Trump signs bill to cancel $9 billion in foreign aid, public broadcasting funding
Some Republicans were uncomfortable with the cuts, yet supported them anyway, wary of crossing Trump or upsetting his agenda. Democrats unanimously rejected the cuts but were powerless to stop them.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
The White House says the public media system is politically biased and an unnecessary expense. Conservatives particularly directed their ire at NPR and PBS. Lawmakers with large rural constituencies voiced grave concern about what the cuts to public broadcasting could mean for some local public stations in their state. Some stations will have to close, they warned.
Advertisement
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said the stations are 'not just your news — it is your tsunami alert, it is your landslide alert, it is your volcano alert.'
On the foreign aid cuts, the White House argued that they would incentivize other nations to step up and do more to respond to humanitarian crises and that the rescissions best served the American taxpayer.
Advertisement
Democrats argued that the Republican administration's animus toward foreign aid programs would hurt America's standing in the world and create a vacuum for China to fill. They also expressed concerns that the cuts would have deadly consequences for many of the world's most impoverished people.
'With these cuts, we will cause death, spread disease and deepen starvation across the planet,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
20 minutes ago
- Politico
The Great Gerrymander War: California fires back at Texas power play
'I know the last thing Riverside County residents want is to eliminate the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and replace it with insider Sacramento politicians gerrymandering district lines behind closed doors,' Calvert said in a statement. When Newsom initially floated a California gerrymander to neutralize Texas, the reaction last month was a mix of enthusiasm and deep skepticism about the legal and political hurdles, given California's use of an independent redistricting commission. But as it became clear that Texas Republicans were unlikely to back down, Newsom pressed the issue, making California the tip of the spear for a counteroffensive embraced by Democrats at all levels of the party. Those dynamics make it likely the Democratic-dominated Legislature votes this month to put a new map on the ballot. While some expressed misgivings Sunday about a rushed process — to secure a November election, lawmakers will need to act quickly — several statehouse Democrats predicted they would muster the necessary two-thirds votes in each house. 'It's not a fight any of us want to be in, but we're in it, so we're going to fight,' said Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, a Democrat from Oakland. 'Nothing,' she added, 'unites the California Democratic caucus quite like Donald Trump.' But getting Sacramento Democrats on board is one thing. Persuading California voters will be entirely different — particularly because they would be asked to return line-drawing power to politicians, letting the Legislature craft new lines until the commission takes over again in 2031 after the next census. 'Voters want to weigh in on redistricting because they don't trust politicians,' said Chris Lehman, a political consultant who has worked on redistricting ballot initiatives. A survey conducted by Newsom pollster David Binder found that 52 percent of California voters would approve of state lawmakers redrawing its congressional district lines if Texas Republicans pulled off a similar gambit. The measure becomes more popular if the fight becomes more overtly partisan; 60 percent of voters back 'rejecting Trump's power grab.' Roughly eight in 10 Democrats and six in 10 independents are in favor of the effort, according to a person who was briefed on the poll's findings. The messages tested in the poll underscore how California Democrats will portray this as a fight they have no choice but to take on. The proposed ballot measure would be contingent on Texas' new districts being enacted. 'The polling shows that Californians overwhelmingly reject Trump's blatant power grab in Texas and want to fight back. The basic components of the program we are considering has strong support,' said Los Angeles-area Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, another Democrat. A successful ballot campaign would still require a titanic political effort. Assuming the Legislature acts, Newsom and allies will have just a few months to raise tens of millions of dollars and educate voters on a sudden, off-year election. Republican foes could be motivated to throw down. With little else on the ballot, that could yield an enormously expensive showdown. 'That'll be the big question mark,' said Brandon Castillo, a political consultant who specializes in ballot initiatives. 'Does that national money pour in, on both sides?'
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Charlamagne tha God responds to Trump's ‘racist sleazebag' remark
Radio host Charlamagne tha God responded on his show Monday to recent comments from President Trump calling him a 'racist sleazebag,' mostly shrugging off the insults and saying he wants the president to succeed. 'Now, the personal insults, I don't care. He called me a sleaze bag. I looked up the definition of sleaze bag, says it's a disgusting or despicable person, depending on who you ask, that may apply to me,' the radio host said Monday on 'The Breakfast Club.' 'Okay, I personally prefer friendly neighborhood, a-hole, okay? He said, I'm 'a low IQ individual,' I don't know. I've never taken an IQ test. He said, I have 'no idea what words are coming out of — coming out of' my 'mouth.' Absolutely true. Okay, I've been surprising myself my whole life,' he added. The radio host and frequent political pundit chafed at being called 'racist.' 'He called me a racist. I didn't mention race, not one time on Lara Trump. I didn't bring up the fact that President Trump issued an executive order directing oversight of institutions like the Smithsonian to remove or suppress narratives about systemic racism and Black history,' Charlamagne said. In a post on Truth Social on Sunday, Trump responded to Charlamagne's appearance on his daughter-in-law Lara Trump's Fox News show, calling the radio host a 'racist sleazebag' and asking 'Why is he allowed to use the word 'GOD' when describing himself?' 'He's a Low IQ individual, has no idea what words are coming out of his mouth, and knows nothing about me or what I have done – like just ending 5 Wars,' Trump added. Trump's post followed the radio host predicting on Saturday that anger among MAGA voters over his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files would lead to traditional Republicans taking back the party in a 'coup.' 'I think there's a political coup going on right now in the Republican Party that people aren't paying attention to. I think that this Epstein thing is going to be a way for traditional conservatives to take their party back. I really do,' Charlamagne, whose given name is Lenard McKelvey, told Lara Trump. On his show on Monday, he said he wanted Trump to remain 'focused' on more important issues, 'President Trump, don't worry about Lenard, okay, don't worry about Charlamagne tha God. I know something I said hit a nerve and rattled you a little bit, but I don't want you rattled,' he said. 'I am an American. I don't care who's in the White House. I want America to succeed. But I need you focused, and right now you're not focused.'
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump escalates nuclear tensions as Russia deadline nears
President Trump is rattling the U.S.'s formidable nuclear saber amid his growing frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin's refusal to halt the war in Ukraine, just days ahead of Trump's deadline for a ceasefire. Trump last week said he was moving two 'nuclear' submarines closer to Russia in response to threatening rhetoric from a top Kremlin official. On Sunday, he confirmed the vessels were now 'in the region.' It's not clear if Trump is referring to nuclear-armed submarines or nuclear-powered attack submarines, but the confusion adds to the threat, which coincides with the president's Friday deadline for Russia to end the war or face further economic isolation. Experts say it's a risky tactic unlikely to sway Putin, who has stood in the way of the president's campaign promise to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of returning to the White House. 'I don't see a lot of the benefits or the advantages, given that the Russians know very well that we have, for decades, had nuclear-armed submarines that could target what matters to them,' said Erin Dumbacher, the Stanton Nuclear Security Senior Fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations. 'I see more risk than reward to using statements like this.' While experts don't see an imminent threat, they warn against careless and bombastic statements that could lead to risky miscalculation and confrontation. 'Does this mean that all of a sudden we should all be going to the cellar and locking ourselves in? No,' said former Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.), who is the executive director of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, in a call with The Hill. 'Of major concern is nuclear rhetoric that could all too easily lead to mistake or miscalculation resulting in catastrophe. Trump's verbal engagement with an essentially powerless Russian politician is inappropriate and unhelpful,' he said in an earlier statement. 'What is needed is a steady hand, not someone who allows his anger at a personal insult to risk escalating to a dangerous situation.' Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy for peace missions, is expected in Moscow later this week to push Putin to agree to a ceasefire. If that fails, Ukraine's supporters are hoping Trump will pull the trigger on 'secondary tariffs' on countries that import oil from Russia, in a bid to choke off the Kremlin's ability to finance its war. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov on Monday downplayed the movement of the U.S. submarines to its nearby waters, saying it does not want to be dragged into a tit-for-tat escalation. 'In general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,' Peskov told reporters, according to Reuters. 'Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.' Peskov added that Russia does not currently see the movement as an escalation. 'It is clear that very complex, very sensitive issues are being discussed, which, of course, are perceived very emotionally by many people,' he added. Trump announced the move after what he called 'highly provocative statements' from former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the deputy chair of the country's security council. Medvedev had criticized Trump's foreign policy and threat of sanctions. Earlier this week, Trump reduced a 50-day timeline for Russia to reach a ceasefire, after repeatedly lashing out at Putin for continued attacks on Ukraine. Medvedev, a frequent anti-Western critic seen as having little decision-making power in the Russian government, said Trump is 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10,' and he warned about the risk of war between 'nuclear-armed adversaries.' He also referenced Russia's 'dead hand' capabilities — a Cold War relic that describes Moscow's ability to launch a nuclear strike even if the Russian leadership is taken out. 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences,' Trump responded in a Truth Social post. 'I hope this will not be one of those instances.' Trump has wielded America's nuclear arsenal in the past, particularly during his attempts to get North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions during his first term. Trump often raised the prospect of nuclear war with Pyongyang, boasting he would unleash 'fire and fury' on the country, and that he had a 'much bigger' and 'more powerful' nuclear arsenal. Trump's latest move to send two U.S. nuclear submarines to circle near Russia is unlikely to cause major concern for Moscow, given that such vessels patrol oceans across the globe daily, experts said. But the heightened rhetoric and concerns for miscalculation are underscoring key gaps in nuclear arms control and nonproliferation efforts. The Russian Foreign Ministry on Monday said it was not bound by a moratorium on short- and intermediate-range missiles, in what Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said was a response to U.S. discussions to deploy long-range conventional missiles to Europe. The missiles were banned under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which Trump pulled out of in his first term in response to Russian violations of the treaty. And the New START treaty between the U.S. and Russia is set to expire in February. The treaty put restrictions on America and Russia's nuclear arsenals and allowed reciprocal inspection and verification. Russia suspended its participation in the treaty in 2023, and the U.S. took countermeasures that effectively suspended American participation, raising concerns among nuclear arms control experts about the next steps. 'I'm not seeing a lot of conversation about what would happen after that, in an effort to restrict or limit or even maintain the current levels,' said Dumbacher, who most recently was a CFR international affairs fellow with the Pentagon. In that role she helped craft language signed on by the U.S. and China that humans, and not artificial intelligence, should control nuclear weapons. Dumbacher pointed out Russia is not a party to that agreement, which speaks to Medvedev's threats of Russia's 'dead hand' capabilities. 'I think every nuclear weapons country should sign on to some sort of confidence building measure like that, where we say we're never going to hand this decision over to a machine,' she said. Even as Trump heightens his rhetoric against Russia, the president has highlighted nuclear arms control as a priority. In a speech to the World Economic Forum in Davos in January, he said he wanted nuclear arms reduction talks with both Russia and China. And Trump boasts of halting fighting between Pakistan and India as averting a nuclear war. Rose Gottemoeller, who served as deputy secretary-general of NATO from 2016-19, noted Trump's success in getting Putin in 2019 to a freeze on all nuclear warheads, as well as his signal more recently that he is not interested in the U.S. building more warheads. 'Today's U.S. political reality mandates that the next arms control treaty has to be wholly owned by President Donald Trump if it is to be successful,' Gottemoeller wrote in an article for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists late last month, pointing out that any new arms control treaty will need the ratification of Congress. 'With the willingness that President Trump has already shown to take on the issue of constraining warheads, the current U.S. administration has the opportunity to forge into new territory on nuclear arms control.'
