Where’s Amelia?

We’re still looking, though recent events seem to offer the possibility, the possibility I emphasize, that we may find out what happened to aviatrix Amelia Earhart, who, along with navigator Fred Noonan, vanished in their twin-engine Lockheed Model 10E Electra as they attempted to fly around the world.

Here’s a recent report from Travel Noire: “U.S. researchers have announced a new mission to locate Amelia Earhart’s lost plane. … The expedition … follows compelling satellite imagery that potentially shows parts of Earhart’s Lockheed Electra 10E protruding from the sand on Nikumaroro, a remote island in Kiribati, approximately 1,000 miles from Fiji.”

We shall see. But this “news” has popped Earhart back into the news.

She vanished in 1937, 88 years ago if you’re counting, and few mysteries have been as durable, few people as eternally alluring as Earhart. You would be hard-pressed to find a contemporary comparison to match her.

She has an official agent and website. Hilary Swank played her in a movie. There have been many books. And there’s Amelia Earhart Elementary School at 1710 E. 93rd St. in the city’s Calumet Heights neighborhood.

Where’s Amelia?
(Viking/TNS)

Also an exciting new book, “The Aviator and the Showman: Amelia Earhart, George Putnam, and the Marriage that Made an American Icon” by Laurie Gwen Shapiro. Set for formal publication on July 15, it has already created a buzz, with a lengthy excerpt in The New Yorker magazine and a number of favorable reviews. David Grann, the author of such bestsellers as “The Wager” and “Killers of the Flower Moon,” says the book is “an exhilarating tale of the adventurous life of Amelia Earhart and the remarkable relationship that helped to forge her legend … stripping away the myths and revealing something far more profound and intricate and true.” Publishers Weekly calls it a “nuanced reprisal of Earhart’s life (that) certainly tarnishes her reputation, but thereby makes her saga all the more captivating.”

And makes the story of her husband all the more disgusting.

His name was George Palmer Putnam, who had published aviator Charles Lindbergh’s hugely successful life story before he met Earhart. On the prowl for another such novelty and hero, he glommed onto her, taken by her modest accomplishments but also her physical attractiveness and charisma.

He wooed her and he promoted her. He’s the one who gave her the “Lady Lindy” tag and further cemented their relationship by having her write her own book, tour the country in her own plane, give hundreds of interviews, embark on a lecture tour, serve as the “aviation editor” of Cosmopolitan magazine and endorse all sorts of products, including cigarettes.

Smart he was, shrewd too. And a master manipulator who left his own wife to marry Earhart. (And, unusually for the time, Earhart did not adopt Putnam’s last name). No question he pushed her but did he push her too far?

Read the book. But know that you will find a man about whom writer Gore Vidal, whose father was a partner with Putnam and Earhart in an aviation venture, said, “I never knew anyone who liked Putnam. It was quite interesting. Everybody who knew him disliked him. Some people disliked him and found him amusing and some people disliked him and found him unamusing.”

Related Articles

Literary calendar for week of July 13

Readers and writers: A terrific novel and strong memoirs, all from Minnesota authors

Arsenic in books? Exhibit shows that some pages can kill

How Desi Arnaz finally gets his due in ‘The Man Who Invented Television’

Readers and writers: Two books take clear-eyed view of health care system’s flaws

Certainly, many of you know some basics of Earhart’s life and a few know of her local connections, even though she wasn’t here long.

Born and raised in Kansas in 1897, she and her family moved around a bit before coming here in 1914. Her father, Edwin, was a lawyer with a dangerous relationship with booze, and her mother, also named Amelia but called Amy, was on the verge of a nervous breakdown. So, in 1914, Amy and her two daughters (Amelia and Muriel) came to Chicago at the invitation of friends and lived in the Beverly neighborhood home of their friends. Amelia, soon to begin her senior year, found the chemistry lab at nearby Morgan Park High School looked “just like a kitchen sink.” So she traveled north to spend her senior year at the highly regarded Hyde Park High School, graduating as a member of the class of 1915.

She did little to distinguish herself — no activities noted in the yearbook — and then it was off to college. She worked as a social worker and got hooked on airplanes. She had her first flying lesson early in 1921 and, in six months, bought her first plane.

In 1928, she was asked to be a passenger with male aviators on a flight across the Atlantic Ocean, emphasis on passenger. Together with pilot Bill Stultz and co-pilot Louis Gordon, she flew in the airplane Friendship, acting as navigator on the flight. On June 18, after 20 hours of flying, they landed in Wales and she became the first woman to cross the Atlantic by air. Acclaim was fast and furious.

After lively visits to New York City and Boston, she came here and the celebrations and events were all but overwhelming. She visited Hyde Park High School, where a band played “Back in Your Own Back Yard”; spoke at the Union League Club and at Orchestra Hall; was cheered by large crowds as she was paraded through the Loop; heard about Mayor Thompson’s idea for a lakefront airport to be named Amelia Earhart Field.

Headlines blared: “Old Hyde Park School Friends Fete Girl Flyer.”

Earhart spoke: “I’ve always loved Chicago.”

Famous forever for being lost, there is no denying that she was an inspiration for self-determined feminists and everyday daredevils, but I now think of her also as shy and vulnerable, a victim of shrewd manipulation by a slick operator.

Doris Rich, author of “Amelia Earhart: A Biography,” published by the Smithsonian Institution in 1989, has said, “The one thing that she really feared was that nothing would happen. She had to have an important life, and that meant you had to have adventure.”

That she did, but at what cost?

rkogan@chicagotribune.com

By MARCIA DUNN

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) — The International Space Station’s first visitors from India, Poland and Hungary headed back to Earth on Monday, wrapping up a private mission and catching a ride home with SpaceX.

Related Articles

A century after a man was convicted of teaching evolution, the debate on religion in schools rages

The US plans to begin breeding billions of flies to fight a pest. Here is how it will work

First images unveiled from world’s largest camera

The summer solstice is here. What to know about the longest day of the year

Want to plant trees to offset fossil fuels? You’d need all of North and Central America, study finds

Their capsule undocked from the orbiting lab and aimed for a splashdown the next morning in the Pacific off the Southern California coast.

The short, privately financed mission marked the first time in more than 40 years that India, Poland and Hungary saw one of their own rocket into orbit. The three astronauts were accompanied by America’s most experienced space flier, Peggy Whitson, who works for Axiom Space, which chartered the flight. They launched from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center on June 25.

India’s Shubhanshu Shukla, Poland’s Slawosz Uznanski-Wisniewski and Hungary’s Tibor Kapu conducted dozens of experiments during their stay. They also fielded calls from their countries’ prime ministers as well as schoolchildren.

“We will spread the word in our countries that these things are within our reach. These things are possible even for smaller countries like ours,” Kapu said during Sunday’s farewell ceremony, which ended in an emotional group hug.

Shukla noted that “it’s truly a miracle” when humanity comes together for a common goal.

“The sky is no longer the limit. We can explore space,” added Uznanski-Wisniewski.

This image provided by NASA and Axiom Space shows a SpaceX capsule undocking from the International Space Station, Monday July 14, 2025, targeting a splashdown in the Pacific, carrying visiting crew Axiom Space’s Peggy Whitson, Hungary’s Tibor Kapu, India’s Shubhanshu Shukla and Poland’s Slawosz Uznanski-Wisniewski. (NASA via AP)

Uznanski-Wisniewski took special pride in the first pierogies in space. He took up the cabbage and mushroom-stuffed dumplings, which were freeze-dried in advance for easy cooking in zero gravity.

Their three countries shared the cost of the mission, paying more than $65 million apiece.

It was Axiom’s fourth station trip since 2022. The Houston company’s clientele includes the wealthy as well as countries seeking representation in space. NASA embraces commercial spaceflight, helping to set the stage for private space stations in the works by Axiom and others, as well as lunar landers.

This photo provided by Axiom Space shows the 11 astronauts aboard the International Space Station on Sunday July 13, 2025 sharing a group hug ahead of Monday’s planned departure of the private crew of four. (Axiom Space via AP)

The space station’s seven full-time residents remain behind in orbit, representing the U.S., Russia and Japan. Four of them will be replaced in a few weeks by a fresh crew launched for NASA by SpaceX.

“Safe journey home to the best planet in the solar system,” the space station’s Anne McClain radioed as the private crew departed.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

By CORA LEWIS

NEW YORK (AP) — A “click-to-cancel” rule, which would have made it easier for consumers to end unwanted subscriptions, has been blocked by a federal appeals court days before it was set to go into effect. But there are ways to end those subscriptions and memberships, even if they take some work.

The rule would also have required companies to disclose when free trials and promotional offers would end and let customers cancel recurring subscriptions as easily as they started them. But even without the new federal guidance, here are some ways to stay on top of subscription and membership fees.

Use calendar reminders and regularly review your bills

Experts at the Consumer Federation of America recommend setting calendar reminders for whenever a free trial period ends, to alert yourself to cancel promotional offers before the real recurring costs kick in. The auto-enrollment process, in which the company does not remind the consumer via email that a trial is about to end and higher monthly payments will begin, was also at the heart of the FTC’s rule.

“No subscription business model should be structured to profit from a gauntlet-style cancellation process,” said Erin Witte, Director of Consumer Protection for the Consumer Federation of America, in a statement on the click-to-cancel rule.

Regularly reviewing your credit card and debit card bills can also help you keep track of any recurring charges — including price increases you may have missed or that you didn’t anticipate when trying out a new membership or subscription.

Know the terms and conditions of a given subscription

“Companies make it easy for consumers to click to sign up and easy for the companies to automatically withdraw funds from consumers’ accounts,” said Shennan Kavanagh, Director of Litigation at the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) in a statement on the FTC’s click-to-cancel rule. “People should not (have to) spend months trying to cancel unwanted subscriptions.”

Given the FTC’s vacated rule, though, companies may still legally require that customers cancel memberships or subscriptions by phone, even as they permit signing up, enrolling, and paying bills online. Consumer advocates say this places an extra burden of time and energy on the consumer to stop an unwanted recurring fee, but sometimes knowing the terms of the subscription and getting on the phone is worth the trouble.

There are some services that unenroll you

Apps like Rocket Money and services like Trim, which is accessed through a browser, can keep track of your recurring monthly fees and subscriptions, for free — or for a fee — and can help you catch new ones or even unsubscribe from some services.

For parents, especially, a service like Trim could help inform them that a child has started a new subscription, game or membership before the fees recur. And Rocket Money will actively work to end unwanted subscriptions for you, for a monthly price. If the company can’t successfully end or cancel the subscription or membership, it will give the customer the information needed to do so. Trim also provides this service, in its premium form, for an additional fee.

Resist deals when canceling

The FTC is currently moving forward with preparations for a trial involving Amazon’s Prime program, which accuses the retailer of enrolling consumers in its Prime program without their consent and making it difficult to cancel subscriptions.

Often, when a consumer tries to cancel a subscription for something like Prime, which offers free delivery and streaming video, the company will offer a month or more of the subscription at a promotional rate — half off, or at other, better-seeming values, to entice a customer to stay. Staying strong in the face of what may appear to be a good deal can help you stop recurring monthly fees before you forget to cancel them again.

Agreeing to yet another trial or promotional rate, which is another on-ramp to auto-enrollment, just continues the cycle, according to consumer advocates.

What would the FTC’s rule have done?

The FTC’s rule would have required businesses to obtain a customer’s consent before charging for memberships, auto-renewals and programs linked to free trials. The businesses would have also had to disclose when free trials and promotional offers would end.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit said this week that the FTC made a procedural error by failing to come up with a preliminary regulatory analysis, which is required for rules whose annual impact on the U.S. economy is more than $100 million.

The FTC said that it did not have to come up with a preliminary regulatory analysis because it initially determined that the rule’s impact on the national economy would be less than $100 million. An administrative law judge decided that the economic impact would be more than the $100 million threshold, and the court decided to vacate the rule.

Former President Joe Biden’s administration had included the FTC’s proposal as part of its “Time is Money” initiative, which aimed to crack down on consumer-related hassles.

“The Associated Press receives support from Charles Schwab Foundation for educational and explanatory reporting to improve financial literacy. The independent foundation is separate from Charles Schwab and Co. Inc. The AP is solely responsible for its journalism.”

By KEVIN FREKING

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans will test the popularity of Department of Government Efficiency spending cuts this week by aiming to pass President Donald Trump’s request to claw back $9.4 billion in public media and foreign aid spending.

Senate Democrats are trying to kill the measure but need a few Republicans uncomfortable with the president’s effort to join them.

Trump’s Republican administration is employing a rarely used tool that allows the president to transmit a request to cancel previously approved funding authority. The request triggers a 45-day clock under which the funds are frozen. If Congress fails to act within that period, then the spending stands. That clock expires Friday.

The House has already approved Trump’s request on a mostly party line 214-212 vote. The Senate has little time to spare to beat the deadline for the president’s signature. Another House vote will be needed if senators amend the legislation, adding more uncertainty to the outcome.

Here’s a closer look at this week’s debate.

Public media on the chopping block

Trump has asked lawmakers to rescind nearly $1.1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which represents the full amount it’s due to receive during the next two budget years.

The White House says the public media system is politically biased and an unnecessary expense.

The corporation distributes more than two-thirds of the money to more than 1,500 locally operated public television and radio stations, with much of the remainder assigned to National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System to support national programming.

The potential fallout from the cuts for local pubic media stations has generated concerns on both sides of the political aisle.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said he’s worried about how the rescissions will hit radio stations that broadcast to Native Americans in his state. He said the vast majority of their funding comes from the federal government.

“They’re not political in nature,” Rounds said of the stations. “It’s the only way of really communicating in the very rural areas of our state, and a lot of other states as well.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Ala., said that for the tribal radio stations in her state, “almost to a number, they’re saying that they will go under if public broadcasting funds are no longer available to them.”

To justify the spending cuts, the Trump administration and Republican lawmakers have cited certain activities they disagree with to portray a wide range of a program’s funding as wasteful.

In recent testimony, Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought criticized programming aimed at fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion. He said NPR aired a 2022 program entitled “What ‘Queer Ducks’ can teach teenagers about sexuality in the animal kingdom.” He also cited a special town hall that CNN held in 2020 with “Sesame Street” about combatting racism.

Targeting humanitarian aid

As part of the package, Trump has asked lawmakers to rescind about $8.3 billion in foreign aid programs that aim to fight famine and disease and promote global stability.

Among the targets:

— $900 million to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases and strengthen detections systems to prevent wider epidemics.

— $800 million for a program that provides emergency shelter, water and sanitation and family reunification for those forced to flee their own country.

— $4.15 billion for two programs designed to boost the economies and democratic institutions in developing and strategically important countries.

— $496 million to provide humanitarian assistance such as food, water and health care for countries hit by natural disasters and conflicts.

Some of the health cuts are aimed at a program known as PEPFAR, which President George W. Bush, a Republican, began to combat HIV/AIDS in developing countries. The program is credited with saving 26 million lives and has broad bipartisan support.

On PEPFAR, Vought told senators “these cuts are surgical and specifically preserve life-saving assistance.” But many lawmakers are wary, saying they’ve seen no details about where specifically the administration will cut.

The administration also said some cuts, such as eliminating funding for UNICEF, would encourage international organizations to be more efficient and seek contributions from other nations, “putting American taxpayers first.”

U.S. leaders have often argued that aiding other nations through “soft power” is not just the right thing to do but also the smart thing.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told Vought there is “plenty of absolute nonsense masquerading as American aid that shouldn’t receive another bit of taxpayer funding,” but he called the administration’s attempt to root it out “unnecessarily chaotic.”

“In critical corners of the globe, instead of creating efficiencies, you’ve created vacuums for adversaries like China to fill,” McConnell told Vought.

Trump weighs in

The president has issued a warning on his social media site directly aimed at individual Senate Republicans who may be considering voting against the cuts.

He said it was important that all Republicans adhere to the bill and in particular defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

“Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or Endorsement,” he said.

For individual Republicans seeking reelection, the prospect of Trump working to defeat them is reason for pause and could be a sign the package is teetering.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., opted to announce he would not seek reelection recently after the president called for a primary challenger to the senator when he voted not to advance Trump’s massive tax and spending cut bill.

Getting around a filibuster

Spending bills before the 100-member Senate almost always need some bipartisan buy-in to pass. That’s because the bills need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster and advance. But this week’s effort is different.

Congress set up a process back when Republican Richard Nixon was president for speedily considering a request to claw back previously approved spending authority. Under those procedures, it takes only a simple Senate majority to advance the president’s request to a final vote.

Related Articles

‘Who’s got next?’ Democrats already lining up for 2028 presidential race in early voting states

Trump threatens Russia with tariffs if war on Ukraine isn’t resolved within 50 days

Trump to make unprecedented second state visit to UK in September

Tariffs on Brazil could leave coffee drinkers with a headache

MAGA is tearing itself apart over Jeffrey Epstein

It’s a rarely employed maneuver. In 1992, President George H.W. Bush, a Republican, had some success with his rescissions request, though the final bill included some cuts requested by the president and many that were not. Trump proposed 38 rescissions in 2018, but the package stalled in the Senate.

If senators vote to take up the bill, it sets up the potential for 10 hours of debate plus votes on scores of potentially thorny amendments in what is known as a vote-a-rama.

Democrats see the president’s request as an effort to erode the Senate filibuster. They warn it’s absurd to expect them to work with GOP lawmakers on bipartisan spending measures if Republicans turn around a few months later and use their majority to cut the parts they don’t like.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer offered a stern warning in a letter to colleagues: “How Republicans answer this question on rescissions and other forthcoming issues will have grave implications for the Congress, the very role of the legislative branch, and, more importantly, our country,” Schumer said.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., took note of the warning.

“I was disappointed to see the Democrat leader in his recent Dear Colleague letter implicitly threaten to shut down the government,” Thune said.

The Trump administration is likening the first rescissions package to a test case and says more could be on the way if Congress goes along.