An estimated 530,000 Alabama children who get free or reduced price school meals are now eligible for food benefits this summer after the school year ends, officials said Tuesday.

The Alabama Department of Human Resources said qualifying households will get $120 for each participating student to buy food that is eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program at stores that accept Electronic Benefit Transfer cards. The Summer Pandemic EBT program benefits are expected to begin rolling out in mid-to-late summer.

‘Inflation has transformed each grocery trip into a balancing act for low-income families struggling to afford food for their children on top of other costs like housing and transportation,’ said Alabama Department of Human Resources Commissioner Nancy Buckner in a news release. ‘Every dollar of support from programs like P-EBT strengthens their spending power and weakens the prospect of hunger, while promoting nutritious meals for children.’

Summer P-EBT benefits are limited to students who receive free or reduced price meals under the National School Lunch Program. To become eligible, families may apply by contacting their schools. Applications must be approved by May 16 to qualify for summer benefits.

Households with eligible students who received P-EBT benefits previously will access Summer P-EBT benefits on their existing EBT cards. Those who are new to the National School Lunch Program will get EBT cards in the mail.

The Alabama House on Tuesday advanced a plan to use the state’s final $1 billion in federal pandemic relief funds mostly on a mix of water and sewer infrastructure, broadband expansion and health care reimbursements.

Representatives voted 102-3 for the legislation, which now moves to the Senate. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey called lawmakers into special session last week to find a way to use the state’s remaining $1.06 billion sent from the American Rescue Plan — the sweeping relief plan approved by Congress to help the country climb out of the coronavirus crisis.

The proposed spending plan would allocate:

— $339 million for healthcare costs, including $100 million to reimburse hospitals for pandemic-related expenses, $100 million to reimburse nursing homes and $25 million to support mental health programs and services.

— $400 million for water and sewer infrastructure projects, including $195 million for high-need projects, $200 million for matching funds for public water and sewer systems, and $5 million for septic systems in the Black Belt region.

— $260 million for improvement and expansion of broadband network access.

— $55 million for projects that address economic impacts of the pandemic. The legislation says the Department of Finance may distribute the money for a wide range of needs such as food banks, long-term housing and summer learning programs for children.

The spending plan directs pots of money to state agencies, such as the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, and other entities to distribute for the allotted purposes.

House members also voted 104-0 for separate legislation to use $60 million from a budget surplus to finish repaying money borrowed a decade ago during a budget shortfall. Alabama voters in 2012 approved borrowing $437 million from the Trust Fund — a state savings account fueled by offshore drilling royalties — to avoid cuts to state services. Lawmakers stood and applauded when the legislation was approved. The bill also moves to the Alabama Senate.

Schools that experience a high number of crimes would have to hire police officers and station them in their buildings under a Republican-authored bill the state Assembly passed Tuesday.

Under the bill, if a school has more than 100 incidents in a semester, and at least 25 of those result in an arrest, the school must hire an armed school resource officer to work at the school.

The cost of hiring the officer would be partially reimbursed by the state using federal COVID-19 relief money. The state education department said it could not calculate how many schools may qualify.

The measure comes after the state’s two largest districts in Milwaukee and Madison voted in 2020 to remove school resource officers.

The only registered supporter of the measure was the Milwaukee Police Association. Opponents included Milwaukee Public Schools, Disability Rights Wisconsin and the Wisconsin School Social Workers Association. The Wisconsin Association of School Boards also raised concerns.

Democrats criticized the bill as a Republican attack on Madison and Milwaukee schools.

Rep. LaKeisha Myers of Milwaukee said her school board should be allowed to set its own rules and accused Republicans of ‘wrapping yourself in fear.’ Rep. Francesca Hong of Madison said increasing violence in schools is a result of Republicans choosing to underfund public education.

Republicans called the bill a common-sense first step toward reducing violence in schools.

‘It’s clear the status quo can’t continue,’ aid Rep. Nik Rettinger, the bill’s chief Assembly sponsor. ‘I worry that if we stay on the current path, more students and faculty will be attacked.’

The Assembly ultimately approved the bill on a 59-36 vote.

The chamber approved another bill Tuesday that would require schools to collect and report information about crimes on school grounds. The GOP-controlled Legislature passed that measure last session, but Democratic Gov. Tony Evers vetoed it.

Democrats complained that the bill does nothing to stop violence in schools going forward. Republicans countered that parents deserve to know if their children’s schools are failing.

‘I’m not going to solve every problem with this. This is not a school safety bill. This is a school transparency bill,’ said Rep. Cindi Duchow, the bill’s chief Assembly sponsor.

The Assembly passed the bill 61-35.

Both bills go next to the Senate. Approval in that chamber would send the measures on to Evers. Britt Cudaback, the governor’s spokesperson, didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment on the bills’ prospects.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, said Tuesday that he’s planning a hearing on this week’s collapse of two multi-billion dollar banks.

Silicon Valley Bank, the sixteenth-largest bank in the U.S., was shut down by regulators following a rush of investors withdrawing funds, driven by concerns over the bank’s solvency. A short while later, the crypo-focused Signature Bank was shut down in New York in a bid to stave off the potential beginning of another financial crisis.

Members of Congress were briefed on the matter over the weekend, and some again on Monday afternoon. Since then, multiple investigations have been opened into the collapses. The spotlight is now on Brown’s committee to lead the Senate’s response.

‘We’ll do a hearing as soon as we can get things together and get the witnesses. We want to make it a good hearing,’ the Democrat told reporters in response to a question by Fox News Digital.

Brown did not share a specific timeline but indicated that discussions were ongoing over whether lawmakers will seek testimony from the leaders of the failed banks or from Biden administration officials.

‘I’m not sure if we invite bank executives or just the regulators, we haven’t decided,’ Brown said.

Sen. Tina Smith, a Democrat on the panel, told Fox News Digital, ‘potentially yes’ when asked if she would want to hear from the bank CEOs at a future prospective committee hearing.

A Democrat not on the committee, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said getting the bank CEOs to testify would be a ‘smart move.’

But across the aisle, Banking Committee member Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, doubted how much could be gleaned from bank executives’ testimony.

‘You know, I’m happy to hear from the CEOs,’ Vance said. ‘I will say that I don’t think we’re going to learn a whole lot from talking to them. They clearly screwed up, I suspect they’re going to be in CYA-mode, knowing they’re going to face potentially even criminal liability over the next couple of years.’

He added, ‘What I really want to hear from is the FDIC and the Treasury and the [Federal Reserve] about why they decided to bail SVB out in the first place.’

‘The argument that it was necessary to prevent a bank run doesn’t hold water, you could have provided liquidity to the financial system without bailing out the SVB uninsured deposits,’ he said.

The Biden administration has insisted that federal regulators were not bailing out the banks when they announced on Sunday night that they were stepping in to ensure all of SVB’s depositors would get their money back, despite Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) dictating that cash in the bank is only insured up to $250,000.

Vance indicated he wanted to hear in particular from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, explaining, ‘I don’t know why they didn’t see this coming… this is their job, to see impending bank failures within their portfolio.’

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was discharged from a hospital Monday after being treated for a concussion from his fall at a hotel in Washington, D.C., last week. 

In a statement, a spokesperson for McConnell said the recovery was ‘proceeding well.’

‘At the advice of his physician, the next step will be a period of physical therapy at an inpatient rehabilitation facility before he returns home,’ said David Popp, communications director for McConnell. ‘Over the course of treatment this weekend, the Leader’s medical team discovered that he also suffered a minor rib fracture on Wednesday, for which he is also being treated.’

‘The Leader and Secretary Chao are deeply thankful for the skilled medical care, prayers, and kindness they have received,’ Popp added. 

McConnell, 81, was hospitalized for several days after his Wednesday fall while attending an evening dinner for the Senate Leadership Fund, a political action committee aligned with him, when he tripped and fell.

The event was at the Waldorf Astoria Washington DC, formerly the Trump International Hotel, Washington, D.C.

In August 2019, McConnell fractured his shoulder after a fall at his Louisville home. As a child, the senator was treated for polio, and he has since acknowledged some difficulty in adulthood in climbing stairs. 

Fox News’ Brooke Singman and Chris Pandolfo contributed to this report. 

Last month, President Biden’s Department of Energy proposed new efficiency standards for washing machines that requires new appliances to use considerably less water, all in an effort to ‘confront the global climate crisis.’ 

Leading industry corporations have voice their opinion on the rule, claiming the mandates force manufacturers to reduce cleaning performance to ensure their machines comply. Each cycle will ‘take longer, the detergent will cost more, and in the end, the clothes will be less clean,’ according to manufacturers like Whirlpool. 

The proposed washing machine change is the latest example of the Biden administration pushing more consumer regulations to advance green initiatives. In February, the administration received heat for a leaked proposal which would have banned half of America’s gas stoves in addition to another proposal to heavily regulate refrigerators. 

‘Like many efficiency standards, the government claims that although these standards will raise the cost of appliances, they are justified because they will reduce consumer spending on energy & water even more. Of course, if that were true, consumers would likely buy more efficient appliances anyway, given that studies show consumers consider energy and water costs,’ American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow James Coleman told Fox News Digital. ‘If consumers do fully consider what they will pay on energy in their individual circumstances, then the standards would, on-net, harm consumers.’

‘This proposal builds on the more than 110 actions the Biden-Harris Administration took in 2022 to strengthen energy efficiency standards and save the average family at least $100 annually through lower energy bills,’ the Department of Energy said in a press release. ‘Collectively these energy efficiency actions will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 2.4 billion metric tons, save consumers $570 billion cumulatively over 30 years, and support President Biden’s ambitious clean energy agenda to combat the climate crisis.’

The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers argued that the Energy Department’s washing machine regulations ‘would have a disproportionate, negative impact on low-income households’ by eliminating cheaper appliances from the market. The Energy Department estimates that manufacturers will incur nearly $700 million in conversion costs to transition to the new machines.

‘The proposal also argues that it won’t reduce appliance performance, but skepticism is warranted because past regulations have often been found to reduce performance,’ Coleman told Fox News Digital.

Illinois will become one of three states to require employers to offer paid time off for any reason after Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed a law on Monday that will take effect next year.

Starting Jan. 1, Illinois employers must offer workers paid time off based on hours worked, with no need to explain the reason for their absence as long as they provide notice in accordance with reasonable employer standards.

Just Maine and Nevada mandate earned paid time off and allot employees the freedom to decide how to use it, but Illinois’ law is further reaching, unencumbered by limits based on business size. Similarly structured regulations that require employers to offer paid sick leave exist in 14 states and Washington, D.C., but workers can only use that for health-related reasons.

Illinois employees will accrue one hour of paid leave for every 40 hours worked up to 40 hours total, although the employer may offer more. Employees can start using the time once they have worked for 90 days. Seasonal workers will be exempt, as will federal employees or college students who work non-full-time, temporary jobs for their university.

Pritzker signed the bill Monday in downtown Chicago, saying: ‘Too many people can’t afford to miss even a day’s pay … together we continue to build a state that truly serves as a beacon for families, and businesses, and good paying jobs.’

Proponents say paid leave is key to making sure workers, especially low-income workers who are more vulnerable, are able to take time off when needed without fear of reprisal from an employer.

But critics say the law will overburden small businesses already struggling to survive the post-pandemic era amid the high inflation that has gripped the nation for nearly two years.

National Federation of Independent Business Illinois state director Chris Davis said that business owners are best positioned to work with their employees one-on-one to meet their needs.

The new law is ‘a one-size-fits-all solution to a more intricate problem,’ he said.

Bill sponsor Rep. Jehan Gordon-Booth, a Peoria Democrat, said the bill is the product of years of negotiations with businesses and labor groups.

‘Everyone deserves the ability to take time off,’ she said in a statement. ‘Whether it’s to deal with the illness of a family member, or take a step back for your mental health, enshrining paid leave rights is a step forward for our state.’

‘This is about bringing dignity to all workers,’ she said at the signing.

Ordinances in Cook County and Chicago that already require employers to offer paid sick leave have been in place since July 2017, and workers in those locations will continue to be covered by existing laws rather than the new state law.

Any new local laws enacted after the state law takes effect must provide benefits that are greater or equal to the state law.

Molly Weston Williamson, paid leave expert at the Center for American Progress, said the law ‘creates a strong foundation for employers to build from while generating a healthier, more productive workforce.’

But Williamson added that while Illinois’ law is a step in the right direction, U.S. paid leave laws remain ‘wildly out of line with all of our economic peers internationally.’

‘In the United States, federal law does not guarantee anyone the right to even a single paid day off work. Not when you’re sick, not when you have a baby, not when your mom has a stroke. Not a single paid day,’ she said.

Joan Van, a server at an international hotel chain and single mother of three, currently has no paid time off.

But the Belleville parent leader with Community Organizing and Family Issues said that knowing that she will have five days next year brings a smile to her face.

‘It’s going to help out a lot of people, a lot of mothers, a lot of single mothers at that,’ she said.

EXCLUSIVE: The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Chair Rep. Richard Hudson pledges to go ‘on offense’ in next year’s elections to expand the GOP’s razor-thin majority in the House of Representatives.

‘We’re on offense. We’re not going to protect our majority. We’re going to grow our majority. I think this list is very realistic and I think we’ve got some real opportunities to pick up seats,’ Hudson told Fox News in an exclusive interview on Monday.

The list the six-term Republican from North Carolina referred to includes 37 target Democratic held seats that the House GOP re-election committee’s going to aim to flip from blue to red in 2024, in hopes of expanding their current extremely fragile four-seat majority. The list includes two open Democratic seats currently held by Reps. Katie Porter of California and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, who are running for the Senate rather than re-election in the House next year.

Republicans won back control of the chamber from the Democrats in November’s midterm elections, but an expected red wave never materialized and hopes for a larger majority in the House disappeared. Some of the districts the NRCC is targeting are races they heavily invested in during the 2022 cycle but were unsuccessful in flipping.

But Hudson says ‘it’ll be a presidential cycle so it will be very different. I think the turnout models will be different.’

HOUSE DEMOCRATS’ CAMPAIGN CHAIR TAKES AIM AT THE GOP MAJORITY

He also praised his predecessor as NRCC chair – House Majority Whip Rep. Tom Emmer of Minnesota – for ‘recruiting unique and diverse candidates who reflect their districts and so we’re going to continue to do that. I think recruitment’s going to be really important.’

Hudson also pointed to fundraising, noting that ‘one of the big difference makers last election was the money gap that our candidates had compared to the Democratic incumbents in particular. We’re looking at ways we can fix that. We’ve got to get more candidate dollars to our candidates, make sure they’re better funded.’

Hudson emphasized that one thing the NRCC won’t do is take sides in contested GOP House primaries.

‘We’ve got a long-standing policy at the NRCC to not get involved in open seat primaries by endorsing candidates. We won’t do that,’ he said. 

But, he added, ‘I think you may see us get involved earlier in terms of helping people build better campaigns. If we’ve got an open seat and there are a number of candidates that we think have a good chance of winning in the general election and reach out to us and want to work with us, then we’re going to work with them and make sure they build strong campaigns even in the primaries.’

Top of the ticket races traditionally influence down ballot contests – and a major factor that will likely heavily impact the 2024 fight for the House majority will be the White House race – and the battle for the GOP presidential nomination.

Asked how the burgeoning Republican presidential primary race – where fireworks are already flying – may impact his mission to expand the House majority, Hudson answered: ‘I don’t know. Obviously I hope we have a Republican nominee for president who can run away with it and has huge coattails.’

‘We’ve got to hope for the best and prepare for the worst,’ he added. ‘And make sure we’re building strong campaigns and make sure that we’re doing a better job getting funds directly to our candidates, so they’re better positioned than the Democrats.’

The NRCC’s target list was released three days after their counterpart, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) released its own list of 29 vulnerable ‘front line’ members.

‘House Republicans have shown voters their caucus is more concerned with political investigations, empowering extremists, and seeking power for themselves, than working to improve the lives of everyday families – and that will stand in clear contrast to the formidable Democratic Frontliners,’ DCCC Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene of Washington state said in a statement Friday. ‘Democrats will have great offensive opportunities in 2024, and holding onto these seats is key to our path to reclaiming the majority.’

The DCCC has not yet released its own target list of red seats it hopes to flip next year.

North Carolina Republican legislative leaders can defend in federal court the state restrictions on dispensing abortion pills that are being challenged by a physician, a judge has ruled.

U.S. District Judge William Osteen granted the request by House Speaker Tim Moore and Senate leader Phil Berger to formally intervene in the lawsuit filed in January.

Berger and Moore specifically sought involvement after the office of Democratic state Attorney General Josh Stein told the legislators that it believed the arguments by the lawsuit plaintiff about the drug mifepristone were ‘legally correct.’ State attorneys representing Stein, a case defendant but an abortion rights supporter, said the same in a written response to the lawsuit.

Osteen’s ruling on Friday wasn’t surprising. State law already gives the House speaker and Senate leader the ability to intervene in litigation to defend North Carolina’s statutes. A U.S. Supreme Court decision last summer involving North Carolina’s voter ID law also affirmed their ability to enter cases.

Dr. Amy Bryant — the physician who sued — as well as Stein and other defendants didn’t oppose the legislators’ intervention request.

Bryant’s lawsuit alleges state laws and rules conflict with her ability to provide mifepristone to patients. She said those restrictions should be preempted by powers the U.S. Food and Drug Administration hold to regulate the drug.

Osteen told Berger and Moore to file a written response to the lawsuit by March 24. In a previous document, the legislative leaders wrote that North Carolina abortion regulations apply ‘with equal force to both surgical and chemical abortion procedures’ and that Bryant’s arguments would mean the state couldn’t regulate the safety of chemical abortions.

Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee on Monday said the quick collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the sudden need for a bailout plan shows federal regulators may not have been as aware of the situation as they should have been.

Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., accused regulators of being ‘asleep at the wheel’ in a statement to Fox News Digital after the sixteenth-largest U.S. bank collapsed within roughly 48 hours. A short while later, federal regulators shut down the cryptocurrency-focused Signature Bank in New York.

‘As a member of the Senate Banking Committee, I have been following the events of the last week closely. These events are the result of some federal bank regulators being asleep at the wheel and shockingly poor management by an isolated number of banks,’ Lummis told Fox News Digital.

She also stood firm against ‘any bailout of these banks’ beyond the current federal requirements — after the Biden administration vowed that investor funds will be recouped fully, beyond the $250,000 maximum deposit protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). ‘A bailout would encourage risky behaviors by similar institutions down the road,’ she said.

Biden officials have insisted that they are not bailing out SVB’s investors, and that funds used to make bank customers whole would not be paid for with taxpayer receipts, but with fees collected from banks.

Silicon Valley Bank was shut down by regulators following a rush of investors withdrawing funds, resulting in the largest U.S. bank failure since the 2008 financial crisis.

Lummis said she would ‘continue to be engaged on this issue’ and expressed confidence that ‘Wyoming’s banks and credit unions remain strong.’

She did add that she is ‘gravely concerned that Wyoming banks will be charged higher insurance premiums to pay for the FDIC recovering uninsured deposits.’

Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., another member of the Banking Committee, listed off multiple questions she still had about the financial turmoil in comments to Fox News Digital just before Senate Republicans received their own briefing on it — after claiming many were excluded from the Treasury’s initial briefing to Congress on Sunday night.

‘Why did regulators not see this coming? Did Silicon Valley’s focus on ESG distract from their fiduciary responsibilities, in turn contributing to its collapse?’ Britt asked.

‘Ultimately, American taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for bank executives’ mismanagement and regulators’ failure. I will continue to support the strength of our financial system, which is crucial to hardworking families, small businesses, retirees, and communities in every corner of our nation.’

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the top Republican on the banking panel, also signaled wariness at too much federal intervention in a press statement made on Sunday night.

‘Building a culture of government intervention does nothing to stop future institutions from relying on the government to swoop in after taking excessive risks,’ Scott said at the time.