassador Waltz Is Making the UN Great Again
For decades, Americans have complained that the United Nations is a politicized, anti-Western organization that wastes hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. contributions. Presidents and ambassadors have tried to fix it and failed. President Trump and Ambassador Mike Waltz finally have a plan that is producing results.
Trump has told the United Nations to do less, do it better, and make
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on Sept. 25, 2026, to American Greatness:
* * *
How UN Ambassador Waltz Is Making the UN Great Again
For decades, Americans have complained that the United Nations is a politicized, anti-Western organization that wastes hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. contributions. Presidents and ambassadors have tried to fix it and failed. President Trump and Ambassador Mike Waltz finally have a plan that is producing results.
Trump has told the United Nations to do less, do it better, and makeevery American taxpayer dollar count. After a year on the job, Ambassador Waltz and his deputy for management and reform, Jeff Bartos, have turned that directive into results. They helped secure the deepest cut to the UN's regular budget in decades, withdrew the U.S. from hopelessly politicized agencies, and treated America's UN dues as leverage rather than tribute. In doing so, they are reviving a strategy that President Ronald Reagan pioneered and learning from the times it failed.
To read the full article, click here (https://amgreatness.com/2026/09/25/how-un-ambassador-waltz-is-making-the-un-great-again/).
Originally published by American Greatness (https://amgreatness.com/2026/09/25/how-un-ambassador-waltz-is-making-the-un-great-again/)
* * *
The Honorable Fred Fleitz
Vice Chair, American Security
* * *
Original text here: https://americafirstpolicy.com/issues/how-un-ambassador-waltz-is-making-the-un-great-again/
[Category: ThinkTank]
AFPI Celebrates Win for Parental Rights in N.M.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release:
* * *
AFPI Celebrates Win for Parental Rights in N.M.
September 25, 2026
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - AFPI-New Mexico applauds a legal challenge to Albuquerque Public Schools' policy of withholding critical information about children from their parents. Jeanette Martinez, an Albuquerque Public Schools social worker, represented by the Center for American Liberty, filed a federal lawsuit against the Albuquerque Public School Board of Education challenging the policy on First Amendment grounds.
The United States
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release:
* * *
AFPI Celebrates Win for Parental Rights in N.M.
September 25, 2026
ALBUQUERQUE, NM - AFPI-New Mexico applauds a legal challenge to Albuquerque Public Schools' policy of withholding critical information about children from their parents. Jeanette Martinez, an Albuquerque Public Schools social worker, represented by the Center for American Liberty, filed a federal lawsuit against the Albuquerque Public School Board of Education challenging the policy on First Amendment grounds.
The United StatesSupreme Court has long recognized parents' fundamental right to direct the care and upbringing of their children, a principle reaffirmed this year in Mirabelli v. Bonta. Schools should never undermine the parent-child relationship by keeping families in the dark about matters involving their own children.
"Parents have a fundamental right to know what is happening in their children's lives, especially at school," said Vince Torres, AFPI-New Mexico Executive Director. "Albuquerque Public Schools should be working with parents, not creating policies that shut them out. We commend Jeanette Martinez for having the courage to speak up and defend the simple principle that parents, not government institutions, are the primary decision makers for their children."
AFPI recently filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit defending these same fundamental principles. No parent should be sidelined from important decisions involving their child, and no school employee should be forced to choose between following district policy and respecting the rights of families.
* * *
Original text here: https://americafirstpolicy.com/issues/afpi-celebrates-win-for-parental-rights-in-nm/
[Category: ThinkTank]
