US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      What is a government shutdown and why is this year’s threat more serious?

      by

      The federal government is once again on the brink of a shutdown, unless Congress can reach a funding agreement before the start of the new fiscal year, on 1 October.With the clock ticking and both Democrats and Republicans seemingly dug in, there is little time left to avoid a lapse in government funding. And in a sharp escalation, the White House has threatened permanent mass layoffs of government workers in the event of a shutdown, adding to the roughly 300,000 it forced out earlier this year.What is a government shutdown?If a compromise isn’t reached by midnight on 30 September, parts of the government will begin shutting down. Until Congress acts, a wide range of federal services could be temporarily halted or disrupted as certain agencies cease all non-essential functions.In a polarized Washington, with the chambers narrowly divided, shutdown threats have become a feature of recent congressional budget battles. A standoff in 2018, during Trump’s first term, resulted in a 34-day shutdown, the longest in the modern era. At the time, roughly 800,000 of the federal government’s 2.1 million employees were sidelined without pay.What’s causing the fight this time?The federal government’s new fiscal year begins on Wednesday, and Congress has yet to strike an agreement on a short-term funding bill.Republicans, who control both chambers of Congress, are refusing to compromise and in effect daring Democrats to reject a stopgap measure that would extend funding levels, mostly at current levels, through 21 November. That bill narrowly passed the House but fell short in the Senate earlier this month.Donald Trump has said he expects the government to shut down this week. “If it has to shut down, it’ll have to shut down,” he said on Friday, blaming the Democrats.Republican and Democratic congressional leaders remained at an impasse after a Monday-afternoon meeting with Trump at the White House. “I think we’re headed into a shutdown because the Democrats won’t do the right thing,” JD Vance told reporters after the summit.View image in fullscreenDemocrats, locked out of power in Washington, have little leverage, but their votes are needed to overcome the filibuster in the Senate. Democrats are demanding an extension of subsidies that limit the cost of health insurance under the Affordable Care Act and are set to expire, a rollback of Medicaid cuts made in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and the restoration of funding to public media that was cut in the rescissions package.Leaving the White House on Monday, the Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, said: “There are still large differences between us.”Congressional Democrats are under pressure to use their leverage to stand up to Trump and his administration. In March, Schumer lent the necessary Democratic votes to approve a Republican-written short-term funding measure without securing any concessions – a move that infuriated the party’s base.Why is this year’s threat more serious?This time, the impact on federal workers could be even more severe. In a memo released last week, the White House’s office of management and budget (OMB) told agencies not just to prepare for temporary furloughs but for permanent layoffs in the event of a shutdown.The memo directed agencies to ready reduction-in-force notices for federal programs whose funding sources would lapse in the event of a shutdown and are “not consistent with the president’s priorities”.The OMB led the administration’s earlier efforts to shrink the federal workforce as part of a broader government efficiency campaign led by Elon Musk’s “department of government efficiency”.In a statement on Thursday, AFL-CIO’s president, Liz Shuler, said government employees had “already suffered immensely” this year under the Trump administration’s vast cuts to the federal workforce. “They are not pawns for the president’s political games,” she said.Asked about the memo on Thursday, Trump blamed Democrats, saying a shutdown was what the party wanted. “They never change,” he said.At a news conference, the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, said on Thursday that Democrats “will not be intimidated” by the Trump administration’s threats to fire more federal employees if the federal government shuts down. He added that his message to Russell Vought, the head of OMB, was simple: “Get lost.”What happens if the government shuts down?In the event of a full or partial government shutdown, hundreds of thousands of federal workers may be furloughed or required to work without pay. Approximately 750,000 federal employees will be furloughed each day of a government shutdown, according to an estimate by the congressional budget office released on Tuesday.Operations deemed essential – such as social security, Medicare, military duties, immigration enforcement and air traffic control – would continue, but other services may be disrupted or delayed. Mail delivery and post office operations would continue without interruption.Agencies have been releasing updated contingency plans in the event of a shutdown. The Department of Education said nearly all its federal employees would be furloughed, while most of the Department of Homeland Security workforce would remain on the job.The effect can be wide-ranging and potentially long-lasting. Previous shutdowns have closed national parks and the Smithsonian museums in Washington, slowed air travel, delayed food-safety inspections, and postponed immigration hearings.While the broader economy may not feel the effects immediately, analysts warn that a prolonged shutdown could slow growth, disrupt markets and erode public trust. More

    • 150 Shares111 Views

      in US Politics

      DoJ sues pro-Palestinian activists under law often used to protect abortion clinics

      by

      The Trump administration has filed a first-of-its-kind civil rights lawsuit against pro-Palestinian groups and activists, accusing the advocates of violating a law that has traditionally been used to protect reproductive health clinics from anti-abortion harassment and violence.The lawsuit, filed on Monday by the justice department’s civil rights division, alleges that two advocacy groups and six people broke the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (Face) Act when they protested against an event at a West Orange, New Jersey, synagogue in November 2024. The event at the Ohr Torah synagogue promoted the sale of property in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, which are widely considered illegal under international law. Similar events have sparked protests in the years since the outbreak of the war in Gaza, but this event escalated into violence.One man, a pro-Israel counterprotester, pepper-sprayed a pro-Palestinian demonstrator, while another counterprotester bashed the same demonstrator in the head with a flashlight, according to a local news outlet. Local New Jersey prosecutors ultimately filed charges against the two counterprotestors on multiple counts, including aggravated assault. (The pair have denied the accusations against them.)The lawsuit filed by the Trump administration portrays the pro-Palestinian advocates as the aggressors. It alleges that some of the advocates physically assaulted at least one pro-Israel protester, effectively used vuvuzelas “as weapons” – arguing that the horns are “reasonably known to lead to permanent noise-induced hearing loss” – and ultimately disrupted both a memorial service and a lecture on the Torah.“These violent protesters meant their actions for evil, but we will use this case to bring forth good: the protection of all Americans’ religious liberty,” Harmeet K Dhillon, an assistant attorney general in the justice department’s civil rights division, said in a press conference on Monday.The Trump administration is asking a court to fine the pro-Palestinian demonstrators more than $30,000 for their first violation of the Face Act, and roughly $50,000 for each subsequent violation.One of the groups named in the lawsuit, American Muslims for Palestine-New Jersey, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The national branch of another group, the Party for Socialism and Liberation-New Jersey, also did not immediately respond. The other defendants could not be immediately reached for comment.The Face Act penalizes people who go beyond peaceful protest to threaten, obstruct or injure someone who is trying to access a reproductive health clinic or “place of religious worship”, but the federal government has never used the act to protect houses of worship, Dhillon confirmed during the press conference. Instead, it has historically been used to guard abortion clinics, since former president Bill Clinton signed the 1994 bill into law amid unprecedented violence against abortion providers and clinics. The Face Act is so unpopular among anti-abortion advocates that Republicans have repeatedly called for its repeal.For Mary Ziegler, a professor at the University of California’s Davis School of Law, the new case is especially striking because the Trump administration announced earlier this year that it would dramatically curtail its use of the Face Act to protect abortion clinics. Donald Trump has also pardoned several anti-abortion protesters who had been convicted under the Face Act.“It probably feels like a slap in the face to people who support reproductive rights,” said Ziegler, who studies the legal history of reproduction. “The administration has said it’s open season when it comes to the Face Act and reproductive health clinics – but is being pretty aggressive in enforcing it when it comes to places of worship.”Ziegler also sees this use of the Face Act as a means of bigfooting local prosecutors in blue states – and, potentially, cracking down on protests writ large.“If you’re the Trump administration and you want to shut down pro-Palestinian protests altogether, reaching for the Face Act makes sense,” Ziegler said. “The reason the Face Act was put into place is because people were worried that clinic blockades were dangerous and were leading to violence – and, more importantly, because other criminal laws weren’t getting the job done. So the Trump administration is looking to a federal law with steeper penalties probably for a similar reason.” More

    • 175 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Unions are handing Democrats a golden opportunity amid the shutdown battle | Judith Levine

      by

      The Federal Unionists Network (FUN) and 35 national, state and local unions have written a letter to the Democratic congressional leadership – Chuck Schumer in the Senate and Hakeem Jeffries in the House, urging them to hold out against Republicans in the budget negotiations, even if it means a government shutdown and halted paychecks. The signatories represent “tens of thousands of federal workers”, according to an FUN press release.The Democrats’ demands, the letter says, should include “adequate funding for critical public services” and a “guarantee” that funds appropriated by the Congress are spent.This gives the Democrats the chance not just to win this budget battle, but to begin to win back their identity and the people who should be their base.“A government shutdown is never Plan A,” the letter reads. “Federal workers and the communities we serve will face severe hardship. But federal workers will willingly forego paychecks in the hopes of preserving the programs we have devoted our lives to administering.”These workers are showing remarkable solidarity with each other. They are willing to stage the closest thing to a general strike the US has seen since 1946, when more than 100,000 Oakland, California, workers stayed home, shutting the city down.Federal workers cannot legally go on strike. But in the last few months, even the option of a wildcat walkout presented a quandary. It would have granted, if they struck, the Trump administration exactly what it wanted: a decimated civil service. They also would have given their nemeses a psychological victory unpalatable to themselves. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work, because they are increasingly viewed as the villains,” Russell Vought, now US office of management and budget (OMB) director, told a conservative audience last October. “We want their funding to be shut down … We want to put them in trauma.”But now, they’re ready to wake up in the morning and not go to work – if they haven’t already been fired. They are not the villains but the heroes. And they’re handing the trauma back to those who have been almost gleefully traumatizing them.Moreover, labor is standing together not just for its members’ bread and butter. In fact, as miners and railroad workers, teachers and auto workers have done for decades, the members are foregoing their own bread and butter for a greater good, for future workers – and in this case, for a progressive American future. They are speaking for what they should have been speaking for all along: economic justice, democracy and the wellbeing of the people.They’re speaking for what the Democratic party should be speaking for.“Federal unions and workers stand with members of Congress who oppose damaging cuts, unconstitutional executive overreach, attacks on science and data itself, and attempts to undercut organized labor,” the letter says. “We join together with you in the fight to save and strengthen the many important government programs and services that have been created throughout our country’s history to raise standards of living, provide safety, and ensure the continued growth of science, industry, and American prosperity.”Organized labor is giving the party that abandoned it another chance to show which side it is on. They’re standing with Democratic allies in Congress. Those Congress members must stand with them.As usual, the party’s leadership is focusing on one thing. This time it’s cuts to Obamacare subsidies. That’s a good start.But in this letter, the unions have told most of the narrative. The Democrats need only to furnish the moral of the story: why are the Republicans cutting everything under the sun, endangering the country’s safety, security, and prosperity? To further enrich their rich friends and corporate benefactors.Now’s your chance, Democrats. Don’t blow it.

      Judith Levine is a Brooklyn-based journalist, essayist and author of five books. Her Substack is Today in Fascism More

    • 200 Shares93 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘It’s hard to know what day it is’: families tell of grim Ice detention in Texas

      by

      At the South Texas Family Residential Center, guards allegedly refer to detained immigrant families as “inmates”, spouses aren’t allowed to hold hands, and children don’t know where they can kick around a ball without getting in trouble, according to a stark court filing.Yet those are minor indignities compared with accounts given to outside monitors of a lack of clean drinking water, sleep, healthy food, privacy, hygiene supplies and appropriate healthcare. Alongside government admissions of what attorneys called “prolonged unexplained detention” at the facility in the remote town of Dilley, Texas anxiety levels for detainees are high.“It is hard to know what day it is because we have been at Dilley for so long,” one 35-year-old parent told watchdogs who had been sent in to assess the conditions.Legal experts made a barrage of allegations about illegal deprivations, violations of basic detention standards and humanitarian concerns at the only known Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) center in the US currently holding immigrant families, as initially detailed in part one of the Guardian’s report.“My main question is: when can I get out of here?” asked an 11-year-old child who had already been detained at Dilley for 53 days, far longer than the general 20-day legal limit for immigrant children in unlicensed facilities, according to the filing in federal court in Los Angeles.The detainees’ accounts were published earlier this month by attorneys acting as outside monitors for standards of child detention, who visited Dilley four times since it reopened as a family detention facility after Donald Trump returned to the White House with his mass deportation agenda.The center is run for Ice by the private corrections and detention company CoreCivic, which declined requests for comment on conditions at Dilley and referred the Guardian to Ice, which then referred on to its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), from which the Guardian also requested comment but none was forthcoming.However, CoreCivic, in response to similar allegations made by detainees at a different facility, in California, company spokesperson Brian Todd said that all its facilities “operate with a significant amount of oversight and accountability, including being monitored by federal officials on a daily basis, to ensure an appropriate standard of living and care for every individual”.Families held at Dilley gave accounts of their experiences, with their names and countries of origin redacted in the publicly available court documents. Some described a “prison-like” environment, even though immigration proceedings are civil matters in the US, not criminal. Detainees spoke of the many rules they endure under lock and key.“I got in trouble for touching my mom,” one 13-year-old said. “The lady [staff member] said: ‘You can’t touch her.’ And I said: ‘But she’s my mom.’ And she said: ‘You can’t touch her.’”The Dilley center is surrounded by a metal perimeter fence.Within, families live in “isolated, cell-like trailers”.“I tried to sit outside to look at the moon and stars one time, but they wouldn’t let me,” the 13-year-old said.Adults lamented the struggle to parent and comfort their children without autonomy over their lives, unable to fulfill a kid’s simple requests, like going to a playground to break the monotony, or providing a banana to eat.
      “It feels so hard to be a good mother here, where there is so much stress and we have so little control over what happens to us,” said one parent, adding: “I am doing all I can to be strong for my children and take care of them. They do not understand why we have to be in this prison. It is impossible to be a good parent in this place.”Detainees described a lack of potable water, even when it’s supposedly filtered.“We just don’t trust that the water is cleanly dispensed and sometimes the water really smells bad. Maybe that is why so many people here are sick,” said one parent.The paid commissary sells bottled water, but its cost – over a dollar per bottle – is out of reach for many of the families. One parent, who had been detained at Dilley for 42 days, said the available free water “has a strong smell of bleach”. The parent bought bottled water for their toddler but could not afford more for personal consumption. “The staff here will not drink the water, but we do not have any other choice,” the parent told the visiting attorneys, according to the court filing.The 11-year-old who had been detained for 53 days and asked when they could get out, described the food as “the same, the same, the same”. Another family said they “eat just enough to survive”.“I don’t eat a lot here and I’ve lost weight since being at this center. I usually do not want to eat because I feel so much anxiety,” a 16-year-old said.Similarly, a 14-year-old already detained for 54 days with their seven-year-old brother said “the chicken tastes like plastic” and “if I don’t like the food that day, I usually just have bread and water and that’s it”. Their brother had stopped eating, they said, and “my parents had to almost beg the medical staff to give him PediaSure”, a nutritional drink for children.“Being here has affected my little brother a lot,” the 14-year-old added. “He doesn’t sleep well. He cries all night. Yesterday he had an attack where he would not stop crying from 7pm to 9pm, and he was outside the room crying that he didn’t want to go back in, and he wanted to be free.”Several families described their children falling behind on their education and development. The onsite school consists mainly of coloring, drawing, painting and doing basic worksheets, with only one hour a day of class for each age group, they said. Many of the children got so bored they stopped attending.“My parents are so worried for me that we are not studying or able to do anything to support our future here,” said a 13-year-old.In terms of health, families described inadequate care and medical staff who downplayed illnesses or even disabilities, according to the filing. One nine-year-old with autism was so sensitive to cleaning chemicals and other odors in the bathrooms that he would vomit when he entered.“Because he would not want to go in there, he would hold it and hold it, and then eventually he would pee his pants. Some days, I would need to change his clothes five or six times,” his parent said, describing the ordeal as “heartbreaking”. The boy started soiling himself and “was in the bathroom crying and yelling and hitting himself”. They had to resort to diapers for the first time since he was two, the court document said.Meanwhile sleep was chronically elusive for many. One family described frequent checks by guards.“They come in and out of the room without knocking. Some are polite, but others barge in without warning … They do not turn off the lights at night. It is difficult for my son to sleep because of the lights and … the staff talk on very loud walkie-talkies throughout the night.”When they did sleep, some families also reported that children suffered from nightmares, but when they went to see the resident mental health staff, they were just told to pray, do breathing exercises and participate in activities.“The psychologist did not ask what the nightmares were about,” said a parent, whose sons aged eight and 10 were having “so many” bad dreams. “She didn’t check if the boys were thinking about hurting themselves or if they had thoughts about wanting to die. She just said nightmares are normal.” More

    • 200 Shares64 Views

      in US Politics

      Palestinian American denied slot at DNC competing for Georgia governor: ‘We’re trying to rebuild the coalition’

      by

      Ruwa Romman, the first Palestinian-American elected to state-level office in Georgia, was fighting for a speaking slot a year ago at the Democratic national convention, hoping to draw attention to concerns among progressive voters about the Biden administration’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza.On Monday, she announced her candidacy for governor in Georgia – looking for a different kind of attention.“I’m running to build the movement,” she told the Guardian. “Because for over the 20 years Republicans have controlled our state, hospitals have shut down, the minimum wage on our books is still $5.15 an hour, and our education continues to drop. In order to fix all of those things, the first things, the first thing we need to do is replace who the governor is.”Romman, a 32-year-old state representative, enters a crowded field of Democrats seeking the nomination. Lucy McBath, a Georgia congresswoman, who had widely been considered a frontrunner, withdrew from consideration last year, citing her husband’s health. Jason Esteves, a former state senator, Keisha Lance Bottoms, a former Atlanta mayor, Michael Thurmond, a former DeKalb county CEO, Derrick Jackson, a state representative, and Geoff Duncan, a former lieutenant governor and previously a Republican, are competing in the May primary.She laughs at comparisons with Zohran Mamdami’s progressive run in the New York City mayoral race.“I am not here to define any other candidate but myself, for the average everyday voters, as someone who cares about economic issues,” she said. “A typical voter, for me, is young and progressive, but I’m also going after the older voters that understandably are very cynical and very nihilistic right now, and think this is the way the world is, and it will always be.View image in fullscreen“We are trying to rebuild the coalition. And to do that, we are building it so that we can bring those groups back that just don’t see anybody fighting for them, which inadvertently, by the way, ends up being everybody.”Georgia has elected several Muslim men to the general assembly; Romman became the first Muslim woman in 2022, winning a seat in the Atlanta suburbs of Gwinnett county. She is religiously observant and wears a headscarf in public. Born in Jordan and raised in Georgia, Romman was an activist for years before entering politics, she said.Romman became the face of the Uncommitted voter movement that grew out of discontent with the Biden administration’s seemingly unconditional support for Israel as images of dead children washed through America’s political consciousness last year. She lobbied to no avail for a speaking slot at the convention, so that the party would at least acknowledge the internal conflict.Ultimately, Romman released a message endorsing Kamala Harris, while calling for the combatants to “reach a ceasefire, end the killing of Palestinians, free all the Israeli and Palestinian hostages and to begin the difficult work of building a path to collective peace and safety”.Romman acknowledges that most people watching politics probably recognize her from that effort. “But the reality is that I have been doing this work in Georgia for over a decade,” she said. “And while I understand how that plays into all of this … I hope that the same people who paid attention to that nationally and locally will now pay attention to our state and everything that is possible here.”Republicans have held the governor’s seat since 2003 in Georgia with a string of conservatives who have generally eschewed deep ideological partisanship in favor of business-friendly governance, as typified by governor Brian Kemp’s response to political provocations by Donald Trump.Nonetheless, Georgia remains one of 10 states opting against Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act. A brain-dead Georgia woman was kept alive earlier this year to prevent the death of her fetus, a medical decision driven by Georgia’s “fetal heartbeat” anti-abortion law. And pro-growth policies have also led to changes to insurance law, housing affordability and employment law that Democrats believe provides a political opening.Romman said she hopes her candidacy will inspire others to run, particularly in districts where Democrats have struggled in the past, and for people to engage their government and pressure conservatives to consider better options.“Nothing that we are pursuing is unpopular,” she said. “The bills are going up on everything: food, your electric bill, your tax bill on your home, if you’re lucky enough to own a home. If you’re trying to buy a home, you’re getting priced out by corporations. The cultural change that I hope people see is in overcoming cynicism and restoring this civic ethos of being involved in government, and seeing government as a place for everybody, not just special interests.” More

    • 200 Shares105 Views

      in US Politics

      Americans and US food banks brace for Trump cuts: ‘Battling hunger is no longer a priority’

      by

      Americans are bracing for the impact of the largest cuts to the government’s food assistance program for low-income people in US history that have begun to take effect as a result of Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act.Effective 1 October, the beginning of fiscal year 2026, funding for Snap-Ed, part of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap) that provided funding for food banks across the US, is being eliminated. The cuts are part of the sweeping spending bill Trump signed in July.A report this month by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted “some low-income families will see their food assistance terminated or cut substantially (or will be denied benefits) this fall, though most current participants will face cuts when their SNAP eligibility is next recertified,” with estimates that 4 million Americans in a typical month will lose some or all of their Snap benefits when the cuts are fully implemented.A Snap recipient in Camden county, New Jersey, who works as a cake decorator at a small business and requested to remain anonymous, said their Snap benefits were cut off in September without receiving a notice.“Snap was my way to finally not pay half to three-quarters of my paycheck on groceries. Now, I have nothing in my house regularly and it just feels like no one wants to help people any more,” they said. “I only got a little over $110 a month, but it helped tremendously.”They said it’s made it more difficult to work at a job they love, but that doesn’t pay enough.Jessica Griffin of Fort Smith, Arkansas, a mother of three, said she lost her job about five months ago and has struggled to find another, with her family relying on her husband’s income.After rent and utility bills, there isn’t much left over to buy groceries and she doesn’t have reliable transportation to get to food banks, she said.“I used to be able to buy $100 worth of groceries a week to feed a family of five, now even with one child out of the house $100 will only go a couple days,” she said. “The rent rates are so high now as well as groceries that families can barely afford to feed their kids and keep a roof over their heads at the same time. So it almost feels like we have two options, to either live in a house or live on the street and not starve.”View image in fullscreenFunding cuts to states, which will be expected to share costs of Snap for the first time as well as cover more administrative costs, are phased for fiscal years 2027 and 2028, but several provisions and changes to Snap are being implemented as states have to grapple with drastic costs shifted on to them from the federal government.“States don’t have enough administrative staff or capacity to handle this,” said Gina Plata-Nino, interim Snap director at the Food Research and Action Center. “I think we’re on a downward path. Polling and data is showing that one of the biggest obstacles that people are having in being able to eat is just how expensive food is at the moment. This is a direct result of tariffs and other policy choices that the administration has made. It’s something that everyone, regardless of income, can understand.”The looming Snap cuts come as food prices are still rising under the Trump administration and are expected to continue rising due to tariffs and labor shortages in the food industry due to Trump’s immigration policies.From January 2022 to August 2025, overall food cost in the US increased by about 17.8%, according the consumer price index, and has increased 2.0% since January 2025, when Trump took office. Trump’s tariffs are expected to drive further increases, with food prices set to rise 3.4% in the short term and stay 2.5% higher in the long run, according to the Yale Budget Lab.Food banks have been struggling across the US to keep up with demand and manage rising food prices, while bracing for further cuts, higher prices, and a surge in demand once Snap cuts begin taking effect.At a food bank in Charlottesville, Virginia, Jane Colony Mills, executive director of Loaves & Fishes, said the food bank has “experienced a 20% increase in the numbers of people coming for food assistance in 2025, likely driven not only by the cost of groceries in our community, but by the overall cost of living in Charlottesville and Albemarle area.”She noted their food supply has decreased as well, since they rely on food that stores cannot sell, and have also been affected by cuts at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to programs that support food banks. Colony Mills noted Snap cuts haven’t taken effect yet in Virginia, but local social service departments are bracing for those reductions or cancellations starting 1 October.“People who rely on these incremental supports will be struggling even more to provide food for their households each month,” she added.In Washington, the Thurston County Food Bank said they are bracing for significant cuts to Snap that will increase demand and make it more difficult to meet the current demand, let alone handle increases. They have already had to lay off staff positions funded by the Snap-Ed program that was cut by the Trump administration.“We have been told to brace for cuts that could be as much as 20% to 25% of the food we received in prior years. For us, 25% is $1m worth of food in 2024 prices, so with rising food costs, we can assume that is a gap of well over a million dollars,” said executive director of the Thurston County Food Bank.Ahead of the cuts to Snap and rising food prices, the Trump administration announced the cancellation of the annual hunger survey that measures food insecurity in the US and food researchers at the USDA were put on leave.USDA deferred comment to a press release, where they claimed “these redundant, costly, politicized, and extraneous studies do nothing more than fear monger.”The decision is viewed by anti-hunger advocates as an effort by the Trump administration to obfuscate the impacts of their cuts to Snap and other policies affecting food insecurity for Americans.“By cancelling the survey, USDA is sending a signal that tracking and battling hunger is no longer a priority,” Eric Mitchell, president of the Alliance to End Hunger, said in a statement. “It is further troubling that the decision comes amid predictions that hunger may increase in the coming months and years. Hunger will not disappear simply because it is no longer tracked.” More

    • 175 Shares117 Views

      in US Politics

      As US warships prowl the Caribbean, our region must hold fast against Trump’s gaslighting

      by

      For decades, the Caribbean has been caught in the slipstream of other people’s wars – from cold war proxy battles to Washington’s “war on drugs” and “war on terror”. Our islands have too often been turned into the frontlines for policies scripted elsewhere but fought in our waters, our communities, and on the backs of our most vulnerable.The recent US naval strikes against alleged “drug boats” leaving Venezuela, and the decision of Trinidad and Tobago’s prime minister, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, to grant access to territorial waters without first consulting the Caribbean collective of developing countries, Caricom, risk dragging our islands into yet another manufactured storm.As US warships fire missiles at vessels they claim carry “narco-terrorists”, the Caribbean faces the prospect of being sacrificed in someone else’s theatre of war. The consequences could be catastrophic for livelihoods and fragile regional stability. Unless diplomacy and regional solidarity prevail, we could be destabilised in ways we are ill-equipped to endure.The US narrative rests on a familiar trope: that the Caribbean is nothing more than a trans-shipment hub for narcotics flowing north. Geography makes the accusation plausible. For decades, cocaine from Colombia has moved through Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname and across the archipelago to Miami, New York, Madrid and London.But the narrative is dishonest. The true driver is demand. The US insatiable appetite for cocaine and opiates created the billion-dollar trade routes that snake through Trinidad, Jamaica, the Bahamas and Guyana. Rather than own its addiction, the US projects blame outward, painting the Caribbean as “narco-territory” while denying the role of its own citizens as consumers, financiers, and enablers.View image in fullscreenFishing communities have long paid the highest price. In Trinidad and Tobago, countless fishers have been harassed, detained or shot at by Venezuelan coastguards. Some have been killed. These people, eking out a precarious living in overfished waters, now fear being mistaken for traffickers by US drones and warships.When the US broadcasts videos of small boats exploding into fireballs, they endanger every fisher who dares cast a net in the Gulf of Paria, between Trinidad and Venezuela.Washington’s sudden military zeal is telling. After decades of indifference to Caribbean pleas for fair trade, reparations and climate justice, we are asked to believe US destroyers lurk offshore to protect us. But the reality is this is about squeezing the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, destabilising the country and preparing the ground for regime change.It would be naive to ignore the oil factor. Between Trinidad’s long-established energy base, Venezuela’s colossal reserves and Guyana’s massive discoveries, the southern Caribbean has become one of the most coveted hydrocarbon regions anywhere.Donald Trump’s fixation on “narco boats” cannot be separated from the desire to influence who controls this wealth. From Iraq to Libya, Washington has repeatedly intervened in oil states, toppling governments and installing pliable leaders. The Caribbean must recognise the danger of being drafted into the next act of this playbook.History shows the consequences; Grenada in 1983, Panama in 1989, Haiti through multiple interventions. Each was justified as defending democracy; each left behind wreckage. To believe these new strikes are purely about drugs is to ignore the US’s long habit of cloaking imperial ambition in moral language.In a statement, Persad-Bissessar endorsed US naval forces’ presence as a necessary step to tackle organised crime.View image in fullscreen“For two decades, our country has been overwhelmed by bloodshed and rising violence,” she said. Acknowledging remarks by the US vice-president, JD Vance, she added: “He was right to point to our alarming crime and murder rates. My government will not be deterred by partisan outbursts or anti-American rhetoric when it comes to accepting help in confronting the terrorist drug cartels.”In one stroke, she undermined the regional solidarity that has been the Caribbean’s only shield in international politics. Caricom exists precisely so that no island has to face down a superpower alone. Persad-Bissessar has inadvertently conceded a harsher truth: that her administration, like those before it, is clueless in curbing the crime and corruption that continues to bleed the nation.Her unilateral approval of US access was dangerous statecraft. It weakens our collective negotiating hand and leaves Trinidad exposed as the naive accomplice of a superpower with a history of gaslighting its allies. The US knows it can pick off states one by one, securing “basing rights” or “access agreements” without facing a unified Caricom.Venezuela’s response has been furious. Maduro branded the US strikes “extravagant, unjustifiable, immoral and absolutely criminal” and warned of “the biggest threat our continent has seen in 100 years”.His vice-president, Delcy Rodríguez, told Trinidad and Guyana: “Don’t dare, don’t even think about it. You are lending yourselves to the perverse plans of aggression against the Venezuelan people.” She ridiculed US claims of narco-trafficking: “How can there be a drug cartel if there’s no drugs here?”View image in fullscreenDiosdado Cabello, Venezuela’s interior minister, flatly rejected US allegations, saying: “They openly confessed to killing 11 people … none were drug traffickers.”Caracas has since mobilised its navy and air force, raising the risk of accidental clashes at sea. With Trinidad tethered to Washington, the danger of being pulled into the line of fire is very real.All of this plays out against the backdrop of our demographic reality: with more than 22,000 Venezuelan refugees officially registered in Trinidad, and estimates suggesting the true figure may be 45,000 — the country hosts the highest per capita population of Venezuelan migrants anywhere in the Caribbean. The human consequences of any escalation will therefore be borne not only at sea but also within our own communities.At the UN general assembly last week, regional leaders voiced their unease. Barbados’s Mia Mottley warned that militarisation of the Caribbean “could occasion an accident that put the southern Caribbean at disproportionate risk” and insisted that “full respect for the territorial integrity of each, and every state in the Caribbean must be respected.”St Vincent and the Grenadines’ prime minister, Ralph Gonsalves, described US-Venezuela tensions as “most unhelpful”, reminding the world that the Caribbean had long declared itself to be a “zone of peace”.Their interventions reflected a deep regional anxiety about becoming collateral damage in a quarrel between larger powers. Yet in sharp contrast, Persad-Bissessar used her own UN platform to defend her embrace of Washington’s presence, dismissing the “zone of peace” as an “elusive promise”, while justifying security cooperation with the US as necessary to combat crime.The most chilling element of Washington’s narrative is the absence of any proof, though 11 people were killed in the first strike and three in the second. More, allegedly, were killed in subsequent strikes. Yet not a shred of credible evidence has been produced to show that these individuals were traffickers, much less members of the gang Tren de Aragua, as was claimed. Venezuelan officials insist their investigations found no gang affiliations.Are Caribbean citizens simply expected to accept Washington’s word? After Iraq’s phantom weapons of mass destruction and after decades of interventions elsewhere justified by doctored intelligence, we know better. If these were truly narco-traffickers’ boats, why were suspects not detained and questioned? Why was the norm of investigation abandoned in favour of summary execution at sea?The answer lies not in law but in politics. Trump thrives on chaos. His strategy is division, gaslighting and distraction. These strikes play directly to his Maga base – fiery video clips of boats blowing up, paraded as proof of “decisive action”. It is spectacle, not strategy.To believe these operations are genuine counternarcotics measures rather than campaign optics is to ignore everything Trump has shown us about his politics of manipulation. And it is the Caribbean that risks paying the price for his theatre.View image in fullscreenIf this trajectory continues, the consequences will be dire. Fishers may abandon their livelihoods if they fear being mistaken for traffickers, collapsing entire coastal communities. Tourism will falter in a militarised Caribbean where warships and drones haunt the waters. Trade through the Gulf of Paria and regional ports could be disrupted, raising costs for fragile economies already strained by debt and inflation. Diplomacy will fracture as Caricom’s delicate balance with Washington and Caracas collapses, leaving small states exposed.What is needed now is not more posturing but restraint. Talks between Trinidad and Tobago, Venezuela, Caricom, and Colombia – the historic source of the cocaine pipeline – are essential. The international community must demand transparency and de-escalation. Small island states cannot afford to become battlegrounds.The Caribbean must also insist on restoring international norms: detain suspects, investigate, prosecute. To kill without evidence and bomb small vessels without warning or due process is a descent into lawlessness that endangers every fisher, trader and innocent seafarer.Trinidad and Tobago, and the wider Caribbean, cannot be reduced to staging grounds for US electioneering or Venezuelan brinkmanship. Without restraint – from Caricom, the UN and sober voices in the hemisphere – the region risks being dragged into a conflict that is not of its making.Our fishing industry, our tourism, our fragile economies all stand to suffer. And beyond this lies sovereignty over our most valuable assets: oil and gas. The southern Caribbean is a resource frontier of immense global importance. History shows that US interventions in oil-rich states rarely end in stability or prosperity for the people who live there.Caribbean leaders must rediscover the discipline of solidarity, the wisdom of diplomacy, and the courage to say no to superpowers who mistake small states for pawns.The price for silence will not be paid in Washington or Caracas, but in the lives, economies and futures of Caribbean people. More

    • 113 Shares82 Views

      in US Politics

      Pentagon review reportedly confirms Aukus submarines pact is safe

      by

      The Aukus submarine deal will proceed as planned after reportedly surviving the Pentagon’s review of the security pact.The Japan-based Nikkei Asia reported the Trump administration would retain the original timeline for the $368bn program, which includes the US selling three Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to Australia from 2032.A US Department of Defense official would not confirm the report when contacted by Guardian Australia.“The Aukus initiative is still under review. We have no further Aukus updates to announce at this time,” the official said.Sign up: AU Breaking News emailThe prime minister, Anthony Albanese, acknowledged the review was still under way but was confident Aukus had the support of the US and the UK – the third partner in the pact.“We know that Aukus is in the interests of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States,” Albanese said from Abu Dhabi, the last stop in an overseas trip that has included visits to the two Aukus allies.“It is about a partnership which is in the interest of all three nations which will make peace and security in our region so much stronger.”The review will be wrapped up before Albanese’s first scheduled face-to-face meeting with Donald Trump in the US on 20 October, Nikkei Asia reported.The future of Aukus has been under a cloud since the Pentagon launched an appraisal of the deal to determine if it aligned with Trump’s “America-first” agenda.The review has been conducted by the US under secretary of defense for policy, Elbridge Colby, who has previously expressed scepticism about any deal that could weaken the US navy.One of the most significant concerns over Aukus in the US is its capacity to spare any nuclear-powered submarines to sell to Australia as it struggles to build enough for its own needs.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThere has also been speculation the US has wanted clarity from Australia about how it respond in a potential US-China war over Taiwan.The federal government has already handed over $1.6bn to the US to support America’s shipbuilding capacity, with delivery of the first Virginia-class submarines to Australia in the early 2030s contingent on the US ramping up production.Australia’s government has never publicly expressed concern about the Pentagon review, arguing that it was standard procedure for a new administration to examine such an agreement, just as the UK did after a change of government.Earlier on Tuesday, Australia’s defence minister, Richard Marles, would not pre-empt the outcome of the Pentagon review but again expressed confidence that the deal was secure.“Aukus is happening – that’s not in question,” the acting prime minister told ABC Melbourne on Tuesday morning.“We’re very confident about the deal and we’ve been saying that all the way through, as we have also been saying that we welcome this review and will participate in it,” Marles said on Tuesday.“I’ve repeatedly said Aukus is going well; Aukus is happening at a pace; it is meeting all the milestones that it’s meant to be meeting and we are confident about this being the pathway for Australia acquiring its future submarine capability.”The US has also been pushing Australia to raise its overall defence spending to 3.5% of GDP, up from its current level of roughly 2%.Albanese has publicly resisted that pressure, insisting Australia will determine the nature and volume of its military spending.The federal government has made several new defence spending commitments while the review was under way, including $12bn to upgrade a Western Australian shipyard that will be used by the Aukus submarines.Albanese and Marles have confirmed the US navy will be able to use the Henderson defence precinct to dock and maintain its own ships. More