Tag: no-latest

  • Carney embraces a proposal for Canada to become the European Union’s first associate member

    Carney embraces a proposal for Canada to become the European Union’s first associate member

    STRASBOURG, France — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on Thursday embraced the prospect of his country becoming the European Union’s first associate member, saying closer ties with Europe were meant to ensure no country could control Canada’s markets, impair its sovereignty or undermine its freedoms.

    The remarks came after U.S. President Donald Trump suggested the proposed arrangement could be a “hostile act” and threatened heavy tariffs on Europe if he judged its intentions to be unfriendly.

    In a speech that repeatedly extolled cooperation between Europe and Canada, Carney told the European Parliament that he welcomed European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s proposal, unveiled Wednesday.

    He acknowledged that “associate membership” remains to be defined and outlined what he was proposing: deeper Canada-Europe integration across trade, defense, critical minerals, artificial intelligence, energy, space, research and financial services to make both sides less vulnerable to economic and geopolitical pressure.

    “I am not proposing a third bloc in order to become a great-power rival — only with better manners,” he said. “We do not seek power to dominate others.”

    Carney said the goal instead is to build Canada’s resilience so that no country can control its markets, undermine its sovereignty or dictate its choices.

    The prime minister received an ebullient welcome when he walked into the chamber, with many lawmakers approaching him to shake his hand and ask for selfies — and a standing ovation after he spoke. One parliamentarian had donned a Canadian hockey jersey.

    For generations, Canada built its economy around integration with the United States. Trump’s tariffs, demands for economic concessions and repeated talk of making Canada the 51st state have pushed Ottawa to reduce its dependence on the United States and seek a far deeper economic, security and political relationship with Europe.

    Europe offers Canada another path

    Von der Leyen proposed making Canada the EU’s first associate member — a status that does not currently exist in the bloc’s treaties and would have to be created. She said Europe wants to take its relationship with Canada to “the highest level possible.”

    Carney, sitting in the front row of the European Parliament chamber, nodded and rose to embrace von der Leyen as lawmakers gave the proposal a standing ovation.

    Von der Leyen said Canada and the EU should move beyond their existing free trade agreement and create an “Alliance for the Future” encompassing a “common prosperity and economic security space.”

    Carney will host EU leaders for a Canada-EU summit in Montreal on Oct. 29-30, where the two sides are expected to discuss the proposed new relationship in more detail.

    Canada sends roughly 70% of its exports to the United States, making it highly exposed to Trump’s tariffs. Ottawa has retaliated and rejected demands Carney says threaten Canadian sovereignty. Europe took a different path, shelving retaliation and accepting tariffs of up to 15% on most EU exports to the U.S.

    Carney has rallied ‘middle powers’

    Carney has repeatedly urged middle powers to resist that kind of economic coercion. At the World Economic Forum in Davos in January, he warned that when countries negotiate alone with a dominant power, “we negotiate from weakness. We accept what is offered.”

    Trump rebuked him the next day.

    Jonathan Wilkinson, Canada’s ambassador-designate to the EU, said Wednesday that Canada is not seeking full EU membership because that would require surrendering some sovereignty. Instead, Ottawa wants “to get as close as we possibly can” to Europe while increasing Canada’s independence.

    Exactly what associate membership would mean remains to be negotiated.

    Canada has already taken a major step. This year it became the first non-European country to join the EU’s 150-billion-euro ($173-billion) SAFE defense procurement program, giving Canadian companies access to joint procurement as Europe increases defense spending.

    The two sides have also discussed closer cooperation on energy, critical minerals, artificial intelligence and digital trade.

    “The policies and rhetoric of the Trump administration are clearly pushing both Canada and the EU to imagine a world without strong U.S. leadership and to act accordingly,” said Daniel Béland, a political-science professor at McGill University in Montreal.

    Nelson Wiseman, a professor emeritus at the University of Toronto, said Carney’s handling of Trump has heightened European interest in the Canadian leader.

    “Carney’s shrewdness in dealing with Trump has captured Europe’s attention,” Wiseman said.

    Washington will be watching

    Wiseman said Europeans have long regarded Canada as a country that understands the United States particularly well because of their deep economic and political ties. Carney’s willingness to resist Trump rather than quickly accept Washington’s demands has reinforced that perception, he said.

    Béland said Carney may avoid naming Trump on Thursday while leaving little doubt about the target of his broader argument.

    “He knows that, beyond Europe, the world will be watching, including the White House,” Béland said.

  • House passes bill taking aim at data center electricity costs

    House passes bill taking aim at data center electricity costs

    WASHINGTON — The House on Wednesday overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan bill that encourages state utility regulators to insulate consumers from rising energy costs tied to data centers, as members of Congress rush to address a voter outcry over the rapid advance of artificial intelligence.

    It was unclear whether the legislation, introduced by Reps. Gabe Evans, R-Colo., and Kathy Castor, D-Fla., would have its intended effect. The bill would direct state utility regulators to consider adopting federal rules requiring data centers to cover any higher costs associated with their large-scale power use. But under current law, Congress cannot force state regulators to follow federal standards when they are setting electricity rates.

    Still, as the boom in data center construction has become a potent issue in November’s midterm elections, lawmakers in both parties have been eager to have a legislative achievement that they could cite on the campaign trail. It would still have to pass the Senate and be signed by President Donald Trump before it could become law.

    Across the country, Americans in both parties are concerned about rising electricity prices and water use. Data centers, the large complexes of servers that are crucial to powering AI development, have become the most visible avatar of voters’ fears over the growth of AI and the power of big tech companies.

    That issue took on new political urgency this week, after concerns over the safety of AI emerged into wider view and key tech leaders began calling for a slowdown in the pace of development.

    Lawmakers in both parties have called on Congress to impose guardrails on AI, though there is no clear bipartisan consensus on how to do so, and Trump has rejected calls for regulation. Speaker Mike Johnson said Tuesday that he and the president would convene a meeting with AI executives at the White House next week.

    When asked about their plans to address the issue, some House Republicans pointed to the utility legislation, which does not address AI safety concerns. The measure mirrors a voluntary pledge that tech executives made at the White House this year, when they promised to shoulder a larger share of the energy costs associated with data centers.

    “It makes sure that the ratepayers are protected as you’re building out AI infrastructure,” said Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 2 Republican. “That it’s got to be supported by the local community, and that it’s not going to adversely impact ratepayers.”

    Wednesday’s vote, 417-3, reflected the increasingly bipartisan nature of the data center backlash and a growing concern among Republicans that they are particularly vulnerable on the issue after their signature domestic policy bill included tax breaks that benefited developers of data centers. It also marked a turnabout from just a year ago, when almost all House Republicans backed a version of that measure that put a moratorium on any state regulation of AI, though the provision was later stripped by the Senate.

    With the House leaving town Wednesday until after Election Day, this week was lawmakers’ last chance to pass a bill showing they were responsive to voters’ concerns about data centers.

    Evans, who introduced the utility bill, is among the most politically vulnerable Republicans in the House. It is unclear whether the Senate will take up the legislation before October, when it is scheduled to recess until after November’s elections. Its version of the bill was put forward by Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, who is in a competitive race in which Democrats have sought to make data centers a central issue.

    A poll conducted this month by The New York Times and Siena University found that 61% of voters said they opposed the construction of data centers and were about split on which party was better positioned to address it, with a considerable bloc saying they did not know which side to trust.

    When Republicans last year passed their sweeping tax and spending cut bill, they expanded significant tax advantages for businesses for research costs and new investments. They also adjusted a tax break program meant to encourage development in poorer areas so that it would incentivize more development in rural areas.

    Democrats have argued that those provisions have helped technology companies looking to build new data centers, and they have accused Republicans of being indifferent to voters’ worries that such construction is raising their electricity costs and changing their neighborhoods.

    “Unfortunately, these very real concerns are repeatedly swept to the sidelines, minimized or ridiculed by President Trump and Republican congressional leaders,” said Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J.

    Some Republicans have argued that regulations on AI would hinder America’s ability to stay ahead of China in developing the technology. On the House floor, Evans presented his bill as a way to allow for data center development while ensuring that states had a mechanism to address implications for communities.

    The bill, he said, “keeps costs low for Americans and helps us build the energy backbone required to compete and win in the AI race.”

    This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

  • Letters to the Editor | Sept. 17, 2026

    Letters to the Editor | Sept. 17, 2026

    We need a doctor

    As a former healthcare professional, I applaud The Inquirer’s continuing coverage of the measles outbreak in Pennsylvania.

    Even before his appointment, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promoted pseudoscience built on anecdote and apocrypha. He holds no medical degree, and his elevation was a political payoff from Donald Trump — the same president who endorsed Kennedy’s specious claim that autism was caused by Tylenol. Now, because of Kennedy’s anti‑vaccine fearmongering, a disease virtually eliminated 25 years ago is making a resurgence, with cases now surpassing the totals from 2025.

    While the vaccine guidelines supported by Gov. Josh Shapiro are endorsed by preeminent public health researchers, Mr. Kennedy has muddied people’s minds with false flags of political overreach.

    The flu season is upon us. How many will turn away from vaccination, clinging to some politicized belief that they have the “right” to distrust validated medical science? It is a regrettable legacy for the Kennedy name — one that risks associating it not with public service, but with the resurgence of preventable diseases.

    Richard O’Connell, Philadelphia

    Building bridges

    What is wrong with a representative who is willing to cross party lines when they agree with the other party’s position? Isn’t this what we want them to do to reach a compromise to get things done instead of this stalemate we currently have?

    We need more representatives like John Fetterman, not fewer. He should be praised, not criticized.

    Robert Mattern, Wilmington

    Expand imagination

    As board chair of Arts Holding Hands and Hearts, I want to draw attention to an extraordinary milestone in our community: More than 11,500 children in Chester County are now registered for Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library. Thousands of others in the Philadelphia metro area are currently enrolled through local library systems and funding partners. This number represents far more than books — it represents hope, opportunity, and the belief that every child deserves the chance to dream more, learn more, and be more.

    To honor Parton’s life, along with the announcement that Sept. 25 will be “Give Like Dolly Day,” Pennsylvania has an opportunity right now to expand this impact statewide. Senate Bill 459, which would support the statewide expansion of the Imagination Library, is currently before the legislature. I urge readers to contact their state senators and ask them to vote yes on SB 459. This is not a political issue — it is a commitment to our children’s futures.

    I also call on Gov. Josh Shapiro and leaders across Pennsylvania to champion this effort. Dolly Parton has shown what is possible when we invest in children without hesitation or division. We should follow her example and ensure every child in our commonwealth has access to the tools, support, and opportunities that early literacy provides.

    Our kids are ready. Our communities are ready. Now we need our leaders to be ready, too.

    Doug Doerfler, Kennett Square

    Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.

  • Horoscopes: Thursday, Sept. 17, 2026

    Horoscopes: Thursday, Sept. 17, 2026

    ARIES (March 21-April 19). One piece of your life will click into place today, and the rest of the day will go a little better because of it. A solved problem at work may give you more patience at home, or the other way around.

    TAURUS (April 20-May 20). You’re still getting to know someone. Social media posts, dating profiles and resumes project one image. Reputation sheds a more objective light, and some interactions produce another take entirely. Each angle informs, but none tell the whole story.

    GEMINI (May 21-June 21). Because you really want the best for the group, you’re trying to see projects with a more communal eye, blurring the benefit of any particular individual in hopes you can sense the overall good. You’ll have some success with this.

    CANCER (June 22-July 22). The reason you pause before making even a seemingly small choice? You know how small things escalate, sometimes delightfully so. Once upon a time, you said, “I’ll try the …” and that isolated moment has informed a hundred other decisions.

    LEO (July 23-Aug. 22). Each mind makes its own pictures. Light comes from the outside, but the appearance of it comes from the inside. Today, you’ll have an entirely different impression of things than the next person, and it’s important to say your version.

    VIRGO (Aug. 23-Sept. 22). In Greek cosmogony, khaos was the gaping space before the formed universe. When you witness a bit of chaos today, think of it not as the dismantling of order or the breakdown of a system but instead as the moment before creation.

    LIBRA (Sept. 23-Oct. 23). Your opinion of yourself can change by the minute, but it’s better for the work at hand if you stick to one confident stance today. You know what you can do and you can be unwavering in that knowledge. Now’s the time.

    SCORPIO (Oct. 24-Nov. 21). There is a powerful pleasure in knocking down something that is smug, showy or acting superior. Today, a puffed-up claim may give you the opening. One well-placed joke may make your point and get a laugh from the right people.

    SAGITTARIUS (Nov. 22-Dec. 21). Music has no practical purpose, and neither do most of the best things from candy to kisses. Devote some of the day to the impractical and purposeless things that make life delicious.

    CAPRICORN (Dec. 22-Jan. 19). You’ve reason to be confident about your route, although it may not be something you can prove on paper yet. You can trust your gut today — good, because you won’t have time to wait around for the perfect instruction.

    AQUARIUS (Jan. 20-Feb. 18). Of course we can only see what’s on the surface of others, but you wouldn’t for a second believe that’s all there was. You’ve never met a “shallow” person in your life. There’s always more, and your deep respect for this will inform today’s decision.

    PISCES (Feb. 19-March 20). There are some things you’d rather not think about, but it’s not particularly helpful to ignore the entire chapter of life because of a few bad paragraphs. Memories can hurt, but they can also give you comfort, strength and a new plan for going forward.

    TODAY’S BIRTHDAY (Sept. 17). In your Year of Creative Competence, you pour your innate genius into tangible forms, mastering craft and expanding the reaches of what’s possible. Projects, relationships, career and home thrive inside your vision. More highlights: You’ll publish, you’ll take part in an unforgettable event that will repeat for years, and you’ll make big sales and domestic upgrades for better daily living. Libra and Leo adore you. Your lucky numbers are: 20, 5, 14, 29 and 3.

  • Dear Abby | Hornswoggled husband prepares to cast wife aside

    Dear Abby | Hornswoggled husband prepares to cast wife aside

    DEAR ABBY: My husband (80) and I (72) have been married 25 years. This is the second marriage for both of us. Until three years ago, I felt I had a wonderful relationship with his family, so it’s hard to deal with what he’s done to me and my relationships with them. A new daughter-in-law, “Jean,” who has a granddaughter, “Sophie,” has fostered a secret relationship between my husband and this child, who is now 4. I was shocked when they came over on his birthday last year and Sophie was all over him, calling him grandpa, etc. It was apparent what had been going on. I felt humiliated at being excluded but said nothing, as I had been looking forward to getting to know the child. I believe Jean has her eyes on my husband’s money. I suspect he used our joint checking account to buy a life insurance policy with this little girl as a beneficiary. I believe Jean thinks my husband (and I) should foot the bill for Sophie’s college education.

    Now my husband wants a divorce. We’ve had some rocky years due to his health, but this takes the cake. This DIL is greedy and brazen. My husband did not want his son to marry her in the first place, but she had a plan. I have done nothing wrong (though he accuses me of cheating), and it is heartbreaking that his family is ghosting me. How do you fight a liar?

    — ILL IN ILLINOIS

    DEAR ILL: Dealing with a manipulator like Jean can be a nightmare. If you haven’t consulted a divorce lawyer, do so now, and make sure the insurance policy is the first thing you mention. A lot of your story is Jean’s word against yours, but if such a policy was created without your knowledge, your husband could be in big trouble. It may be of utmost interest to your attorney.

    ** ** **

    DEAR ABBY: My oldest son, “Mitch,” from a previous marriage, passed away six months ago. He had five children and two grandchildren. Admittedly, I hadn’t been the most attentive grandparent over the years. I got along well with them, but I wasn’t always around because I was raising my own family. Since Mitch’s death, I haven’t heard a word from any of them. His kids are grown; the youngest is 24. Mitch’s wife has made it known that I am not needed in their lives. She said she needs time and space. I’m respecting that, but I’m not happy that I don’t get to see one of my great-grandsons. Should I force the issue and show up at her door one day? I don’t want to alienate them, but it’s becoming obvious that I’m out of their lives forever. These are sad times. I miss my son as much as they do, but they don’t care about me.

    — DOWN AND OUT IN INDIANA

    DEAR DOWN AND OUT: You mentioned that you “weren’t the most attentive” grandparent over the years. Did this include forgetting them on birthdays, Christmas, graduations and so forth? If the answer lies between “maybe” and “yes,” then it shouldn’t be surprising that your grandchildren learned to do without you in their lives. Allow me to offer this suggestion: Rather than show up unannounced, it might be more effective to reach out to them individually.

  • Speaker Johnson recesses the House early as Rep. Thomas Massie pushes Hegseth impeachment

    Speaker Johnson recesses the House early as Rep. Thomas Massie pushes Hegseth impeachment

    WASHINGTON — Speaker Mike Johnson closed up the House early, sending lawmakers home Wednesday to campaign for the midterm elections after what he claims is the most productive Congress in decades.

    But not without a scathing rebuke from GOP Rep. Thomas Massie for all the unfinished business.

    Massie’s resolution to impeach Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over the war in Iran and his bipartisan effort to force the release of more files in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation are all being left behind, blocked from votes.

    “We’re calling off Congress? And we’re in the majority?” Massie railed from the House floor.

    “I’m trying to get justice for the Epstein survivors,” he said. “I’m trying to stop a war.”

    Massie, the renegade Republican from Kentucky, seized control of the chamber for a blistering hourlong speech criticizing Johnson, the Republican majority, and the work he said the speaker is refusing to conduct to lower prices for Americans and hold the Trump administration accountable.

    “Why would we be canceling days when the country is burning?” Massie said. “We should stay here for every day that’s on the calendar and we should debate.”

    A fitting end to a tumultuous House session

    The afternoon showdown provided a colorful capstone to what has been a tumultuous two-year session of House Republicans in control by a bare majority, with Johnson routinely struggling to keep the place running.

    Despite the enormous tools of the gavel — the speaker holds one of the most powerful positions in Washington, second in the line of succession to the president — Johnson has often been thwarted by his own conference.

    The speaker has repeatedly and abruptly canceled House voting days to send lawmakers home rather than manage the disruptions from his own rebellious flank — particularly those legislative efforts that threatened to rebuke President Donald Trump.

    By one tally, the House has cut 28 days this year, while adding four others, for a net loss of 24 days — about one-fourth of the total scheduled.

    Still, Johnson has hauled major legislation to the finish line, most notably the “Big Beautiful Bill,” a package of tax breaks and social service cuts that Trump signed into law last summer. And on Wednesday the House powered through a full agenda, passing bills large and small, including one to name the American mastodon the national fossil mammal and the Tyrannosaurus Rex the national fossil dinosaur.

    Johnson called Massie’s effort to impeach Hegseth “a stunt.”

    “Secretary Hegseth has done an extraordinary job at the Department of War,” Johnson said.

    “This has literally been the most productive and successful and aggressive Congress” in decades, he said earlier this month, calling it the top five of all time. “We’re confident American voters are going to remember that when they head to vote this fall.”

    Voters will be assessing the situation in November as they decide whether to keep Trump’s party in power, while Democrats work to dislodge Republicans from majority control of both the House and the Senate.

    House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries assailed the “do-nothing” Republican majority and promised Democrats will perform better.

    “Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans promised to bring down grocery prices on Day One. They promised to stop endless wars in the Middle East,” Jeffries said from the steps of the Capitol, flanked by Democratic lawmakers.

    “But Republicans have done nothing to make life more affordable for the American people,” he said.

    He said Democrats’ message is a simple one: “We hear you. We see you … And we are committed to making life better for you.”

    Massie’s last stand

    The confrontation also provided a platform for Massie, the libertarian-leaning go-his-own-way congressman who orchestrated the initial release of the Epstein files and helped lead efforts to halt the conflict in Iran through a war powers resolution.

    Massie lost his own primary bid for reelection after Trump mounted a costly campaign to kick him out of Congress.

    But the congressman has only appeared emboldened in his final days in office.

    Massie spent much of his floor speech assailing Johnson’s leadership and decrying what he calls the “uniparty,” which he characterizes as moving in lockstep with big-money special interests at home and abroad.

    He also devoted substantial time to criticizing Hegseth and the “stupid war” he said the U.S. should not be involved with in Iran. Deriding Hegseth’s leadership, he mocked the secretary for trying to rename the Defense Department as the Department of War without consulting Congress.

    “Hell, you can’t even rename a post office without us,” he said.

    Hegseth’s role in sending the U.S. into the Iran war without approval of Congress and directing the U.S. military strikes of alleged drug trafficking boats in the Caribbean are among the actions Massie characterized as high crimes and misdemeanors in the articles of impeachment against the Defense secretary.

    Massie said he knew when he landed in Washington that he would stand apart.

    “I’m not playing this game,” he said. “I am going to tell people what is going on up here.”

  • Annie Dillard, Pulitzer-winning author of ‘Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,’ dies at 81

    Annie Dillard, Pulitzer-winning author of ‘Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,’ dies at 81

    Still in her 20s and possessed of a curious eye and sensitive spirit, Annie Dillard set out beneath the trees along Tinker Creek in southwestern Virginia and emerged with a best-selling book that made her one of the most honored and beloved writers of her time.

    Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, published in 1974, won the Pulitzer Prize and made Ms. Dillard something more than a literary celebrity: She was viewed as a bard of the environment, a 20th century Henry David Thoreau, a youthful sibyl of the wildwoods, a visionary whose shimmering prose offered glimpses of the eternal.

    Ms. Dillard, who went on to write well-received novels, memoirs, essays, and poems, and was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2015, died Tuesday at her home in Wellfleet, Mass. She was 81. Her death was confirmed by writer Maggie Nelson, her literary executor.

    Pilgrim at Tinker Creek seemed to be an almost perfect embodiment of its times: an eager embrace of the natural world, a work of mystical, even sensuous prose, and the spiritual autobiography of a questing soul.

    “I am no scientist but a poet and a walker with a background in theology and a penchant for quirky facts,” Ms. Dillard wrote. “I walk out; I see some event that would otherwise be utterly missed and lost, or something sees me, some enormous power that brushes me with its clean wing, and I resound like a beaten bell.”

    Her model was Thoreau, who chronicled a year spent in a cabin in his 19th century literary classic Walden, which became a lodestar for students and nature lovers of the 1960s. Ms. Dillard similarly wrote about a single year — winter to winter — at Tinker Creek, giving the impression that she was isolated deep in the Blue Ridge Mountains of southwestern Virginia.

    In reality, Tinker Creek flowed through the suburbs of Roanoke, where Ms. Dillard lived at the time with her first husband. When she recorded her musings on nature, she was seldom out of range of houses, highways, and other fixtures of modern life.

    “I didn’t say, ‘I walked by the suburban brick houses,’” she told the Atlantic in 2015. “I didn’t obscure anything, I just left it out.”

    Yet her descriptions of the stones, trees, insects, and slippery creatures she found there — and her responses to them — suggested a pristine state leading to meditation, even prayer.

    “A reader’s heart must go out to a young writer with a sense of wonder so fearless and unbridled,” novelist Eudora Welty wrote in the New York Times. “There is an ambition about her book that I like, one that is deeper than the ambition to declare wonder aloud. It is the ambition to feel.”

    Ms. Dillard openly invoked a sense of the divine as she explored the world above her head and beneath her feet, but her depiction of nature went far deeper than sunshine and birdsong.

    “Evolution loves death more than it loves you or me,” she wrote in Pilgrim.

    In one of the book’s most celebrated passages, Ms. Dillard described the death of a Tinker Creek frog, attacked by a giant water bug:

    “As I looked at him, he slowly crumpled and began to sag. The spirit vanished from his eyes as if snuffed. His skin emptied and drooped; his very skull seemed to collapse and settle like a kicked tent … I gaped bewildered, appalled. An oval shadow hung in the water behind the drained frog; then the shadow glided away. The frog skin bag started to sink.”

    Earlier writers, including Aldo Leopold, Rachel Carson, and Henry Beston, had described the workings of nature with perception and skill, but Ms. Dillard brought a new sensibility to the art.

    She evoked the ecstasy of saints as she described her search “through the peach orchards of summer, in the forests of fall” for a tree burning with light. When she found such a tree, she described it almost as a moment of seduction: “It was less like seeing than like being for the first time seen, knocked breathless by a powerful glance.”

    Soon after winning the Pulitzer for nonfiction in 1975, Ms. Dillard moved from Virginia to an island in Puget Sound in Washington state. She published another slender meditation on nature and faith, Holy the Firm, in 1977. Two years later, she settled in Middletown, Conn., where she lived for many years while teaching at Wesleyan University.

    In the 1980s, she published Teaching a Stone to Talk, a collection of essays built around travel and science; Living by Fiction, a work of literary criticism; and Encounters With Chinese Writers, based in part on a visit to China with a cultural exchange program.

    Her acclaimed 1987 memoir, An American Childhood, described her Pittsburgh childhood, her intellectual and spiritual growth, her curiosity about the natural world, and her sometimes-strained relations with her socially prominent but idiosyncratic parents. Her father once quit his job to pilot a boat downriver to New Orleans to visit Dixieland jazz clubs. Her mother had a wicked gift for practical jokes, sometimes answering wrong numbers by handing the telephone to another person and giving the instruction, “Here, take this, your name is Cecile.”

    “Our family was on the lunatic fringe,” Ms. Dillard once said.

    From the time Pilgrim was published, her books were never out of print and were often collected in omnibus volumes. Other nonfiction writers of the 1970s and 1980s, including Tom Wolfe, Joan Didion, and Hunter S. Thompson, became renowned for their extravagant prose or personal styles, but their work relied primarily on the outward-looking conventions of journalism.

    Ms. Dillard’s vision, by contrast, was more internal. Like Wolfe and other writers first known for their nonfiction, she began to experiment with fiction and in 1992 published her first novel, The Living, a multigenerational saga about the 19th century settlement of the Northwest.

    She published a collection of essays, For the Time Being, in 1999. Another novel, The Maytrees, about the marital struggles of a couple on Cape Cod, appeared in 2007. Ms. Dillard then turned to painting and, except for a 2016 book of reprinted essays, fell silent as a writer.

    “One of the few things I know about writing,” she wrote in her 1989 book The Writing Life, “is this: spend it all, shoot it, play it, lose it, all, right away, every time. Do not hoard what seems good for a later place in the book, or for another book; give it, give it all, give it now. The impulse to save something good for a better place is the signal to spend it now.”

    Affluent upbringing

    The oldest of three daughters, she was born Meta Ann Doak in Pittsburgh on April 30, 1945. A great-great-grandfather had founded the bathroom-products company American Standard, and she grew up in affluent circumstances.

    She attended private schools, played baseball, and developed an early fascination with natural history. She also became a dedicated reader, documenting the thousands of books she read since 1964.

    An admitted rebel as a teenager, she was suspended from school for smoking. (She was a heavy smoker throughout her life, even when communing with nature.)

    Partly to “smooth off her rough edges,” her parents sent her to what is now Hollins University, a women’s college in southwestern Virginia. After her second year, she married her creative writing professor, poet Richard Dillard.

    After graduating in 1967, she received a master’s degree in English from Hollins in 1968, then stayed for several years in Roanoke, reading about nature and theology and exploring the nearby mountains and streams. She composed much of Pilgrim at Tinker Creek in the Hollins library.

    At first, Ms. Dillard wrote poetry, publishing her first collection, Tickets for a Prayer Wheel, in 1974, just before Pilgrim.

    “My poetry, unfortunately, is no good,” she told the Washington Post in 1987. “There’s nothing in the language that poetry can do that prose can’t do much better — discursive writing, reasoning, information as symbol, narrative — all those things that poetry has forbidden itself.”

    Her first marriage ended in divorce, as did her second, to anthropologist Gary Clevidence. In 1988, she married Robert D. Richardson, the author of biographies of Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson. He died in 2020.

    Survivors include a child from her second marriage, Cody-Rose Clevidence; four stepdaughters, Carin and Shelly Clevidence, and Anne and Lissa Richardson; and two sisters.

    In later years, Ms. Dillard told interviewers she could not write any better than she had when she was younger. She spent her time painting and reading at her homes in Massachusetts and Key West, Fla.

    “Why are we reading,” she observed in The Writing Life, “if not in hope that the writer will magnify and dramatize our days, will illuminate and inspire us with wisdom, courage and the possibility of meaningfulness, and will press upon our minds the deepest mysteries, so we may feel again their majesty and power?”

  • Senate blocks cryptocurrency regulation as Democrats push back on Trump investments

    Senate blocks cryptocurrency regulation as Democrats push back on Trump investments

    WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats on Tuesday blocked legislation to create a new regulatory framework for cryptocurrency, stalling an industry-backed effort to place new guardrails around digital assets after demanding more limits on President Donald Trump’s investments.

    The 49-50 vote on whether to move forward with the legislation was a pivotal election-year test for the $2.3 trillion cryptocurrency market as the industry has pushed aggressively for a uniform set of rules. The Senate debate came as cryptocurrency companies have become a major political force, and as Trump has amassed significant wealth in crypto while in office.

    While some Democrats are friendly toward the industry and support the idea of regulation, they have been adamant that the bill include strong ethics safeguards to prevent the president and his family from enriching themselves while he’s in office. The opposition appears to have only solidified two months before the midterm elections, despite significant donations that crypto groups have given to some Democrats in recent years. In the end, no Democrats supported it.

    “Let’s make sure that we do not pass a crypto bill that will let Donald Trump continue to rake in billions of dollars in crypto profits while working families across this country struggle to deal with higher prices and an economy that gets worse by the day,” said Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee.

    Several Democrats who have been supportive of the bill aside from the ethics concerns said they were still open to negotiating.

    Virginia Sen. Mark Warner said he still wants regulation of the crypto industry, but “we cannot pass landmark legislation governing this industry while allowing the president of the United States to personally profit from it.”

    The White House indicated Tuesday that it would now turn to agencies to implement parts of their crypto agenda and warned that the failed vote would continue to stifle financial innovation domestically while it flourishes abroad.

    “The full cost of today’s result may not be known for years to come, but this much is clear: It increases the risk that the standards that global financial markets adhere to in the future will be those of Brussels or Beijing, rather than Washington and New York,” Patrick Witt, the White House’s crypto adviser, said.

    Trump agrees to some changes as Democrats push back

    As Democrats made clear they would block the bill, Trump agreed to some concessions on ethics, including new restrictions on federal elected officials from issuing digital assets like the presidential meme coins he and his wife Melania launched before he took office for his second term. He agreed to new concessions Sunday, such as additional powers for state attorneys general that Democrats had sought to enforce the crypto measures.

    Those concessions were not enough for Democrats, who sent a counteroffer late Monday to expand the ethics provision but were not able to strike a final deal. Among other issues, they said the bill still needed stricter enforcement and a requirement for Trump or any future president to divest if holdings reach a certain value.

    “Instead of spending their time twisting themselves into knots to appease President Trump, Republicans should have worked more closely with Senate Democrats to craft a bill that could pass with strong ethics provisions,” said Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, who was involved in last-minute talks with GOP senators on the bill.

    Republicans needed Democratic support to win the 60 votes necessary to move forward on the bill in the 53-47 Senate.

    North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican who worked with Gallego to strengthen the ethics provision, said before the vote that he was pleased with Trump’s latest concessions.

    “We’re so close,” Tillis said. “It’s just a shame to not take this opportunity.”

    Trump has amassed big crypto profits

    Trump’s family has raked in big profits in the crypto sector since he was reelected, including the meme coin, announced the day before Trump took office. Top investors were invited to a private reception with the president.

    Trump’s family also has a controlling stake in World Liberty Financial, a crypto firm co-founded with the president’s special envoy Steve Witkoff. Trump reported more than $500 million in revenue from World Liberty Financial sales of crypto products, including “governance tokens,” in his annual disclosure report filed with the Office of Government Ethics. That is a significant share of the more than $1.4 billion that the president reported from crypto businesses last year.

    A measure enacted into law last year regulating stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency, barred members of Congress and their families from profiting off them, but it did not extend to Trump or his family.

    Legislation aims to give crypto firms legal certainty

    Republicans who have been working on the legislation for more than a year say it could now stall indefinitely. The House and Senate will be out of session during October and before the elections, and the dynamics could significantly shift if Democrats win back the majorities of the House or Senate, or both, in November.

    Republican Sen. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, a lead sponsor of the bill, said beforehand that a no vote means ”opposing real ethics reforms on politicians’ personal investments, handing American leadership in digital assets to our foreign competitors, and leaving Americans with zero protections in the digital asset markets.”

    Supporters say the legislation aims to give the industry more legal certainty and protect consumers by creating a broad set of guardrails and regulatory requirements, including better enforcement to prevent bad actors and protections to prevent a market collapse.

    As talks continued Tuesday morning, Lummis posted on X that it was “now or never for the Clarity Act,” referring to the bill’s name.

    “The time for negotiating is over,” she wrote.

    Crypto cash has flooded campaigns

    Opponents, mostly Democrats, say the bill is a giveaway to the industry as crypto companies have become generous donors to candidates in both parties around the country.

    “It’s no secret that they are seeking to ram a bill through Congress based upon not the merits of the bill, but the threat that they will spend even more money in elections against people who vote against it,” said Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut.

    In 2024, the crypto industry spent more than $130 million in congressional races, including $40 million in Ohio and $10 million each in Arizona and Michigan.

    “DC received a clear message that being anti-crypto is a good way to end your career, as it doesn’t represent the will of the voters,” Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, the nation’s largest crypto exchange, wrote in a social media post the day after the 2024 election.

  • Trump bars some South Africans over claims of anti-white discrimination

    Trump bars some South Africans over claims of anti-white discrimination

    JOHANNESBURG — The Trump administration imposed visa restrictions on selected South Africans on Tuesday and warned that it could take further punitive actions if South African leaders did not address President Donald Trump’s concerns over what he sees as discrimination against white people.

    The visa policy expands the administration’s efforts to punish South Africa since Trump last year accused the government of seizing land from Afrikaners, a white South African minority, and allowing them to be killed in what he has labeled genocide. Claims of genocide against white South Africans are widely acknowledged as false, and President Cyril Ramaphosa has said Trump’s policies toward South Africa are racist.

    The visa restrictions will prevent selected individuals from entering the United States. Under law, the government is not allowed to publicly disclose who is affected.

    In a statement, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the United States remained “gravely concerned about racially motivated crime and government-sponsored discrimination occurring against the Afrikaners and other minority populations in South Africa.”

    He said the restrictions would target South Africans involved in race-based discrimination, those responsible for a law that enables the government to seize land without compensation, and those who incite violence against racial minorities.

    In a statement, South Africa’s foreign minister, Ronald Lamola, said Washington’s unilateral action “once again aligns with the misrepresentation of South Africa’s domestic policy by fringe groups.” He called on the United States to respect South Africa’s sovereignty on handling domestic issues.

    The policy was announced less than three weeks after Ramaphosa met with the U.S. ambassador, Leo Brent Bozell III. The South African government described the engagement as “an opportunity to strengthen and recalibrate” the relationship between the countries.

    In a social media post Wednesday, Bozell said he had “attempted time and again to express” that South Africa could face severe consequences if it did not take action on the administration’s demands, which include exempting American companies from Black ownership requirements and rolling back a land expropriation law.

    “This visa restriction policy is only the first step in a series of escalatory measures that will show America’s firm resolve in this matter,” Bozell wrote.

    The U.S. move was the latest sign of the deteriorating relationship between the United States and South Africa.

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • Charlie Kirk’s family accuses university of ‘stunning’ security failures

    Charlie Kirk’s family accuses university of ‘stunning’ security failures

    The family of slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk has accused the Utah university where he was killed last year of “stunning” security failures that made him an easy target for a rooftop assassin.

    In a legal notice filed this month, lawyers for Kirk’s wife, parents, and children said Utah Valley University did not have a written security plan or hold a security briefing before Kirk arrived for an open-air debate last September that drew a crowd of thousands.

    They also said the university’s police chief had failed to address concerns raised by Turning Point USA, the conservative activist group founded by Kirk, about how easily people could climb onto the rooftops that overlook the sunken plaza where he was shot.

    The accusations came in a “notice of claim” that lawyers for the Kirk family sent to the state of Utah earlier this month and made public Wednesday. Kirk’s family has not yet sued, but the notice is a potential precursor to a wrongful-death lawsuit against the public university or the state.

    “His murder was entirely preventable,” Brett Parkinson, a lawyer for the Kirk family, said in a statement.

    In a statement Tuesday, Utah Valley University said its “focus remains on supporting our campus community” but declined to comment further on the notice. It is conducting its own review of security surrounding the shooting.

    Kirk, one of the country’s most influential and visible conservative activists, made Utah Valley University in Orem the first stop of his “American Comeback” tour of college campuses. About 3,000 people showed up on Sept. 10, 2025, to see him debate political opponents on a sunny afternoon.

    He was just minutes into the event and answering an audience member’s question when he was shot in the neck by a gunman perched on a rooftop about 400 feet away.

    In the legal notice, lawyers for Kirk’s family said the university’s security decisions “ultimately rendered Mr. Kirk helpless to the rooftop shooter in an assassination that could have been avoided.”

    According to the notice, a Turning Point USA official texted Jeff Long, the university police chief, before the event to relay concerns from a Turning Point campus chapter about students’ ability to take staircases to building rooftops.

    “It would be nice to either have it controlled access or allow one of my guys to be there as well. If possible,” a Turning Point official texted Long, according to the legal notice.

    Kirk’s lawyers say Long responded, “I got you covered.”

    Lawyers for the Kirk family argued in the legal notice that the university should have been on alert for a rooftop sniper after a would-be assassin fired at President Donald Trump in 2024 from a roof outside a rally in Butler, Pa.

    Surveillance videos and testimony from investigators suggest that Tyler J. Robinson, the 23-year-old man charged with aggravated murder in Kirk’s killing, encountered virtually no obstacles or resistance on his way to the roof. Robinson, who could face the death penalty, has pleaded not guilty.

    Surveillance videos from the morning of the shooting captured the gunman as he walked to a railing on the roof of a campus building and then left. When he returned later, he “crawled to a sniper perch” along the edge of the roof, took aim at Kirk, and fired, according to a legal filing by prosecutors.

    The legal claim filed by Kirk’s family said the university did not fly drones or monitor its surveillance cameras in real time during the event — actions that might have spotted the gunman.

    It also says that despite Kirk’s fame and the size of the crowd, the university only had six officers on duty that day and did not ask police in Orem or nearby Provo for help until after the fatal shot was fired.

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.