Latest news with #governmentshutdown
CNN
23-07-2025
- Business
- CNN
‘We learned some lessons': How Chuck Schumer and Democrats are gearing up for the next funding fight with Trump
Democrats will soon face a significant test of their willingness to take on President Donald Trump with a fall funding deadline fast-approaching. And this time, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer doesn't want to become his party's bogeyman. Months after a contentious fight that put him at the center of anti-Trump Democratic outrage, Schumer is already taking steps to avoid, once again, being put in an impossible position between Democratic voters gunning for an ugly shutdown fight with Trump and his party's long-time stance that Democrats should fund the government. This time, they don't want to find themselves with little leverage to get out of a government shutdown with a Republican president. Members say Schumer's strategy is to start laying the groundwork early for what will be a contentious and unpredictable post-August recess with the hope of avoiding the 'Democrats in disarray' narrative that plagued the party in the spring. 'We learned some lessons on what to do and not to do,' one Democratic senator said of the difference between now and the March funding fight. 'Schumer's working on trying to find a path that unifies us.' On Tuesday, Democrats held a lengthy caucus-wide meeting on the path ahead and the Senate minority leader met with his House counterpart, Hakeem Jeffries, later in the day. Members and aides caution there is no formal plan yet for how to tackle Democrats' next showdown with Trump, but it's clear Schumer wants to shield his party from the intense backlash it faced from their voters in March – and avoid his own black eye in the process. Finding consensus, however, won't be easy nor is it a guarantee in a diverse caucus where just nine members joined Schumer in voting with Republicans in March to keep the government open. Since then, Democrats' reasons for challenging Trump have only grown. Republicans passed a massive tax and spending cuts bill that included historic slashes to Medicaid and food programs with just GOP votes. Republicans also voted last week to claw back $9 billion in federal funds for foreign aid and public broadcasting that had already been appropriated by Congress. 'Here's where I am. Unless the Republicans agree to a no rescissions clause, a vote on an appropriations bill is a fake,' Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, told CNN. King was among those in the caucus who voted with Schumer and the GOP to keep the government open, but now King says he has not decided yet if he'd be willing to do that again in the fall. 'Why vote for an appropriation bill if two weeks from now they can submit a rescissions package and undo everything that is in the bill?' King asked. 'Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I am not going to be fooled twice.' The challenge for Democrats is that they are finding themselves between two realities. On the one hand, Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought and conservatives on Capitol Hill are signaling a willingness for steeper budget cuts that reflect the massive slashes from Trump's Department of Government Efficiency. On the other, Senate Democrats are also working cooperatively with Republicans on the appropriations panel to pass several of the bills to fund military and veterans, agriculture and the legislative branch with broad bipartisan support. And they realize that if the government does shut down –- they may not have the leverage to reopen it. 'There is a real tension between Russ Vought and OMB and the rescissions vote, which are going right at a stable, steady appropriations process and what has been happening on committee so far,' Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the Defense appropriations subcommittee, said. Tuesday night, most Senate Democrats joined Republicans on a procedural vote to advance the military and veterans spending bill on the floor, and Schumer signaled that Democrats don't want to stand in the way of advancing bipartisan spending bills that his members have worked hard on. But, there is still a number of factors outside of Schumer's control. For one, House Republicans will manage their appropriations process. Already, conservatives are laying the groundwork for a full revolt if Speaker Mike Johnson tries to move ahead with a stopgap government funding measure known as a continuing resolution rather than passing all 12 individual spending bills. And even if the House could pass the dozen bills with their tight majority, they would many are likely to be nonstarters in the Senate where Republicans need 60 votes to advance their bills. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries signaled this week that Democrats were in no mood to help Republicans pass those bills. 'It's my expectation that if Republicans tried to jam a highly partisan spending bill down the throats of the American people here in the House we'll reject it,' the New York Democrat said when asked by CNN if he would take the same tactic as last year in rejecting GOP spending bills. 'At the end of the day, Republicans control the trifecta,' Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat, said of the unpredictability of the next few months for the party. In March, Schumer defended his decision to vote with Republicans to keep the government open. He argued that not doing so would give Trump more power, not less. And he downplayed the divisions within his ranks even as some members openly clashed with him over his decision. But in recent weeks, Schumer has signaled he's open to preparing a number of options depending on how the spending talks unfold, and Democratic members say he has been deeply engaged for weeks on how to manage the September fight. The minority leader held an impromptu press conference last week assailing comments from Vought that the appropriations process should be more partisan going forward. On the floor, Schumer warned Republicans that any passage of a spending cuts package with just GOP votes would poison the well for the September funding talks. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Democrat who voted against the stopgap funding bill in March, told CNN that Schumer clearly has taken lessons from the spring and carried them forward to this moment. 'I definitely know in the aftermath of that, he called all 47 of us. We were on recess the following week, he called all 47. What do you think? What should we do differently next time? I mean he's been very diligent in trying to seek advice and then also engage in significant discussions in the caucus about CRs and spending battles,' Kaine said. There are signs that some Senate Democrats – even those who were willing to vote for a stopgap measure to keep the government open last time – aren't as willing to repeat the move. A number of Democrats are also clamoring for Republicans to put in writing that any spending deal they agree to won't be reversed later with a GOP-only package to pull back funding for programs they don't like. 'I don't understand what it means to negotiate an appropriations deal with Republicans unless they have put in writing that there will be no rescissions and no impoundment,' Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said. But Democrats like Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, who voted with Schumer to keep the government open in the Spring, warned the most important thing is that Republicans and Democrats in the Senate agree that they, not the executive branch, should be making the spending calls. 'This really shouldn't be a partisan issue. It's a which branch of government are you in and what kind of oversight to you want to have over the executive?' she said. As for what Democrats learned from the spring fight, Shaheen offered one piece of guidance that she thinks Schumer is exercising now. 'I think in terms of lessons learned, I think the big lesson was we should have talked about it sooner and made it clear sooner what we thought was important to do.' In the House, some Democrats are also warning that early talk of a funding plan may help manage expectations from Democratic voters. 'A lot of people are looking for that silver bullet or that hidden stake that is going to take out Trump. Standing up on the appropriations bill is not going to be that,' Rep. Adam Smith, a Democrat from Washington, said. As for the GOP, many Republicans argue it's up to Democrats to decide how contentious the next eight weeks will be. 'Democrats need to decide do you want a deal? Do you want a shut down? Do you want a CR? What do you want to do? It's really not our choice,' House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole said. 'I think a shutdown is a losing game for them. They should have learned that last time, but they beat up poor Chuck Schumer when he did the right thing, kept the government open and accepted the CR.'
The Guardian
30-06-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Fired federal workers lobby for help on Capitol Hill – is anyone listening?
The Tuesday Group was feeling something familiar as its members milled around a bank of elevators in the bustling basement of a Senate office building: rejection. They had often been told no over the past months – when the government moved to fire them with Donald Trump's blessing, when judges rejected challenges to that decision and when the lawmakers who they have taken to tracking down on Capitol Hill once a week when Congress is in session would turn a deaf ear to their pleas. More than 59,000 federal workers have lost their jobs since Trump took office, according to government data, but those in power have not changed their tune. This Tuesday morning, it was staffers of Maine's Republican senator Susan Collins who had told them no, even after they staged an impromptu sit-in in her office for the better part of a half hour. So they proceeded five floors down to the basement of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, hoping that some senator – any senator – would give them a moment of their time. Then the elevator doors opened and who should come out but Collins. 'Senator Collins!' someone in the group yelled. Another tried to introduce themselves: 'I'm a fired federal worker.' But the senator began waving her hands in front of her in an unmistakable sign of: I don't have time for this. 'Thank you,' Collins said, as she made her way down the hall. 'It's somewhat typical,' observed Whitt Masters, a former USAID contractor who has been unemployed since the end of March, when the company employing him decided to file for bankruptcy after its client began to shut down. 'You know, I don't expect every senator to stop and speak with us. I wish she'd been a bit more approachable, especially since we had spent some time in her office earlier today.' What's been dubbed the Tuesday Group has come around the Capitol since mid-February, as Trump and Elon Musk's campaign to thin out the federal workforce began to bite. Some who show up have been fired, others are on paid leave while a judge considers whether it is legal to fire them, and those who work for USAID expect to officially lose their jobs next Tuesday, when the agency shuts down. Democrats often welcome them, but when it comes to the Republicans who control Congress – and are weighing legislation to codify some cuts and make deeper ones in the next fiscal year – the reception has been uneven. They've been ignored, blown off and belittled – all things they would experience last Tuesday, their 17th visit to the Hill. Their encounter with Collins fruitless, the group formed something of a gauntlet at the intersection of a hallway leading between office buildings and to the Senate subway, a place where lawmakers were sure to pass on a scorcher of a day. They would call out to any face they recognized, but the group of 10 was nothing a determined senator couldn't handle. Montana Republican Tim Sheehy speed-walked by with a reporter and cameraman in pursuit; Washington Democrat Patty Murray pounded past in sneakers; and Arkansas Republican John Boozman ambled through alone, displaying no sign that he knew the group was even there. 'Would you like to hear how we are impacting your constituents?' asked Stephie Duliepre, who was fired from her Science for Development fellowship program at USAID, when Tennessee Republican Marsha Blackburn came around the corner. The senator pushed on, the answer apparently being no. John Hoeven, a Republican from North Dakota, exited a stairwell that deposited him right in the middle of the group. He appeared to recognize them – on a previous visit, attendees said that Hoeven had discussed his support for folding a major USAID food assistance program into the state department. 'I see you're still working on it,' he quipped, before heading off. The Democrats they encountered uttered words of encouragement, and a few stopped to talk. 'Don't give up,' Dick Durbin of Illinois said when he encountered the group. 'I'm with you,' Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin called out. South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham attempted the silent treatment as he came past, but Amelia Hertzberg, who was on administrative leave from her job in the Environmental Protection Agency, was not having it. She followed him down the hall, and started prancing around to get his attention. 'You have a bright future,' Hertzberg recalls the senator saying. 'Well, I was going to have a bright future, and then I was fired,' she replied. The group spotted Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican and prominent Trump ally. 'Senator Hawley, these are fired federal workers. Do you have a second to talk to them?' asked Melissa Byrne, a community organizer who had put together the group. 'No,' he replied. The group was aghast, but they'd been treated worse. When Mack Schroeder encountered Indiana Republican Jim Banks one Tuesday and introduced himself as having been fired from the Department of Health and Human Services, the senator replied, 'You probably deserved it,' before calling him 'a clown'. That was in April. The incident made the news, Banks refused to apologize, and the Tuesday Group kept showing up. 'I've spoken to the media and been on the radio. I've called my senators, my representatives, and it feels a little bit like shouting into a void,' said Hertzberg, who has made about 12 visits to the Capitol now. 'So it feels good to go into senator's offices and be there and take up space for a while and make them see, or their staff see that there is a person behind all this.'
Yahoo
29-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Fired federal workers lobby for help on Capitol Hill – is anyone listening?
The Tuesday Group was feeling something familiar as its members milled around a bank of elevators in the bustling basement of a Senate office building: rejection. They had often been told no over the past months – when the government moved to fire them with Donald Trump's blessing, when judges rejected challenges to that decision and when the lawmakers who they have taken to tracking down on Capitol Hill once a week when Congress is in session would turn a deaf ear to their pleas. More than 59,000 federal workers have lost their jobs since Trump took office, according to government data, but those in power have not changed their tune. This Tuesday morning, it was staffers of Maine's Republican senator Susan Collins who had told them no, even after they staged an impromptu sit-in in her office for the better part of a half hour. So they proceeded five floors down to the basement of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, hoping that some senator – any senator – would give them a moment of their time. Then the elevator doors opened and who should come out but Collins. 'Senator Collins!' someone in the group yelled. Another tried to introduce themselves: 'I'm a fired federal worker.' But the senator began waving her hands in front of her in an unmistakable sign of: I don't have time for this. 'Thank you,' Collins said, as she made her way down the hall. 'It's somewhat typical,' observed Whitt Masters, a former USAID contractor who has been unemployed since the end of March, when the company employing him decided to file for bankruptcy after its client began to shut down. 'You know, I don't expect every senator to stop and speak with us. I wish she'd been a bit more approachable, especially since we had spent some time in her office earlier today.' What's been dubbed the Tuesday Group has come around the Capitol since mid-February, as Trump and Elon Musk's campaign to thin out the federal workforce began to bite. Some who show up have been fired, others are on paid leave while a judge considers whether it is legal to fire them, and those who work for USAID expect to officially lose their jobs next Tuesday, when the agency shuts down. Democrats often welcome them, but when it comes to the Republicans who control Congress – and are weighing legislation to codify some cuts and make deeper ones in the next fiscal year – the reception has been uneven. They've been ignored, blown off and belittled – all things they would experience last Tuesday, their 17th visit to the Hill. Their encounter with Collins fruitless, the group formed something of a gauntlet at the intersection of a hallway leading between office buildings and to the Senate subway, a place where lawmakers were sure to pass on a scorcher of a day. They would call out to any face they recognized, but the group of 10 was nothing a determined senator couldn't handle. Montana Republican Tim Sheehy speed-walked by with a reporter and cameraman in pursuit; Washington Democrat Patty Murray pounded past in sneakers; and Arkansas Republican John Boozman ambled through alone, displaying no sign that he knew the group was even there. 'Would you like to hear how we are impacting your constituents?' asked Stephie Duliepre, who was fired from her Science for Development fellowship program at USAID, when Tennessee Republican Marsha Blackburn came around the corner. The senator pushed on, the answer apparently being no. John Hoeven, a Republican from North Dakota, exited a stairwell that deposited him right in the middle of the group. He appeared to recognize them – on a previous visit, attendees said that Hoeven had discussed his support for folding a major USAID food assistance program into the state department. 'I see you're still working on it,' he quipped, before heading off. The Democrats they encountered uttered words of encouragement, and a few stopped to talk. 'Don't give up,' Dick Durbin of Illinois said when he encountered the group. 'I'm with you,' Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin called out. South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham attempted the silent treatment as he came past, but Amelia Hertzberg, who was on administrative leave from her job in the Environmental Protection Agency, was not having it. She followed him down the hall, and started prancing around to get his attention. 'You have a bright future,' Hertzberg recalls the senator saying. 'Well, I was going to have a bright future, and then I was fired,' she replied. The group spotted Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican and prominent Trump ally. 'Senator Hawley, these are fired federal workers. Do you have a second to talk to them?' asked Melissa Byrne, a community organizer who had put together the group. 'No,' he replied. The group was aghast, but they'd been treated worse. When Mack Schroeder encountered Indiana Republican Jim Banks one Tuesday and introduced himself as having been fired from the Department of Health and Human Services, the senator replied, 'You probably deserved it,' before calling him 'a clown'. That was in April. The incident made the news, Banks refused to apologize, and the Tuesday Group kept showing up. 'I've spoken to the media and been on the radio. I've called my senators, my representatives, and it feels a little bit like shouting into a void,' said Hertzberg, who has made about 12 visits to the Capitol now. 'So it feels good to go into senator's offices and be there and take up space for a while and make them see, or their staff see that there is a person behind all this.'
The Guardian
29-06-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Fired federal workers lobby for help on Capitol Hill – is anyone listening?
The Tuesday Group was feeling something familiar as its members milled around a bank of elevators in the bustling basement of a Senate office building: rejection. They had often been told no over the past months – when the government moved to fire them with Donald Trump's blessing, when judges rejected challenges to that decision and when the lawmakers who they have taken to tracking down on Capitol Hill once a week when Congress is in session would turn a deaf ear to their pleas. More than 59,000 federal workers have lost their jobs since Trump took office, according to government data, but those in power have not changed their tune. This Tuesday morning, it was staffers of Maine's Republican senator Susan Collins who had told them no, even after they staged an impromptu sit-in in her office for the better part of a half hour. So they proceeded five floors down to the basement of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, hoping that some senator – any senator – would give them a moment of their time. Then the elevator doors opened and who should come out but Collins. 'Senator Collins!' someone in the group yelled. Another tried to introduce themselves: 'I'm a fired federal worker.' But the senator began waving her hands in front of her in an unmistakable sign of: I don't have time for this. 'Thank you,' Collins said, as she made her way down the hall. 'It's somewhat typical,' observed Whitt Masters, a former USAID contractor who has been unemployed since the end of March, when the company employing him decided to file for bankruptcy after its client began to shut down. 'You know, I don't expect every senator to stop and speak with us. I wish she'd been a bit more approachable, especially since we had spent some time in her office earlier today.' What's been dubbed the Tuesday Group has come around the Capitol since mid-February, as Trump and Elon Musk's campaign to thin out the federal workforce began to bite. Some who show up have been fired, others are on paid leave while a judge considers whether it is legal to fire them, and those who work for USAID expect to officially lose their jobs next Tuesday, when the agency shuts down. Democrats often welcome them, but when it comes to the Republicans who control Congress – and are weighing legislation to codify some cuts and make deeper ones in the next fiscal year – the reception has been uneven. They've been ignored, blown off and belittled – all things they would experience last Tuesday, their 17th visit to the Hill. Their encounter with Collins fruitless, the group formed something of a gauntlet at the intersection of a hallway leading between office buildings and to the Senate subway, a place where lawmakers were sure to pass on a scorcher of a day. They would call out to any face they recognized, but the group of 10 was nothing a determined senator couldn't handle. Montana Republican Tim Sheehy speed-walked by with a reporter and cameraman in pursuit; Washington Democrat Patty Murray pounded past in sneakers; and Arkansas Republican John Boozman ambled through alone, displaying no sign that he knew the group was even there. 'Would you like to hear how we are impacting your constituents?' asked Stephie Duliepre, who was fired from her Science for Development fellowship program at USAID, when Tennessee Republican Marsha Blackburn came around the corner. The senator pushed on, the answer apparently being no. John Hoeven, a Republican from North Dakota, exited a stairwell that deposited him right in the middle of the group. He appeared to recognize them – on a previous visit, attendees said that Hoeven had discussed his support for folding a major USAID food assistance program into the state department. 'I see you're still working on it,' he quipped, before heading off. The Democrats they encountered uttered words of encouragement, and a few stopped to talk. 'Don't give up,' Dick Durbin of Illinois said when he encountered the group. 'I'm with you,' Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin called out. South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham attempted the silent treatment as he came past, but Amelia Hertzberg, who was on administrative leave from her job in the Environmental Protection Agency, was not having it. She followed him down the hall, and started prancing around to get his attention. 'You have a bright future,' Hertzberg recalls the senator saying. 'Well, I was going to have a bright future, and then I was fired,' she replied. The group spotted Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican and prominent Trump ally. 'Senator Hawley, these are fired federal workers. Do you have a second to talk to them?' asked Melissa Byrne, a community organizer who had put together the group. 'No,' he replied. The group was aghast, but they'd been treated worse. When Mack Schroeder encountered Indiana Republican Jim Banks one Tuesday and introduced himself as having been fired from the Department of Health and Human Services, the senator replied, 'You probably deserved it,' before calling him 'a clown'. That was in April. The incident made the news, Banks refused to apologize, and the Tuesday Group kept showing up. 'I've spoken to the media and been on the radio. I've called my senators, my representatives, and it feels a little bit like shouting into a void,' said Hertzberg, who has made about 12 visits to the Capitol now. 'So it feels good to go into senator's offices and be there and take up space for a while and make them see, or their staff see that there is a person behind all this.'
Yahoo
17-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
We Better Pray That No Unexpected Crisis Hits While Trump Is President
If you live in the United States, you are in greater jeopardy today than you were six months ago. So is your family. So are your friends and neighbors. Virtually all of the most important parts of the U.S. government that were created to protect the U.S. from the greatest risks we face are being shut down, gutted, or marginalized. What is more, plans and statements of the president and his advisers suggest further cuts are contemplated that increase the likelihood that one or more crises will catch us unawares and that when that happens, we will be much less equipped to handle it than we have been in decades. Our early warning capabilities, our planning tools, our interagency coordinating mechanisms, and the resources available to the government to respond to crises have all been greatly diminished. This will remain true despite planned increases in defense and homeland security spending—especially as those resources are directed at illusory 'invasions' and nonexistent 'insurrections.' It will remain true despite—and even to a degree because of—costly and distracting displays of military and law enforcement muscle-flexing. Area after area of the government with responsibility for anticipating, preparing for, and handling major national security threats has been affected. Despite news reports addressing some of these developments individually, the scope of the changes to institutions, personnel, budgets, and policy, and the interrelated and cumulative consequences of those changes, must be better understood and reversed. This should not be a partisan issue. It impacts red states and blue, Democrats and Republicans, cities and rural areas, rich and poor, all of us. Furthermore, this is not an abstraction. Every area impacted is demonstrably one that recent history has shown should be of urgent concern to us. At the core of this critical situation is the effective lobotomization of our government's national security 'brain' and 'nervous system.' We have not had a dedicated national security adviser to the president since May 1 when Mike Waltz resigned. In the intervening six weeks, this critical role has ostensibly been filled by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. But not only does Rubio have a massively challenging job as secretary of state, he is also serving as interim head of the U.S. Agency for International Development and as acting archivist of the United States—head of the agency responsible for preserving all the government's records. None of these tasks is minor. None can be performed on a part-time basis. Although it has been observed that Henry Kissinger once held both the top State and National Security Council positions, that was considered such an error that President Gerald Ford told me when I interviewed him for my history of the NSC, Running the World, that undoing the arrangement was one of his most important decisions as president. The State Department is undergoing a major reorganization while dealing with the complex and volatile world situation. USAID, a crucial tool of U.S. foreign policy and one with a vital role to play in helping to contain disease and conflict worldwide, is effectively being dismantled. Rubio is also taking on roles that many former secretaries of state did not get deeply engaged in, like determining who should be granted or denied visa status. In addition, his burdens are increased because there is no confirmed U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and more than 70 other ambassadorial positions remain open. Rubio simply could not effectively do what he is being asked to do even were he not also being given the most critical national security policy development and coordinating role in the White House. Making matters dramatically more challenging, on May 23, the White House announced the elimination of 100 jobs within the National Security Council, reducing its professional staff to its smallest size in decades. Furthermore, there are credible reports that further cuts are likely, with some estimates suggesting the president is considering reducing the NSC staff to half of its over 350 positions or even further to 'just a few dozen people.' This would make the NSC smaller than it has been in decades. But for an entity that is responsible for monitoring the world and threats to our national well-being and then coordinating the development of policies and the implementation of the plans approved by the president, as big a blow as the cuts are, more important is that the entire NSC process is being marginalized by a president who has repeatedly and recklessly made it clear he does not feel he needs advice. His refusal to hold regular intelligence briefings and reports of his resistance to consuming written intelligence illustrate this point. So do his decisions to appoint top aides to national security posts like Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who are among the least experienced ever to hold their jobs. As events surrounding the military deployment in Los Angeles illustrate, Trump has sought aides not for their counsel but for the willingness to do unquestioningly what they are told. (This point is supported by contrasting the resistance Trump received from his secretary of defense and chairman of the joint chiefs to plans to deploy the military against Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 with the reflexive support of Hegseth for the legally questionable moves against protesters in California.) Rubio has indicated that the NSC cuts target it as a stronghold of the 'deep state.' But of course, the president can appoint anyone he wants to the NSC staff; therefore, drastically reducing the agency's role is not the only way of addressing the issue of the loyalties of staffers. Cuts in its bloated staffing were certainly justifiable. What is not defensible is so drastically weakening the advice available to the president, the quality of that advice, or the ability to coordinate interagency actions in support of presidential decisions. The diminution of the NSC's role might not increase the risks faced by the U.S. so drastically if at the same time the NSC was shrunk and sidelined other national security agencies were strengthened—especially those associated with critical crisis areas. But that is clearly not the case either. Essentially all overseas roles in USAID are being eliminated. The State Department plans to do away with nearly one out of five employees. Thousands are expected to be cut from the U.S. intelligence community. The president has expressed a desire to disengage from the United Nations and minimize other alliances and international institutions that have played a multilateral crisis management role in the past. NATO in particular, our most important alliance, has been weakened even as the position of our enemies and rivals has been strengthened by changes to our policies and priorities. The president's 2026 budgets calls for over $500 million in cuts at the FBI—which plays a crucial role in U.S. counterintelligence activities. Some of the FBI's most experienced professionals have been removed from their offices. The Department of Justice has cut U.S. efforts to stop foreign interference in our elections. Chillingly, the government's main coordinating mechanism with the Department of Homeland Security for managing counterterrorism threats has been downgraded dramatically, with the appointment of a 22-year-old with virtually no experience of any sort to head it. The president has announced he is considering eliminating the Federal Emergency Management Agency and handling all disaster response decisions personally. The ability to anticipate hurricanes and help people prepare for other environmental disasters will be harmed by cuts to the parts of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that handle those duties. Even cuts to public broadcasting will make it harder for information about natural disasters to get to rural areas. Elevating individuals who don't believe in climate science certainly also makes matters worse. Cuts at the Department of Health and Human Services have hobbled our ability to predict or respond to pandemics or bioterrorism. Cuts to Medicaid will hinder our ability to prevent or respond to disease outbreaks—once again with impact on rural communities being most negative. Programs to develop and promote vaccines that could help prevent such health disasters have been eliminated, as has vital expertise in epidemiology and immunology, among other key areas. Even the parts of the government that help us avoid and control financial crises have been weakened dramatically, and financial institutions have been given more latitude to repeat past or invent new forms of risky behavior. Rather than learning from the experiences of our own lifetime, from terror attacks to wars to financial crises to the pandemic, we are actually increasing the chances we relive them or worse in the near future. We cannot anticipate what will come next. With the volatility in the Middle East at the moment, increasing violent extremism at home and abroad, bird flu, measles and tuberculosis cases regularly being reported, market volatility due to trade uncertainty, and the start of hurricane season, what we do know is that serious risks are everywhere. But what is clear is that whatever the next crisis may be, we will be less able to handle it, and our citizens, our economy, our allies, and our country will suffer. It is time for the Congress to live up to its oaths and reverse these trends. It is essential voters recognize the dangers that are accruing to their own communities and lives. Furthermore, those who may aspire to be responsible for the national security decisions in any future government should be developing plans over the next couple of years that can be quickly implemented to reverse the damage that is being done to our ability to protect our citizens.
