World
Fact check: Did Clinton set the precedent for mass federal worker buyouts?
As unions and Democrats denounced the Trump administration’s effort to slash the federal workforce through worker buyouts, some social media users have said the president’s actions parallel those of former President Bill Clinton.
“To all you Democrats freaking out over President Trump’s buyout programme, I present to you a piece of history,” LD Basler, a retired federal law enforcement officer, wrote on X. His post quoted a 1995 statement Clinton made a year after he signed the Federal Workforce Restructuring Act.
“I guess Clinton didn’t have the authority either, when he did it in the 90s? (Because) the precedent was set BY DEMOCRATS,” another X user wrote.
Is that true?
Under Clinton, the government offered mass buyouts. But there’s a key difference with what’s happening under President Donald Trump: a bipartisan Congress overwhelmingly approved Clinton’s programme following months of review.
By contrast, Trump’s “deferred resignation” offer, conversationally known as a buyout, emerged within a week of his inauguration, with lots of uncertainty about the terms.
“We spent six months, involved several hundred federal workers, and made hundreds of recommendations to Clinton and Gore, some of which they accepted, some they didn’t,” said David Osborne, an adviser to the Clinton-era review that preceded the buyouts.
The status and legality of Trump’s programme remains unclear. The administration set a midnight February 6 deadline for workers to accept the offer, but a federal judge in Massachusetts blocked that deadline and set a hearing for February 10.
Federal unions sued and wrote that the administration “has offered no statutory basis for its unprecedented offer”. The lawsuit questions whether the federal government will honour the commitment to pay participants through September 30.
The US Office of Personnel Management said 40,000 employees as of February 5 have taken the offer.
Buyouts under Clinton stemmed from a review and act by Congress
A few weeks into his presidency in February 1993, Clinton issued an executive order telling each government department or agency with more than 100 employees to cut at least 4 percent of its civilian positions over three years through attrition or “early out programmes”.
Congress paved the way for buyouts. In March 1994, Clinton signed HR 3345, the Federal Workforce Restructuring Act of 1994. The legislation passed by wide, bipartisan margins: 391-17 in the House and 99-1 in the Senate.
The legislation authorised buyouts of up to $25,000 for selected groups of employees in the executive and judicial branches except employees of the Department of Defense, Central Intelligence Agency or the General Accounting Office (now called the Government Accountability Office). The law set an April 1, 1995, deadline.
Clinton said the plan would enable the “reduction of employment” by 273,000 people by the end of 1999.
“After all the rhetoric about cutting the size and cost of Government, our administration has done the hard work and made the tough choices,” Clinton said in a statement. “I believe the economy will be stronger, and the lives of middle class people will be better, as we drive down the deficit with legislation like this.”
The legislation was an outgrowth of Clinton’s National Performance Review, which launched in March 1993 with the slogan “Make Government Work Better and Cost Less”. Clinton appointed Vice President Al Gore to lead the review and issue a report within six months.
About 250 career civil servants worked on the review and created recommendations with agency employees.
Not everyone agreed with the Clinton-Gore initiative.
“There was opposition,” but union leaders supported reducing the power of middle managers, the target of most of the reductions, and the increased role of unions in bargaining, “so they felt this was an acceptable trade-off”, John M Kamensky, National Performance Review deputy director, told PolitiFact.
Gore visited “federal offices for what are billed as ‘town meetings’ but are more like group therapy sessions that allow workers to air their feelings about their jobs”, The Chicago Tribune wrote in June 1993.
Gore’s September 1993 report made hundreds of recommendations including buyouts. Gore went on David Letterman’s late-night television show to promote the plan.
“So, have you fixed the government?” Letterman asked.
“We found a lot of really ridiculous things that cost way too much money,” Gore said.
Gore brought up government-purchased ashtrays and read the federal regulations about how the ashtrays must break when dropped. Wearing safety goggles, Gore cracked the ashtray with a hammer.
Clinton had a “very deep commitment to change, but it was not hostile”, Paul Light, New York University professor emeritus of public service, said.
Clinton’s effort to reduce the federal workforce stemmed from his campaign platform as a “new Democrat” who said the era of big government was over, said Elaine Kamarck, who helped lead the Clinton-Gore review and is now director of the Brookings Institution’s Centre for Effective Public Management.
“We had a tech revolution going on that did not require as many layers of management as the old days,” Kamarck said.
How the Trump administration wants to cut jobs
The Clinton approach sought to be surgical in determining which employees could be eased out without compromising the government’s overall mission.
The Trump approach, so far, involves buyouts and firings, without a review period or congressional action. On January 28, the Office of Personnel Management emailed federal employees about the “fork in the road”. (Elon Musk, who heads Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency, used the same phrase in an all-staff message in 2022 after buying Twitter.)
The email said remote workers must return to work five days a week and offered “deferred resignation”. Employees had until February 6 to resign and be paid through September 30 (until the February 6 court intervention). The email hinted that layoffs were possible.
About two million employees received the offer. The civilian federal workforce is about 2.4 million, setting aside US Postal Service workers, according to the Pew Research Center. The average annual pay is about $106,000.
Some workers were exempt from the offers, including the military, Postal Service employees and workers in immigration enforcement, national security and public safety.
Trump’s programme is more generous than Clinton’s, Rachel Greszler, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, told PolitiFact. Clinton’s $25,000 offer is about $55,000 in today’s dollars. Trump’s plan says it will pay people over about eight months, so factoring in the average federal worker salary, that’s higher.
Democratic attorneys general said the payments may not be guaranteed and urged unionised workers to follow the guidance of their union officials. Democratic senators raised similar concerns about the short window for employees to decide and Trump’s authority to do this.
Trump issued an order to reclassify workers so he can more easily fire them – another subject of lawsuits. An order to end federal diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes led to workers being placed on paid leave.
A reporter asked White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt whether the programme was a way to purge the government of people who disagree with the president.
“That’s absolutely false,” Leavitt said. “This is a suggestion to federal workers that they have to return to work. And if they don’t, then they have the option to resign. And this administration is very generously offering to pay them for eight months.”
World
Israeli strike on village in eastern Lebanon kills 12, as Israel calls up more troops there
BEIRUT (AP) — An Israeli airstrike on a village in eastern Lebanon killed 12 people, state media said Tuesday, as an Israeli official said the military had called up more troops to Lebanon.
The strike hit the village of Mashghara in the Bekaa Valley late Monday, according to Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency.
It came after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that he had authorized more intensive strikes targeting the Hezbollah militant group across Lebanon. The Israeli military did not comment on this particular strike, but said Monday that it was targeting Hezbollah infrastructure in eastern Lebanon.
An Israeli security official said the military had called up an additional battalion to Lebanon. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations.
Rescue workers say that a dozen bodies were pulled out of the rubble following an intense wave of overnight strikes targeting swaths of southern and eastern Lebanon.
The intensified attacks come three days before Lebanese and Israeli military delegations are set to meet in Washington for direct talks.
Hezbollah is attacking Israeli troops in southern Lebanon and northern Israeli towns, and has vowed to continue fighting until Israel stops its daily airstrikes and withdraws its troops from the country.
In recent weeks, Hezbollah has boasted that it is using new fiber-optic drones that Israeli troops have struggled to intercept, hitting both Israeli troops and northern border villages.
Israel has updated its defensive guidelines in line with the recent developments in its northern areas, telling people not to gather in large numbers.
“What this requires of us now is to increase the blows, to increase the intensity. We will smite them hip and thigh,” Netanyahu said in a video posted on social media Monday ahead of the strikes.
The Lebanese government hopes that the direct talks with Israel, opposed by Hezbollah, will lead to a ceasefire.
Over a million people in Lebanon have been displaced in the war, which was sparked by Hezbollah firing rockets into northern Israel on March 2 in solidarity with Iran.
3,185 people in Lebanon have been killed in Israeli strikes since the start of the war, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry. Over 9,600 others have been wounded.
The intensified strikes have brought fear in Lebanon of a renewed full-scale war, leaving the capital exposed to possible strikes again.
“By just saying a few words on TV he (Netanyahu) causes everyone to panic and flee their homes,” said Tony Aboud, in Beirut’s bustling Hamra district. “I don’t know what’s going to happen and how long we can live like this.”
___
Associated Press writer Sam Mednick in Tel Aviv, Israel, and senior video producer Malak Harb in Beirut contributed to this report.
World
Pope Leo warns AI risks becoming tool of ‘domination, exclusion and death’ in new encyclical
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Pope Leo unveiled the Vatican’s new encyclical, “Magnifica Humanitas,” warning that artificial intelligence risks becoming a tool of “domination, exclusion and death” unless governments and institutions place moral limits on the rapidly developing technology.
The Vatican is formally entering the global debate over artificial intelligence as governments and tech companies race to develop increasingly powerful AI systems with limited international regulation.
The pontiff invoked Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical “Rerum Novarum,” which addressed worker exploitation during the Industrial Revolution, arguing that AI represents a similarly transformative moment threatening human dignity.
“Today we find ourselves facing a transformation of similar magnitude, with perhaps even greater consequences,” the Pope said.
UN REVISITS ‘KILLER ROBOT’ REGULATIONS AS CONCERNS ABOUT AI-CONTROLLED WEAPONS GROW
Pope Leo warns artificial intelligence could become a force for “domination, exclusion and death” without moral limits in the Vatican’s new encyclical. (Alberto PIZZOLI / AFP via Getty Images)
The pope warned about increasingly autonomous weapons systems that are beyond meaningful human control. He also said AI systems could block access to healthcare, employment and security because of biased data. He compared AI governance to nuclear arms control.
“Like nuclear energy, it must be at the service of all and of the common good,” he said.
AI layoffs may be backfiring on companies
Pope Leo XIV leads a vigil for peace inside St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican on April 11, 2026. (Gregorio Borgia/AP)
The pope said disarming AI alone is not enough and called on governments and institutions to “build” systems rooted in trust and human dignity. Recalling devastating floods in Peru, he said rebuilding means restoring trust and hope.
WHY A CLASSICAL EDUCATION MAY BE THE KEY TO HUMANITY’S FUTURE IN THE AI ERA
Pope Leo XIV leads the Angelus prayer from the window of the Apostolic Palace at the Vatican on March 1, 2026, warning that escalating violence in the Middle East risks becoming an “irreparable abyss.” (REUTERS/Guglielmo Mangiapane)
The pope also laid out the church’s broader argument about humanity and technology.
“The person bears within him- or herself a freedom, an interiority and a vocation to love and worship that no machine can replace,” he said.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The Vatican is attempting to insert moral theology into a largely secular technological arms race.
“Stay awake,” the pope urged, warning humanity not to surrender moral judgment to machines.
World
What’s the EU’s single ticket that simplifies train travel?
The new Passenger Package, announced on 13 May, is a fundamental shift toward a unified, digital, and legally protected rail network. It moves away from the current, fragmented European system, where thousands of train journeys are disrupted, leaving millions stranded.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The new “single ticket” will allow travellers to combine multiple rail segments, regardless of operator, into one single booking. This ensures transparency protections and full, consistent passenger rights for the entire journey. If delays occur, passengers are protected, with operators required to provide rerouting, assistance, accommodation, and compensation (such as 25 per cent for 60–119-minute delays and 50 per cent for 120+ minute delays).
The nightmare of train travel
The European rail ticket system routinely fails to let passengers book a cross-border trip from point A to point B in one seamless transaction.
On Europe’s busiest transit corridors, data shows that one in five international rail journeys simply cannot be purchased as a unified ticket through major operator platforms. This fragmentation gets dramatically worse over longer distances, where more than half of all train journeys spanning over 900 kilometres cannot be booked end-to-end.
Public frustration has forced the issue onto the highest political stages. A 2025 Eurobarometer survey showed that 25 per cent of Europeans struggle to book tickets combining different multi-train journeys, with 43 per cent not booking them at all because the multi-app booking process is a hassle. This means that planning a sustainable continental train ride takes, on average, 70 per cent longer than booking a commercial flight.
Greens MEP Lena Schilling points to cross-border routes where journeys exist physically but disappear digitally depending on where travellers search.
“When you want to travel from Paris to Barcelona or wherever, there is a train ticket on the French booking service, but you can’t book it if you’re Spanish over your own booking system. So, it’s the same train, the same connection, but one booking app is showing you this option because it’s a direct train … and on the Spanish side it’s not.”
Monopolies and regional isolation
Dominant national rail operators protect their market shares by actively restricting ticket data access and keeping independent platforms from displaying or selling their full range of fares. Through this closed ecosystem, these monopolies stifle competition from smaller rail startups and third-party vendors who could otherwise offer travellers more transparent, cheaper alternatives.
According to Schilling, some of the resistance comes from operators concerned about losing control over customer relationships and pricing visibility: “They need to share their train connections not just with each other, but also with independent train operators like Trainline. They are afraid to lose customers.”
This digital gridlock is another major barrier to the EU’s goal of a single, highly integrated economic market because it isolates regions behind incompatible national infrastructure walls. While commercial aviation does seamlessly link European cities, the fragmented rail network makes regional divides worse and makes remote, or border communities feel cut off from central economic hubs.
“[…] trains, a good connection, and real connection are really vital,” for a solid European Union, said Schilling.
The new package is a continuum
The Passenger Package builds on a comprehensive set of long-term rules on the liberalisation and interoperability of the European railway system.
By addressing the end-to-end ticketing system, the package goes beyond the Commission’s four previous railway packages launched between 2001 and 2016. These focused more on market opening, competition, and safety, failing to link the ticketing business with Europe’s reality of multi-operator journeys.
The 2012 Single European Railway Area Directive allowed railway companies to operate services throughout the EU under a unified legal framework, effectively integrating Europe’s railway market into a single, connected system. Today, this allows citizens to enjoy cross-border mobility, including purchasing end-to-end tickets for trips across the bloc.
A multi-leg train journey is feasible when national road transport systems are interconnected. The 2010 Intelligent Transport Systems Directive (ITS) improved interoperability among member states’ rail systems by accelerating the deployment of traffic and transport management technologies across the bloc.
The new package can enhance passenger rights across the EU, building on the 2021 Rail Passenger Rights Regulation. This regulation established a clear minimum standard for rail passengers in all member states. Key provisions included the right to rerouting or reimbursement for delays of over 60 minutes, access to clear information about ticket prices, timetables, and delays, and the ability to file complaints easily.
What are the benefits for passengers?
The package aims to eliminate the current issue where cross-border or multi-operator rail trips are difficult to book because tickets are split across multiple platforms.
Passengers can now combine tickets from different operators into one single ticket for multi-leg journeys. This simplifies the booking process, allowing users to compare options and make a purchase all in one go on a single website, rather than using multiple apps.
“[…] you just open your one train app, whatever it is, your national broadcast or any other app, and then you just search for the connection you need and buy it with one click”, said Schilling.
Finding tickets across different websites will become easier because train companies are now required to allow third-party platforms to sell their tickets. Larger providers must also show all railway services available in their country on their ticketing websites, not just their own.
Operators must present travel options in a neutral and transparent manner, allowing consumers to choose their preferred journey. Platforms’ default settings must include greenhouse gas emissions as a filter, allowing users to rank trips by carbon footprint.
Travellers are fully protected in the event of journey disruptions. In addition to guaranteeing compensation for the overall delay, the railway company responsible for the disruption will need to reroute passengers to their final destinations at no additional cost. Assistance, including meals and refreshments, is foreseen, with accommodation for overnight stays.
On passenger rights, Schilling wants clear rules on train connections. “[…] you have this one booking system, but then the problem is, how much time do you need to change between one train and the next one? So I want to have a minimal time that is always thought through to change at the train station because otherwise you miss it, and what then?” .
Impact on companies and infrastructure
According to the Commission, open data breeds competition. So this framework will give smaller, low-cost startups the visibility they need to challenge monopolies and drive down ticket prices. For operators, it’ll provide a standardised data-sharing network that reduces administrative friction and unlocks access to a wider pool of cross-border passengers.
It also benefits the broader infrastructure by serving as a policy lever to compel member states to modernise tracks, synchronise national signalling systems, and eliminate physical border bottlenecks.
“If a lot of people ask for something, we must think of how we can increase supply, how we can increase infrastructure,” argued Schilling.
However, the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER) already issued warnings. They consider the mandatory distribution deals an unprecedented regulatory overreach.
CER argues that forcing major national rail companies to sell competitor products strips operators of commercial freedom and disincentivises investment in their own, often costly, ticketing technologies.
Alberto Mazzola, executive director of CER, explained that the proposal risks shifting power away from rail operators and towards digital intermediaries, third-party apps that would gain market leverage.
“[…] the platform that is dominant will impose conditions on the market”, Mazzola said. “Now it is no longer a commercial relation where two partners are equal. One will have an obligation, and the other one will have a right.”
They argue that once platforms become sufficiently powerful, they could demand higher commissions, potentially increasing costs for rail operators and ultimately passengers.
CER also explained that ticketing remains a secondary issue compared with Europe’s physical infrastructure gaps.
“You have the infrastructure, then we have the trains, then we have the tickets. We don’t start with the tickets,” Mazzola said.
Europe has spent decades expanding roads while parts of its rail network have contracted. According to CER, the focus should instead be on increasing network capacity and accelerating cross-border high-speed rail.
“People want to see a good price and a short duration. To reduce the duration of the trip, you need to go high speed.”
Unified ticketing remains a symbolic gesture without physical rail connections to back it up. A single ticket is useless if congestion or incompatible signalling systems, such as the varied national versions of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS), prevent trains from running smoothly across borders.
Therefore, the success of this legislation hinges entirely on accelerating physical integration, with the Commission linking this to 2026 funding projects that ensure the rail infrastructure can deliver on the promise of seamless travel.
The road ahead
The Commission must now submit its recommendations to the Parliament and Council for review and approval. Member states must accelerate the implementation of the ITS to ensure smooth operationalisation of the simplified booking system.
As part of the package, co-legislators also need to greenlight two additional initiatives, the Multimodal Digital Mobility Services (MDMS) and the Single Digital Booking and Ticketing Regulation (SDBTR). The MDMS enhances transparency and promotes fair competition in the bloc’s ticketing market, while the SDBTR increases the availability of rail tickets on digital platforms.
-
Videos5 minutes agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLgDPjKkw64
-
Movie Reviews11 minutes agoObsession (2026) – Review | Curry Barker Horror Movie | Heaven of Horror
-
World23 minutes agoIsraeli strike on village in eastern Lebanon kills 12, as Israel calls up more troops there
-
News29 minutes agoTo Understand Pope Leo’s Efforts on A.I., Look at the Man 3 Seats Away
-
Politics35 minutes ago5 Races to Watch in Texas Runoffs on Tuesday
-
Business41 minutes agoThe Homesteading Mother of 6 Taking On Big Tech
-
Science47 minutes agoA Powerful H.I.V. Drug Lands in Zambia. But Will It Reach Those Who Need It?
-
Lifestyle1 hour agoIt only takes 30 minutes to be a good mom : It’s Been a Minute