The United States’ human rights practices are taking a nosedive

Rights violations have become widespread and systematic, and not just against immigrants

K. Chad Clay, University of Georgia

In the lead-up to the 2026 midterm elections, how is the U.S. government performing in terms of human rights? Listening to politicians, it can be difficult to know.

On one hand, some have pointed to a number of potential human rights abuses committed by the U.S. government inside and outside its borders in the past two years.

On the other hand, while marking the United States’ 250th anniversary this year, Donald Trump called the country “the home of freedom,” “the land of liberty” and “the most extraordinary, most exceptional, most incredible nation ever to exist on the face of the earth.”

“We’re doing better now than we’ve ever done before,” he said.

So which is it?

According to many of the human rights data sources available, the U.S. lags behind most other high-income democracies – countries that are both members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and classified as high income by the World Bank. The U.S.’s poor performance spans civil and political rights, such as the right to be free from torture and the right to political participation, as well as economic and social rights, including the rights to health and food.

In fact, the U.S. has been a relatively poor performer across many of these rights for quite some time, regardless of the political party in power.

Even accounting for the U.S.’s prior poor practices, however, new data from the Human Rights Measurement Initiative shows that in 2025 the country’s civil and political rights performance deteriorated even further.

As a human rights scholar who has been measuring human rights practices for 20 years – and as one of HRMI’s co-founders – I believe this data raises serious questions about the United States’ commitment to human rights.

Justice League reject

Donald Trump's big meeting with China's leader

The "airport" was actually the US Air Force Joint Base Andrews just outside DC. It wasn't like Trump met Xi at the gate at Dulles.

Before Xi JinPing deplaned, Trump had US military personnel on their hands and knees making sure the red carpet was absolutely clean:

Despite a warm fall day, Trump worn an overcoat and, oddly, one glove over the hand that is often heavily caked with makeup to hide discoloration. Then during an Air Force flyover, Trump seemed to wince in pain:

But all was good when Trump and Xi met in private: 

Satire (AI generated), though this could be real.

Former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau shares insights into Trump policies with Brown University audience

Says Trump’s ‘win-lose’ approach is hurting U.S.-Canada relations

By Christopher Shea, Rhode Island Current

The last time former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was in Rhode Island, he spoke to a gathering of U.S. governors to advocate for free trade amid tensions between the two North American neighbors.

Nearly a decade later, Trudeau returned to Providence where he said the relationship has moved beyond ordinary trade disputes to what he described as a threat to Canada’s sovereignty under the Trump administration

“Canadians are feeling rightly, deeply destabilized by this,” Trudeau told a crowd of more than 2,000 people inside Brown University’s Pizzitola Sports Center Tuesday. “And it seems to have no logical point.”

The former Canadian prime minister’s remarks came as part of Brown’s 106th Stephen A. Ogden Jr. ’60 Memorial Lecture on International Affairs. Much of the hour-long discussion with University President Christina Paxson focused on differences between the two countries’ healthcare systems, the value of diversity and the increasingly strained relationship between the U.S. and its northern neighbor.

Trudeau, 54, served more than nine years as Canada’s 23rd prime minister after leading the Liberal Party to a historic majority government in 2015. Amid declining support and poor polling, he announced in January 2025 that he would resign as prime minister once a successor was chosen. He was succeeded by fellow Liberal Mark Carney that March.

His time in office was marked by the COVID-19 pandemic and the global economic disruptions it caused, along with a domestic agenda that included a gender-balanced cabinet, a national $10-a-day childcare program, efforts toward reconciliation with Indigenous peoples and climate policies aimed at encouraging clean energy investment.

The Nor'easter IS coming: be prepared for high winds, power outages and lots of rain

 National Weather Service forecast: 

WPRI's forecast:

Potential rainfall totals:

Medicare Costs Are Rising in 2027

Here’s What Seniors Need to Know

By Terry H. Schwadron

Seniors face higher drug costs, shrinking Medicare Advantage benefits and growing pressure to pay more for their health care in 2027.

It seems all but definite that Medicare, federally paid medical insurance for seniors, will cost more next year.

While there still are some loose ends around the rules, there is no question that providers of Medicare Advantage plans are cutting back on current benefits, that general monthly premiums are going up and that prescription drug caps are being significantly changed or dropped altogether.

Like health care offered more widely through the Affordable Care Act and through Medicaid cuts to those eligible by income and disability, the government is about to execute its broadest and deepest cuts to health insurance for seniors as well. Obviously, seniors have more medical issues than younger Americans.

Donald Trump has said on multiple occasions that he wants to protect seniors from cuts hitting other parts of the overall health system, though he is happily having Vice President JD Vance looking for fraud in billing and service claims. But reports from providers, retirement advocates like AARP and political sources say otherwise.

And, if you go to Medicare.org to learn just how it will affect you, good luck. They are not addressing the issues. We are on the cusp of annual open medical enrollment starting Oct. 15 and the details of health care do not seem to be among the top agenda items for our elections.

Indeed, despite a series of self-serving statements about cutting the price of a select number of prescription drugs, Trump has variously insisted that states should fund Medicare and Medicaid or somehow privatize payments.

Trump said in April that it’s “not possible” for the federal government to fund Medicare, Medicaid and childcare costs, arguing that it should be up to the states to “take care” of those programs while the federal government focuses on military spending.

Trump and Kennedy’s Health Industry Deals Haven’t Been Enforced and Are at Risk of Vanishing

No surprise, given who's in charge

By Stephanie Armour

In the thick of his competitive reelection race in Michigan, Republican Rep. Tom Barrett joined Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at a sprawling 400-acre apple orchard, farm, and winery. They touted Trump administration efforts to improve the American diet, including the removal of some artificial dyes from processed foods.

“We had a great discussion about healthy options for all Americans and taking back control of our healthcare,” Barrett said in a June Instagram post, after sampling the farm’s apple cider.

Like the focus on artificial dyes, however, many of the administration’s highest-profile health initiatives rely on voluntary agreements. The goals, such as lower drug prices and nutrition classes for doctors, have widespread appeal, cutting across party lines and economic divisions.

But the administration-industry deals lack the enforcement teeth of more traditional federal regulation. Their details are vague, and minimal oversight makes it hard to monitor progress. In some cases, the administration has claimed victories that have yet to materialize.

Republicans consider the dealmaking a winning strategy. It fits with the party’s anti-regulatory stance, they say, and enables the administration to quickly forge agreements Donald Trump and his allies can tout as accomplishments. In the run-up to the midterm elections, some, like Barrett, hope to woo voters by trumpeting the Trump administration’s efforts to shape health policy.

Following historical precedent

No cause for alarm

After the primaries, handshakes or bad blood?

Gubernatorial primary battles end with different outcomes.

By Nancy Lavin, Rhode Island Current

No love lost

Less than 24 hours after losing a bruising primary reelection battle, Gov. Dan McKee backed his rival, Helena Buonanno Foulkes for the Nov. 3 general election.

Yet endorsements have not materialized in other heated primary matchups, including the Providence Democratic mayoral race. Mayor Brett Smiley declined to endorse his progressive challenger, David Morales, as first reported by The Boston Globe Rhode Island.

Meanwhile, Elaine Pelino, who narrowly lost the Republican gubernatorial nomination to Aaron Guckian, appears unwilling to endorse her opponent, despite pleas for party unity by Guckian. 

But will any of it sway voters?

Not really, according to Adam Myers, an associate professor of political science at Providence College.

“These kinds of personal endorsements from former rivals can make a difference in the margins, but I don’t think there’s strong evidence they matter a lot,” Myers said. “Most voters don’t pay attention enough for it to make a difference.”

Unlike Foulkes and McKee, whose differences are more personal than ideological or generational, GOP nominee Aaron Guckian and his primary opponent, Elaine Pelino, represent vastly different brands of conservatism.

Guckian, 50, of East Greenwich, is a self-described compassionate conservative while Pelino, 72, of Smithfield is a strong MAGA supporter. Guckian cemented his place as the nominee by 259 votes on Tuesday, following a review by election administrators of the memory sticks for ballot-counting machines. 

Guckian said Friday he’s still waiting to hear from Pelino to concede the race. He has not asked Pelino for her endorsement. But that doesn’t mean he doesn’t want it.

“I would hope she would endorse me,” Guckian said in an interview. “We need to unify as a party for November.”

With just 14% of state voters registered as Republicans, the already slim path to victory for Guckian is only possible with a united base of conservative supporters, Myers said.

“Even the appearance of a divided Republican base does not look good for Guckian,” Myers said. 

Especially when matched up against former Republican-turned independent gubernatorial challenger Ken Block, 60, of Barrington, who trailed Foulkes by 20 points in August public polling. But he has nearly as much support among registered Republican voters as he does independents, according to the surveys.

“He could definitely peel off a lot of Republican voters,” Myers said of Block. 

Especially if he got the backing of Pelino.

Scientists reversed biological age in older adults in just 4 weeks

Healthy foods again may hold the key

University of Sydney

Older adults may be able to shift important markers of aging in a surprisingly short amount of time simply by changing what they eat.

New research from the University of Sydney found that Australians aged 65 to 75 who reduced either dietary fat or animal-based protein showed signs of a lower biological age after just four weeks. Biological age is an estimate of how old the body appears based on its health and physiological condition, rather than the number of years a person has been alive.

The findings were published in Aging Cell and were led by Dr. Caitlin Andrews from the University of Sydney's School of Life and Environmental Sciences.

Although the results suggest that diet may influence aging-related health markers relatively quickly, the researchers stress that the findings are preliminary. Longer studies will be needed to determine whether the changes persist, whether they translate into a lower risk of age-related disease, and whether similar effects occur in younger or different populations.

The FBI Anti-Corruption Squad Was Circling Susan Collins — Until Trump Got in the Way

Former CEO of URI-connected contractor bought Collins' support

By William Turton, Avi Asher-Schapiro, Molly Redden and Kirsten Berg for ProPublica

Then-URI President David Dooley (left) and Navatek CEO Martin Kao (right)
sign collaboration agreement in 2013 establishing Peace Dale office.
Photo by Will Collette

In the final weeks of 2019, a top fundraiser for Sen. Susan Collins walked into a perilous meeting at a Corner Bakery in Washington, D.C.

For the first time in her two-decade Senate career, the Republican lawmaker from Maine was in danger of losing her seat. President Donald Trump’s dismal approval ratings were dragging her down in the polls, and she was falling behind her likely 2020 Democratic challenger in fundraising.

Scott Reed, head of the Collins super PAC, was on a mission to close that gap. Reed was meeting that day with three executives from a Hawaiian defense contractor, Navatek. A year earlier, Collins had helped their company land a multimillion-dollar Navy research contract in Maine. Now, seated at a coffee shop not far from the U.S. Capitol, Reed asked them for a $500,000 donation.

Government contractors are banned from making political contributions. More consequentially, for the company to offer donations to Collins in exchange for an official action, or for Collins to accept, would constitute criminal bribery.

But the company did have such a proposal: Navatek was hungry for more government contracts in Maine. If they cut a big check, the CEO told Reed, Navatek wanted Collins to guarantee tens of millions of dollars in additional federal funding.

To skirt campaign finance laws and conceal the source of the funds, Navatek planned to funnel the donation through a shell company. The CEO wanted assurance that Collins would know where the money came from. Reed confirmed that she would, the executive said — and that Navatek would get its government contracts.

After the Corner Bakery meeting, Navatek’s CEO, Martin Kao, sent an initial $150,000 to the Collins super PAC using the shell company. Two months later, he told Navatek executives that Collins committed to getting the company $32 million in naval contracts, according to an internal company email reviewed by ProPublica.

Three years later, Kao holed up in a conference room to recount the Corner Bakery meeting to a group of four FBI agents and federal prosecutors. The FBI had seen through his shell company ruse, and in 2022 a grand jury indicted him for making illegal campaign contributions. No one working for Collins was charged.

Facing years in prison, Kao hoped to do less time by revealing the entire scheme.

What he told them has never before become public. The Corner Bakery meeting, he asserted, was just one episode in a sprawling pay-to-play operation that embroiled some of the most powerful figures in Congress.

Over three days at the U.S. attorney’s office in Honolulu, Kao laid out in devastating detail how his operation worked. He gave agents a 50-page document naming dozens of lobbyists, congressional staffers and members of Congress who he said helped him trade cash for contracts. Kao and his close associates had donated nearly $900,000 to dozens of politicians, allowing Navatek to establish operations in half a dozen states with over $40 million a year in government funding.

Most damningly, Kao told FBI agents and prosecutors, the company’s work for the government was of no real value. Navatek’s research under his stewardship never resulted in products the military wanted to buy, ProPublica found.

Kao’s tell-all interviews with the FBI lasted into late 2024. His confessions opened up an entirely new phase of the investigation. Agents sifted through hundreds of thousands of records seized during Kao’s arrest and found that many were consistent with his account of widespread influence peddling.

Kao had credibility issues. He was now a felon trying to avoid a lengthy prison sentence. And there were other challenges. Building a corruption case against elected officials requires extraordinary proof of a quid pro quo arrangement, in part because the Supreme Court has narrowed what counts as bribery.

DISCLOSURE: I first wrote about Navatek in 2013 when it opened its first university-partnered branch in Peace Dale. My nephew, a newly minted Ph.D. in ocean engineering was among their first hires and has worked for the company ever since. Their model of teaming up with engineering schools was, and still is, very promising despite Martin Kao's many flaws revealed in ProPublica's investigation.  - Will Collette

Desperate to appear strong, Trump shows pathetic weakness

Surprisingly, providing more evidence that he is crazy doesn't help Trump to regain public support

Paul Waldman

Remember “Sharpiegate,” a relatively inconsequential but uncommonly stupid episode from Trump’s first term?

The Sharpie is back.

In the surrealist performance hall that is the Oval Office, Trump grabbed his pen, took out a map of the Great Lakes, crossed out “Lake Ontario” and wrote in “Lake America,” part of a pointless new trade war he has started with Canada.

“Lake Ontario, that’s gone. Lake America,” he said. “So now we have a lake and now we have a Gulf because we have the Gulf of America and now we have Lake America.”

Stirring words.

Like so much of what Trump does, this was meant to be a show of strength. Yet it actually demonstrated just the opposite: Trump is weak and getting weaker.

He can instruct the federal government to change its maps, as he did with an executive order late last week, and will even find that many people will submit to his desires.

As of this writing, Google Maps has changed Lake Ontario to Lake America for those searching in the US, while Apple Maps has yet to do so — though since Apple Maps did change the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America on Trump’s instruction, it may fall in line soon. (MapQuest loudly refused to make the change, in what may be a bid to inform people that it still exists.)

But if there are any voters in America who are impressed by Trump’s lacustrine nomenclature revisionism, they will surely be hard to find.

Instead, the “Lake America” inanity will be slotted alongside Trump’s ballroom, his quest to keep his name on the Kennedy Center, his helipad, and his Reflecting Pool faceplant. These are the things a failing, frustrated president does in a desperate bid to look strong, because he hasn’t been able to accomplish much of anything that might improve Americans’ lives.

Who does Daddy love moe?

Two year's later, it's still Biden's fault