npr

Air Force veteran Jeri Dilno realized she was a lesbian at a young age. For StoryCorps, she discussed the risk she took joining the military in the late 1950s.

From left: a Labubu, Joey Chestnut, Dominique Thorne.Pedro Pardo/AFP via Getty Images; David Becker/Getty Images for Netflix; Kevin Winter/Getty Imageshide caption

Greetings, quiz takers! This week's installment features weird dolls, presidential decrees and even a sports question! Best of luck.

If you think you can do better at quiz-writing than the quiz-writer, now you can try. We're taking reader submissions for each week's bonus question. The submission form and instructions are below the quiz. Please submit by 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday, June 24.

To submit a bonus question, please enter your proposed question and the answer in the form below. Your question should relate to news from June 16 through June 24.

If your submission is selected for inclusion in the NPR Weekly Quiz, you will be acknowledged in a list of contributors on NPR's website or otherwise receive appropriate credit, but failure to do so shall not be deemed a breach of your rights.

Your submission will be governed by our generalTerms of UseandPrivacy Policy. As the Privacy Policy says, we want you to be aware that there may be circumstances in which the exemptions provided under law for journalistic activities or freedom of expression may override privacy rights you might otherwise have.

An oriental magpie-robin perches on a tree branch in Bangkok in 2022. The bird was among the species that researchers studied in a rainforest in India.Jack Taylor/AFP via Getty Imageshide caption

Researchers have some new evidence about what makesbirds make so much noiseearly in the morning, and it's not for some of the reasons they previously thought.

For decades, a dominant theory about why birds sing at dawn — called the "dawn chorus" — has been that they can be heard farther and more clearly at that time.

Sound travels faster in humid air and it's more humid early in the morning. It's less windy, too, which is thoughtto lessen any distortionof their vocalizations.

But scientists from the Cornell Lab of Ornithology's K. Lisa Yang Center for Conservation Bioacoustics and Project Dhvani in India combed through audio recordings of birds in the rainforest. They say they didn't find evidence to back up this "acoustic transmission hypothesis."

It was among the hypotheses involving environmental factors. Another is that birds spend their time singing at dawn because there's low light and it's a bad time to look for food.

"We basically didn't find much support for some of these environmental cues which have been purported in literature as hypotheses" for why birds sing more at dawn, says Vijay Ramesh, a postdoctoral research associate at Cornell and the study's lead author.

The study, called "Why is the early bird early? An evaluation of hypotheses for avian dawn-biased vocal activity," was published this month in the peer-reviewed journalPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B.

The researchers didn't definitively point to one reason for why the dawn chorusishappening, but they found support for ideas that the early morning racket relates to birds marking their territory after being inactive at night, and communicating about finding food.

A large swathe of forest covers India's Western Ghat mountains, in Kerala's Wayanad District. The Western Ghat area is where the researchers collected audio.Manjunath Kiran/AFP via Getty Imageshide caption

The team analyzed recordings from audio recorders placed at 43 locations in the Western Ghats mountain range in southern India, which is known as a biodiversity hotspot. They examined sounds of what they determined were 69 different species of birds. They studied recordings from the hours around dawn and the hours around dusk to compare activity.

Unsurprisingly to anyone who's been woken up by a cacophony of bird calls, the "vast majority" of species they studied had "significantly higher" vocal activity at dawn compared to dusk.

In order to evaluate the acoustic transmission hypothesis, they first had to make a prediction: that birds that vocalize at higher frequencies would be more active at dawn than at dusk. They predicted this because they said higher frequencies are more susceptible to degradation due to environmental factors, such as wind and humidity.

But they write that they found "no significant relationship between the peak frequency of vocalizations" and a type of bird's preference for making noise at dawn instead of dusk.

And when the researchers looked into another "environmental" factor — that birds sing in the low light of dawn because that low light makes a bad time to forage — it would make sense that the same would be true at dusk. But most birds were far more vocal at dawn.

"I think that that's probably the most significant finding here, is not to demonstrate what the dawn chorus is about definitively, but to rule out this class of hypotheses, this environmental open window set of hypotheses," says Steve Nowicki, a professor of biology at Duke University who has studied birdsong and was not involved in the study.

A white-throated kingfisher is pictured in India's Rajasthan state in 2013. The bird was among those studied that was most vocal at dawn instead of dusk.Sebastien Berger/AFP via Getty Imageshide caption

The relationships they did spotlight were that birds that were more territorial, and those with an omnivorous diet, were more vocal at dawn rather than dusk.

Birds that are highly territorial "tend to make advertisements early in the morning to sort of like claim territories or advertise where they are" after a night of inactivity, Ramesh says.

And when it comes to food, birds are engaging in "a lot of communication about where resources are, or often if there is a predator nearby," he says. They speculate that a reason that omnivorous birds have a "marginally higher" level of vocal activity at dawn is because they often participate in flock "hunting parties" that more often happen at dawn. But as to why those hunting parties happen at dawn to begin with, they aren't sure.

As the researchers note, there are plenty of caveats. They only studied birds in one particular tropical region in India (Ramesh says there's "pretty much no overlap" with bird species we see in the U.S.). They didn't observe the birds visually, and didn't record exactly when dawn and dusk started, they just used approximate times.

Plenty of hypotheses exist for the dawn chorus. Nowicki says the researchers here didn't examine some others, including that birds sing in the morning to warm up, "like a performer doing vocal warmups," or that it's related to females mating in the early morning.

In the paper, the scientists noted opportunities for future research using more sophisticated audio equipment and climate monitoring.

"Sometimes there are phenomena, like the dawn chorus could be one, where there's not a single causal reason. And that's kind of frustrating to scientists," Nowicki adds.

There could be "different reasons that species are more likely to sing at dawn or not," he says. "In some ways that's an unsatisfying answer because it's not buttoning things up."

John Spitzberg, 87, holds a "Support our Veterans" sign during a veterans march at the National Mall on March 14 in Washington, D.C. The 87-year-old veteran was arrested June 13 at the U.S. Capitol while protesting the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary parade, which coincided with President Trump's 79th birthday.Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Imageshide caption

In the video, one officer wheels away John Spitzberg's rollator walker, while the other uses zip ties to bind his hands behind his back.

The 87-year-old veteran is unsteady on his feet — the result of several disabilities he suffers — as the crowd applauds, cheers and chants, "We won't back down, we won't retreat!"

Soon, the cheering turns to jeering and booing and chants of "Shame!" against the officers.

The scenehas been shared widely across social platforms and viewed millions of times, becoming a crystalizing moment for those protesting the Trump administration. Now back at a care home in Florida, Spitzberg told NPR he's ready for what's next.

Capitol Police officers arrest Spitzberg at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., during protests on June 13.Carolina Lumetta/Screenshot by NPRhide caption

"I plan to be as active as I physically can be at my point in life and whatever the Veterans for Peace and the younger people who are activists, whatever they need, I'll do the best I can," he said.

Anti-war groups Veterans for Peace and About Face: Veterans Against the War organized last Friday's protest against America's peacetime military parade. It was held to mark the Army's 250th anniversary, but also coincided with President Trump's 79th birthday. Theparade has drawn heavy criticismfrom protesters and politicians who saw it as a waste of resources and politicization of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Protesters carry a banner representing the preamble to the U.S. Constitution in downtown Los Angeles during an anti-Trump No Kings Day demonstration on June 14.Mario Tama/Getty Images North Americahide caption

Spitzberg was among the dozens of veterans who were arrested at the Capitol last Friday. The arrests came just half a day before millions of people flooded American streets forNo Kings protests, meant to stand in contrast to themilitary paradebeing held the same day.

"I think the parade was a colossal slap in the face of the American people," said Spitzberg, an Army and Air Force veteran. "And the president of the United States apparently sees himself as more than the people's president. He sees himself as a king or, I don't even know, an emperor."

Capitol Police said officers arrested about 60 people last Friday who illegally crossed a police line while running toward the Rotunda steps. All are facing charges, including unlawful demonstration and crossing a police line.

Spitzberg said he crossed the barrier because he saw officers manhandling his fellow protesting veterans.

"I just couldn't stand there behind those barricades while my fellow veterans were being pummeled," he said.

"My goal was to go and help the veterans so they wouldn't be hurt," he added. He said police told him he would be arrested if he didn't go back behind the line. But he kept walking and police held to their word.

Capitol Police, whose officers were at the center of defending the Capitol against Jan. 6 rioters, said the heightened political threat environment means that the officers were on high alert.

"These demonstrators illegally crossed a police line and were running towards the direction of the U.S. Capitol building. Our officers will enforce the law and will not let anyone disrupt the important work of the Congress," Capitol Police said in a statement.

Spitzberg said he spent about 12 hours being transferred between holding facilities before his release. He had an emotional homecoming Wednesday at his care facility in Gainesville, Fla., where some residents had feared for his well-being.

"All they could do was hold me and cry. And it was very sad for me because I love them," he said.

This was far from his first protest. He has been arrested before, in Zuccotti Park in New York, where Occupy Wall Street protests railed against economic inequality in 2011 during the fallout from the Great Recession. And hestood at Standing Rock in 2016, reported theFrontiersmanin Alaska.

He has also spent time helpingUkrainian refugees in Romania,according to theFairbanks Daily News-Miner. He spent more than two years in Vietnam supporting people who suffered the effects of Agent Orange and worked as a teacher and a paramedic, he said.

And Spitzberg says despite his health challenges, he will continue to stand for what he believes is right.

"The best thing for me to do at this point in my life is just to basically be a body," Spitzberg said. "Because you need numbers and if they ever say we're doing something else again, God willing, I'll be there."

An Iraqi Shia cleric holds a portrait of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during a protest against Israeli attacks on multiple cities across Iran, at a bridge leading to the fortified Green Zone where the U.S. Embassy is located in Baghdad, Iraq, Thursday.Hadi Mizban/APhide caption

PARIS — Foreign ministers from the United Kingdom, France and Germany are meeting with their Iranian counterpart in Geneva Friday, marking the most significant known diplomatic talks between Tehran and Western governments since Israel launched asurprise offensiveagainst Iran one week ago.

"We were attacked in the midst of an ongoing diplomatic process," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said before the United Nations Human Rights Council, before the meeting. "We were supposed to meet with the Americans on June 15 to craft a very promising agreement for peaceful resolution of the issues fabricated over our peaceful nuclear program."

The meeting comes on a day of efforts to find diplomatic pathways to stop the war, as the United Nations Security Council simultaneously convened in New York to discuss the issue as well, even as Israel and Iran continued to carry out heavy strikes on one another.

The Geneva talks revive the trio of European countries known as the "E3," which led previous negotiations with Iran in the early 2000s and helped broker the 2015 nuclear deal under then-President Barack Obama's administration. President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the deal in his first term.

British Foreign Secretary David Lammycalledthe situation "perilous" after meeting Thursday with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff.

"A window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution," Lammy said, referencing President Trump'sannouncementthat he would make a decision on whether the U.S. will strike Iran by early July.

Trump's statement, read out loud by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Thursday, tamped down speculation that the U.S. was poised to assist Israel in its offensive by striking an Iranian nuclear facility.

A person familiar with the matter, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, told NPR that Israeli officials believe Israel can destroy Iran's most fortified nuclear site Fordo on its own — without the U.S. bombing it, but that it would be quicker if the U.S. takes part.

Middle East experts tell NPR that U.S.bunker-busting bombswould do serious damage to the Fordo site, but that does not destroy Iran's know-how to build nuclear weapons in the future.

Lammy and his French and German counterparts are urging Iran toreturn to nuclear negotiations. Iran, for its part, has signaled resistance while under attack.

"We do not want to negotiate with anyone while the Zionist regime's aggression continues," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchisaidon state television Friday. He accused the U.S. of being complicit in Israeli strikes, citing social mediapostsfrom Trump earlier this week in which he appeared to give the U.S. partial credit for control of Iran's airspace.

"The demand for an end to this war has already begun," Araghchi added. "It shows how effective the resistance of the Iranian people has been and will be."

In France, Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot defended his country's neutral stance, saying on national television Thursday that "France is always on the side of international law" and "has not participated in any preventive war." He noted that 1,000 French nationals remain in Iran.

Germany's Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, meanwhile, said Berlin was open to further discussions with Iran if there is a "serious willingness" from Tehran to provide assurances on its nuclear and missile programs.

Those assurances, according to Wadephul, would mean Iran renouncing enrichment of nuclear material that would lead to weaponization and would also include reducing its missile program.

Israel's U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon cast doubt on the talks in Geneva. "We have seen diplomatic talks for the last few decades and look at the results," he told reporters on Friday in New York.

"If there will be a genuine effort to dismantle the [nuclear arm] capabilities of Iran, then that's something we can consider. But it is going to be like another session and debates. That's not going to work," he added.

He also said the session Friday of the U.N. Security Council, called at Iran's request, would be absurd.

It is the second time the U.N. Security Council is meeting to discuss the conflict since Israel launched its attack on Iran.

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urged the body to act to prevent a wider war and return to diplomacy.

"The expansion of this conflict could ignite a fire that no one can control," Guterres told the council. "Let us act — responsibly and together — to pull the region, and our world, back from the brink."

Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, also told the council a diplomatic solution is within reach. "The IAEA can guarantee through a watertight inspection system that nuclear weapons will not be developed in Iran," he said.

Independent experts say the country has enriched enough uranium for several bombs. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful, civilian purposes.

The U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Dorothy Shea said the administration supports Israel's "actions against Iran's nuclear ambitions."

Shea said, "Iran's leaders could have avoided this conflict had they agreed to a deal that would have prevented them from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. But they refused to do so, choosing instead to delay and deny."

Israel and Iran traded more strikes overnight into Friday, with the Israeli military saying it struck dozens of Iranian military targets around Tehran and western Iran.

In Israel, at least five people were injured after an Iranian missile struck a residential building in the southern city of Beersheba. The strike comes just a day after an Iranian missile hit Soroka Medical Center, the largest hospital in southern Israel.

At least 24 people have been killed by Iranian missile and drone strikes and hundreds more injured since the start of the war, according to the Israeli prime minister's office.

Israel's strikes on Iran have killed more than 200 people, according to Iran's Health Ministry. But an independent group called the Human Rights Activists News Agencysaysit has recorded 657 killed and more than 2,000 injured in Iran based on nongovernmental sources.

Rebecca Rosman reported from Paris, Alex Leff from Washington, D.C. Rob Schmitz contributed reporting from Berlin, Daniel Estrin from Tel Aviv, Israel, and Michele Kelemen from Washington.

Good morning. You're reading the Up First newsletter.Subscribehere to get it delivered to your inbox, andlistento the Up First podcast for all the news you need to start your day.

A federal appeals court in California has ruled that President Trump can maintain control over 4,000 California National Guard troops in Los Angeles.The decision blocks, at least temporarily, Gov. Gavin Newsom'sefforts to regain controlof the Guard. The Trump administration deployed the troops nearly two weeks ago in response to protests in LA, which were sparked by immigration raids in the area.

Protesters stand off against California National Guard soldiers at the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles during a "No Kings" protest on Saturday.Richard Vogel/APhide caption

Trump will make a decision about whether the U.S. will strike Iran within two weeks, the White House announced. This latest move over theUnited States' involvement in the Israel-Iran conflictcomes amid growing concerns from some of his vocal supporters, who have expressed that they think Trump is betraying his "America First" principles. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson warned that the president's legacy could be on the line based on his decision. The White House has dismissed any connection between the decision's delay and the criticism.

Today, European diplomats are meeting Iran's foreign minister in Geneva in an attempt to reach a diplomatic solution between Israel and Iranas they enter their second week of war. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has suggested that Israel will continue attacking Iran's nuclear sites even if Trump doesn't take part. Over 650 people in Iran have been killed by Israeli strikes, according to an independent group. Israel says Iranian missiles have killed 24 people in its country.

Margarita Rojas Mena, in Mojaudó, stitched up the photograph of the community school, wounded by bullets from an armed confrontation.Fernanda Pineda/MSFhide caption

Doctors Without Borders launched a two-year project in 2022 aimed at healing psychic wounds in the remote area of Alto Baudóin western Colombia. The region has experienced years of violence due to conflicts between armed rebel groups and criminal organizations. The project involves tearing up photographs of loved ones and homes and then sewing them back together, an act that serves as a metaphor for healing. The goal is to create rituals that help individuals manage anxiety, depression and other mental health issues. Colombian photographer Fernanda Pineda documented the initiative in her photo seriesRiografias del Baudó. Take a peek at the photo collectionhere.

Check out whatNPRis watching, reading and listening to this weekend:

🍿 Movies:The latest Pixar movie,Elio, follows a lonely 11-year-old orphan who believes that being abducted by aliens is his only path to happiness. Plus, here are two more new moviesworth checking out.

📺 TV:FromThe Waterfront, which focuses on a family struggling to maintain control of a fishing empire, toKing of the Hillreturning after 15 years, these are someshows worth checking outthis summer.

📚 Books:Ready to spice up your life with some mystery and suspense this month? One orall four of these new novelsare sure to scratch that itch.

🎵 Music:Next Friday, Bruce Springsteen is releasing seven new records at once, featuring previously unreleased music recorded between 1983 and 2018. To prepare for his upcoming box set,Tracks II: The Lost Albums,take a look at this listening guide.

🎮 Games:NPR's Vincent Acovino attended the Play Days showcase, where he had the opportunity to experience a variety of games, including Resident Evil Requiem and a heist game that took him by surprise. Here'shis honest reviewof many upcoming titles.

❓ Quiz:Educated guesses and trick questions left me with a barely passing score this week. Are you up for the challenge of passing with flying colors?Give it a try.

Labubu figures and dolls are seen on display at a Pop Mart store on June 9 in Shanghai.Visual China Group/Getty Imageshide caption

This newsletter was edited bySuzanne Nuyen.

Republicans are proposing changes that could result in some children and families losing access to health care, food benefits and financial assistance.Annie Otzen/Moment RF via Getty Imageshide caption

Low-income children and families would be among the groups hit hardest by Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

While the bill would be a boon to wealthy Americans, it would scale back resources for the nation's poorest households, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) warned in a recentletterto lawmakers.

In an effort to pay for an extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts, Republicans in both the House and Senate want to change or reduce key social safety net programs that provide health care, food benefits and financial assistance for millions of children.

More than 37 million childrenare enrolledin either Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), a federal program that provides affordable health insurance to pregnant mothers and children who live just above Medicaid's poverty threshold.

Combined, Medicaid and CHIP protectnearly half of all childrenin the United States, beginning with important prenatal care, coveringover 40%of U.S. births as well as nearlyhalfof all rural births, and continuing to insure millions of vulnerable children into young adulthood.

Congressional Republicans want to continue to allow states to impose waiting periods before families can enroll in CHIP and to lock them out of the program if they fail to keep up with premiums.

They also propose changing Medicaid to include a first-evernational work requirement. As the House bill is written, it would exempt parents, "but what we've seen from past experience with work requirements is that exemptions are not always effective," says Allison Orris, director of Medicaid policy at the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Senate Republicans propose going even further, with a part-time work requirement including parents of children over 14.

"If [parents'] earnings go up because they're complying, that actually could be good for the kids," says Kevin Corinth, who studies poverty and safety net programs at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute (AEI). "Because there is good research showing that, when parents work and we get more earnings coming into the household, that can improve current and future outcomes [for children]."

In addition to work requirements, Republicans are proposing other changes that would create new administrative hurdles for families,according toGeorgetown University's Center for Children and Families.

"When there's more red tape, we know that it's harder for families," says Joan Alker, head of the center and a Georgetown research professor.

"To see these kinds of cuts is very, very scary."

House Speaker Mike Johnson's office defended the changes in apress release, writing that "Republicans are protecting and strengthening Medicaid for American citizens who need and deserve it by rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse."

He also claimed onNBC'sMeet the Press, "there are no Medicaid cuts in the Big, Beautiful Bill. We're not cutting Medicaid."

Yet CBO estimates the House bill would cut federal spending on Medicaid by roughly$800 billionover the next decade, and the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation focused on improving health care access,estimates 1 in 5 childrencould be at risk of losing their Medicaid coverage if the House proposal goes into place.

Alker says the House changes would force states to make difficult decisions about whether to cut services or raise taxes.

"Governors are gonna have to do the dirty work," she says. And the Senate's proposal, she warns, would be even harder on states.

According toresearch by CBO, consistent Medicaid coverage in childhood increases earnings in adulthood, which increases tax revenue and can gradually repay the federal government for its early investment.

In fact,CBO found, "increasing children's enrollment in Medicaid would reduce the future federal deficit by between roughly $800 and $3,400 per child per year of enrollment."

House Republicans have also proposed big changes to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps, which, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, helps pay for groceries formore than 15 million childrenin the U.S.

This bill would bring "the deepest cut to food assistance in history,"saysKatie Bergh, a senior policy analyst for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The House bill would expand SNAP's existing work requirements, though Bergh says "research has repeatedly shown that this doesn't increase people's employment. It doesn't increase their earnings. It just cuts people off of SNAP and leaves them hungry."

The House bill would also cut more than$290 billion from SNAPover 10 years – a cut Bergh estimates would "eliminate or substantially reduce" food assistance for more than 2 million children.

And the House proposal could, for the first time in the history of SNAP,put states on the hookfor between 5% and 25% of the cost of food benefits.

Whether this shift in funding, from the federal government onto states, is a good idea is "debatable," says AEI's Corinth, though he points to one potential upside: It could force states to have "more skin in the game."

One potential downside,according to CBO, is that some states "would modify benefits or eligibility or possibly leave [SNAP] altogether because of the increased costs."

And for children, losing access to SNAP benefits could hurt them in more ways than one, as they would also lose their automatic enrollment in free meals at school.

In its analysis of the overall impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill,CBO estimatesresources for the poorest households "would decrease by about $1,600 per year," a loss "mainly attributable" to cuts in the social safety net, including Medicaid and SNAP.

By contrast, CBO predicts the wealthiest households would see an average annual gain of $12,000.

House Republicans hotly dispute CBO's math, with Speaker Mike Johnsonclaiming"the biggest beneficiaries of this [bill] will be low- and middle-income Americans."

Senate Republicans'proposalmirrors the House proposal in many ways, including a work requirement and significant cost-shifting onto states.

Senate Republicans are proposing updates that could improve and expand access to a handful of tax benefits that help families pay for child care, including the Child and Dependent Care tax credit.

"Expanding child care tax credits in the Senate bill is a step in the right direction toward making care more affordable and accessible for families nationwide," Sarah Rittling, executive director of First Five Years Fund, said in a statement. Her organization advocates for affordable access to quality child care and early learning.

Researchers and child policy experts are less supportive of proposed changes to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC).

The EITC is essentially an anti-poverty program in the form of a refundable tax credit that AEI's Kevin Corinth points out provides low-income, working families with extra help. Congressional Republicans are proposing additional administrative hurdles that families would have to overcome to qualify. Namely, requiring thatthey go through an onerous precertification processfor their children before being able to claim the credit.

This additional step would be a burden not only on families but on the IRS, which has been the subject ofsevere staff cutsby the Trump administration.

Then there's the current Child Tax Credit, which can lower a family's tax bill by up to $2,000 per child. House Republicans want to increase that to $2,500. But households have to earn a certain amount of income to be eligible for the full credit.

Republicans are also "making what is, in theory, a new higher credit much harder for families with children to actually receive," says Megan Curran, policy director with the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University.

Current law requires children to be either U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents to be eligible for the CTC. The House bill could disqualify more than 4.5 million children,Curran estimates, because it would require both parents to have a Social Security number.

TheSenate bill would requirethat only one parent have a Social Security number for their child to be eligible. It's unclear how many children that change would still disqualify.

The bill would also continue current policy, blocking the lowest-income families from qualifying for the full tax credit.

"Under current policy, a two-adult, two-child family needs at least $36,000 [in income] in order to get the full [credit]," Curran says. "That's 1 in 4 kids nationwide who are left out of the full credit."

On the other hand, wealthy households earning up to $200,000 for individuals, or $400,000 for couples, can claim the full credit.

This disparity would get even more pronounced if the credit grows, Curran says, with that two-adult, two-child family now needing to earn $48,000 to claim the full credit.

"As a result, under the House Reconciliation Bill, 1 out of every3children would be left out of the full credit nationwide," Curran says.

Senate Republicans are pitching a smaller increase to the CTC, to $2,200, but the underlying machinery would similarly limit the benefit for the lowest-income households.

Many countries employ some kind of child benefit for families, but Curran says the U.S. is unusual in that "we exclude the families with lower and moderate incomes. And those are children who arguably could really benefit from this type of investment the most."

In 2021, Congress briefly increased and expanded the child tax credit to include the nation's lowest-income families. The expansion was short-lived — just six months — but research shows it helped cut the share of children living in poverty bynearly half.

Research shows investing in vulnerable children isn't just a benefit to them and their families, it alsoprovides lifetimereturnsto the nation.

"Every dollar that you spend on the child tax credit in an expanded form that reaches all kids would return at least $10 a year," Curran says.

That's because children would be healthier, she says, and do better in school. Later, they would get better jobs and pay more back into the system, in the form of taxes.