What's Happening

US News

President Trump Touts Lower Drug Prices

What's going on: Swearing at your prescription bill is basically a national pastime — and on Monday, President Donald Trump tapped into that frustration. He signed an executive order calling on drugmakers to reduce their prices within 30 days to align with those paid by other countries. The cuts — which Trump says could be at least 50%, also “59%, PLUS!” and even “maybe 90%” — would extend beyond Medicare to drugs offered through Medicaid and private insurance. Drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy could also see price drops. But while the idea is popular, the details are still vague. The order sidesteps Congress, leans heavily on drugmakers’ voluntary cooperation, and threatens to take additional action if companies don’t slash prices.

What it means: This isn’t Trump’s first stab at trying to cut prescription drug costs. Americans currently pay up to 10 times more for the same meds than patients elsewhere. But experts say the fine print in the executive order doesn’t guarantee relief: It’s not a mandate, has no dedicated funding, and isn’t part of the current GOP-led spending plan. As one drug pricing expert put it: “I don’t see a lot of the how. And the how is always the rub.” While the pharmaceutical lobby came out swinging, there’s also the question of whether the US could actually get the same deals as other countries, which often negotiate lower prices for humanitarian reasons — something the US likely wouldn’t qualify for.

Related: Trade War With China Gets a Timeout: What the 90-Day Deal Means (NBC News)

Politics

The GOP's Family Dream? More Stay-at-Home Parents

What's going on: The Trump administration has babies on the brain — specifically, combating declining birth rates in the US. But for some conservative lawmakers, building stronger “family units” isn’t only about more babies — it’s about having parents spend more time at home, per The New York Times. To achieve their pronatalist plans, some GOP lawmakers are pitching bigger child tax credits (up to $5,000 per kid), more housing options, and even direct payments to stay-at-home parents. Most Republicans advocating for this don’t specify which parent would stay home, but the data speaks volumes: more than 80% of stay-at-home caregivers are women. (Not everyone in the White House subscribes to this, per this photo of Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and her baby.)

What it means: Some child care advocates argue the GOP’s family dream doesn’t address the nationwide shortage of care and the increasing costs of raising children. An Ohio mom described the proposed child tax credit this way: “It’s pennies when you need dollars.” Critics also fear a cultural agenda is at play that prioritizes traditional gender roles and sidelines women. While conservatives believe kids are happiest when one of their parents stays home, the research remains mixed. What matters more, studies suggest, is the quality of care — whether it comes from a parent or a provider.

Related: What If We Co-Parented With Our Friends? (The Atlantic)

Climate

The Cost of Climate Disasters Just Got Harder to Track

What's going on: Earlier this year, the Palisades and Eaton wildfires tore through nearly 40,000 acres in Los Angeles, causing an estimated $50 billion in damages, according to one estimate from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). But after producing that estimate, lead researcher Adam Smith says he was told to stop discussing his work, per NBC News. He resigned out of concern. Soon after, the Trump administration retired the database he helped maintain, which had tracked damage from over 400 disasters since the 1980s. The tool had long been used by scientists, insurers, and homeowners to understand climate risks. A current NOAA employee told CBS Newsthe database was decommissioned because it was “not core” to the agency’s mission, but the move comes amid broader White House cuts to climate programs.

What it means: Experts warn the US is now heading into an era of increasingly severe wildfires with far less information to prepare. There’s no longer a clear, centralized record of how destructive wildfires are becoming — making recovery efforts, policy decisions, and future planning harder to justify or shape. NOAA’s now-defunct database was one of the few public tools linking climate disasters to real-world costs. While insurers still have access to private risk models, regular people don’t. That gap means homeowners in fire-prone areas like California and Florida are often stuck with soaring premiums, sometimes hitting $10,000 a year, as insurers like State Farm exit entire regions.

Related: Climate Change Could Be Coming for Your Bananas (The Guardian)