Presidential second terms are rarely successful, and on the evidence of his first 100 days Donald Trump’s won’t be different. The president needs a major reset if he wants to rescue his final years from the economic and foreign-policy shocks he has unleashed.

There’s no denying his energy or ambition. Mr. Trump is pressing ahead on multiple fronts, and he has had some success. His expansion of U.S. energy production is proceeding well and is much needed after the Biden war on fossil fuels. He has ended the border crisis in short order.

He is also rolling back federal assaults on mainstream American values — such as by policing racial favoritism. Mr. Trump was elected to counter the excesses of the left on climate, culture and censorship, and he is doing it.

On other priorities, the execution hasn’t matched the promises. That would seem to apply to DOGE, which we’ve supported but has been so frenetic it isn’t clear what it is achieving. Easy targets like USAID make for symbolic victories but no fundamental change in the growth of government. The Trump budget will offer more reform proposals, if the White House can get them through Congress. He badly needs a pro-growth tax bill.

Even on popular causes, one problem has been needless excess. Harvard and other universities need to change, but trying to dictate their curriculum and faculty choices is an intrusion on free speech and risks defeat in court. His deportation of criminals is worthwhile, but denying due process and toying with the courts will sour the effort. The White House motto seems to be that if something is worth doing, it’s worth doing too much.

That’s especially true on tariffs, which could sink his presidency. Mr. Trump was elected to control inflation and raise real incomes, but tariffs do the opposite. They guarantee at least a one-time increase in prices on imported goods that will flow through the economy. They portend shortages for consumers, and for businesses that source goods and components from abroad.

The tariffs are the largest economic policy shock since Richard Nixon blew up Bretton Woods in 1971, which unleashed inflation that Nixon tried to stop with wage and price controls and a tariff. The economic consequences arguably doomed Nixon’s second term, perhaps as much as Watergate.

It’s a mistake to think the tariff damage is only domestic. The willy-nilly assault on friends and foes has shaken global confidence in U.S. reliability. Ken Griffin, the investor and major donor to Mr. Trump, summed it up last week as a self-inflicted blow to the American brand. The U.S. is needlessly ceding global economic leadership.

China is already taking advantage by courting U.S. allies as a more dependable giant market. This will make it much harder to build a trade alliance to stop China’s often predatory economic behavior. Mr. Trump last week called us “China Loving,” which must amuse Beijing. Mr. Trump’s tariffs on allies are the real gift to Xi Jinping.

There are signs Mr. Trump is finally recognizing some of the tariff risks, as he now talks of doing some 200 trade deals. He is also saying he might unilaterally cut his 145% tariff on Chinese imports. We’d like nothing better than to see a retreat. But Mr. Trump remains a long way from making such a pivot, and those trade deals won’t be easy to strike.

Mr. Trump’s second-term foreign policy so far is a work in progress. He is trying to reclaim Middle East sea lanes from the Houthis after Joe Biden ’s timidity. And he is restoring “maximum pressure” on Iran to abandon its nuclear program. These are hopeful signs.

The main cause for alarm is his one-sided pursuit of peace in Ukraine. Until last weekend he had said scarcely a discouraging word about Vladimir Putin while squeezing Ukraine to make concessions that could doom it to future marauding. Much will hang on the details of an armistice, if there is one, and not merely for Europe’s future.

Joe Biden’s retreat from Afghanistan destroyed American deterrence. A debacle in Ukraine would do the same for Mr. Trump, with ramifications for Iran, North Korea and especially Chinese ambitions in the Pacific. Don’t be surprised if China decides to snatch Taiwan’s outer islands or tries a partial blockade. Mr. Trump told us in October that he’d respond to such a provocation with tariffs, but he’s already playing that card without success.

— The Wall Street Journal

Related Articles

Rwanda confirms early talks to host deported US migrants

Visa crackdown leads international students in the US to reconsider summer travel

How Alcatraz became America’s most notorious prison

20 attorneys general ask federal judge to reverse deep cuts to US Health and Human Services

States sue Trump administration for blocking the development of wind energy

By ED WHITE

President Donald Trump wants to convert Alcatraz back into a federal prison, decades after the California island fortress was converted into a U.S. tourist destination because it had become too costly to house America’s worst criminals.

The prison off the coast of San Francisco is where the government sent notorious gangsters Al Capone and George “Machine Gun” Kelly as well as lesser-known men who were considered too dangerous to lock up elsewhere.

Circled by herons and gulls and often shrouded in fog, Alcatraz has been the setting for movies featuring Sean Connery, Nicolas Cage and Clint Eastwood.

Trump says Alcatraz, now part of the National Park Service, suddenly is needed to house America’s “most ruthless and violent” criminals.

“When we were a more serious Nation, in times past, we did not hesitate to lock up the most dangerous criminals, and keep them far away from anyone they could harm. That’s the way it’s supposed to be,” Trump said Sunday on his Truth Social site.

What is Alcatraz?

Alcatraz is in San Francisco Bay off the coast of San Francisco and visible from the Golden Gate Bridge. It is best known for its years as a federal prison, from 1934-63, but its history is much longer.

President Millard Fillmore in 1850 declared the island for public purposes, according to the park service, and it soon became a military site. Confederates were housed there during the Civil War.

By the 1930s, the government decided that it needed a place to hold the worst criminals, and Alcatraz became the choice for a prison.

“A remote site was sought, one that would prohibit constant communication with the outside world by those confined within its walls,” the park service said. “Although land in Alaska was being considered, the availability of Alcatraz Island conveniently coincided with the government’s perceived need for a high security prison.”

Why did it close?

The remoteness eventually made it impractical. Everything from food to fuel had to arrive by boat.

“The island had no source of fresh water,” according to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, “so nearly one million gallons of water had to be barged to the island each week.”

The cost to house someone there in 1959 was $10.10 a day compared with $3 at a federal prison in Atlanta, the government said. It was cheaper to build a new prison from scratch.

Why is Alcatraz notorious?

Despite the location, many prisoners tried to get out: 36 men attempted 14 separate escapes into the bay, according to the FBI. Nearly all were caught or didn’t survive the cold water and swift current.

“Escape from Alcatraz,” a 1979 movie starring Eastwood, told the story of John Anglin, his brother Clarence and Frank Morris, who all escaped in 1962, leaving behind handmade plaster heads with real hair in their beds to fool guards.

Related Articles

Coalition of 19 states ask federal judge to reverse deep cuts to US Health and Human Services

States sue Trump administration for blocking the development of wind energy

Cuts have eliminated more than a dozen US government health-tracking programs

A GOP congressman is peppered with questions about Trump during raucous town hall

South Dakota students weigh protest against university honors for homeland security chief Noem

“For the 17 years we worked on the case, no credible evidence emerged to suggest the men were still alive, either in the U.S. or overseas,” the FBI said.

“The Rock,” a 1996 fictional thriller with Connery and Cage, centers on an effort to rescue hostages from rogue Marines on Alcatraz.

A national park

Alcatraz became part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area and was opened to the public in 1973, a decade after it was closed as a prison.

The park service says the island gets more than 1 million visitors a year who arrive by ferry. A ticket for an adult costs $47.95, and visitors can see the cells where prisoners were held.

In 1969, a group of Native Americans, mostly college students, claimed to have a right to Alcatraz and began an occupation that lasted for 19 months. It ended in 1971 when federal authorities intervened.

“The underlying goals of the Indians on Alcatraz were to awaken the American public to the reality of the plight of the first Americans and to assert the need for Indian self-determination,” late historian Troy Johnson wrote.

By MARIA GRAZIA MURRU and SYLVIA HUI

ROME (AP) — Next week’s conclave to elect the successor to Pope Francis as leader of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics is a solemn affair steeped in centuries-old traditions.

Related Articles

Dinner parties, listening and lobbying. What goes on behind closed doors to elect a pope

‘Jackpot!’ How French police freed a cryptocurrency hostage whose finger was severed for ransom

Israel plans to capture all of Gaza under new plan, officials say

Ahead of the conclave, Vatican staff must vow secrecy under threat of excommunication

Europe launches a drive to attract scientists and researchers after Trump freezes US funding

But far from the Sistine Chapel where cloistered cardinals will cast votes, people are placing bets on who will be chosen as the next pope. From cash bets on websites to online games modeled after fantasy football leagues and casual wagers among friends and families, the popularity of guessing and gambling on the future of the papacy is increasing worldwide, experts and participants say.

It’s even topped the Europa League soccer tournament and Formula One drivers’ championship, said Sam Eaton, U.K. manager for Oddschecker, a leading online platform analyzing odds across sports, events and other betting markets.

“There’s a huge level of interest globally,” he said. “I don’t think we’ve had a market like this where we’ve had so many countries interested in seeing odds.”

Around the world, thousands of bets on the next pope

Hundreds of thousands of people from some 140 countries have visited Oddschecker to review each cardinal’s chances of becoming the next pope, Eaton said. He noted special eagerness in the United Kingdom, Ireland and the United States.

Cardinals attend a mass on the fifth of nine days of mourning for late Pope Francis, in St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican, Wednesday, April 30, 2025. (AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino)

In the U.K., about 30,000 pounds (almost $40,000) have been wagered with one leading online betting platform as of this week, Eaton said – a far cry from 1.2 million pounds on the singing contest Eurovision but still noteworthy as a trend, with the conclave days away.

“Betting on the next pope is definitely a niche market in the grand scheme of things, but it generates global interest,” said Lee Phelps, a spokesman for William Hill, one of the U.K.’s biggest bookmakers.

“Since April 21, we’ve taken thousands of bets, and it’s the busiest of all our non-sports betting markets,” said Phelps, who expects a surge in interest once the conclave begins Wednesday.

Betting on elections, papal conclaves and all manner of global events is almost a tradition of its own in the U.K., but such betting is not legal in the United States. BetMGM, one of the world’s top sports-betting companies, said it would not have any bets up.

But Eaton noted that in the unregulated, illegal space, one of the biggest sites has $10 million wagered so far in pope bets.

Fantasy “teams” of cardinals

In Italy, betting on the papal election — and all religious events — is forbidden.

Some people in Rome are making friendly, informal wagers — the equivalent of $20 on a favorite cardinal, with the loser pledging to host a dinner or buy a pizza night out.

Others are turning to an online game called Fantapapa, or Fantasy Pope, which mimics popular fantasy football and soccer leagues. More than 60,000 people are playing, each choosing 11 cardinals – as if for a soccer team – whom they believe have the best shot at becoming the next pope.

Cardinals nattend a mass on the sixth of nine days of mourning for late Pope Francis, in St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican, Thursday, May 1, 2025. (AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia)

They also draft the top contender, or captain. As with online wagers, the No. 1 choice for fantasy players has been Italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin, closely followed by Filipino Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle.

“It’s a really fun game to play with friends and have a laugh,” Italian student Federico La Rocca, 23, said. “Initially my dad sent it to me ironically, but now that it’s going to be the conclave, I decided to have a go and try it.”

La Rocca said he chose Tagle because “he looks like a nice guy and fun person.”

Players’ selections determine the number of points they rake in. But what’s the jackpot?

“Eternal glory,” joked Mauro Vanetti, who created the game when Francis was hospitalized earlier this year.

Vanetti said he and his co-founder are against gambling, but they wanted to create something fun around the event.

“It seems like in Italy there’s a certain inquisitiveness about the mechanisms of the Catholic hierarchy, but it’s a critical curiosity, a sarcastic and playful curiosity, so we were interested in this jesting spirit for such a solemn event,” Vanetti said. “In some ways it deflates the sacredness, in a nonaggressive way.”

Some concerns about betting on a solemn event

Beyond simply picking who the next pope will be, players and gamblers also can guess how many tries it will take the cardinals to choose the leader, which day of the week he’ll be elected, what new name he will decide on, or where his priorities will land on the progressive-conservative scale.

Pilgrims arrive to visit St. Peter’s Basilica on the seventh of nine days of mourning for late Pope Francis, at the Vatican, Friday, May 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Francisco Seco)

While the game and some of the bets have a novel or fun nature, anti-gambling advocates have raised overall concerns about legal gaming and the growing popularity of wagering on all manner of events.

A study published last fall found that 10% of young men in the U.S. show behavior that indicates a gambling problem, which is a rising concern in other parts of the world, too.

And for gambling around the papacy in general, some have raised religious concerns. Catholic teaching doesn’t go so far as to call games of chance or wagers sinful, but its Catechism warns that “the passion for gambling risks becoming an enslavement.”

It says gambling becomes “morally unacceptable” if it gravely affects a person’s livelihood.

Hui reported from London. AP writers Giovanna Dell’Orto in Rome and Mark Anderson in Las Vegas contributed.

Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

By REBECCA BOONE and AMANDA SEITZ

Attorneys general in 19 states and Washington, D.C., are challenging cuts to the U.S. Health and Human Services agency, saying the Trump administration’s massive restructuring has destroyed life-saving programs and left states to pick up the bill for mounting health crises.

Related Articles

States sue Trump administration for blocking the development of wind energy

Cuts have eliminated more than a dozen US government health-tracking programs

A GOP congressman is peppered with questions about Trump during raucous town hall

South Dakota students weigh protest against university honors for homeland security chief Noem

Amid Cinco de Mayo celebrations, a tax on Mexican tomatoes looms

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Washington D.C. on Monday, New York Attorney General Letitia James said. The attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia signed onto the complaint.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. restructured the agency in March, eliminating more than 10,000 employees and collapsing 28 agencies under the sprawling HHS umbrella into 15, the attorneys general said. An additional 10,000 employees had already been let go by President Donald Trump’s administration, according to the lawsuit, and combined the cuts stripped 25% of the HHS workforce.

“In its first three months, Secretary Kennedy and this administration deprived HHS of the resources necessary to do its job,” the attorneys general wrote.

Kennedy has said he is seeking to streamline the nation’s public health agencies and reduce redundancies across them with the layoffs. The cuts were made as part of a directive the administration has dubbed, “ Make America Healthy Again.”

HHS is one of the government’s costliest federal agencies, with an annual budget of about $1.7 trillion that is mostly spent on health care coverage for millions of people enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid.

The cuts have resulted in laboratories having limited testing for some infectious diseases, the federal government not tracking cancer risks among U.S. firefighters, early childhood learning programs left unsure of future funds and programs aimed at monitoring cancer and maternal health closing, the attorneys general say. Cuts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also have hampered states’ ability to respond to one of the largest measles outbreaks in recent years, the lawsuit says.

“This chaos and abandonment of the Department’s core functions was not an unintended side effect, but rather the intended result,” of the “MAHA Directive,” they said. They want a judge to vacate the directive because they say the administration can’t unilaterally eliminate programs and funding that have been created by Congress.

The restructuring eliminated the entire team of people who maintain the federal poverty guidelines used by states to determine whether residents are eligible for Medicaid, nutrition assistance and other programs. A tobacco prevention agency was gutted. Staff losses also were significant at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

The Trump administration is already facing other legal challenges over cuts to public health agencies and research organizations. A coalition of 23 states filed a federal lawsuit in Rhode Island last month over the administration’s decision to cut $11 billion in federal funds for COVID-19 initiatives and various public health projects across the country.

Boone reported from Boise, Idaho and Seitz reported from Washington, D.C.