Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
A Roadmap or a Rift? Examining Trump’s 28-Point Ukraine Peace Proposal
As negotiations around the war in Ukraine continue to dominate global headlines, a newly surfaced 28-point peace proposal associated with former U.S. President Donald Trump has triggered intense debate across NATO capitals, Kyiv, and Moscow. The document — described in reporting by Reuters, Axios, Sky News, Al Jazeera and other outlets — outlines a framework aimed at ending the conflict but includes provisions that many analysts say could significantly reshape Europe’s security landscape. A Plan Built Around Ceasefire, Guarantees, and Reconstruction At its core, the plan calls for a formal ceasefire, a non-aggression pact between Russia, Ukraine, and European states, and a set of “security guarantees” meant to deter future conflict. Reporting indicates that Ukraine would receive assurances that any renewed Russian offensive would trigger a coordinated international response. The plan also proposes the creation of a major reconstruction program — potentially financed in part with frozen Russian assets — to rebuild infrastructure and modernize Ukraine’s economy. The proposal references pathways for deeper Ukrainian integration with Europe, including support for progressing toward EU membership and providing enhanced access to European markets. A large “Ukraine Development Fund” is also mentioned in multiple summaries of the plan. Provisions Driving the Most Global Pushback The most controversial elements relate to Ukraine’s territorial integrity and long-term security posture. Outlets such as Sky News and Al Jazeera report that the draft would recognize Russian control over Crimea and large parts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson — areas currently occupied by Russian forces. Ukraine would also be required to formally abandon NATO membership and cap its military at 600,000 personnel. Additional provisions include restrictions on the presence of foreign troops in Ukraine, phased lifting of sanctions on Russia, full amnesty for war-related actions, and the reintegration of Russia into global economic and political structures. These components have drawn sharp responses, particularly from European leaders who argue the plan could reward aggression and undermine international legal norms. Dr. Glen Duerr is a citizen of three countries. He was born in the United Kingdom, moved to Canada as a teenager, and then to the United States to obtain his Ph.D. His teaching and research interests include nationalism and secession, comparative politics, international relations theory, sports and politics, and Christianity and politics. View his profile. What Remains Unclear or Still Under Discussion Reporting from Reuters and AP notes that many sections of the plan remain undefined or are still in flux. The exact mechanism behind the proposed security guarantees is not detailed. Oversight of reconstruction funds, timelines for reintegration of Russia, and the legal handling of frozen assets also require further clarification. Some reporting suggests parts of the plan draw from a prior informal Russian “non-paper,” raising questions about the provenance and intent of specific provisions. Why the Proposal Matters With the war approaching four years of fighting, any formal proposal for ending hostilities carries significant geopolitical weight. Supporters of the plan frame it as a pragmatic attempt to halt loss of life and begin rebuilding. Critics argue it risks legitimizing territorial conquest and weakening the broader post-Cold-War security order. As governments evaluate the implications, journalists covering defense, diplomacy, and international law will find this evolving proposal central to understanding where U.S., European, Russian, and Ukrainian negotiators may — or may not — be willing to go next.
Trump’s Threat is His Destruction of the Republican Party
In All the King’s Men, Robert Penn Warren describes Willie Stark’s final victory. “And there wasn’t any Democratic party. There was just Willie, with his hair in his eyes and his shirt sticking to his stomach with sweat. And he had a meat ax in his hand and was screaming for blood.” Warren’s description is darkly poetic and metaphorical. Stark, the populist governor of a fictional state, did not murder his rivals, but he did destroy them, along with the political party he rode to power. Like Stark, Donald Trump has carved up the Republican Party of old, and in its place, there is just Trump. This is not the first time a politician has remade a political party, but the death of the G.O.P. threatens to unbalance our political system. We are defined by close elections, tight legislative majorities, and polarized preferences. Neither side in the cultural conflict can achieve core objectives, so the temptation to put more hope and power into the Executive, to skew the system, is mounting. We can argue about the degree to which past Republicans were truly restrained, especially in government spending, but at least the G.O.P. used to advocate for two seatbelts to keep the body politic safe from accidents: character to govern the self and constitutionalism to limit what government can do to others. As the G.O.P. grew to rival Democratic power, in the 1980s and 1990s, the New Deal coalition fractured, along with the assumption that simply more power, expertly applied, could solve our problems. Democrat Bill Clinton conceded “the era of big government is over.” Justice Elena Kagan recognized, “we’re all textualists now.” The tug of war between an evolving progressivism and a robust conservatism may not have made for an ideal way to solve problems, but it did encourage humility, born of the recognition that radical actions, even if successful, would be punished. Dr. Mark Caleb Smith serves as Professor of Political Science and the Director of the Center for Political Studies at Cedarville University. He teaches courses in American Politics, Constitutional Law, and Research Methodology/Data Analysis. His primary research interest is in the field of religion and American politics. View his profile Those days are over. Donald Trump’s Republicans are no longer a restraint of any kind. The seatbelts of the past have been snipped by the same leaders who claimed to buckle them in place. The Epstein Files are the exception of congressional pushback that proves the rule of the party’s degradation. But what of the appointment of unqualified and incompetent leaders in the F.B.I., H.H.S., Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense? Illegal and extra-judicial killings in the Caribbean? An unexplained and unauthorized military buildup in the same region? Shakedowns of universities and media outlets? Crypto corruption? Tariffs? Strong-arming law firms and firing career civil servants for seeking justice in our courts? The Republican response has mostly been crickets. There is no longer a major party that pretends to restrain the president through the law out of principle. The real disagreement between Trump Republicans and Biden Democrats is not about should the president abuse his power, but how. Unless something dramatic happens, the politics of the meat ax will come for us all. Mark is available to speak with the media regarding the state of politics in America. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview.
A popular on-the-go sandwich is now the subject of a mega trademark lawsuit between two food industry giants. The J.M. Smucker Company, more commonly known as Smucker's, recently filed a trademark lawsuit against grocery chain Trader Joe's over what it alleges is infringement upon its iconic billion-dollar investment: the Uncrustables sandwich. Smucker's seeks to obtain unspecified monetary damages from Trader Joe's, as well as profit from its similar product. But beyond the novelty of the sandwich suit lies a complex case built around a lesser-known morsel of trademark law, says Waseem Moorad, Esq., assistant professor of Law at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law and director of the school's Intellectual Property Clinic. Professor Moorad, a former U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent (USPTO) examiner, recently discussed the actual claims of the lawsuit, and how both parties are preparing for a potential trial. Q: Since this lawsuit was filed, it has been a popular topic of public discourse, much of which has centered on the product—a crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwich—itself. Is that what this is truly about? Professor Moorad: Much of the commentary has been focused on the argument of whether Smucker's is permitted to have a monopoly of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, or if Trader Joe's can actually infringe upon the Uncrustables product without necessarily using the actual trademarked name. While both discussions are legitimate conversations folks could have while munching on the delicious snack products, they are not necessarily the relevant legal claims at the crux of this lawsuit. Q: Before we get into what those relevant legal claims are, Smucker's has filed dozens of trademarks in its 128-year history. What sorts of intellectual property do these trademarks generally protect? PM: Most of their trademarks filed with the USPTO are registered to protect against competitors from using words, logos, slogans, symbols and other materials that are linked to the brand name of the company, its affiliates, or its respective products. Well-known examples include Smucker's, Folgers, Jif and, of course, Uncrustables. If a competing company has a brand or a product that has a similar sounding name or appearance, such as "Giff Peanut Butter," then Smucker's could sue that company for trademark infringement. That name is not only infringing upon a trademark that Smucker's has federal protection over, but also is in the same related industry (food products), within which Smucker's has protection. Q: But Trader Joe's did not necessarily infringe on any trademarked words, symbols, slogans or the like. What, then, is the basis for the claims of infringement? PM: The issue is related to a deeper subset of trademark law, specifically the concept of "trade dress." Trade dress is the intellectual property associated with the visual and aesthetic characteristics of a product or its related packaging that allows a consumer to know with whom that product or packaging is associated. For example, Coca-Cola's name, which is federally protected, is well known as a registered trademark; however, the Coca-Cola bottle, with the curvy appearance where it gets slimmer in the middle, is an example of a registered trade dress belonging to Coca-Cola. If there was no logo or word mark on the bottle, the average consumer would still be able to recognize it as a Coke bottle. There are several trademarks that Smucker's owns that are related to the trade dress of its products. Smucker's isn't alleging that Trader Joe's is copying any of the branding names of their products; they are accusing their competitor of mimicking the trade dress or aesthetic appearances, textures and characteristics of its Uncrustables products and packaging. Q: What specific trade dress trademarks are they claiming have been infringed upon? PM: There are at least two registered trademarks that Smucker's is drawing legal attention to. In 2002, Smucker's had trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich that has pie-crimping indentations or marks along the circumference of the sandwich, and in 2019, the company trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich with a bite taken out of it. Smucker's argument is that the Trader Joe's packaging for a similar crustless peanut butter and jelly shows an image of a sandwich with a bite taken out of it, as well as the crimping along the outer edges. Q: How does one make a legal case out of something like this? PM: In order to effectively file a trademark infringement lawsuit, the plaintiff must not only show that their federally-protected intellectual property rights are being infringed upon, but also demonstrate that as a result of this infringement, the customer or consumer is being confused. Smucker's alleges that as result of Trader Joe's actions, customers are now confused over the product and are purchasing Trader Joe's peanut butter and jelly sandwiches thinking they are actually Smucker's Uncrustables sandwiches. Smucker's is of the belief that if the Trader Joe's packaging did not show pie-like crimped edges and the image of the sandwich with a bite taken out of it, confused consumers would not have purchased the Trader Joe's products and would have instead purchased Smucker's Uncrustables. It is this argument that will be the crux of the court cases to follow. Q: Assuming this goes to trial, how will the two parties prepare and what are some of the challenges for Smucker's as plaintiff? PM: Part of the case on Smucker's end will be to gather customer feedback or testimony that demonstrates confusion in the marketplace as a result of the similar packaging and trade dress. Trader Joe's will focus on the fact that even though the packaging may be similar, there would be no reason or basis for a customer to be confused between a Trader Joe's-branded product and a Smucker's-branded product. As the plaintiff in this case, the burden shall be on Smucker's to prove the confusion element necessary to have trademark infringement. The Trader Joe's product clearly says Trader Joe's, and the chain has a marketplace reputation for selling its own products rather than other-branded products. The challenge in such a scenario will be to prove, despite this, that customers purchasing this product would still have gotten confused and either assumed that they were purchasing Uncrustables, or mistakenly believed that Uncrustables may now have a commercial relationship with Trader Joe's.
Detecting Fraud Using Emerging Technology: Innovating Beyond Traditional Controls
Fraud and financial crime are evolving at a pace that challenges even the most established detection systems. From cyber-enabled schemes and complex financial misappropriations to subtle internal manipulations, traditional audit and compliance methods are often too slow or too narrow to keep up. In a world where billions of data points can hide a single irregularity, the investigative advantage now lies in speed, intelligence, and technological adaptability. J.S. Held’s Ken Feinstein recently authored an article exploring how artificial intelligence, machine learning, and advanced data analytics tools are transforming how organizations uncover and prevent fraud. In his piece, “Detecting Fraud Using Emerging Technology: Don’t Be Afraid to Innovate,” Feinstein illustrates how the integration of digital investigation techniques — from automation to predictive analytics — is reshaping the fraud-detection landscape, helping companies not just react to wrongdoing but anticipate and deter it. Ken Feinstein specializes in investigative data analytics and has over 25 years of experience. He provides data analytics solutions spanning multiple sectors, including retail and consumer products, life sciences, technology, financial services, and industrial products. His clients include law firms and Fortune 500 legal and compliance teams for whom he delivers large-scale, complex investigations, regulatory response matters, proactive anti‐fraud efforts, and compliance programs. View his profile here Why This Matters As fraudsters exploit digital tools and globalized networks, detection efforts must evolve in kind. Regulators expect faster, data-driven investigations, and boards demand real-time risk visibility. Those who innovate with AI-enabled detection and forensic analytics are better positioned to protect assets, reputation, and shareholder trust. Looking to know more? Connect with Ken Feinstein today by clicking on his icon below.
Forensic Meteorology in Insurance: Bridging Weather Science, Claims, and Liability
When severe weather strikes, the insurance industry is not only contending with damage and loss, but also with the question: Did this storm event actually occur, and did it trigger the risk covered under policy terms? J.S. Held's forensic meteorologist Daniel Schreiber authored an article explaining how Certified Consulting Meteorologists substantiate (or refute) storm-event claims by reconstructing what the weather actually did at a loss location. In his article “Forensic Meteorology in Insurance: How Do Certified Consulting Meteorologists Help with Storm Damage Claims & Disputes?” Schreiber illustrates how the overlap of a valid insurance policy, a damaging event, and a verified storm forms the core of many disputed claims. Dan Schreiber is a Certified Consulting Meteorologist with over ten years of experience in military, aviation, and severe weather operations. Mr. Schreiber has provided consulting and expert services for both plaintiff and defense law firms and insurance adjusters, appraisers, umpires, and policyholders throughout North America. He has been consulted and/or retained as an expert in over 850 matters and has testified in both depositions and during trials in state and federal courts. View his profile here Why This Matters In an era of escalating extreme weather events and heightened exposure for insurers, the science of forensic meteorology — the application of certified weather expertise to claims investigation and litigation — is becoming indispensable. Professional meteorology, as it relates to insurance claims handling and the litigation process, is becoming increasingly recognized, and the employment of meteorologists within the insurance industry is growing. Schedule an interview with Daniel Schreiber to learn more about how forensic meteorologists can help with insurance claims and disputes by clicking on his icon below.
As sustainability moves from niche topic to boardroom central, companies face an increasingly complex global environment of regulatory divergence, disclosure demands and reputational risk. A recent article by J.S. Held's John Peiserich examines how multinational firms can respond effectively to the “crosscurrents” of ESG compliance, litigation exposure and evolving definitions of corporate responsibility. John Peiserich specializes in environmental risk and compliance. With over 30 years of experience, John provides consulting and expert services for heavy industry and law firms throughout the country with a focus on Oil & Gas, Energy, and Public Utilities, including serving as an expert witness in arbitration proceedings and in state and federal courts. View his profile here Key Insights: Sustainability now touches every major business function — environmental, social, and governance — and must be embedded in strategy rather than treated as an add-on. Regulatory landscapes are diverging: while the U.S. federal approach remains fragmented, individual states like California are moving ahead with mandatory climate and emissions-related corporate disclosures. In contrast, the European Union’s Green Deal and related frameworks promote a more unified regulatory model, creating operational tension for multinational corporations. Litigation and disclosure risk are increasing, with “greenwashing” (overstating sustainability achievements) and “greenhushing” (avoiding or under-reporting ESG performance) emerging as major board-level concerns. Effective risk management now requires scalable data systems, transparent communication, strong governance, and agility to adapt across multiple regulatory regimes. Why this matters: The widening divide between jurisdictions — and intensifying scrutiny of corporate sustainability claims — means ESG compliance can no longer be treated as a checkbox exercise. Organizations that fail to anticipate regulatory expectations or align ESG strategy with business goals risk legal exposure, reputational harm, and missed opportunities for value creation. Strategic Insights for Corporate Leadership on Sustainability Boards and executives must adjust their mindset, seeing sustainability not as a burden but as a catalyst for growth and differentiation. Proactive investment in research, development, and stakeholder engagement will help organizations seize new opportunities and maintain credibility in a fast-changing world. Documentation and transparency are vital defenses against legal challenges, while ongoing monitoring of policy and market trends ensures adaptability. Ultimately, the most successful companies will treat sustainability as an essential tenet of strategy—aligning profit, purpose, and governance to secure their position in the global marketplace. Navigating the crosscurrents of sustainability requires courage, judgment, and a commitment to continuous learning. By embracing these principles, corporations can build a future that is not only profitable but also just, resilient, and worthy of the trust placed in them by shareholders and society alike. Looking to know more or connect with John Peiserich about this important topic? Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Federal Budget 2025: What's In It for Canadian Seniors?
Let's be honest: the word "budget" probably makes you want to take a nap. Or pour a stiff drink. Maybe both. We spent decades pinching pennies, brown-bagging lunches, and watching every dollar so we could finally retire and stop thinking about money every waking minute. Now here I am, telling you to read about a government budget. I know. I'm sorry. But stick with me—I promise to make this as painless (and possibly entertaining) as possible. Why You Should Care About the 2025 Federal Budget (Even If You Really Don't Want To) Some of you hate talking about money. I get it. But here's the thing: information is power, and denial isn't just a river in Africa (give it a second to land)—it creates unnecessary ignorance and real missed opportunities to regain some control over your financial life. Plus, this budget affects your kids and grandkids too. So even if you're sitting pretty, the people you love might not be. The Economy Right Now: A Very Quick Explainer You've probably noticed everything costs more. A lot more. Welcome to inflation, courtesy of today's tariff-happy trade wars. (And if you want a deeper dive into how inflation affects more than just your wallet, check out my earlier piece: "Inflation: It's not just for prices anymore".) Here's the short version: When governments slap tariffs on imported goods (think: "You want to sell your stuff here? Pay up!"), Companies pass those costs directly to you at checkout. Your grocery bill goes up. Your heating costs rise. Even that new garden hose costs more because, apparently, everything comes from somewhere else now. So when you're living on a fixed income—CPP, OAS, maybe some RRIF withdrawals—and prices keep climbing while your income stays flat, that's a problem. A big one. Enter: the federal budget. It's basically Ottawa's financial to-do list: where they'll spend money, what they'll cut, and (theoretically) how they plan to make your life easier. Or at least less expensive. What's Actually In This Federal Budget Thing (The Good Parts Only) I've waded through the charts, jargon, and multi-billion-dollar announcements so you don't have to. Here's what matters to you: 1. Your House: Now it's a Potential ATM Remember when turning your basement into a rental suite sounded expensive and complicated? Ottawa heard you. The Secondary Suite Loan Program is expanded: Borrow up to $80,000 at 2% interest (15-year term) to build a basement apartment, garden suite, or in-law unit. The refinancing rules are also relaxed: You can now refinance up to 90% of your home's post-renovation value to fund these projects. Translation: You can turn unused space into monthly rental income, house a caregiver, or create a spot for family—all while boosting your property value. It's like your house went to entrepreneurship school. For more on Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs), check out this post. 2. Slightly Less Painful Tax Season Ottawa is cutting the base federal tax rate for modest-income earners and cancelling the consumer carbon price on heating fuels. Translation: If you're still working part-time or living on CPP + OAS + RRIF withdrawals, expect slightly lower deductions and cheaper heating bills starting this winter. We're talking maybe $30–$50 more per month—not a windfall, but enough to buy groceries without wincing at the checkout. 3. Health Care: Maybe, Possibly, Getting Better The budget includes more money for provinces to spend on health care and long-term care reform. The goal? Shorter wait times and expanded home-care programs. Translation: The government says they're helping seniors age at home with dignity. Whether that actually happens depends on your province not blowing the money on consultants and photo ops. Keep your eyes on provincial announcements for new or expanded home-care subsidies. 4. Your Savings: Slightly Less Likely to Evaporate Budget 2025 confirmed Canada has the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. They're also cracking down on bank fraud and scams targeting seniors. Translation: Lower national debt helps keep interest rates and inflation under control, protecting the real value of your fixed income. And Ottawa is finally recognizing that scammers love targeting retirees. (If you haven't already, read my piece on The Rise in Grandparent Scams—it's eye-opening.) About time. Watch for my upcoming article on a recent senior scam making the rounds—and my assessment of how banks can do much more to protect seniors. 5. $60 Billion in "Savings" (Don't Panic) You'll hear politicians bragging about cutting $60 billion. Before you worry they're gutting CPP or OAS, relax. They're trimming their own bureaucracy—less middle management, more digital tools, fewer wasteful meetings about meetings. Translation: They're supposedly spending less on themselves so they can spend more on things that matter—like housing, health care, and infrastructure. Whether they actually pull this off remains to be seen, but at least they're talking about it. So What Does All This Actually Mean? Look, I won't pretend this budget is a game-changer. It's not. But it does offer a few smart moves if you're willing to act. And let's remember: this is Carney's first budget. Changing financial policy and spending priorities takes time—and some patience on our part. Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither is a functional federal budget that actually helps everyday Canadians. Review your home equity. Could an ADU loan help you age in place and generate income? Audit your expenses annually. Cutting $100/month in spending equals roughly $1,500 in pre-tax income. That's real money. Stay vigilant against scams. Government protection is nice, but it starts with you not clicking sketchy emails and text messages. Ask about tax credits. Low-income seniors may qualify for increased refundable credits under provincial top-ups this year. This isn't a flashy budget. There are no big checks in the mail. But it does signal a shift toward pragmatism: help Canadians stay housed, healthy, and financially secure while Ottawa tightens its own belt. For Canadians 55+, that means: Slightly lower everyday costs More options to create income from your home Continued investment in health and home care A more stable economy to protect your savings Progress? Maybe. One cautious, bureaucratic step at a time. Your Next Move Take 30 minutes this week to think through how these programs could fit into your life. Could an ADU loan make aging in place possible? Could refinancing free up cash flow? Small adjustments now = big peace of mind later. And that's what being hit, fit, and financially free is all about. And hey—you just read an entire article about a government budget. Voluntarily. That deserves recognition. Go ahead, brag about it. You've earned it. Now go enjoy your retirement. You've definitely earned that too. Sue Don’t Retire…Re-Wire!!!
Motor vehicle crashes remain one of the leading causes of death among teenagers. For the youngest drivers, getting behind the wheel marks freedom but also comes with measurable risk. At the University of California, Irvine, Dr. Federico Vaca, professor and executive vice chair of emergency medicine, is determined to change that trajectory. “Driving licensure among our youngest drivers remains a major life milestone, and it allows for newfound freedom and opportunity for not only youth but their parents as well. At the same time, learning to drive and licensure come at a time when youth are rapidly moving through life with new transitions in school, with friends, and likely exposure to alcohol and drugs,” he says. “Our priority … is to examine the complexities of young driver behavior and to thoroughly understand crash injury risk and crash prevention among this special group of drivers.” Vaca’s work is at the intersection of health, transportation science and policy. A fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine and a researcher at UC Irvine’s Institute of Transportation Studies, he previously served as a medical fellow at the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in Washington, D.C. His long-standing goal is to prevent the injuries he has seen and treated in emergency departments and trauma centers through rigorous research, using the findings to inform and advance evidence-based programs and policies that save lives on the road. Innovating safety science UC Irvine is home to a new hub for understanding and preventing crash injuries among young drivers, the Brain, Body & Behavior Driving Simulation Lab, founded by Vaca and his interdisciplinary team. At the heart of the B3DrivSim Lab is a high-fidelity, half-cab driving simulator capable of replicating real-world conditions with precision. It uses advanced software to design customized driving scenarios – from complex roadway environments to the inclusion of such human elements as distraction and fatigue – all while capturing real-time video and driving behavior as well as vehicle control metrics. This integration of medicine, behavioral science and engineering enables researchers to measure how developmental and socioecological factors shape driver decisions in unique and consequential ways. The B3DrivSim Lab also represents a growing mentorship ecosystem at UC Irvine. In mid-June, the facility welcomed Siwei Hu, a postdoctoral scholar who earned a Ph.D. in civil and environmental engineering, with a focus on transportation studies, at UC Irvine. Hu works closely with Vaca to combine engineering and modeling analytics with behavioral and crash risk insights. The half-cab driving simulator uses advanced software to replicate real-world conditions and design customized driving scenarios – from complex roadway environments to the inclusion of such human elements as distraction and fatigue – all while capturing real-time video and driving behavior as well as vehicle control metrics. Steve Zylius / UC Irvine From the lab to policy Beyond simulation, Vaca’s latest National Institutes of Health-funded study, separate from his lab’s work, takes this philosophy to the national level. His project, “Modeling a National Graduated-BAC Policy for 21- to 24-Year-Old Drivers,” explores whether lowering the legal blood alcohol limit for young adults could reduce alcohol-related crashes and deaths. “When you turn 21, at that very moment, the application of several alcohol-related prevention laws changes in the blink of an eye,” Vaca says. “Before that, the minimum legal drinking age and zero-tolerance laws are in place to protect young drivers from alcohol-impaired driving. Effectively, the second you turn 21, those prevention policies don’t apply, and you’re suddenly allowed to have a much higher blood alcohol concentration in your body that’s intimately tied to serious and fatal crash risk. It’s a very dangerous disconnect.” The study will use national crash data, behavioral surveys and system dynamics modeling to examine how a “graduated BAC policy” might bridge that gap, giving young adult drivers a safer transition into full legal responsibility and saving many more lives. Bridging science, education and prevention Earlier this year, Vaca and his B3DrivSim team joined prevention program educators, policymakers, engineers and law enforcement professionals in Anaheim at a Ford Driving Skills for Life event, part of a Ford Philanthropy-sponsored national effort teaching teens hands-on safe driving techniques – from hazard recognition to impaired-driving awareness. Speaking to more than 130 high school students and their parents from local and distant communities, Vaca emphasized the connection among driving, independence, opportunity and responsibility. That message aligns with his broader initiative, Youth Thriving in Life Transitions with Transportation, which introduces high school students to traffic safety and transportation science and their role in promoting health, education and employment in early adulthood. By linking research and real-world experience, the project empowers youth to see mobility as a foundation for opportunity with safety as its cornerstone. With overall young driver crash fatalities rising 25 percent nationally over the last decade and a 46 percent increase in fatal crashes where a young driver had a BAC of ≥ .01/dL, Vaca’s work represents a crucial step toward reversing that trend. Through a combination of clinical insight and prevention, transportation and data science underscored by community collaboration, he and his team are redefining how researchers and policymakers think about youth driver safety.
On Sunday, October 19, at 9:34 a.m., four masked individuals surged into the Louvre’s Galerie d’Apollon from a severed, second-floor window. Hurriedly, they smashed open two display cases, seized eight pieces of jewelry, then shimmied down a ladder and sped off on motorbikes toward Lyons. In seven minutes’ time, in broad daylight, they absconded with an estimated $102 million in valuables from the world’s most famous museum. This past Saturday, October 25, French authorities announced the first arrests in connection with the daring heist. However, despite the police’s progress, the country continues to litigate the matter—embroiled in discussions of heritage, history and national identity. Recently, Roderick Cooke, PhD, director of French and Francophone Studies at Villanova University, shared his perspective on the situation as well as the artifacts lost. Q: The Louvre heist has been described as “brazen,” “shocking” and a “terrible failure” on security’s part. Is there any sort of precedent for this event in the museum’s history? Dr. Cooke: Nothing on this scale has ever happened to the Louvre since its founding as a museum during the Revolution. The closest equivalent is the 1911 theft of the Mona Lisa by a former employee who claimed it should be returned to Italy. However, that was one painting, the heist was not committed by organized crime, and the Mona Lisa did not have the renown it enjoys today. The impact of the theft was thus lower, although it did cause major outrage and a sweeping law-enforcement response at the time. Ironically, that theft is often credited with making da Vinci’s painting the global icon it continues to be. Q: What has the reaction to this event been among the French people? DC: It’s harder to get a sense of reactions across French society, because so much of the aftermath has focused on the intellectual milieux’s opinions. And in those realms, it has immediately become a political football. Individuals positioning themselves as anti-elite or anti-status quo, such as Jordan Bardella of the National Rally party, have called the theft a “humiliation,” immediately tying it to French national prestige. Former President François Hollande has conversely and vainly called for the event to be de-polemicized, citing national solidarity. This is happening because the Louvre is one of the most visible manifestations of French soft power—the most-visited museum anywhere on Earth. As such, anything attacking its integrity becomes an attack on the nation, and how individual French citizens feel about the theft is closely tied to their broader view of the nation. Q: Several of the items stolen from the Louvre once belonged to Empress Eugénie. Could you share a bit of information on her story? DC: Eugénie de Montijo was a Spanish aristocrat who married the Emperor of the French, who ruled as Napoleon III between 1852 and 1870. It was a time of authoritarian repression and sham democracy—Napoleon III installed the Empire through a coup. Its clearest legacy is that Paris looks the way it does today largely because of the thorough modernizations overseen by Napoleon III’s appointee Baron Haussmann. So, Eugénie and her now-lost jewels represent a complex point in French history, when culture and the economy developed quickly, but did so in a climate of fear for any French person who opposed the regime too loudly (like Victor Hugo, who went into exile on the Channel Islands and wrote poems savaging Napoleon III and his deeds). Some accused the Empress of being responsible for the more hardline and conservative stances taken by her husband’s government. On a different note, she was a diligent patron of the arts and arguably the most significant figure in the contemporary fashion world, famous for setting trends such as the bustle that radiated across Europe. This explains the mix of anger and admiration that followed her depending on the sphere she was operating in. A new English-language biography argues that far from being a traditionalist, she was a pioneering feminist by the standards of the time. It looks like her historical importance will continue to be debated. Q: Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez described the stolen items as “of immeasurable heritage value.” How significant of a cultural loss do you consider this theft? DC: These jewels are referred to in French as “les Joyaux de la Couronne” (the Crown Jewels), but of course that phrase lands very differently in republican France than it does across the water in the United Kingdom. The items actually represent several different dynasties of French rulers, some of whom came to power through direct conflict with others. The now-ransacked display at the Louvre smoothed over these historical divisions, for which many French people died over the centuries. President Macron referred to the stolen items as embodying “our history,” which is emblematic of the French state’s work to create a conceptual present-day unity out of the clashes of the past. At a time when France is arguably more divided than at any point since World War II, any unitary symbol of identity takes on greater significance. Q: Do you have any closing thoughts on the artifacts taken and what they represent? DC: I’d reemphasize the previous point about the smoothing effect of the museum display on the violent history that made it possible. Much of the reporting on the stolen jewels lists off the different queens and empresses who owned them, without giving readers a sense of the complicated succession of regime changes and ideologies that put those women in power in the first place. The relative stability of the last 60-odd years is an anomaly in modern French history. This set of jewels and the names of their original owners may seem far removed from the concerns of an ordinary French citizen today, but just beneath their surface is a legacy of changing governments and tensions between social classes that survives in new forms in 2025.
Florida needs veterinarians trained to respond to natural disasters. Congress can help.
When Hurricane Helene struck, we were on the frontlines in Florida’s Big Bend region, racing against time to support the Humane Society as they rescued animals displaced by the most powerful storm ever to hit this part of the state. Two weeks later, we were back in action, facing the devastating flooding from Hurricane Milton. These back-to-back disasters showcased the urgency and critical need for emergency-response veterinarians who can act fast to save lives. We lead one of the nation’s only three emergency veterinary response teams — the University of Florida Veterinary Emergency Treatment Service (UF VETS). Founded after the 2004 hurricane season and operating under the UF College of Veterinary Medicine, the UF VETS program hosts two distinct, yet complementary, branches: a medical response unit for disaster-affected animals and an animal technical rescue branch, which manages complex operations like overturned livestock trailers. Larry Garcia specializes in veterinary disaster preparedness and response, animal technical rescue/training and shelter medicine operations. View his profile here Our team is on call whenever disaster strikes, working alongside local and state veterinary organizations, animal rescues and law enforcement to save animals in crisis. But here’s the problem: Without a nationwide system for coordinating these efforts, it’s often chaotic, and animals suffer because of it. Now Congress has a golden opportunity to change that. As they return to Washington, they have the chance to make a game-changing impact by including funding in the final FY 2025 Homeland Security Appropriations bill to create a nationwide network of veterinary emergency teams. This funding could revolutionize how the U.S. handles animal care during national disasters — and it needs to happen, fast. Read more ... Looking to know more about this important topic or connect with Lawrence Garcia - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
