“Investment in AI is helping to make the U. S. Economy the ‘HOTTEST’ in the World But overregulation by the States is threatening to undermine this Growth Engine,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social. “Some States are even trying to embed DEI ideology into AI models, producing ‘Woke AI’ (Remember Black George Washington?). We MUST have one Federal Standard instead of a patchwork of 50 State Regulatory Regimes,” he added. The president then preempted common criticisms of Big Tech, saying a common regulatory framework could be found that “protects children AND prevents censorship!” WEALTH IN THE AGE OF AI: HEDGE OR HARNESS? Major Republicans in the House and Senate, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), have pursued legislation to ban state-level AI regulation. Previous efforts have been unsuccessful due to past Republican skepticism about Big Tech overreach, so Trump’s endorsement could prove decisive in getting it through. The growing prospect of AI has driven heavy investment from businesses and entire countries, as people and entities scramble to be at the forefront of AI development. The rush to invest more in AI has also led to concerns about an AI bubble, which has caused significant market volatility over the past week.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/3891375/trump-woke-ai-one-federal-standard-regulation/
Tag: Trump
Are American workers being replaced? Inside the H-1B visa controversy
**Understanding the Controversy Surrounding H-1B Visas**
Following months of controversy, President Donald Trump issued a proclamation in September decrying the systemic abuse of the H-1B visa program. He argued that the program is fueling the “large-scale replacement of American workers” and has “undermined both our economic and national security.”
To address this, Trump instituted a $100,000 fee for companies seeking to obtain an H-1B visa, a move that has been widely criticized by business leaders, especially in the tech industry. The debate over the program has split both the American public and the GOP, with one side asserting that visa holders are poaching American jobs, while the other emphasizes the program’s importance to U.S. competitiveness.
So, what exactly are H-1B visas, and why have they become such a political flashpoint?
—
### What is an H-1B Visa?
An H-1B visa is a non-immigrant work visa that allows U.S. companies to hire highly-skilled foreign workers in specialty occupations. These visas are issued for an initial period of three years and can be extended up to six years.
According to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the visas are meant for individuals of “exceptional merit and ability.” To qualify, candidates must have at least a bachelor’s degree in a relevant field.
—
### Which Industries Use H-1B Visas Most?
By far, the tech industry is the largest user of H-1B visas, accounting for roughly 60 to 70 percent of all new applications in recent years. Other prominent sectors include consulting and professional services, engineering and manufacturing, healthcare and medical research, and higher education.
—
### How Many Foreign Workers Hold These Visas?
There is no official figure for the number of people currently holding H-1B visas. However, there is a yearly cap of 65,000 visas, with an additional 20,000 reserved for individuals holding master’s degrees or higher.
Most universities and non-profit research organizations are exempt from this cap, which further increases the number of people approved each year. The Pew Research Center estimated that about 400,000 H-1B visa applications were approved last year under the Biden administration.
—
### Where Do Visa Holders Come From?
Nearly three out of every four — 73 percent — of H-1B visa holders come from India, according to Pew. China ranks second, with 12 percent, while the remaining 15 percent come from various other countries, none exceeding a 2 percent share.
—
### Who Is Against H-1B Visas?
Criticism of the H-1B visa program comes from both sides of the political aisle, including former President Trump and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Critics contend that the program has strayed from its original purpose — attracting top global talent — and is now being exploited by employers to import cheaper foreign labor, suppress wages, and displace American workers.
In response, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) reintroduced bipartisan legislation in September aimed at reforming the program, closing loopholes, protecting American workers, and preventing outsourcing of jobs.
On the state level, Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis issued guidelines in October to combat what he called a university loophole. He directed the Florida Board of Governors to require universities to prioritize American graduates and curb the practice of “importing foreign workers on H-1B visas instead of hiring Americans.”
—
### Who Supports H-1B Visas?
On the other side, many prominent figures argue that the program is essential for maintaining U.S. competitiveness. Elon Musk, for example, has publicly supported the H-1B program, stating, “The reason I’m in America along with so many critical people who built SpaceX, Tesla, and hundreds of other companies that made America strong is because of H1B.”
Musk also acknowledged that “the program is broken and needs major reform,” proposing to raise the minimum salary threshold and introduce yearly costs for maintaining H-1B status to make overseas hiring more expensive compared to domestic hiring.
Business leaders assert that the H-1B program is crucial for competing with countries like China, which recently launched its own talent visa program called the K-visa. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also supports the H-1B program.
—
### Are Visa Holders Taking American Jobs?
On September 19, President Trump issued a proclamation titled “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,” claiming that the H-1B visa program is being “deliberately exploited to replace, rather than supplement, American workers with lower-paid, lower-skilled labor.”
He argued that this abuse artificially suppresses wages, disadvantages American workers in the labor market, and complicates efforts to attract and retain the highest-skilled subset of temporary workers — with the most significant impact in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields.
Trump stated that the large-scale replacement of American workers through systemic abuse of the program has undermined both economic and national security.
—
### New Rules and Fees
To curb abuses, Trump imposed a $100,000 fee on companies applying for H-1B visas, effective September 21, 2025, with the restriction set to expire one year later. His administration has also been directed to initiate rulemaking prioritizing high-skilled and high-paid applicants.
Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to narrow the definition of “specialty occupation,” increase worksite compliance inspections, and require employers to submit applications directly, aiming to prevent companies from contracting out H-1B workers to other firms.
—
### What’s Next?
The debate over H-1B visas is far from over. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration’s new $100,000 fee, arguing that it would make the program prohibitively expensive for many U.S. employers, particularly small and midsize businesses.
The lawsuit claims the fee is unlawful as it overrides provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which require visa-related fees to be based on the government’s costs to process them.
As the political and economic battles continue, the future of the H-1B visa program remains uncertain, but its impact on the American workforce and technological innovation will continue to be a critical issue.
—
*Stay tuned for further updates on the evolving H-1B visa policy.*
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/american-workers-being-replaced-inside-h-1b-visa-controversy
Trump slams air traffic controllers who called out during the government shutdown
President Trump is slamming U.S. air traffic controllers who called out of work during the government shutdown, a period during which they were forced to stay on the job without pay.
Trump expressed his frustration in a post on Truth Social Monday morning, stating that he was “NOT HAPPY” with controllers who took time off. “All Air Traffic Controllers must get back to work, NOW!!! Anyone who doesn’t will be substantially ‘docked,'” he wrote.
Some controllers have taken on second jobs, while others have called in sick. They are set to miss their second full paycheck this week. Meanwhile, Trump praised those controllers who took no time off during the longest shutdown in U.S. history, calling them “GREAT PATRIOTS” and saying he would recommend giving each a $10,000 bonus.
He added that any controllers wishing to quit shouldn’t hesitate but would receive “NO payment or severance of any kind!” and would be “quickly replaced by true Patriots.” It’s important to note that one reason for the shortage of controllers is that it takes years to train and certify new personnel.
In a subsequent post on X, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy praised “those who have worked throughout the shutdown” and said he would work with Congress to “reward your commitment.”
However, others have sharply criticized Trump’s comments. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg responded on X, saying, “The President wouldn’t last five minutes as an air traffic controller, and after everything they’ve been through and the way this administration has treated them from Day One he has no business s****ing on them now.”
Last week, the FAA announced it would reduce flights by up to 10% at 40 of the busiest airports in the country, starting with a 4% reduction implemented on Friday. These cuts contributed to major travel headaches over the weekend.
According to the flight tracking website FlightAware, there were more than 4,500 cancellations and 18,000 delays at airports across the U.S.
At Philadelphia International Airport, passenger Phill Hicks experienced multiple cancellations. His flight to West Palm Beach, Florida, was canceled and rebooked twice on Sunday. Preparing to head home for the night and return for his flight Monday morning, he wasn’t confident his flight would take off either.
“I don’t believe this ticket,” Hicks told NPR, “but I’m going to gas my truck up, and take that trip if I have to.”
Similarly, Seth Alpert faced a two-hour delay on his flight back to Columbus, Ohio. Preparing for uncertainties, he rented a car as a backup plan.
“We’ll see. The incoming flight says it’s on time, or a few minutes delayed so, you know, 50-50,” Alpert said regarding his chances.
Hicks, who was stranded at the airport for several hours before senators announced they had reached a potential deal to reopen the government, expressed frustration with Congress.
“I think little cry babies need to get together and figure it out,” he said. “People elect them to do a job. Do your damn job.”
https://www.npr.org/2025/11/10/nx-s1-5604664/trump-air-traffic-controllers-forced-time-off-bonus
$100M in Token Unlocks Set to Hit Market This Week
Over $100 Million in Token Unlocks Set to Hit the Market This Week
The cryptocurrency market faces a crucial week as more than $100 million worth of token unlocks are scheduled to enter circulation. These releases could introduce considerable volatility to an already fragile market sentiment, testing whether bulls can absorb the influx of unlocked supply without triggering major selloffs.
PUMP and APT Lead Token Unlocks
Pump.Fun (PUMP) leads the pack with a substantial $41.57 million unlock set for November 15. Aptos (APT) follows closely, with $36.33 million unlocking on November 13, representing approximately 1% of its total supply. These large-scale token releases have the potential to drive significant price volatility for both assets in the coming days.
StarkNet, Sei, and Linea Add to Supply Glut
Other notable token unlocks include StarkNet (STRK) and Sei (SEI), with $18.91 million and $17.51 million worth of tokens unlocking on November 16, respectively. While these amounts are smaller than the top two, they remain sizable enough to influence local trading activity.
Linea (LINEA) stands out with a $12.87 million unlock happening on November 11, which accounts for about 1.42% of its total supply. More significantly, this unlock represents a substantial 18.24% of Linea’s total circulating supply, posing a major test for the token’s price stability.
Additional unlocks include Mocaverse (MOCA) with $8.36 million and Solayer (LAYER) releasing $6.70 million on November 12.
Macro Stimulus: A Potential Counter-Catalyst?
In a surprising development, President Donald Trump’s proposed “tariff dividend”—a direct $2,000 per person payout—could potentially inject around $600 billion into the U.S. economy. If implemented, this stimulus may act as an unexpected catalyst for the crypto market, which is currently struggling to gain momentum.
Unlike the pandemic-driven rally of 2020, primarily fueled by defensive measures, this capital injection would occur in a mature market featuring fully developed crypto infrastructure, spot ETFs, and broad brokerage access. Analysts at CryptoQuant suggest that liquidity could flow into the crypto space more swiftly and aggressively than seen previously.
Market Snapshot
At press time, Bitcoin trades at $106,000, down 1% over the past week. The cryptocurrency remains strong above the critical $100,000 level and maintains a market valuation exceeding $2 trillion. Meanwhile, the broader market is experiencing a modest upswing following last week’s massive selloff.
As the week unfolds, market participants will closely watch how these significant token unlocks and potential macroeconomic stimuli interact, shaping crypto market dynamics moving forward.
https://bitcoinethereumnews.com/tech/100m-in-token-unlocks-set-to-hit-market-this-week/
Trump Proposes $2,000 Tariff Dividend as Crypto Markets Rally
**President Trump Announces $2,000 Tariff Dividend for Most Americans**
President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that most Americans will receive a $2,000 dividend funded by tariff revenue. The announcement was made via his Truth Social platform, where he stated that the payments would help reduce the national debt while providing direct financial benefits to citizens. “A dividend of at least $2,000 a person, not including high income people, will be paid to everyone,” Trump wrote in his post, defending his tariff policies amid ongoing legal challenges.
—
**Cryptocurrency Markets React Positively**
Following the announcement, the cryptocurrency market responded with gains. Bitcoin rose by 1.93% over 24 hours, trading above $103,000. Ethereum climbed 4.75% to surpass $3,500, and Solana increased by 2.49% to top $160. The CoinDesk 20 index also saw a rise of more than 1.5%.
This rally comes after a difficult week for crypto markets, during which the CD20 index had fallen nearly 15%. Despite the recent recovery, Bitcoin remains down 5.7% for the week, while Ethereum is still down 7.5%.
—
**Legal and Financial Hurdles Ahead**
The Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments regarding the legality of Trump’s tariff policies. Prediction markets indicate low confidence in court approval, with Kalshi traders assigning just a 23% chance and Polymarket traders slightly lower at 21%.
Beyond legal challenges, implementation of the dividend faces significant hurdles. Andy Constan, CEO of Damped Spring Advisors, emphasized that the President cannot authorize such payments unilaterally. Federal spending requires Congressional approval, meaning any plan to distribute tariff revenues must pass through the legislative branch.
—
**Funding Gap Raises Concerns**
Financial calculations present another major obstacle. Erica York, Vice President of Federal Tax Policy, estimated that if the income cutoff is set at $100,000, about 150 million adults would qualify. This translates to an approximate cost of $300 billion. If children are included in the payments, the cost would be even higher.
However, tariffs have only generated $120 billion in revenue so far, creating a sizeable funding gap.
York also explained that economic effects reduce net tariff revenue further. For every dollar raised by tariffs, approximately 24 cents of income and payroll tax collections are offset. After accounting for these offsets, net tariff revenue stands at about $90 billion—far below the $300 billion needed to fund the proposed dividend program.
—
**Expert Opinions and Market Predictions**
Investment analysts at The Kobeissi Letter estimate that around 85% of U.S. adults would receive these stimulus checks based on COVID-era distribution data.
Bitcoin analyst Simon Dixon suggested that recipients should consider investing the dividend payments in assets to protect against inflation. Similarly, investor Anthony Pompliano noted that stocks and Bitcoin typically rise following stimulus announcements.
Traders appear to be pricing in the possibility of increased inflows into the crypto market if the dividend funds reach recipients.
—
**Summary**
While President Trump’s $2,000 tariff dividend proposal has generated optimism in cryptocurrency markets, legal and financial challenges remain significant. Congressional approval is required, and current tariff revenues fall substantially short of the amount needed to fund the payments. The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on tariff legality will play a crucial role in determining the proposal’s viability.
https://coincentral.com/trump-proposes-2000-tariff-dividend-as-crypto-markets-rally/
Thomas Massie says he’s now ‘America Only’
Woah. The term “mixed review” doesn’t do justice—he totally SAVAGES Trump.
Here are some key notes:
First, Trump claims that Epstein is a hoax. Let me be clear: it is no hoax.
On the domestic front, he has delivered a gut punch to farmers and ranchers, especially regarding beef. This decision will likely hurt us in the upcoming midterms, particularly in key states like Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota.
Meanwhile, a new front is opening in Venezuela. However, it’s important to remember that it is not constitutional for the president to make war abroad without proper authorization.
Financially, money is still flowing to Ukraine, despite ongoing concerns.
Statistically speaking, I vote with the GOP 91% of the time. I used to consider myself “America First,” but now my stance has shifted to “America Only.”
Honestly, I’m tired of spending money overseas or buying Argentinian beef when we have our own resources at home.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4351703/posts
Trump heads to Miami to speak about his economic agenda on the anniversary of his election win
By SEUNG MIN KIM, Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is heading to Miami on Wednesday, the anniversary of his reelection to a second term, to speak to a forum of business leaders and global athletes about what he sees as his economic achievements.
His speech to the American Business Forum will provide a broad look at his economic agenda and highlight how investments he has secured abroad are benefiting U.S. communities, according to a senior White House official. This marks a significant effort from Trump to put a positive spin on the economy, especially at a time when Americans remain uneasy about their finances and the cost of living. Many of Tuesday’s election campaigns were centered on issues of affordability and economic stability.
The AP Voter Poll, which surveyed more than 17,000 voters in New Jersey, Virginia, California, and New York City, indicated that the public is concerned about higher prices and fewer job opportunities. These worries persist despite Trump’s promises to tame inflation and spur growth.
In his speech, Trump is expected to address key issues including deregulation, energy independence, oil prices, and affordability, according to the senior White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to preview the president’s remarks.
Last week, Trump spent five days in Asia with stops in Malaysia, Japan, and South Korea, working to ease trade tensions with Beijing in a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. In Tokyo, he advocated for several major energy and tech projects that Japan will help fund for the U.S.
Miami Mayor Francis Suarez said he believes Trump’s recent travels “have been transformational in his presidency” and described the upcoming speech as a highlight of the forum. Organizers have characterized the event as a more accessible version of high-profile gatherings like the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, or the Milken Institute Global Conference, which convene the world’s elite for discussions on the economy.
“This conference not only is creating this incredible collection of people, but it’s also creating them in a particular moment in time,” said Suarez, a Republican.
Trump’s visit also underscores Miami’s growing influence during his second term. Next year, Trump is set to host leaders from the world’s leading rich and developing economies at the Group of 20 summit, to be held at his golf club in the nearby city of Doral. This decision has sparked criticism over the potential appearance of impropriety, though Trump has maintained that his family’s business will not profit from hosting the summit.
Trump’s sons are currently running the Trump Organization while their father is in office. The president has also stated that his family’s business will not make any money by holding the summit at the golf club.
Miami is also where Trump hopes to locate his future presidential library, although a legal challenge is underway regarding whether a plot of land in downtown Miami is being properly transferred for this purpose.
Additionally, Miami is one of the U.S. host cities for next year’s World Cup—an event the president has eagerly promoted as the kickoff to several major global sporting events that the U.S. will host. Ensuring the success of the World Cup has become a top priority for the Trump administration.
https://www.bostonherald.com/2025/11/05/trump-miami/
What to know about the Supreme Court arguments over Trump’s tariffs
**Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Trump’s Emergency Tariffs**
WASHINGTON — Three lower courts have ruled illegal President Donald Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose worldwide tariffs. Now, the Supreme Court—featuring three justices appointed by Trump who are generally favorable toward expanded presidential power—will have the final say.
In roughly two dozen emergency appeals, the justices have largely sided with Trump, temporarily allowing parts of his aggressive second-term agenda to take effect while lawsuits play out. However, the case being argued Wednesday marks the first time the court will issue a definitive decision on a major Trump policy.
**Why This Case Matters**
The stakes are enormous, both politically and financially. Tariffs have been central to Trump’s economic and foreign policy strategy, and he has described a negative Supreme Court ruling as a potential “disaster.” The outcome will have broad implications for presidential powers and the economic future of the United States.
**Understanding Tariffs**
Tariffs are taxes on imports. They are paid by companies importing finished products or parts, with the added cost often passed on to consumers. Through September, the government reported collecting $195 billion in revenue from tariffs.
The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impose tariffs. However, Trump claimed extraordinary power to act without congressional approval by declaring national emergencies under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
In February, he invoked IEEPA to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, arguing that the illegal flow of immigrants and drugs across the U.S. border constituted a national emergency demanding further action from these countries. By April, Trump imposed worldwide tariffs after declaring America’s longstanding trade deficits “a national emergency.”
**Legal Challenges**
Libertarian-backed businesses and several states challenged Trump’s tariffs in federal court. They secured favorable rulings from:
– A specialized trade court
– A district judge in Washington, D.C.
– A business-focused appeals court also in the nation’s capital
These courts found that Trump could not justify the tariffs under the emergency powers law, which doesn’t mention tariffs. However, the courts allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the legal process continued.
**The ‘Major Questions’ Doctrine**
The appeals court relied on the “major questions” legal doctrine, created by the Supreme Court. This doctrine requires Congress to clearly address matters of “vast economic and political significance.” It previously doomed several Biden administration policies, including:
– The eviction moratorium during the coronavirus pandemic
– A vaccine mandate for large businesses
– Student loan forgiveness totaling $500 billion over 10 years
In comparison, the stakes in the Trump tariff case are even higher—tax revenues from these tariffs are estimated to reach $3 trillion over ten years. Challengers to the tariffs have cited writings by Trump appointees Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh, urging the court to apply similar limitations to Trump’s signature policy.
For example, Barrett compared ambiguous congressional instructions to a babysitter’s vague directive to “make sure the kids have fun,” noting that such instructions could be interpreted in dramatically different ways. Kavanaugh, however, has suggested that the court should avoid imposing such limiting standards in foreign policy and national security contexts.
A dissenting appellate judge also argued that Congress intentionally gave presidents more leeway under the emergency powers law.
**A Renewed Nondelegation Challenge**
Some businesses challenging the tariffs have also raised a separate constitutional argument, claiming Congress cannot delegate its taxing power to the president. The so-called “nondelegation principle” hasn’t been used by the Supreme Court in 90 years, since striking down parts of the New Deal. Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justices Alito and Thomas, recently authored a dissent advocating for stricter limits on congressional delegations of power.
**Expedited Supreme Court Review**
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the tariff case in September and scheduled arguments less than two months later—a rapid turnaround by its standards. This likely means the justices will act swiftly. While most high-profile cases take half a year or more to resolve, the court has demonstrated an ability to decide quickly when necessary.
For example, the justices recently issued a unanimous ruling only a week after hearing arguments in the TikTok case, upholding a law requiring the popular social media app to be banned unless sold by its Chinese parent company. Trump has frequently intervened to keep laws like these from taking effect while negotiations continue.
**What’s Next?**
The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on Trump’s emergency tariffs will shape both the balance of power between Congress and the presidency and the economic landscape for years to come. Observers across the political and business spectrum are watching closely as the justices prepare to weigh in on this landmark case.
https://www.clickorlando.com/business/2025/11/05/what-to-know-about-the-supreme-court-arguments-over-trumps-tariffs/
Only Reduced Food Stamps Benefits Will Be Issued, and May Take Months to Get To You
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced on Monday that it will pay about half of November benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). However, the department warned that benefits could take months to flow to recipients. This update came in a brief submitted to a federal court in Rhode Island.
### Partial Payment Amid Shutdown
The USDA’s four-page report responded to U.S. District Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr.’s order. The judge instructed President Donald Trump’s administration to pay at least a portion of benefits to the 42 million people who receive SNAP assistance by the end of Wednesday, despite the ongoing government shutdown.
Notably, the USDA’s action did not clarify what would happen if the shutdown continues beyond November.
### Political Backlash
Leading Democrats in Congress sharply criticized the administration’s decision to pay only part of the monthly benefits. They accused President Trump of willfully denying food assistance to needy Americans.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said, “Providing partial benefits is not enough, is not compliant with the law, and it’s particularly cruel of Trump with the Thanksgiving season around the corner.”
### Judge’s Options and USDA’s Choice
On Saturday, Judge McConnell laid out two options for the administration:
– Pay partial benefits by the end of Wednesday using a contingency fund that currently has about $4.65 billion available.
– Pay full month benefits by utilizing other reserve sources, such as funds from the child nutrition program, by the end of Monday.
The USDA chose to use the contingency fund, giving the department until Wednesday to distribute benefits.
### Delays Expected in Benefit Distribution
Patrick A. Penn, USDA’s deputy under secretary for food, nutrition, and consumer services, noted that administrative hurdles in calculating and delivering half-month benefits could delay payments “anywhere from a few weeks to up to several months.”
According to the status report, USDA began the process of resuming payments on Monday to comply with Judge McConnell’s order. The report stated:
> “USDA will fulfill its obligation to expend the full amount of SNAP contingency funds today by generating the table required for States to calculate the benefits available for each eligible household in that State. USDA will therefore have made the necessary funds available and have authorized the States to begin disbursements once the table is issued.”
### Challenges in Processing Payments
While Judge McConnell acknowledged that calculating reduced benefits would take time, giving USDA until Wednesday if choosing the partial funding route, Penn said this timeline was insufficient. Some states have outdated systems for processing benefits, contributing to delays.
The federal government planned to provide updated benefit tables by Monday. States then need to send updated files to vendors who process benefits and load funds onto beneficiaries’ Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards used for groceries.
### A Lengthy Shutdown
Monday marked the 34th day of the federal government shutdown, which began October 1 after Congress failed to approve funding or pass a temporary spending bill. The U.S. Senate was expected to hold another procedural vote to advance the House-passed GOP stopgap bill that would fund the government at fiscal 2025 levels through November 21.
Democrats have opposed this measure to push for negotiations on expiring tax credits for Affordable Care Act marketplace health insurance buyers.
If the shutdown continued past Tuesday, it would tie the longest government shutdown in history, from 2018 to 2019.
### Contingency Fund Dispute
Before October ended, the administration had claimed it was legally barred from using the contingency fund, originally intended for natural disasters and emergencies, to pay SNAP benefits during the shutdown.
However, two federal judges ruled on October 31 that the USDA could and must use the fund to keep SNAP benefits flowing.
Saturday marked the first lapse in benefit payments since SNAP’s inception during President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty.
Program advocates and experts warned that users would experience delays in receiving November benefits as the administration worked to restart payments.
### Funding and Spending Breakdown
Interestingly, this stance was a reversal from a USDA shutdown plan issued on September 30, which explicitly called for using the contingency fund to maintain benefits.
SNAP costs the federal government about $9 billion monthly. While USDA did not use the contingency fund to pay regular benefits, it spent approximately $750 million of the original $6 billion during October:
– $450 million for state administrative expenses
– $300 million for block grants to Puerto Rico and American Samoa
For November, USDA planned to spend $450 million on administrative expenses and $150 million for block grants, leaving about $4.65 billion available to pay benefits.
### Child Nutrition Funds Off-Limits
Deputy Under Secretary Penn also explained why USDA chose not to use funds from the child nutrition program to cover the SNAP shortfall, emphasizing the importance of preserving that fund.
> “Child Nutrition Program funds are not a contingency fund for SNAP,” he said. “Using billions of dollars from Child Nutrition for SNAP would leave an unprecedented gap in Child Nutrition funding that Congress has never had to fill with annual appropriations, and USDA cannot predict what Congress will do under these circumstances.”
The child nutrition program supports school meals, summer meals for children, and summer EBT benefits for low-income families. The school lunch program alone serves around 29 million children daily.
### Democratic Response: “Not Acceptable”
Democrats expressed dismay at the partial funding decision.
Senator Patty Murray of Washington state wrote on social media:
> “Just now paying the bare minimum to partially fund SNAP is not enough, and it is not acceptable. Trump should immediately work to fully fund benefits under the law.”
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the ranking member of the House Appropriations panel, called the situation “entirely avoidable,” accusing Trump of using hungry children, seniors, and veterans as political pawns.
> “Now, only partial benefits will be sent out late, and families will go hungry, while this administration continues to host lavish parties for their billionaire donors and political allies,” DeLauro said.
She urged USDA to “put politics aside and use the money they have available to ensure families do not go hungry.”
### House Speaker Defends Administration
At a press conference Monday, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson defended Trump’s handling of the SNAP payments.
He stated, “The president is desperate for SNAP benefits to flow to the American citizens who desperately rely upon it.”
Johnson echoed arguments by Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins that the agency was legally constrained from tapping the contingency fund if the underlying fund was suspended.
He blamed congressional Democrats for voting against the stopgap spending bill and noted that two judges who ordered payments to resume—Judge McConnell and Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts—were appointed by Democratic former President Barack Obama.
Judge Talwani ruled Friday that USDA’s pause on SNAP was illegal but gave the administration until Monday to respond before she considers forcing benefits to be paid despite the shutdown.
Johnson acknowledged the complexity of releasing funds:
> “It’s not as easy as hitting go on a computer. You’ve got to go through and recalculate partial payments to the 42 million recipients of the program. That puts a huge burden on states and on the feds to try to figure that out in short order.”
—
*Reporters: Jacob Fischler, Shauneen Miranda, Florida Phoenix.*
https://flaglerlive.com/only-reduced-food-stamps-benefits-will-be-issued-and-may-take-months-to-get-to-you/
Here is what it would take for me to join a No Kings rally (Opinion)
To all those who wrote me personally or sent a letter to the editor about my October 19th column, I’m glad you attended the No Kings rally. You’re right; the protest did succeed in providing participants a sense of community and a platform to voice concerns about Trump’s abuse of power.
The flawed optics, however, obscured the protest’s vital message and hardened the hearts of Trump supporters as I feared it would. In the future, protests against Trump’s unconstitutional actions must do more than simply amplify voices of resistance; they must ensure those voices are actually heard.
When I talk with people who ardently disagree with me, I do not try to make them see I am right. Rather, I aim to move them from “you’re wrong, Kafer” to “that’s reasonable. I can see why you feel that way.” This is a considerable step given that nobody wants to change his or her mind.
Reaching plausibility, the first step in persuasion, requires credibility and consistency. Thus, the next rally must present a more consistent, credible message to be heard beyond those who already agree.
### First, fix the signs.
Protest signs I saw included messages such as:
– “You ban books. You ban drag, yet kids are still in body bags,”
– “Defund Israel,”
– “Putin’s Puppet,”
– “Tax the Rich,”
– “Color is not a crime,” and
– “RFK’s brainworms died of starvation.”
There were also various flags—blue and pink, rainbow, Ukrainian, etc. All of this, and the costumes, made the protests appear to be catch-all leftist rallies rather than a unified movement against abuse of power.
Waving signs that read “Save due process,” “Protect the constitution,” “The 10th Amendment matters,” and “I didn’t support Biden’s abuses either” lack flair but they would be more likely to make Trump supporters question Trump’s abuses than a hodgepodge of off-message partisan policy preferences or over-the-top comparisons with mass-murdering dictators.
Signs reading “German soldiers were also just following orders!!!,” “Not my dictator,” and “No Nazis” are ridiculous. Remember, fear is a potent but risky tactic in persuasion. Too little has no impact, but too much is likely to evoke disbelief or fatalistic inaction. Nazi signs generate eye rolls, not credibility.
And while there is truth to the assertion that Trump behaves more like a monarch than a constitutionally-restrained elected official, the slogan “No Kings” evokes derision. Kings are not elected; Trump was. Kings don’t generally tolerate protests; they arrest protesters. There’s a reason there are few political marches in Brunei, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, or Eswatini, where royalty holds power.
### Second, the next rally must emphasize bipartisanship.
Don’t list dozens of leftist organizations on the website or on flyers because it only furthers the lie that protests were dominated by the far-left and protesters were paid for their participation. Organizers were paid, as they are for every large-scale event undertaken by the right or left, but participants were unpaid volunteers.
Any website or flyer should focus on volunteers, not those working on logistics.
### Lastly, save the costumes for Halloween.
While there were comparatively few frogs, unicorns, and dinosaurs in the crowd, they were the most noticeable participants. Perhaps silly costumes successfully combated false narratives about threatening, angry protesters as intended, but they also detracted from the seriousness of the message.
Did the guys dressed as Founding Fathers at Tea Party rallies during the Obama presidency make you more or less open to their message about the size and scope of the federal government? One of the reasons the 60s Civil Rights marches were so successful is that ambivalent Americans saw men and women in ties and dresses.
In the future, remember any strangely dressed person in the crowd will end up on camera and appear representative of the whole. Look like the people you want to influence.
Next time, if the message is more consistent and the messenger more credible, the protest will do more to multiply the number of concerned Americans rather than further divide.
I honked in solidarity as I drove by the Littleton No Kings rally. Perhaps next time, I will join.
—
*Kirsta Kafer is a Sunday Denver Post columnist. Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.*
https://www.denverpost.com/2025/11/03/no-kings-protests-trump-colorado-plausible/