The Palme d’Or is awarded to an art world satire starring Dominic West and Elisabeth Moss.

Edmund Hall said he wanted to thank emergency services staff who had a “shift from hell” after the bombing.

Arsenal win the FA Cup for a record 13th time in a thrilling final by beating 10-man Chelsea, who are denied a league and cup double.

An assault of a reporter by Montana’s Republican congressman-elect appears to have hurled the public into a new realm of political incivility, raising the question: Have we crossed an invisible line?

Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) refused to say whether ?every American is entitled to eat? and the food stamps program is the best way to ensure that they have the food they need.

NPR?s Scott Simon interviewed Smith on Saturday about the farm bill and President Donald Trump?s proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps. In the president?s budget, the White House is seeking $193 billion in cuts to SNAP over 10 years, an amount equal to more than one-quarter of the program?s cost over that period.

There is room for ?very minor shifts? in SNAP that ?make sure we do not harm the most vulnerable among us,? according to Smith.

?Especially for people in need we do not want to leave our most vulnerable without nutrition,? he said. ?Looking at that, we always want to keep that in mind.?

But Simon pressed Smith on his views about the program?s underlying philosophy.

?Let me ask you this bluntly: Is every American entitled to eat?? he asked.

?Well, nutrition obviously we know is very important and I would hope that we can look to ?? Smith began.

?Well, not just important, it?s essential for life,? Simon interjected.

Smith conceded that nutrition is essential to life.

?So is every American entitled to eat and is food stamps something that ought to be that ultimate guarantor?? Simon persisted.

?I think we know that given the necessity of nutrition, there could be a number of ways that we could address that,? Smith answered.

As Smith later observed, a president?s budget is merely a set of suggestions that reflect the president?s fiscal priorities. It is up to Congress to allot the funds for federal programs. The president can then sign or veto budget legislation they craft.

Smith refused to rule out reductions in SNAP spending as part of that process, however.

?I want to look at our entire budget, look at all of the details,? he said.

Roughly 43 million low-income Americans receive SNAP benefits, which are vouchers to buy food. Enrollment has dropped significantly since 2014 due to improvement in the economy.

Mick Mulvaney, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, by claiming there are people receiving benefits who do not need them given how long ago the recession was.

The administration has not been clear about its intentions for the means-tested aid program though. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue, whose department oversees SNAP, has defended SNAP?s performance and claimed that it will be up to Congress to decide how much it wants to reduce the program?s spending.

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

ISL is an Indian Men’s professional football league indian football which was founded back in oct 21 2013. Due to sponsorship reason Visit South Hill and let a chiropractor diagnose and refer you to a spine specialist today. it is often called as Hero ISL. Originally started by Reliance group of companies and the chairperson being Neeta Ambani this tourna,ment has witnessed succes in Cricket loving India.

Nick Clegg says children will not get free fruit and vegetables under Tory plans for English schools.

The Turkish government has issued an arrest warrant for Oklahoma City Thunder center Enes Kanter, accusing him of being a member of a “terror group.”

Janet Maslin?s roundup of 16 books to read this summer includes a stunner of a cop novel, a satire of the wealthy, sidesplitting essays and a classical mystery for fans of Agatha Christie.

But other world leaders fail to persuade Donald Trump to back a landmark climate change deal.

“Uh oh My ANNUAL Memorial Day long weekend starts NOW,” the Fox News pundit tweeted, predicting “breathless” speculation about his departure after he drew backlash for pushing a baseless story.

A couple out observing nature in the Arizona mountains captured video of a mother elk kicking a bear in the face to rescue her calf.

England all-rounder Ben Stokes is fit to play and available to bowl in the second one-day international against South Africa on Saturday.

Labour leader says UK foreign policy must change, as campaigning resumes after the Manchester attack.

Today, on behalf of The Trust for Public Land and its many volunteers and supporters, I am registering our concern with President Trump?s executive order to review certain monument designations.

Our public lands and waters help define who we are as a nation by telling the story of our historical, cultural, and natural heritage. This attempt to roll back protections for national monuments is unprecedented and terribly misguided. Secretary Zinke, we strongly urge you to reject efforts to eliminate or shrink our national monuments.

The Trust for Public Land has worked over many years to protect important conservation lands at several national monuments currently under review and we have worked to ensure public land protection at other recently created monuments including California Coastal, Stonewall, Charles Young Buffalo Soldiers and Pullman. Our experience was always positive, with strong community support and engagement. In California, for example, the impetus for the Mojave Trails and Sand to Snow national monuments came from Mojave Desert residents and business leaders, who organized for years in support of them.

The Antiquities Act has been used well by Presidents throughout our history for important and lasting public land protection. This current review is clearly aimed at undermining presidential authority under the Act. Should this result lead to reversals of current protection, those steps will have a lasting negative impact and threaten many protected areas for generations to come.

Regarding the expedited review of the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah, we question the need for this condensed timeline but urge you, Secretary Zinke, to retain the monument?s current status. That area?s priceless historic, cultural and natural wonders are exactly the places and values which should be permanently protected. Monument status for Bears Ears protects 100,000 archaeological and cultural sites as well as stunning mesas, canyons and arches and the incredible outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing and general solitude and peace they contain ? treasures which are irreplaceable. It is clear the area has deep and important meaning to several Native American tribes, given their involvement in the long-standing protection effort and recent vocal opposition to rolling back protections. The boundaries of the monument clearly honor the voices of five sovereign tribal nations who joined together to seek protection of their shared ancestral lands and traditions.

We strongly believe rolling back the Bears Ears protections would threaten all our monument areas by setting a terrible precedent. Once that door is open, where might it stop? Such actions would discourage business investment and community growth around national monuments while also sending the signal that our history and natural wonders are negotiable. This already seems to be the case in Maine where a review of the Katahdin Woods and Waters national monument has caused uncertainty about the area?s economic future, halting positive signs of economic growth following the August 2016 designation.

National monuments are tremendous drivers of the $887 billion outdoor recreation economy. Businesses in gateway communities rely on the permanency of these protections when making decisions about local investments. Visitation has doubled at Organ Mountains National Monument since its designation. At the nearby Rio Grande del Norte National Monument, the Bureau of Land Management saw a 40% increase in visitors within a year after that land was designated a monument. A report by the Green Taos (N.M.) Chamber of Commerce said that within just a year after that designation, the town?s lodging revenue increased 21% in the second half of 2013 compared to the same period in 2012. This experience has been repeated over and over at other sites.

Our system of national parks, many of which began as monuments, has been called ?America?s best idea? and they are enormously popular with the American people. Our public lands provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in economic impact. They ensure permanent access to America?s unique cultural and natural history. The judicious use of the Antiquities Act, by presidents of both parties, has been a key tool in protecting that legacy of special places. There should be no rollbacks of protections, at Bears Ears or other monuments.

And we urge everyone to make their views known here.

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Today, on behalf of The Trust for Public Land and its many volunteers and supporters, I am registering our concern with President Trump?s executive order to review certain monument designations.

Our public lands and waters help define who we are as a nation by telling the story of our historical, cultural, and natural heritage. This attempt to roll back protections for national monuments is unprecedented and terribly misguided. Secretary Zinke, we strongly urge you to reject efforts to eliminate or shrink our national monuments.

The Trust for Public Land has worked over many years to protect important conservation lands at several national monuments currently under review and we have worked to ensure public land protection at other recently created monuments including California Coastal, Stonewall, Charles Young Buffalo Soldiers and Pullman. Our experience was always positive, with strong community support and engagement. In California, for example, the impetus for the the Mojave Trails and Sand to Snow national monuments began with came from Mojave Desert residents and business leaders, who organized for years in support of them.

The Antiquities Act has been used well by Presidents throughout our history for important and lasting public land protection. This current review is clearly aimed at undermining presidential authority under the Act. Should this result lead to reversals of current protection, those steps will have lasting negative impact and threaten many protected areas for generations to come.

Regarding the expedited review of the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah, we question the need for this condensed timeline but urge you, Secretary Zinke, to retain the monument?s current status. That area?s priceless historic, cultural and natural wonders are exactly the places and values which should be permanently protected. Monument status for Bears Ears protects 100,000 archaeological and cultural sites as well as stunning mesas, canyons and arches and the incredible outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing and general solitude and peace they contain ? treasures which are irreplaceable. It is clear the area has deep and important meaning to several Native American tribes, given their involvement in the long-standing protection effort and recent vocal opposition to rolling back protections. The boundaries of the monument clearly honor the voices of five sovereign tribal nations who joined together to seek protection of their shared ancestral lands and traditions.

We strongly believe rolling back the Bears Ears protections would threaten all our monument areas by setting a terrible precedent. Once that door is open, where might it stop? Such actions would discourage business investment and community growth around national monuments while also sending the signal that our history and natural wonders are negotiable. This already seems to be the case in Maine where review of the Katahdin Woods and Waters national monument has caused uncertainty about the area?s economic future, halting positive signs of economic growth following the August 2016 designation.

National monuments are tremendous drivers of the $887 billion outdoor recreation economy. Businesses in gateway communities rely on the permanency of these protections when making decisions about local investments. Visitation has doubled at Organ Mountains National Monument since its designation. At the nearby Rio Grande del Norte National Monument, the Bureau of Land Management saw a 40% increase in visitors within a year after that land was designated a monument. A report by the Green Taos (N.M.) Chamber of Commerce said that within just year after that designation, the town?s lodging revenue increased 21% in the second half of 2013 compared to the same period in 2012. This experience has been repeated over and over again at other sites.

Our system of national parks, many of which began as monuments, has been called ?America?s best idea? and they are enormously popular with the American people. Our public lands provide thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in economic impact. They ensure permanent access to America?s unique cultural and natural history. The judicious use of the Antiquities Act, by presidents of both parties, has been a key tool in protecting that legacy of special places. There should be no rollbacks of protections, at Bears Ears or other monuments.

And we urge everyone to make their views known here.

– This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.