A man applies finishing touches to graffiti representing a vaccine in Kolkata, India.

Rupak De Chowdhuri/Reuters

Health officials in India approved two COVID-19 vaccines on Sunday, including one made by AstraZeneca, for emergency use. While announcing the emergency use, VG Somani, the country's drug's controller general said the vaccines were "110% safe," according to The Times of India."A decisive turning point to strengthen a spirited fight," India's prime minister, Narendra Modi, said on Twitter.Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Health officials in India on Sunday approved two COVID-19 vaccines, including one made by AstraZeneca, for emergency use. 

"A decisive turning point to strengthen a spirited fight," India's prime minister, Narendra Modi, said on Twitter.

The drugs controller general of India approved a local drug made by Bharat Biotech, along with the vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford University, according to officials and media reports. 

In announcing the emergency use, VG Somani, DCGI chief, said the vaccines were "110% safe," according to The Times of India.

AstraZeneca's manufacturing partner, Serum Institute of India, will work to produce its drug locally, according to CEO Adar Poonawalla. AstraZeneca's drug is called Covishield in India. 

—Adar Poonawalla (@adarpoonawalla) January 3, 2021

The UK on Wednesday became the first country to approve AstraZeneca's vaccine for emergency use. The company has reportedly increased production, with the goal of producing 2 million doses per week. 

Although the drugs were approved for emergency use, they haven't finished clinical trials, the government said. Phase 3 trials for Bharat's drug, Covaxin, are underway with about 20,000 volunteers in 26 hospitals, said Suchitra Ella, Bharat's joint managing director, in a televised interview with Rajya Sabha TV on Friday. 

With a population of 1.3 billion people, India is the world's second-most populous country. It plans to vaccinate 300 million people by July, according to Gulf News. That will include 30 million healthcare and frontline workers.

The country has been hard hit by  COVID-19. About 149,435 people have died from it in India, according to figures from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. 

With 10.3 million confirmed cases, it's behind only the US's 20.4 million cases, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.

Like elsewhere, rumors have spread about vaccine side effects. In India, some worried the vaccine would make people impotent, a falsehood Somani sought to end on Sunday. 

"Some side effects like mild fever, pain & allergy are common for every vaccine. [The impotence rumour] is absolute rubbish," he said, according to the Times of India. 

After the emergency approval announcement, Modi thanked frontline workers for their work battling COVID-19. 

"We reiterate our gratitude to doctors, medical staff, scientists, police personnel, sanitation workers and all Corona warriors for the outstanding work done, that too in adverse circumstances. We will remain eternally grateful to them for saving many lives," he said. 

Some GOP members of the Senate and the House have indicated they will challenge Biden's win.

Gene J. Puskar/Associated Press

Vice President Mike Pence is supporting the efforts of GOP lawmakers who plan to challenge President-elect Biden's win during a joint session of Congress.About a dozen senators and 140 House Republicans have indicated they will oppose the certification of Electoral College votes.Objections by members of the House and Senate could delay the certification of the results, but would not change the election results in any US state.Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Vice President Mike Pence is supporting the efforts of Republican lawmakers to challenge President-elect Joe Biden's win by opposing the certification of Electoral College votes.

"Vice President Pence shares the concerns of millions of Americans about voter fraud and irregularities in the last election," Marc Short, Pence's chief of staff, said in a statement, The Washington Post reported.

"The vice president welcomes the efforts of members of the House and Senate to use the authority they have under the law to raise objections and bring forward evidence before the Congress and the American people on January 6th."

The statement came after Republican senators and representatives indicated they will object to the certification of the Electoral College votes.

President-elect Joe Biden won the election by receiving 306 electoral votes compared to President Donald Trump's 232. The results have been certified in every state, and presidential electors cast their votes last month.

The electors' votes are due to be certified Wednesday during a joint session of Congress that is usually procedural, confirming the winner that voters and the Electoral College have already chosen.

As vice president, and president of the Senate, Pence will oversee the certification of the results.

But Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas announced Saturday he would oppose certification, and he is expected to be joined by about a dozen other senators. Cruz's effort is seeking a 10-day emergency audit of the election results.

Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri had also indicated Wednesday he would oppose the certification.

The objecting senators have expressed concerns over the integrity of the election, although dozens of lawsuits concerning election fraud have been unsuccessful. The Justice Department also said it found no evidence of widespread fraud that would change the election results.

Some Republican senators, including Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, have said they will not support effort to challenge the election results.

Meanwhile, at least 140 House Republicans are also planning to vote against certifying the Electoral College vote on January 6.

Objections by members of the House and Senate could delay the certification of the results, but would not change the election results in any US state.

Pence's indication of support for the efforts came one day after a lawsuit against him was dismissed in court.

Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas led a bid to sue the vice president over his role in overseeing the certification process set for Wednesday. Gohmert argued Pence should have the authority to accept or reject the election results of individual states, which would give him the opportunity to reject votes from states won by Biden.

Before the court ruling, Pence and the Justice Department asked the judge to stop the lawsuit, which was already unlikely to succeed.

President Donald Trump listens as Vice President Mike Pence speaks at a coronavirus briefing in February 2020.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

A federal appeals court on Saturday evening threw out Rep. Louie Gohmert's lawsuit against Vice President Mike Pence seeking to overturn the election.Gohmert's last-ditch legal effort asked the judges to empower Pence to "exercise the exclusive authority and sole discretion in determining which electoral votes to count for a given State."The appeals court judges noted that a lower court had already dismissed Gohmert's lawsuit, and wrote in a one-paragraph order that "we need say no more."Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

A federal appeals court threw out Rep. Louie Gohmert's lawsuit against Vice President Mike Pence on Saturday evening, issuing a one-paragraph response rebuffing the lawmaker's effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Gohmert's last-ditch legal effort asked the judges to dismantle the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and instead empower Pence to "exercise the exclusive authority and sole discretion in determining which electoral votes to count for a given State."

Pence will preside over the January 6 session of Congress certifying the election results, and will declare the winner of the presidency.

Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas

Screenshot via C-SPAN

President-elect Joe Biden won the election with 306 electoral votes over President Donald Trump's 232 electoral votes. All states certified their election results throughout November and early December, and the Electoral College formally met on December 14 and affirmed Biden's victory.

Pence and the Department of Justice responded to Gohmert's lawsuit by asking the district court judge to toss Gohmert's lawsuit. Gohmert filed his own response on Friday, arguing that Pence's role as vice president should not be limited to "the glorified envelope-opener in chief."

The three judges who sit on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals - two Reagan appointees and one Trump appointee - noted in their order that a lower court had already dismissed Gohmert's case due to a lack of standing, meaning that Gohmert hadn't adequately alleged an injury that could be traced to the defendant and remedied by the court.

"We need say no more, and we affirm the judgment essentially for the reasons stated by the district court," the judges wrote. "We express no view on the underlying merits or on what putative party, if any, might have standing."

Sen. Mitt Romney criticized the efforts of some of his colleagues, including Sen. Ted Cruz.

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

Republican Sens. Mitt Romney, Pat Toomey, and Lisa Murkowski have said they will oppose an effort by their colleagues to challenge the election results.Sen. Ted Cruz is among a group of GOP senators that said they will oppose the certification of Electoral College votes on Wednesday during a joint session of Congress that is usually procedural.The effort could delay the certification of the results, but it will not change the results of the vote in any US state.In a statement Saturday, Romney said the effort "may enhance the political ambition of some, but dangerously threatens our Democratic Republic."Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah and other Republican senators said on Saturday that they will oppose an effort by their colleagues to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Earlier in the day, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas announced he will object to the certification of Electoral College votes, and a number of GOP senators are expected to join him.

"The egregious ploy to reject electors may enhance the political ambition of some, but dangerously threatens our Democratic Republic," Romney said in a statement.

President-elect Joe Biden won the election by receiving 306 electoral votes compared to President Donald Trump's 232. The results have been certified in every state, and presidential electors cast their votes last month.

The electors' votes are set to be certified Wednesday during a joint session of Congress that is usually procedural, confirming the winner that voters and the Electoral College have already chosen.

Cruz's effort to object could delay the certification of the results, but it will not change the election results in any US state.

Romney harshly rejected the effort, emphasizing the will of the voters.

"Were Congress to actually reject state electors, partisans would inevitably demand the same any time their candidate had lost," Romney said. "Congress, not voters in the respective states, would choose our presidents."

Republicans planning to object are reportedly requesting a 10-day emergency audit of the election results in some states, though Romney also noted that the Trump campaign lost all of its election lawsuits and that the Justice Department found no evidence of widespread voter fraud that would change the outcome.

He also criticized Trump directly for calling on his supporters to rally in DC the day the vote would be certified, saying it could lead to "disruption, and worse."

"I could never have imagined seeing these things in the greatest democracy in the world," Romney said. "Has ambition so eclipsed principle?"

Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska also said they would oppose the effort.

"A fundamental, defining feature of a democratic republic is the right of the people to elect their own leaders," Toomey said in a series of tweets on Saturday.

He said the attempt by Cruz and others to overturn the election results "directly undermines this right."

Toomey said the senators are justifying their objection by citing allegations of fraud, but that "allegations of fraud by a losing campaign cannot justify overturning an election." He also said judges across the US have determined the allegations of fraud were not supported by evidence.

He said he voted for Trump, but that he plans "to vigorously defend our form of government by opposing this effort to disenfranchise millions of voters in my state and others."

Murkowski also said in a statement Saturday that she will vote to affirm the Electoral College results and urged senators of both parties to do the same.

"The courts and state legislatures have all honored their duty to hear legal allegations and have found nothing to warrant overturning the results," she said. 

Republicans who reportedly plan to object to the certification of the results include Cruz, Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, James Lankford of Oklahoma, Steve Daines of Montana, John Kennedy of Louisiana, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Mike Braun of Indiana, and Sens.-elect Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Roger Marshall of Kansas, Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, and Tommy Tuberville of Alabama.

Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri also said on Wednesday that he intends to object.

In an email to GOP senators Saturday night, Hawley called the recent comments "shameless personal attacks," Politico reported. Toomey specifically named Hawley in his comments about undermining democracy.

"We should avoid putting words into each other's mouths and making unfounded claims about the intentions of our fellow senators," Hawley said, according to Politico. "I never claim to speak for another senator, but I do speak for my constituents when they raise legitimate concerns about issues as important as the fairness of our elections."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

Alex Wong/Getty Images; Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images

Nearly half of Americans believe that "Republicans in Congress and Senator Mitch McConnell" was to blame for the inability to pass the $2,000 stimulus checks, according to a new poll published by the progressive think tank Data for Progress.Nearly one-third said the failure to pass the $2,000 checks was due to "Democrats in Congress and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi," according to the same poll.House lawmakers voted in favor of bumping the second round stimulus checks to $2,000 from $600, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to consider a standalone bill to increase the check amount.Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Nearly half of respondents to a newly released poll blamed Republican lawmakers and Senat Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for Congress' inability to agree on $2,000 stimulus checks. 

The new poll, published Friday by the left-leaning think tank Data for Progress, revealed that 47% of 1,166 people surveyed responded that "Republicans in Congress and Senator Mitch McConnell" were to blame for the delay in reaching a consensus on the checks.

In comparison, 32% said it was "Democrats in Congress and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi." Just 15% of respondents said President Donald Trump was to blame. 

After months of failures and stalled negotiations, lawmakers finally came to a consensus on a new coronavirus relief package at the end of December. President Trump initially refused to sign the deal, complaining about various provisions and urging that Congress include $2,000 stimulus checks, before eventually signing the bill on Sunday. The signed bill includes $600 stimulus checks. 

After the bill was signed, House lawmakers voted on a separate bill to bump the $600 stimulus checks up to $2,000. But the bill faces a roadblock in the Senate - McConnell recently rebuffed efforts to pass a standalone bill to increase the stimulus checks, Business Insider's Oma Seddiq reported.

Read more:'No realistic path to quickly pass the Senate': McConnell refuses to consider standalone bill on $2,000 stimulus checksLindsay Graham slammed Mitch McConnell for delaying $2,000 stimulus payments: 'Going from $600 to $2,000 doesn't make you a socialist'With a Senate vote on $2,000 stimulus checks looming, Republicans face an agonizing choice between defying Trump and abandoning a tenet of conservatismTrump threw away his leverage by signing the COVID-19 package with $600 checks and can now only watch as McConnell blocks $2,000 payments

 

"High angle view of Pennsylvania Avenue and Capitol Hill, Washington DC, USA.Click on the photo below to view similar images in my patriotism collection."

Terraxplorer/Getty Images

The House of Representatives on Sunday is slated to vote on whether to pass a series of changes that would eliminate all gendered words from its rules.The proposal put forth by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rules Committee Chair James McGovern swaps gendered words like "chairman" for gender-inclusive ones like "chair." The "bold reforms," if passed, would be "advancing inclusion," Pelosi said in a press release.House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy called the proposal "stupid." Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

The House of Representatives on Sunday is set to vote on a series of changes that would eliminate all gendered words like "mother," "father," "he," and "she" from its rules.

In addition to these specific words, the proposal outlines dozens of other shifts to gender-neutral language, as well as the establishment of an "Office of Diversity and Inclusion."

The proposal was put forth by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rules Committee Chair James McGovern. In a press release, McGovern said the proposal "promotes inclusion and diversity" and is a way to "honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender-neutral."

Read more: Secret Service experts are speculating in group chats about how Trump might be hauled out of the White House if he won't budge on Inauguration Day

Pelosi called the proposal a series of "bold reforms" that reflect "the views and values of the full range of our historically diverse House Democratic Majority."

Scholars have long studied the effect of gendered language on biases and perceptions. One 2016 study published in "Frontiers of Psychology," for example, said, "the way gender is encoded in a language may be associated with societal gender equality." The study says research consistently demonstrates that male-centric words like "chairman" and "policeman" as opposed to "chair" or "police officer" "evoke a male bias in mental representations and make readers or listeners think more of male than female examplars" when prompted.

The push for gender-inclusive language drew ire from House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who said in a Friday tweet that the effort was "stupid." The top Republican signed his tweet, "A father, son, and brother."

—Kevin McCarthy (@GOPLeader) January 2, 2021

McGovern and proponents of the changes argue the rules are meant to be not just inclusive, but also accurate.

The proposal comes as a growing number of transgender and non-binary people who may not use or identify with gendered pronouns have been elected to serve at various levels of government.

Socially, gender-inclusive language has been gaining traction in recent years. A 2019 Pew Research survey found that about one in five Americans know someone who uses a pronoun other than "he" or "she." Those odds increased to 32% among the younger respondents surveyed between the ages of 18 and 29.

Darian Dozier.

Darian Dozier

Darian Dozier is a writer, creator of the medical school admissions and wellness blog Melanated and Meducated, and current osteopathic medical student based in Houston.From a young age, Dozier knew she wanted to become a doctor, and says her parents' lessons of studying hard, staying focused, and always trying her best helped her stay motivated throughout the journey to med school.Certain practices, like insisting she finished high school homework on Friday instead of Sunday, taught Dozier the importance of not procrastinating or turning in subpar work.Regardless of your child's age, Darian says instilling in them good values, a solid work ethic, and an aim of excellence will lead them to success in any career path.Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

It takes a special kind of person to want to go into medicine. The path is really hard, expensive, and incredibly self-doubting. One mitigating factor in all of that is having the right support system. Not only can a good support system really help with getting through medical school, but also the process of getting in. 

The journey to medical school, and really any profession, doesn't develop overnight.

Preparation, planning, and execution starts years before you ever start that first application. When you're still a child or young adult with all of these challenging, long-term goals, it's easy to be nearsighted and just live in the moment.

You know that eventually you want to become a doctor, lawyer, nurse, professional athlete, etc. At the same time, you don't want to be studying, training, or going to professional development camps all the time. You want to hang with friends, go out, and have fun. This was definitely how I was in high school, and well into college. 

I'd known that I wanted to be a doctor since I was 15. 

In high school I had good grades, strong extracurriculars, and the drive to do well. I have always been a competitive and determined person, but I also always had my parents there to push me just a little harder. As self-motivated as I was, there were several times where I got complacent, or just didn't really understand the work it would take to get where I wanted to go.

Read more: 'Microschool' entrepreneurs: 3 founders offering parents a safer, more personalized option for their kids and providing teachers a more lucrative career path

My parents always taught me to give my best effort and work as hard as I could.

As simple as this message is, there are a lot of kids who don't get that push to just give their best effort no matter what. My parents and I had this conversation several times in regards to sports, academics, and any other aspects of my life. Without this encouragement and direction, I'm not sure I ever would have had the work ethic that it takes to pursue something as challenging and selective as medical school. 

My parents also put a lot of value on education, which was also really important. I've worked with and studied with many kids who didn't care about school. It was merely a formality, or a legal obligation. When I spoke with many of them, they said their parents didn't put a lot of emphasis on attending school, and they just wanted to work, make money, and support their families. 

This is a common value, and a very understandable one considering the socioeconomic background that my patients or friends came from. However, in the world we are in now, higher education can be the bridge to better health, social, and economical life. Almost any form of higher education is positively correlated with a better predicted life outcome. This is something my parents understood and instilled into me and my brothers. 

When I was in high school, I would actually get in trouble if I was caught doing homework on Sunday because it should have been finished on Friday. 

This sounds extreme (it's the weekend, who cares when it gets done) and at the time I felt it was. But I realized later that my parents were trying to teach me the value of not procrastinating, and waiting until the last minute. There's a breath of fresh air you can breathe on Sunday night knowing that all of your assignments are done and you're not cramming and turning in subpar work. These are skills that they wanted me to carry through college, and eventually, medical school. 

In my mom, I was also given a strong example of what it means to pursue higher education.

Dozier and her mom on family vacation in Las Vegas in September 2019.

Darian Dozier

My mom went on to get her PhD while working a full-time job and taking care of my family. It was inspiring to watch her balance everything and still excel in a very challenging doctorate program. Was everything perfect all the time? No. But she tried her best in every aspect of her life, and that's the important value she wanted me to understand. You don't have to be perfect, you just have to try your best, and eventually, that will translate into being one of the best.

Read more: 6 bootcamps that cost little to nothing upfront, teach students crucial tech skills, and help them land roles at Google and Spotify

Getting into medical school does require a level of perfection and high performance. 

It's stressful, and questionable if that's the best approach, but when someone like a doctor has your life in their hands, you would hope that they have the mindset of trying to be their very best every day. You would hope that in the light of adversity, they would have the grit and resilience to problem-solve, and do everything they can to keep you alive and well. 

These are just a few of the skills and lessons my parents wanted me to learn, and I really didn't understand it as a child. I thought they were being unnecessarily hard and putting a lot of pressure on me. Sometimes, I still feel that way. But I know, at the end of the day, it's so I can go out into a world that cares nothing about my feelings and excel no matter what. 

Parents shouldn't feel bad about pushing their kids to do their best and teaching them to value education, hard work, and excellence. 

It's these attributes that will help children become extraordinary and pursue the seemingly impossible. You don't have to have a PhD or even a Bachelor's or high school diploma to show your kids what's important. Just instill in them good values, a solid work ethic, and let them know the world is theirs for the taking, and they will excel in anything they put their minds to.     

Then-President Barack Obama confers with national security leaders including (from left) former Secretary of Defense William Cohen, and former Secretaries of State Colin Powell and James A. Baker III at the White House on November 13, 2015.

AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File

Former GOP Senator and Defense secretary William Cohen on Thursday slammed President Donald Trump and GOP legislators who are contesting President-elect Joe Biden's election win, suggesting the formation of a new political party.Cohen, who represented Maine in the US Senate from 1979 to 1997 and served as Defense secretary from 1997 to 2001 under then-President Bill Clinton, slammed Sen. Josh Hawley's efforts to challenge the election results as "shameful.""We have to remember that the current occupant of the White House is a ringmaster and what he expects to do is snap his whip and all the elephants hop up on chairs," Cohen said. "What they have to understand is he is going to continue to snap the whip whether he's in office or out of office.Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Former Republican Senator and Defense Secretary William Cohen on Thursday slammed GOP legislators who are contesting President-elect Joe Biden's 2020 election win, suggesting the creation of a new political party. 

While speaking on CNN's "The Situation Room," Cohen, who represented Maine in the Senate from 1979 to 1997 and served as Defense secretary from 1997 to 2001 under then-President Bill Clinton, blasted Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley's efforts to object to the Electoral College vote certification on Jan. 6 as "shameful."

Cohen said the GOP maneuverings were a result of President Donald Trump's pressure, comparing him to the "ringmaster" of a circus.

Read more: Secret Service experts are speculating in group chats about how Trump might be hauled out of the White House if he won't budge on Inauguration Day

"We have to remember that the current occupant of the White House is a ringmaster and what he expects to do is snap his whip and all the elephants hop up on chairs," Cohen said. "What they have to understand is he is going to continue to snap the whip whether he's in office or out of office. And every time they're going to have to jump up and sit on that stool in order to satisfy him and his supporters."

He added: "I think they have to understand you're never going to satisfy President Trump. He is always going to up the ante, he cannot be satisfied. There's nothing in him. There's no moral core, and so they are going to be extorted or bribed in order to avoid a primary in 2022 or 2024."

—The Situation Room (@CNNSitRoom) January 1, 2021

Cohen said that while Hawley wants to be "the me-too Trump," Republicans including Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah have chosen to abide by the Constitution and accept the election results. He warned Republicans supporting Trump in his electoral efforts that they won't be able to escape his influence.

"For Trump, it's pathological," Cohen said. "For those who are jumping up to support him, it's diabolical and I don't think it's diabolically clever. I think they will find they will be hostage for the rest of their time in the Senate and going forward if they are only there to appease the Trumpsters."

He concluded: "Maybe it's time for a new party. One that abides by the rule of law, balanced-budget opportunities, and fiscal responsibility...but also faithful to the people of this country, who vote to elect them."

Hawley's efforts will only result in a slight delay in certifying Biden's electoral victory - 140 House Republicans are also expected to contest election results during the Electoral College certification.

Since Election Day, the Trump campaign team has filed dozens of lawsuits challenging election results across the country, but largely in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin. The efforts have been met with repeated defeats in state courts, federal courts, and the Supreme Court.

Lindsey Graham.

Getty

Sen. Lindsey Graham on Friday urged Congress to seriously consider giving Americans $2,000 checks, an idea that's been rejected by Senate Republicans multiple times.In a Thursday floor session, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said increasing stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000 would be "socialism for the rich." Graham disagreed with McConnell's characterization, saying, "Going from $600 to $2,000 doesn't make you a socialist."Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Sen. Lindsay Graham on Friday urged the Republican-led Senate to avoid delaying passing a bill that includes $2,000 direct checks to Americans, a move that's been shut down by the top leaders in the upper chamber.

In a Thursday floor session, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said increasing stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000 would be "socialism for the rich." 

"Borrowing from our grandkids to do socialism for rich people is a terrible way to get help to families who actually need it," he said. 

Don't miss: Sign up here for our live event on January 5 to learn how to make the most out of PPP

McConnell's characterization struck Graham, who pushed back against it in a tweet Friday.

—Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) January 1, 2021

 

"With all due respect to my Republican colleagues, a $2k direct payment for individuals and families who are struggling is not socialism," Graham said. "In my view, it is necessary in the times in which we live."

"The country is being overwhelmed by #COVID, hospitals are full, and business are hanging by a thread. Direct payments may not be the most efficient way to help people in need but, given the situation we face are extremely necessary," he continued. 

Read more: Secret Service experts are speculating in group chats about how Trump might be hauled out of the White House if he won't budge on Inauguration Day

In December, after monthslong negotiation and delays, lawmakers finally reached a deal on another coronavirus stimulus package. It came with $600 direct checks for taxpayers, in an effort to offset some of the financial devastation brought on by the coronavirus pandemic. This was the second relief package since March, when President Donald Trump signed a bill that included $1,200 direct payments to Americans.  

Since the second bill, Trump has urged Congress to come to an agreement that includes $2,000 checks for Americans. House Democrats immediately pounced on the suggestion, but McConnell has repeatedly shut it down. Friday became the fourth day in a row that Senate Republicans, led by McConnell, blocked the House-passed bill that includes $2,000 checks. 

"Going from $600 to $2,000 doesn't make you a socialist," Graham said in a tweet. "Mr. President, keep fighting for the American people who are suffering. Insist on a standalone vote.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

As 2020 comes to a long-awaited end, a series of filings indicate that venture capitalists are ending the year with fresh money. According to SEC paperwork, Learn Capital and USV have filed paperwork that shows the firms have raised new, multimillion-dollar funds.

If you’ve been paying attention to news this past year, it’s clear that much of venture capital isn’t just surviving 2020 – it’s flourishing through it. Zoom investing, it seems, is working just fine for cash-rich firms looking to double down on bets in categories from edtech to climate.

First up, New York-based USV submitted a pair of filings on late Thursday. The first filing shows that the firm has closed $151 million for USV Climate 2021, which one can assume is focused on climate-tech investments. As my colleague Jonathan Shieber has pointed out, climate tech.

The other, more nebulous filing, is the firm’s $22.4 million investment vehicle titled USV Bundled. It’s unclear what this is focused on, but a recent blog post suggests that the firm will continue to double down on its education investments.

Speaking of edtech, Learn Capital, an education-focused venture capital fund, filed paperwork indicating that it has closed $132 million in capital. It plans to raise a total of $250 million for this fund, which will be the firm’s fourth investment vehicle to date. The edtech category has obviously been booming with interest, which also fueled Owl Ventures to close $585 million in new capital in September.

Finally, I’ll give an honorable mention to Lattice CEO Jack Altman’s New Years Eve filing, which shows that the executive plans to raise $20 million for a new fund. It’s unclear if this filing indicates Apollo’s next step, a venture fund started by the Altman brothers. The trio, beyond Jack, includes Max and Sam, the former president of Y Combinator who currently serves as the CEO of OpenAI.

I edited hundreds of stories in 2020, so choosing my favorites would be an exercise in futility.

Instead, I’ve tried to gather a sample of Extra Crunch stories that taught me something new. (Which means this top 10 list betrays my ignorance, a humbling admission for a know-it-all like myself.)

While narrowing down the field of candidates, I realized that we’re covering each of the topics on this list in greater depth next year. We already have stories in the works about no-code software, the emergence of edtech, proptech and B2B marketplaces, to name just a few.

Some readers are skeptical about paywalls, but without being boastful, Extra Crunch is a premium product, just like Netflix or Disney+. I know: We’re not as entertaining as a historical drama about the reign of Queen Elizabeth II or a space western about a bounty hunter.

But, speaking as someone who’s worked at several startups, Extra Crunch stories contain actionable information you can use to build a company and/or look smart in meetings — and that’s worth something.

Thanks for reading, and I hope you have a very happy new year.

Full Extra Crunch articles are only available to members
Use discount code ECFriday to save 20% off a one- or two-year subscription

1. The VCs who founders love the most

Managing Editor Danny Crichton spearheaded the development of The TechCrunch List earlier this year to help seed-stage founders connect with VCs who write first checks.

The TechCrunch List has no paywall and contains details and recommendations about more than 400 investors across 22 verticals. Once it launched, Danny crunched the data to pick out 11 investors for which “founders were particularly effusive in their praise.”

2. API startups are so hot right now

Alex Wilhelm uses his weekday column The Exchange to keep a close eye on “private companies, public markets and the gray space in between,” but one effort stood out: An overview of six API-based startups that were “raising capital in rapid-fire fashion” when many companies were trying to find their COVID-19 footing.

For me, this was particularly interesting because it helped me better understand that an optimal pricing structure can be key to a SaaS company’s initial success.

3. ‘No code’ will define the next generation of software
4. Tracking the growth of low-code/no-code startups

Two stories about the advent of no-code/low-code software that we ran in July take the third and fourth position on this list.

I have been a no-code user for some time: Using Zapier to send automated invitations via Slack for group lunches was a real time-saver in the pre-pandemic days.

“Enterprise expenditure on custom software is on track to double from $250 billion in 2015 to $500 billion in 2020,” so we’ll definitely be diving deeper into this topic in the coming months.

5. ‘Edtech is no longer optional’: Investors’ deep dive into the future of the market

Natasha Mascarenhas picked up TechCrunch’s edtech beat when she joined us just before the pandemic. Twelve months later, she’s an expert on the topic.

In July, she surveyed six edtech investors to “get into the macro-impact of rapid change on edtech as a whole.”

Ian Chiu, Owl VenturesShauntel Garvey and Jennifer Carolan, Reach CapitalJan Lynn-Matern, Emerge EducationDavid Eichler, TCVJomayra Hererra, Cowboy Ventures

6. B2B marketplaces will be the next billion-dollar e-commerce startups

In 2018, B2B marketplaces saw an estimated $680 billion in sales, but that figure is expected to reach $3.6 trillion by 2024.

As companies shifted their purchasing online, these platforms are adding a range of complementary services like payment management, targeted advertising and logistics while also hardening their infrastructure.

7. Facebook’s former PR chief explains why no one is paying attention to your startup

Reporter Lucas Matney spoke to Caryn Marooney in August at TechCrunch Early Stage about how startup founders who hope to expand their reach need to do a better job of connecting with journalists.

“People just fundamentally aren’t walking around caring about this new startup,” she said. “Actually, nobody does.”

Speaking as someone who’s been on both sides of this equation, I most appreciated her advice about focusing on “simplicity and staying consistent” when it comes to messaging.

“Don’t let the complexity of your intellect cloud what needs to be simple,” she said.

8. You need a minimum viable company, not a minimum viable product

In a guest post for Extra Crunch, seed-stage VC Ann Miura-Ko shared some of what she’s learned about “the magic of product-market fit,” which she termed “the defining quality of an early-stage startup.”

According to Miura-Ko, a co-founding partner at Floodgate, startups can only reach this stage when their business model, value propositions and ecosystem are in balance.

Using lessons learned from her portfolio companies like Lyft, Refinery29 and Twitch, this article should be required reading for every founder. As one commenter posted, “I read this thinking, ‘I need to add some slides to my deck!’”

9. 6 investment trends that could emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic

During “the early innings of this period of uncertainty,” an article we published offered several predictions about investor behavior in the U.S.

Although we posted this in April, each of these forecasts seem spot-on:

Future of work: promoting intimacy and trust.Healthcare IT: telemedicine and remote patient monitoring.Robotics and supply chain.Cybersecurity.Education = knowledge transfer + social + signaling.Fintech.

10. Construction tech startups are poised to shake up a $1.3-trillion-dollar industry

I’ve always found the concept of total addressable market (TAM) hard to embrace fully — the arrival of a single disruptive company could change an industry’s TAM in a week.

However, several factors are combining to transform the construction industry: high fragmentation, poor communication, a skilled labor shortage and a lack of data transparency.

Startups that help builders manage aspects like pre-construction, workflow and site visualization are making huge strides, but because “construction firms spend less than 2% of annual sales volume on IT,” the size of this TAM is not at all speculative.

11. Don’t let VCs be the gatekeepers of your success

As a bonus, I’m including a TechCrunch op-ed written by insurtech founder Kevin Henderson that describes the myriad challenges he has faced as a Black entrepreneur in Silicon Valley.

Some of the discussions about the lack of diversity in tech can feel abstract, but his post describes its concrete consequences. For starters: he’s never had an opportunity to pitch at a VC firm where there was another Black person in the room.

“Black founders have a better chance playing pro sports than they do landing venture investments,” says Henderson.

What could go wrong?

Hello and welcome back to Equity, TechCrunch’s venture-capital-focused podcast (now on Twitter!), where we unpack the numbers behind the headlines. As you can see, this is our yearly predictions episode. Our behind-the-scenes guru Chris Gates joins us on the mic, we take shots at our prior prognostications, and nosh on what we feel is positively persaged.

As always, this episode is in good fun. If you don’t agree with we think is up ahead, that’s fine. You’re probably right. But we’re nothing if not up for a challenge, so we kept the tradition alive this year.

This is the last Equity episode of 2020. While we can’t tell you yet what our plans are for 2021, we can say — nay, project — that there are a lot of fun and big things coming for Equity. We’re planning our busiest year ever, by far.

And with that, we’re out of here. Thanks for several million downloads this year, our biggest annum to date.

Amazon just announced that it’s acquiring Wondery, the network behind podcasts including “Dirty John” and “Dr. Death.”

Wondery will become part of Amazon Music, which added support for podcasts (including its own original shows) in September. At the same time, the announcement claims that “nothing will change for listeners” and that the network’s podcasts will continue to be available from “a variety of providers.”

Media companies and streaming audio platforms are all making big bets on podcasting, with Spotify making a series of acquisitions including podcast network Gimlet, SiriusXM acquiring Stitcher and The New York Times acquiring Serial Productions. Amazon is coming relatively late to this market, but it will now have the support of a popular podcast maker as it works to catch up.

“With Amazon Music, Wondery will be able to provide even more high-quality, innovative content and continue their mission of bringing a world of entertainment and knowledge to their audiences, wherever they listen,” Amazon wrote.

Financial terms were not disclosed. The Wall Street Journal previously reported that acquisition talks were in the works, and that those talks valued Wondery at around $300 million.

The startup was founded in 2016 by former Fox executive Hernan Lopez (who’s currently fighting federal corruption charges tied to his time at Fox). Numbers from Podtrac rank it as the fourth largest podcast publisher in November, with an audience in the U.S. of more than 9 million unique listeners.

Wondery has raised a total of $15 million in funding from Advancit Capital, BDMI, Greycroft, Lerer Hippeau and others, according to Crunchbase.

 

Here’s another edition of “Dear Sophie,” the advice column that answers immigration-related questions about working at technology companies.

“Your questions are vital to the spread of knowledge that allows people all over the world to rise above borders and pursue their dreams,” says Sophie Alcorn, a Silicon Valley immigration attorney. “Whether you’re in people ops, a founder or seeking a job in Silicon Valley, I would love to answer your questions in my next column.”

Extra Crunch members receive access to weekly “Dear Sophie” columns; use promo code ALCORN to purchase a one- or two-year subscription for 50% off.

Dear Sophie:

I’m working in the Bay Area on an H-1B visa and my employer won’t sponsor my green card.

I really want permanent residence, but I never won a Nobel prize; I’m single; and I don’t have a million dollars yet. However, I think I might qualify for an EB-2 NIW green card.

What can you share?

— National in Napa

Dear National:

Wonderful that you’re taking matters into your own hands! This is a complicated process, so the most important advice I can give you is to retain an experienced business immigration attorney to represent you and prepare and file your green card case.

For additional do’s and don’ts in U.S. immigration, please check out the recent podcast that my law firm partner, Anita Koumriqian, and I posted on the commandments of immigration (and especially what to not do when it comes to visas and green cards).

This particular episode focuses on family-based green cards, but these recommendations are timeless and apply to individuals who are self-petitioning for employment-based green cards, such as the EB-2 NIW (National Interest Waiver) for exceptional ability and the EB-1A for extraordinary ability. Our top recommendation in that podcast episode is to avoid DIY immigration, so definitely retain legal counsel!

Filing for an EB-2 NIW or any green card requires more than just filling out the appropriate forms. The process needs to be understood, as the law and legal requirements, and the analysis of whether and how you can best qualify is complicated.

With any immigration matter, one needs to have the resources to fully understand the process, the steps for applying, and the timing and deadlines. We want to always make sure that you always maintain legal status (never falling out of status) so that you can remain in the U.S. (and don’t have to leave).

This has been the year of the social organization. As the COVID-19 pandemic swept across the world and the United States, governments and a patchwork of nonprofits and volunteer organizations sprang into action, offering everything from food and medical supplies to children’s books and clothing to individuals and families struggling in the virus’s wake.

Perhaps the biggest divide though to getting people help has been digital — non-profits need to connect with their beneficiaries over the internet just as much as any retailer today. Unfortunately, tech talent is expensive and hard to find, particularly for often cash-strapped nonprofits.

That was part of the impetus for two Stanford seniors, Mary Zhu and Amay Aggarwal, to co-found Develop for Good, a matching service designed to connect motivated and ambitious undergrads in computer science, design and economics to nonprofits with specific projects that require expertise. They launched the network in March as the pandemic started spreading rapidly, and since then, the organization has itself started growing exponentially as well.

Develop for Good “was in response to [the pandemic], but at the same time, a lot of our peers were having their internships canceled, [and] a lot of companies were having hiring freezes,” Zhu explained. “People were also seeking opportunities to be able to develop their professional skills and develop their project experience.” This coincidence of needs among both students and nonprofits helped accelerate the matching that Develop for Good offers.

So far, the 501(c)(3) non-profit has coordinated more than 25,000 volunteer hours across groups like the Ronald McDonald House, UNICEF, the Native American Rights Fund (NARF), Easterseals, The Nature Conservancy, Save the Children, AARP and more. The program, which in its first batch focused on Zhu and Aggarwal’s network at Stanford, has since expanded to more than a dozen schools across the United States. The two first reached out to nonprofits through Stanford’s alumni network, although as the program’s reputation has grown, they have started getting inbound interest as well.

Volunteers take on a project for 5-10 hours per week for 10 weeks, typically in teams. Each team meets their nonprofit client at least weekly to ensure the project matches expectations. Typical projects include application development, data visualization, and web design. Most projects conclude at the end of the batch, although the founders note that some in-depth projects like product development can cross over into future batches. As the program has expanded, Zhu and Aggarwal have added a more formal mentorship component to the program to help guide students through their work.

Applications for the next batch starting in January are currently open for students (they’re due January 2nd, so get them in quick!). The founders told me that they are expecting 800 applications, and are likely going to be able to match about 200 volunteers to 32 projects. Applications are mostly about matching interests with potential programs for the best fit, rather than a purely competitive exercise. So far, the program has worked on 50 projects to date.

For this next batch, Amazon Web Services will sponsor a stipend for first-generation and low-income students to help defray the financial impact of volunteer work for some students. “Over the past cycle, a few people had to drop out because they said, ‘they’re unable to work for free because they’re having a lot of financial stress for their families’,” Aggarwal said. The new stipend is meant to help these students continue to volunteer while alleviating some of that financial burden.

Aggarwal said that two-thirds of the program’s volunteer developers and designers are female, and one-third are first-generation or low-income.

Since Minneapolis police officers killed George Floyd in May and kicked off months of nationwide protests, the corporate world — including venture capitalists — have attempted to respond to the Black Lives Matter movement.

Indeed, many quickly took to social media to voice their support, broadcast their new diversity-focused networking groups and pledge to do better, particularly when it comes to finding and funding more Black founders and other underrepresented entrepreneurs.

It was tempting to dismiss it as so much hot air, given that VCs have talked about diversity for eons without doing much about it.

As of February 2020, according to a report by All Raise, an organization that promotes female founders, 65% of VC firms still had no female partners. As of 2018, 81% of venture firms still lacked a single Black investor, per an analysis by Equal Ventures partner Richard Kerby.

Those numbers are comparatively rosy when considering the percentage of women and Black investors in senior decision-making roles. According to recent PitchBook data, at the start of this year, just 12.4% of decision-makers at U.S. venture firms were women (up slightly from the 9.65% at the start of 2019). As for for the number of Black investors in senior positions, it has long hovered around just 2%.

But here’s the good news: While it remains an ongoing challenge to get these numbers in sync with other industries, there were two developments specifically in 2020 that may beget more action in 2021.

We’d first point to the decision this fall by Yale’s endowment to require its asset managers to do better when it comes to diversity. Specifically, the school’s $32 billion endowment — led since 1985 by investor David Swensen — told its 70 U.S. money managers that from here on out, they will be measured annually on their progress in increasing the diversity of their investment staff, from hiring to training to mentoring to their retention of women and minorities.

CommonGround, a startup developing technology for what its founders describe as “4D collaboration,” is announcing that it has raised $19 million in funding.

This isn’t the first time Amir Bassan-Eskenazi and Ran Oz have launched a startup together — they also founded video networking company BigBand Networks, which won two technology-related Emmy Awards, went public in 2007 and was acquired by Arris Group in 2011. Before that, they worked together at digital compression company Optibase, which Oz co-founded and where Bassan-Eskenazi served as COO.

Although CommonGround is still in stealth mode and doesn’t plan to fully unveil its first product until next year, Bassan-Eskenazi and Oz outlined their vision for me. They acknowledged that video conferencing has improved significantly, but said it still can’t match face-to-face communication.

“Some things you just cannot achieve through a flat video-conferencing-type solution,” Bassan-Eskenazi said. “Those got better over the years, but they never managed to achieve that thing where you walk into a bar … and there’s a group of people talking and you know immediately who is a little taken aback, who is excited, who is kind of ‘eh.'”

That, essentially, is what Bassan-Eskenazi, Oz and their team are trying to build — online collaboration software that more fully captures the nuances of in-person communication, and actually improves on face-to-face conversations in some ways (hence the 4D moniker). Asked whether this involves combining video conferencing with other collaboration tools, Oz replied, “Think of it as beyond video,” using technology like computer vision and graphics.

Bassan-Eskenazi added that they’ve been working on CommonGround for more than year, so this isn’t just a response to our current stay-at-home environment. And the opportunity should still be massive as offices reopen next year.

“When we started this, it was a problem we thought some of the workforce would understand,” he said. “Now my mother understands it, because it’s how she reads to the grandkids.”

As for the funding, the round was led by Matrix Partners, with participation from Grove Ventures and StageOne Ventures.

“Amir and Ran have a bold vision to reinvent communications,” said Matrix General Partner Patrick Malatack in a statement. “Their technical expertise, combined with a history of successful exits, made for an easy investment decision.”

If you build it, they will come, but they sure as hell are going to complain about everything until they do.

There were millions of bets made in the tech industry last year. Some of those bets involved actual venture capital dollars. Others involved individual decisions on where to live: Do you bet on the future of San Francisco or do you want to partake in the growth of some other startup hub? Are you going to launch this new feature in your product or improve one of your existing ones? Do you switch jobs or stay and double down?

Yet, for all those bets, just three seem to have achieved a collective and hysterical frenzy in the industry as we close out this year: a bet on the future of media, a bet on the future of (audio) media and a bet on the future of one of America’s greatest cities.

Substack, Clubhouse and Miami as a major tech hub are compelling bets. They are early bets, in the sense that most of the work to actually realize each of their dreams remains to be done. All three are bets of optimism: Substack believes it can rebuild journalism. Clubhouse believes it can reinvent radio with the right interactivity and build a unique social platform. And Miami is a bet that you can take a top global city without a massive startup ecosystem and agglomerate the talent necessary to compete with San Francisco, New York and Boston.

Yet, that optimism is not broadly endorsed by the tech commentariat, who see threats, failures and barriers from every angle.

I wish I could say it’s just the ennui of an industry in flux given the pandemic and constant cavalcade of chaos and bad news that’s hit us this year. That cynicism, though, has gotten deeper and more entrenched over the past few years even before coronavirus was a trending topic, even as more startups than ever are getting funding (and at better valuations!), even as more startups than ever are exiting, and those exits are collectively larger than ever as we saw earlier this month.

Insecurity is the fabric that runs through most of these bleak analyses. That’s particularly prominent with Substack, which sits at the nexus of insecurity in tech and insecurity in media. The criticism from tech folks seems to basically boil down to “it’s just an email service!” Its simplicity is threatening, since it seems to intimate that anyone could have built a Substack, really anytime in the last decade.

Indeed, they could. Substack is simple in its original product conception, which is a DNA it happens to share with a lot of other successful consumer startups. It is (or perhaps better to say now, was) just email. It’s Stripe + a CMS editor + an email delivery service. A janky version could be written in a day by most competent engineers. And yet. No one else built Substack, and that’s where the insecurity starts in the startup world.

From the media perspective, it’s of course been brutal the last few years in newsrooms and across publishing, so understandably, the level of cynicism in the press is already high (and journalists aren’t exactly optimistic types to begin with). Yet, most of the criticism here basically boils down to, “Why hasn’t Substack completely stopped the bloodletting of my industry in the short few years it’s been around?”

Maybe they will, but give the folks some goddamn time to build. The fact that a young startup is even considered to have the potential to completely rebuild an industry is precisely what makes Substack (and other adjacent startups in its space) such a compelling bet. Substack, today, cannot reemploy tens of thousands of laid-off journalists, or fix the inequality in news coverage or industry demographics, or end the plight of “fake news.” But what about a decade from now if they keep growing on this trajectory and stay focused on building?

The cynicism of immediate perfection is one of the strange dynamics of startups in 2020. There is this expectation that a startup, with one or a few founders and a couple of employees, is somehow going to build a perfect product on day one that mitigates any potential problem even before it becomes one. Maybe these startups are just getting popularized too early, and the people who understand early product are getting subsumed by the wider masses who don’t understand the evolution of products?

This pattern is obvious in the case of Clubhouse, the drama aspects we have mostly managed to avoid at TechCrunch. It’s a new social platform, with new social dynamics. No one understands what it’s going to become in the next few years. Not Paul Davison (who might, even so, have a dream of where he wants to take it), not Clubhouse’s investors, and certainly not its users. This past week, Clubhouse hosted a live “Lion King” musical event with thousands of participants. Who had that on their bingo board?

Are there problems with Substack and Clubhouse? For sure. But as early companies, they have the obligation to explore the terrain of what they are building, find the key features that compel users to these platforms, and ultimately find their growth formula. There will be problems — trust and safety chief among them, particularly given the nature of user-contributed content. No startup has ever been founded, however, that didn’t uncover problems along its journey. The key question we must ask is whether these companies have the leadership to fix them as they continue building. My sense — and hypothetical bet — is yes.

Talking about leadership, that leads us to Francis Suarez, the mayor of Miami, whose single tweet offering to help has sparked the most absurd kerfuffle of San Francisco lovers and vitriolic pessimists the world over right now.

Keith Rabois and a few other VCs and founders are blazing a trail from San Francisco to Miami, linking up with the local industry to try to build something new and better than what existed before. It’s a bet on a place — an optimistic one — that the power of startups and tech can migrate outside of its central hubs.

What’s strange is that the cynicism around Miami here seems even less warranted than it did a decade ago. While San Francisco and distantly New York and Boston remain the clear hubs of tech startups in the U.S., cities like Salt Lake, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, Austin, Denver, Philadelphia and more have started to score some serious points. Is it really so hard to believe that Miami, a metro region of 5.5 million and one of the largest regional economies in the United States, might actually succeed as well? Maybe it literally just required a few major VCs to show up to catalyze the revolution.

Nothing got built by cynicism. “You can’t do it!” has never created a company, except perhaps to trigger a founder to start something in revolt at the fusillade of negativity.

It takes time though to build. It takes time to take an early product and grow it. It takes time to build a startup ecosystem and expand it into something self-sustaining. Perhaps most importantly, it takes extraordinary effort and hard work, and not just from singular individuals but a whole team and community of people to succeed. The future is malleable — and bets do pay off. So we all need to stop asking what’s the problem and pointing out flaws, and perhaps ask, what future are we building toward? What’s the bet I’m willing to back?

Rocket launch startup Skyroot is closing out 2020 with a key milestone in the development program for their Vikram-I launch vehicle: A successful test firing of a solid rocket propulsion stage that serves as a demonstrator of the same tech to be used in the production Vikram. This is the first time that a private Indian company has designed, built and tested a solid rocket propulsion stage in its entirety, and follows a successful engine burn test of an upper-stage prototype earlier this year.

Skyroot also created its solid rocket stage using a carbon composite structure whose manufacturing process is entirely automated, the company says. That allows it to realize weight savings of up to five times versus use of steel, a material typically used to house solid rocket propellant stages. The goal is to use the same process in the production of the final version of Vikram-I, which will help the small launch vehicle realize big benefits in terms of cost, in addition to the reliability benefits that come with the relatively uncomplicated fundamental design of solid rockets, which have no moving parts and therefore less opportunity for failure.

The final third-stage Vikram-1 engine will be 4x the size of this demonstrator, and Skyroot is also in the process of manufacturing four other test solid rocket motors, which have a carrying range of thrust, and which will be tested throughout the course of next year as work finishes on their construction.

Skyroot aims to perform its first Vikram-I launch by next December, supported in part by the Indian Space Research Organization. The company has raised $4.3 million to date, and says it’s currently in the process of raising another $15 million. which it’ll aim to close next year. It’s set to become the first private Indian company to build and operate private launch vehicles, with the regulatory framework now in place to allow that to happen since India opened up private launcher operations earlier this year.

La Soufrière volcano in St. Vincent and the Grenadines pictured on December 31, 2020.

University of West Indies Seismic Research Centre/National Emergency Management Organization of St Vincent and the Grenadines via Reuters

Residents of St. Vincent and the Grenadines have been told to be ready to evacuate after a volcano started spewing lava, ash, and gas.La Soufrière is the highest point in St. Vincent and is located near the northern tip of the country but has remained dormant for decades before it suddenly became active on Tuesday, AP reported.The government of the country, which consists of a chain of islands where over 100,000 people live, issued an orange alert, meaning eruptions could occur with less than 24 hours' notice.Last month authorities from the nearby Caribbean island of Martinique issued a yellow alert due to seismic activity under Mount Pelée, the Independent reported.Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Residents of St. Vincent and the Grenadines have been told to remain alert a Caribbean volcano came back to life.

La Soufrière is the highest point in St. Vincent and is located near the northern tip of the country but remained dormant for decades before beginning to spew ash on Tuesday this week, AP reported.

La Soufrière, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, are in the Windward Islands, close to Barbados and St Lucia.

Business Insider

Steam, gas, and a volcanic dome formed by lava that reached the earth's surface could also be seen above the volcano, according to the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA).

The country's government, which consists of a chain of islands home to more than 100,000, raised the alert level to orange, meaning that eruptions could occur with less than 24 hours' notice. 

La Soufrière last erupted in 1979 but did not cause any harm due to warning, while a 1902 eruption led to 1,600 deaths.

In an unrelated incident early last month, authorities from the nearby Caribbean island of Martinique issued a yellow alert due to seismic activity under Mount Pelée, the Independent reported.

Fabrice Fontaine from the Volcanological and Seismological Observatory of Martinique told AP that it is the first time an alert of its kind has been issued since the volcano last erupted in 1932.

Mount Pelée also erupted in 1902 and killed almost 30,000 people, making it the deadliest eruption in the whole of the 20th century.

In December, Hawaii's Kilauea volcano erupted for the first time since 2018 and created a 600ft deep lava lake, according to NPR.

However, the most active volcanoes in the Americas have been the Soufrière Hills in Montserrat, which have erupted continuously since 1995 and killed at least 19 people in 1997, Erik Klemetti, a volcanologist from Denison University, Ohio, told AP.