Trump administration to end LGBTQ+-specific crisis hotline
SAMHSA will end the service, known as the "Press 3" option, on July 17, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration announced this week.
The Trevor Project, a leading LGBTQ+ advocacy group that works with the government to help administer the Press 3 option for the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline, warned that the decision could have grave consequences.
'This is devastating, to say the least,' Trevor Project CEO Jaymes Black said in a statement Wednesday. 'Suicide prevention is about people, not politics. The administration's decision to remove a bipartisan, evidence-based service that has effectively supported a high-risk group of young people through their darkest moments is incomprehensible.'
SAMHSA said the decision was made to maximize efficiency, writing in a statement Tuesday that it would no longer 'silo LGB+ youth services' with a focus on instead 'serving all help seekers, including those previously served through the Press 3 option.'
'The fact that this news comes to us halfway through Pride Month is callous — as is the administration's choice to remove the 'T' from the acronym 'LGBTQ+' in their announcement. Transgender people can never, and will never, be erased,' Black said.
A 2024 survey from the Trevor Project found that nearly 40 percent of LGBTQ+ young people had 'seriously considered' suicide in the past year. And half of the survey's respondents who reported wanting mental health care in the previous year had not been able to access it. The LGBTQ+ hotline has received roughly 1.3 million calls since its pilot program in 2022.
At least one Republican, Rep. Mike Lawler of New York, has come out against the decision.
"This is wrong," Lawler wrote on X. "According to studies, LGBTQ+ young people have an elevated risk of suicide and are more likely than their peers to attempt it. We should ensure they have the resources necessary to get help. The 988 hotline has been a lifesaver. This decision should be reversed."
When asked for comment, the White House referred POLITICO back to SAMHSA's statement from Tuesday. HHS had already proposed removing funding for the hotline in its fiscal year 2026 budget.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Israel's Iran strategy heavily banks on US getting good nuclear deal, sources say
Israel also hopes that Trump can successfully place limits on Iran's ballistic missile supply, but this is even more uncertain. Israel is feeling ascendant after its significant achievements against Iran during the June 13-24 war. Still, sources have said that the current strategy going forward is overwhelmingly banking on the US nailing Tehran down to a tough and long new nuclear deal. If the US does not secure such an airtight deal, Israel is unclear on what its strategy or next steps would be. In contrast to the ceasefire deal and end of the war with Hezbollah on November 27, 2024 which in and of itself set clear limits on Hezbollah's right to rearm and clearly outlined how Israel could proactively enforce those limits, the Iran ceasefire simply stopped the fighting between the sides with zero provisions regarding the future. This lack of a clear plan and certainty is true about how much Israel thinks it can hold back the Islamic Republic from rebuilding its heavily damaged nuclear weapons program, and sources have indicated that the plan may even be less clear regarding imposing and enforcing limits on Iran's ballistic missile program. Jerusalem's ideal world would be a US-brokered deal that ends Iran's nuclear program or ends its uranium enrichment and advanced centrifuges for a period of multiple decades, as well as keeps its quantity of ballistic missiles with a range to hit Israel down at the current 500-1,000 total missiles level. But what if Iran only agrees to certain concessions, but not others? For example, Iran could agree not to enrich uranium for the next year or two, during a period of time when it may not in any event be able to do so after the Israeli and American attacks, followed by enriching uranium at "low levels" like it did under the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal. This would basically be accepting the offer that US President Donald Trump was offering them before the war, except now they would be "losing" nothing because they cannot, at least for some period of time, do very much uranium enrichment right now anyway. Would Trump reject such a deal and potentially allow Iran to rebuild its nuclear program with no limits and no IAEA inspectors? The part about the IAEA inspectors is not theoretical, as since June 13, the UN nuclear inspectors have had no access to any aspects of the Iranian nuclear program. In fact, as of Wednesday, Iran also formally announced that it has indefinitely cut ties with the IAEA. This does not mean that Jerusalem and Washington are blind about what is happening in Iran. On Tuesday, The Jerusalem Post reported that Israeli satellites took tens of millions of photos of Iranian territory leading up to and ruing the 12-day war. But wherever the IAEA had electronic surveillance, it had 24-7 surveillance even indoors, even underground, something which is difficult even for top intelligence agencies to achieve. In short, IAEA inspections have never been sufficient by themselves, but they are crucial and invaluable. If the world was partially blind regarding Iran's nuclear program when Iran rolled back cooperation with the IAEA in 2021 and again in 2022, it is truly blind now. The only good news so far on the nuclear front is that even Iran is starting to admit that its nuclear facilities, including Fordow, were badly damaged. This means that even if the world is blind, there could be several months or more of little new progress by Iran toward reconstituting its nuclear program, no matter how hard it tries. Prior to the war, the Islamic Republic's ballistic missile program was not even on the table. Now, Israel will try to inject it onto the table, arguing that Iran's three massive ballistic missile attacks on the Jewish state in April 2024, October 2024, and this month make it a new existential threat. What if Trump settles for a nuclear deal, but with no limits on ballistic missiles? Israel was worried about Iran building a facility which could jump its missile inventory from 2,500 to 4,000 in around a year or so, and to 8,800 in around two years. Such numbers could overwhelm Israel's missile shield in a far more devastating way than even the 28 Israelis killed and 1,250 wounded from the 12-day war. Presumably, then, Israel would attack before the numbers ballooned that much. But how soon would Israel attack? When will the numbers get back to the pre-war 2,500 level? Earlier, such as when Iran builds and starts to operate a new ballistic missile production facility? Or yet earlier, as soon as it starts to build such a facility? Or maybe Israel can agree to Iran building unlimited ballistic missiles as long as their range falls below the 1,500 kilometer range to hit the Jewish state, given that many Iranian missiles do fall below that range. Will Jerusalem really risk ballistic missile attacks on hospitals, universities, and central Israel just to stop a facility from being built? And if it won't, will it get harder to respond even as the process goes forward because Israeli leaders will need to admit they are afraid of the Iranian response? Jerusalem has some time to let Trump try to resolve these issues. But if Trump cannot resolve them in the coming weeks or months, Israel will likely need to make some clear, hard, and uncompromising decisions about being ready to enforce certain limits, with coordination with the US and a yellow light to strike, even if there is not full-throated approval.
Politico
34 minutes ago
- Politico
How House Republicans could bypass their own budget
Mike Johnson is staring down the legislative challenge of his career. As soon as this morning, the speaker will attempt to ram the Senate-passed megabill through the House as dozens of Republicans threaten to vote it down. The detractors come from across the Republican conference after the Senate sent over a bill with deeper Medicaid cuts, steeper deficit hikes and less onerous clean-energy provisions than expected. And he's gunning to deliver by President Donald Trump's self-imposed July 4 deadline, as severe thunderstorms in Washington threaten full attendance. 'We'll see. I've got to play the cards that are dealt to me,' Johnson said Tuesday, after admitting he was 'not happy' with the Senate's changes to the bill. 'And we're working through that. … But we remain optimistic we're going to land it at this point.' Johnson has 24 to 48 hours to persuade reluctant fiscal hawks and Medicaid moderates to swallow the Senate's bill. He spent Monday on calls with concerned lawmakers and caucuses, scrambling to figure out how to pass it this week without making changes to the bill. (John Thune and Johnson have been in contact through much of the process but did not speak in the hours leading up to the Senate vote, the majority leader told POLITICO.) But the Senate bill will be tough to sell. House Freedom Caucus members like Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) blasted the Senate's bill Tuesday for adding to the deficit and softening clean energy tax credits. Roy and Norman both voted against the bill in the Rules Committee overnight. House moderates are worried about the steep cuts to Medicaid, which Johnson has privately said could cost Republicans the House in 2026. Sen. Thom Tillis' (R-N.C.) speech torching the Senate's Medicaid provisions for similar reasons shook many vulnerable Republicans. And a substantial cross section of the two groups of holdouts would rather take time to rework the package and send it back to the Senate, instead of jamming the Senate version through the House under a self-imposed deadline. Norman said the House should go back to the original bill, leave town and come back when Senate Republicans are 'serious.' Some signs of progress for Johnson: Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) appeared more likely to support the bill Tuesday night after previously refusing a deal on a state and local tax deduction. Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.), previously a strong no on the bill over the Medicaid provider tax, told POLITICO a local provider tax tweak in the wraparound amendment for New Jersey and other states has him feeling better about the bill. But it would still be a gamble for Johnson to put it on the House floor: Many Republicans think the bill would fail without additional changes. However, the speaker has previously succeeded in putting bills on the floor without the votes — and relying on Trump to pressure holdouts to fold. What else we're watching: — Weather problems could delay House vote: Over 200 flights into Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport were either canceled or delayed Tuesday amid thunderstorms in Washington, according to the flight-tracking service FlightAware. Johnson said Tuesday night that the travel issues could push back the House vote on the GOP megabill, which is expected as early as Wednesday. — More reconciliation packages: As the House looks to pass the current reconciliation package without further tweaks, Johnson is suggesting there could be future opportunities for lawmakers to get their priorities into party-line packages. In an interview on Fox News on Tuesday night, Johnson said the House will plan to do two more reconciliation bills during this session of Congress, which ends in 2026. Jordain Carney, Meredith Lee Hill and Benjamin Guggenheim contributed to this report.
Chicago Tribune
40 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Florida's ‘Alligator Alcatraz' detention center is set to receive its first group of immigrants
OCHOPEE, Fla. — The first group of immigrants were scheduled to arrive Wednesday night at a new detention center deep in the Florida Everglades that officials have dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz,' the state's attorney general said. 'Alligator Alcatraz will be checking in hundreds of criminal illegal aliens tonight,' Florida Republican Attorney General James Uthmeier said on the X social media platform. 'Next stop: back to where they came from.' It wasn't immediately clear precisely when the detainees would arrive or where they were coming from. They were being brought to the facility on buses, officials said. The facility, at an airport used for training, will have a capacity of about 3,000 detainees when fully operational, according to Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis said. The center was built in eight days over 10 miles (16 kilometers) of Everglades. It features more than 200 security cameras, 28,000-plus feet (8,500 meters) of barbed wire and 400 security personnel. Environmental groups and Native American tribes have protested against the center, contending it is a threat to the fragile Everglades system, would be cruel to detainees because of heat and mosquitoes, and is on land the tribes consider sacred. It's also located at a place prone to frequent heavy rains, which caused some flooding in the tents Tuesday during a visit by President Donald Trump to mark its opening. State officials say the complex can withstand a Category 2 hurricane, which packs winds of between 96 and 110 mph (154-177 kph), and that contractors worked overnight to shore up areas where flooding occurred. DeSantis and other state officials say locating the facility in the rugged and remote Florida Everglades is meant as a deterrent, and naming it after the notorious federal prison of Alcatraz, an island fortress known for its brutal conditions, is meant to send a message. It's another sign of how the Trump administration and its allies are relying on scare tactics to try to persuade people in the country illegally to leave voluntarily. State and federal officials have touted the plans on social media and conservative airwaves, sharing a meme of a compound ringed with barbed wire and 'guarded' by alligators wearing hats labeled 'ICE' for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The Republican Party of Florida has taken to fundraising off the detention center, selling branded T-shirts and beer koozies emblazoned with the facility's name.
