By April Ryan, BlackPressUSA

As this nation observes the 60th anniversary of Bloody Sunday in Selma, Alabama, the words of President Trump reverberate. “This country will be WOKE no longer, an emboldened Trump offered during his speech to the recent a joint session of Congress night. Since then, Alabama Congresswoman Terri Sewell posted on the social media platform formerly known as Twitter that “Elon Musk and his DOGE bros have ordered GSA to sell off the site of the historic Freedom Riders Museum in Montgomery.” Her post of little words went on to say, “This is outrageous and we will not let it stand! I am demanding an immediate reversal. Our Civil Rights history is not for sale!”

Also, in the news, the Associated Press is reporting they have a file of names and descriptions of more than 26,000 military images flagged for removal because of connections to women, minorities, culture, or DEI. In more attempts to downplay Blackness, a word that is interchanged with woke, Trump supporters have introduced another bill to take down the bright yellow letters of Black Lives Matter Plaza in Washington, D.C., in exchange for the name Liberty Plaza. D.C. Mayor Morial Bowser is allowing the name change to keep millions of federal dollars flowing there. Black Lives Matter Plaza was named in 2020 after a tense exchange between President Trump and George Floyd protesters in front of the White House. 

There are more reports about cuts to equity initiatives that impact HBCU students. Programs that recruited top HBCU students into the military and the pipeline for Department of Defense contracts have been canceled.

Meanwhile, Democrats are pushing back against this second-term Trump administration’s anti-DEI and Anti-woke message. In the wake of the 60th anniversary of Bloody Sunday in Selma, several Congressional Black Caucus leaders are reintroducing the Voting Rights Act. South Carolina Democratic Congressman James Clyburn and Alabama Congresswoman Terry Sewell are sponsoring H.R. 14, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. Six decades ago, Lewis was hit with a billy club by police as he marched for the right to vote for African Americans. The right for Black people to vote became law with the 1965 Voting Rights Act that has since been gutted, leaving the nation to vote without the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. 

Reflecting on the late Congressman Lewis, March 1, 2020, a few months before his death, Lewis said, “We need more than ever in these times many more someones to make good trouble- to make their own dent in the wall of injustice.”

The post Trump supporters push for removal of Black Lives Matter Plaza appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Ill.) delivered a sharp and relentless rebuttal to former President Donald Trump’s chaotic address to Congress on Tuesday night, warning that his economic policies and erratic leadership will leave everyday Americans footing the bill for a billionaire-friendly agenda. Slotkin, the newly elected senator from Illinois—one of the key states Trump flipped in 2024—blasted the former president’s approach to governance, calling his economic promises “a reckless and chaotic gamble” that would “walk us into a recession.” “Trump is on the hunt to find trillions of dollars to pass on to the wealthiest of Americans, and to do that, he’s going to make you pay,” she said, tearing into his trade policies, rising prescription drug costs, and ballooning national debt.

Slotkin also aimed the Trump administration’s sweeping federal layoffs, which she called a “mindless” purge of critical workers. “The firing of people who protect our nuclear weapons, keep our planes from crashing, and conduct life-saving research—only to rehire them two days later? No CEO in America could do that without being summarily fired,” she said. Speaking from Wyandotte, Michigan, Slotkin positioned herself as a voice for working-class Americans frustrated by rising costs and political dysfunction. She called out Trump’s coziness with billionaires like Elon Musk, warning that their unchecked influence could jeopardize everything from Social Security to private financial data. “Is there anyone comfortable with Musk and his gang of 20-year-olds using their own servers to poke through your tax returns, your health information, and your bank accounts?” she asked.

Slotkin didn’t hold back on foreign policy either, skewering Trump for his embarrassing Oval Office clash with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. “That wasn’t just a bad episode of reality TV,” she said. “It summed up Trump’s whole approach to the world. Cozy up to dictators like Vladimir Putin, kick our allies like the Canadians in the teeth, and call it strategy.” The Illinois senator, a former CIA analyst, framed the stakes as a choice between responsible leadership and reckless upheaval. “America wants change, but there’s a responsible way to make change and a reckless way,” she said. “We can make that change without forgetting who we are as a country and as a democracy.” Closing her remarks with a call to action, Slotkin urged Americans not to disengage. “Hold your elected officials, including me, accountable,” she said. “Go to town halls. Demand action. Doom scrolling doesn’t count—I’m putting that on a pillow.”

The post Senator blasts Trump’s economic plan as reckless and chaotic appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

Just before President Donald Trump took the podium to deliver his address to a joint session of Congress, Democratic Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett sent a message loud and clear: He is “not like us.” Crockett, dancing and lip-syncing to Kendrick Lamar’s culture-defining hit, later punctuated her defiance with a pointed jab. “Well… the State of the ‘DisUnion’ will begin shortly,” Crockett noted. “I’m gonna be in attendance.” It was just one of many signs of resistance from Democrats who braced for what they predicted would be an address filled with misinformation and political grandstanding. Undeterred, Crockett implored her millions of social media followers, “Do not watch.”

The defiance extended beyond rhetoric. House Democratic leadership refused to participate in the traditional escort committee that brings the president into the House chamber, a symbolic rebuke of Trump’s presidency. A spokesperson for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said the move “speaks for itself.” It was a notable departure from the morning’s strategy session, during which Jeffries and his leadership team urged House Democrats to focus on Americans suffering under Trump’s policies. However, when Trump took the stage, unity gave way to unfiltered outrage. Trump entered the chamber, flanked by Speaker Mike Johnson, determined to present his administration as a sweeping success. The reality outside his rhetoric told a different story.

Days before the address, Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance engaged in a heated and globally embarrassing Oval Office confrontation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, rocking the international community. The exchange reinforced concerns that Trump is abandoning Ukraine in favor of his well-documented admiration for Russian leader Vladimir Putin. On the domestic front, his administration has dismantled civil rights protections, slashed federal jobs, and thrown millions into uncertainty. Yet, standing before Congress, Trump claimed that more Americans believe the country is on the right track for the first time in modern history. “Now, for the first time in modern history, more Americans believe that our country is headed in the right direction than the wrong direction,” Trump declared. That was false.

Of the eighteen “right track/wrong track” polls archived by RealClearPolitics since Trump took office, only two showed more respondents believing the country was moving in the right direction—one by Rasmussen with a one-point margin and another by Emerson College with a four-point edge. Meanwhile, sixteen other polls showed the opposite, some revealing double-digit margins. The RealClearPolitics average showed a nearly nine-point lead for “wrong track.” Yet Trump stood before the American people and claimed victory. The speech had barely begun when Rep. Al Green of Texas stood in the aisle, waving his cane at the president. Lawmakers responded with cheers and boos, forcing Speaker Johnson to issue repeated warnings for decorum.

“Members are engaging in willful and continuing breach of the quorum, and the chair is prepared to direct the Sergeant at Arms to restore order to the joint session,” Johnson declared. He then ordered Green’s removal from the chamber. While Republicans erupted in applause throughout Trump’s speech, Democrats sat stone-faced. Some took it further, removing their jackets to reveal messages emblazoned in white on their backs. Some read, “Resist.” Florida Rep. Maxwell Frost’s shirt said, “No More Kings.” At the start of Trump’s speech, Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan held up a whiteboard with the words, “That’s a Lie.”

Some Democrats refused to attend the address altogether. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York announced her absence on social media. “I’m not going to the Joint Address. I will be live posting and chatting with you all here instead. Then going on IG Live after,” she wrote. Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut also dismissed Trump’s speech as a “MAGA pep rally” and chose to spend the evening at an event with MoveOn. “We have to fight every single day, every single day,” Murphy proclaimed. Rep. Becca Balint of Vermont also made her position clear. “I watched him take an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution, and all he did was spew lies, stoke division, and make no effort to unify our country. I won’t sit and watch him lie to the American people again,” she asserted. Despite his claims, Trump failed to offer any real economic plan.

He blamed Biden for inflation while ignoring that his tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico are set to raise prices even further, a reality already confirmed by economists. Yet he promised “dramatic and immediate relief” while enacting policies that would do the opposite. At one point, Trump took credit for ending the so-called “weaponized government,” portraying himself as the victim. “And we’ve ended weaponized government where, as an example, a sitting president is allowed to viciously prosecute his political opponent. Like me,” he said. Republicans cheered. Beyond the speech’s theatrics, the real story remains the fallout of Trump’s second term. Civil rights protections have been dismantled. Federal workers have been fired en masse. Veterans and people with disabilities have been left scrambling. MAGA loyalists have received unchecked power. And yet, the president stood before Congress and told Americans everything was fine. Rep. Crockett, however, was not having it.

She fired back without hesitation when asked if she had anything to say to Trump. “Grow a spine and stop being Putin’s hoe,” Crockett railed, using language that proved common in an earlier meeting between CBC members and Black journalists. The apparent divide in the chamber became more undeniable as television cameras panned across the room. Republicans stood, grinning, basking in Trump’s promises. Democrats, many dressed in bright pink as a deliberate display of protest, sat in silence. Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández of New Mexico, chair of the Democratic Women’s Caucus, explained the color choice. “Pink is a color of power and protest.,” she said “It’s time to rev up the opposition and come at Trump loud and clear.” By the time Trump’s speech ended, one thing was clear. Democrats aren’t backing down. They aren’t standing idly by as Trump and his enablers attempt to rewrite reality. They aren’t going to pretend that what’s happening to this country is normal. As Trump walked out of the chamber, the message left behind by Democrats and on the backs of those standing in defiance said it all. “Resist.”

The post Democrats defy Trump’s address as chaos erupts in Congress appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

By Matthew Borus, Binghamton University, State University of New York

An estimated 20% to 25% of Americans have a disability of some kind, including physical, sensory, psychological and intellectual disabilities.

Disability experts, myself included, fear that the Trump administration is creating new barriers for disabled people to being hired at a job, getting a quality education and providing for basic needs, including health insurance.

Here are four key areas of disability policy to watch over the coming years.

1. Rights at work

The Americans with Disabilities Act, which became law in 1990, requires that employers with more than 15 employees not discriminate against otherwise qualified candidates on the basis of their disability. It also requires that employers provide reasonable accommodations to disabled workers. This means, for instance, that a new or renovated workplace should have accessible entrances so that a worker who uses a wheelchair can enter.

Despite these protections, I have spoken to many disabled workers in my research who are reluctant to ask for accommodations for fear that a supervisor might think that they were too demanding or not worth continuing to employ.

Trump’s actions in his first days in office have likely reinforced such fears.

In one of the many executive orders Trump signed on Jan. 20, 2025, he called for the relevant government agencies to terminate what he called “all discriminatory programs,” including all diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility policies, programs and activities that Trump deems “immoral.”

The next day, Trump put workers in federal DEIA and accessibility positions on administrative leave.

The following week, a tragic plane crash outside Washington, D.C., killed 67 people. Trump, without any evidence, blamed the crash on unidentified disabled workers in the Federal Aviation Administration, enumerating a wide and seemingly unrelated list of disabilities that, in his mind, meant that workers lacked the “special talent” to work at the FAA.

Advocates quickly pushed back, pointing out that disabled workers meet all qualifications for federal and private sector jobs they are hired to perform.

2. The federal workforce

Many government disability programs have complex rules designed to limit the number of people who qualify for support.

For instance, I study supplemental security income, a federal program that provides very modest cash support – on average, totaling US$697 a month in 2024 – to 7.4 million people who are disabled, blind or over 65 if they also have very low income and assets.

It can take months or even years for someone to go through the process to initially document their disability and finances and show they qualify for SSI. Once approved, many beneficiaries want to make sure they don’t accidentally put their benefits at risk in situations where they are working very limited hours, for example.

To get answers, they can go to a Social Security office or call an agency phone line. But there are already not enough agency workers to process applications or answer questions quickly. I spoke in 2022 with more than 10 SSI beneficiaries who waited on hold for hours while they tried to get more information about their cases, only to receive unclear or conflicting information.

Such situations may grow even more severe, as Trump and billionaire Elon Musk try to eliminate large numbers of federal employee positions. So far, tens of thousands of federal workers have been laid off from their jobs in 2025. More layoffs may be coming – on Feb. 12, 2025, Trump instructed federal agency heads to prepare for further “large-scale reductions in force.”

At the same time, multiple Social Security Administration offices have also been marked for closure since January 2025. An overall effect of these changes will be fewer workers to answer questions from disabled citizens.

3. Educational opportunities

Students with disabilities, like all students, are legally entitled to a free public education. This right is guaranteed under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, passed in 1975. IDEA is enforced by the federal Education Department.

But Trump is reportedly in the process of dismantling the Education Department, with the goal of eventually closing it. It is not clear what this will mean for Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act enforcement, but one possibility is laid out in the Project 2025 Mandate for Leadership, a policy blueprint with broad support in Trump’s administration.

Project 2025 proposes that Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act funds “should be converted into a no-strings formula block grant.” Block grants are a funding structure by which federal funds are reduced and each state is given a lump sum rather than designating the programs the funds will support. In practice, this can mean that states divert the money to other programs or policy areas, which can create opportunities for funds to be misused.

With block grants, local school districts would be subject to less federal oversight meant to ensure that they provide every student with an adequate education. Families who already must fight to ensure that their children receive the schooling they deserve will be put on weaker footing if the federal government signals that states can redirect the money as they wish.

4. Health care

Before President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law in 2010, many disabled people lived with the knowledge that an insurer could regard a disability as a preexisting condition and thereby deny them coverage or charge more for their insurance.

The ACA prohibited insurance companies from charging more or denying coverage based on preexisting conditions.

Republicans have long opposed the ACA, with House Speaker Mike Johnson promising before the 2024 election to pursue an agenda of “No Obamacare.”

About 15 million disabled people have health insurance through Medicaid, a federal health insurance program that covers more than 74 million low-income people. But large Medicaid cuts are also on the Republican agenda.

These deep cuts might include turning Medicaid into another block grant. They could also partly take the form of imposing work requirements for Medicaid beneficiaries, which could serve as grounds on which to disqualify people from receiving benefits.

While proponents of work requirements often claim that disabled people will be exempt, research shows that many will still lose health coverage, and that Medicaid coverage itself often supports people who are working.

Medicaid is also a crucial source of funding for home- and community-based services, including personal attendants who help many people perform daily activities and live on their own. This helps disabled people live independently in their communities, rather than in institutional settings. Notably, Project 2025 points to so-called “nonmedical” services covered under Medicaid as part of the program’s “burden” on states.

When home- and community-based services are unavailable, some disabled people have no options but to move into nursing homes. One recent analysis found that nursing homes housed roughly 210,000 long-term residents under age 65 with disabilities. Many nursing facilities are understaffed, which contributed to the brutal toll of the COVID-19 pandemic in nursing homes.

In response to both the pandemic and years of advocacy, the Biden administration mandated higher staffing ratios at nursing homes receiving Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. But Republicans are eyeing repealing that rule, according to Politico’s reporting.

Daunting task

Tracking potential changes to disability policy is a complicated endeavor. There is no federal department of disability policy, for example.

Instead, relevant laws and programs are spread throughout what we often think of as separate policy areas. So while disability policy includes obvious areas such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, it is also vitally relevant in areas such as immigration and emergency response.

These issues of health care, education and more could impact millions of lives, but they are far from the only ones where Trump administration changes threaten to harm disabled people.

Different programs have their own definitions of disability, which people seeking assistance must work to keep track of.

This was a daunting task in 2024. Now it may become even more difficult.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Matthew Borus, Binghamton University, State University of New York

Read more:

• Why including people with disabilities in the workforce and higher education benefits everyone
• Trump’s claims of vast presidential powers run up against Article 2 of the Constitution and exceed previous presidents’ power grabs
• Parents with disabilities have faced discrimination for years in the US, but new rules will help ensure that child welfare systems treat them more fairly

Matthew Borus received funding in the past from ARDRAW, a small grant program for graduate students working on disability research. The program was run by Policy Research, Inc. and funded by the Social Security Administration. The opinions and conclusions expressed here are solely the author’s.

Feature Image: Disabled people’s employment rights and access to free health care are among the policy issues that the Trump administration is aiming to change. Catherine McQueen/Moment/Getty Images

The post Trump’s changes to federal disability policy: A threat to millions appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

By Tom Sapsford, Boston College

A few weeks into his second term, President Donald Trump signed two executive orders restricting the rights of trans workers in the federal government. The first was a renewal of the ban on transgender people joining the U.S. military – initially signed in 2017 and later repealed by President Joe Biden in 2021. The second was a more sweeping memo that recognizes only two sexes in federal records and policies.

In the ancient Roman world, which I study, biological sex and gender expression did not always line up as neatly as the president is demanding to see in today’s government.

In antiquity, there were masculine women, feminine men and people who altered their bodies to match their gender expression more closely. In particular, two figures – the cinaedus and the gallus – provide examples of men whose effeminate behavior and modified anatomies were striking yet still integrated into Roman society.

The cinaedus and the commander in chief

In ancient Rome, some men who did not fit neatly within gender categories were called “cinaedi.” They were usually adult males singled out for their extreme effeminacy and nonnormative sexual desires.

The cinaedus was already a recognizable figure in ancient Greece and was first mentioned in the fourth century B.C. by Plato. He says little more than that a cinaedus’ life was terrible, base and miserable. Later Roman authors provide more detail.

Martial, a Roman poet writing in the first century A.D., for instance, describes a cinaedus’ dysfunctional penis as like a “soggy leather strap” in one epigram. In the same century, the Roman novelist Petronius has a cinaedus suggest that both he and his fellows have had their genitals removed.

In a fable by Phaedrus, also written in the first century A.D., a barbarian is threatening the troops of the military leader, Pompey the Great. All are afraid to challenge this fierce opponent until a “cinaedus” volunteers to fight.

The cinaedus is described as a soldier of great size but with a cracked voice and mincing walk. After pleading permission in a stereotypically lisping manner from Pompey the Great, his commander in chief, the cinaedus steps into battle. He quickly severs the barbarian’s head and, with army agog, is summarily rewarded by Pompey.

In Phaedrus’ fable, the cinaedus is untrustworthy. He is described as having stolen valuables from Pompey early on in the tale and then later swears on oath that he hasn’t.

Yet the moral of Phaedrus’ fable of the soldier-cinaedus is that such deceptive appearances and actions might actually be strategically successful in military matters. The cinaedus has an edge over Pompey’s other soldiers precisely due to his disarming effeminacy. In the tale, this doesn’t at all diminish his skills as a lethal fighter. Rather, the cinaedus’ effeminacy combined with his martial valor ultimately lead to the barbarian’s defeat.

Trans priests and the safety of the Roman state

The galli, another group that lived in the heart of the city of Rome, also blurred gender roles. They were males who had castrated their genitalia in dedication to the Great Mother goddess Cybele, who was their protector.

As reported by several ancient sources, including Cicero and Livy, in 204 B.C. the Roman state consulted a set of prophetic scrolls called the Sibylline Oracles on how best to respond to the pressures it faced as a result of the Second Punic War – Rome’s prolonged conflict with Carthage and its fierce military general, Hannibal.

The oracles’ answer – and Rome’s subsequent action – was to import a strange and foreign religious order from Asia Minor into the heart of Rome, where it would remain for the next several hundred years.

The temple of Cybele was located on the Palatine Hill, next to several important shrines, monuments and later even the residence of the Emperor Augustus. As the poet Ovid tells us, each year during Cybele’s festival the galli would proceed through the streets of Rome carrying a statue of the goddess, while ululating wildly in time with the sound of wailing pipes, banging drums and crashing cymbals.

More so than the figure of the cinaedus, ancient literary sources present the galli’s gender difference similarly to modern-day trans women, often using feminine pronouns when describing them.

For instance, the poet Catullus details the origin story of the galli’s founder figure, Attis, who was Cybele’s mythical consort and chief priest. Notably, Catullus switches from using masculine adjectives to feminine ones at the very moment of Attis’ self-castration.

Similarly, in his novel, “The Golden Ass,” the second century A.D. writer Apuleius has one gallus address his fellow devotees as “girls.”

While several ancient sources mock these figures for their gender-nonconforming appearance and behaviors, it is nevertheless evident that the galli held a sacred place within the Roman state. They were viewed as being important to Rome’s continued safety and prominence.

For example, Plutarch in his “Life of Marius” relates that a priest of the Great Mother came to Rome in 103 B.C. to convey an oracle that the Romans would be triumphant in war. Though believed by the Senate, this priest, Bataces, was mocked mercilessly in the plebian assembly. However, when the individual who had insulted Bataces swiftly died of a terrible fever, the plebians too gave this oracle and the goddess’s prophetic powers their backing.

Today’s trans issues

Behind Trump’s executive orders are two assertions: first, that transgender identity is a form of ideology: a modern invention created to justify deviance from one’s sex as assigned at birth; second, that transgender identity is both a form of disease and of dishonesty.

The reissued military ban doubles down on the perceived dishonesty of trans folk, contrasting it with the ideals and principles needed for combat. The order states that the “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle.”

Taking a long view of gender diversity across millennia has shown me that many individuals in antiquity certainly lived lives outside of the clear-cut formula that the Trump administration has stated, namely that “women are biologically female and men are biologically male.”

Gender diversity is not simply a late 20th- or early 21st-century phenomenon. However, the fear that gender-diverse people are diseased and devious likewise arises in several ancient sources. In the classical world, these fears seem limited to the realms of satire and fantasy; in our current time, we are seeing these fears being harnessed for government policy.

This article incorporates material from a story originally published on Aug. 1, 2017.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Tom Sapsford, Boston College

Read more:

• Ukraine war: Trump is not trying to appease Putin – he has a vision of a new US-China-Russia order
• A trans soldier in the ancient Roman army?
• Trump’s military policy overlooks data on why transgender troops are fit to serve

Tom Sapsford is affiliated with the Lambda Classical Caucus. 

Feature Image: A relief showing a gallus making sacrifices to the goddess Cybele and Attis. Sailko via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

The post Ancient Rome offers a glimpse into the politics of gender appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

As the Trump administration prepares to close out its first full month back in power, the fears many Americans expressed about Project 2025 are rapidly becoming frightening realities. House Republicans unveiled a budget resolution on Wednesday that slashes federal spending by $2 trillion while providing up to $4.5 trillion in tax cuts—largely benefiting the wealthy and major corporations. The budget, introduced by House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, sets the stage for a massive GOP-led legislative push to pass President Donald Trump’s economic agenda. If the committee and the full House approve, Republicans could move forward with a party-line reconciliation bill that would bypass Senate filibuster rules and enact sweeping tax and spending changes.

At the heart of the plan is the dramatic redistribution of resources, cutting programs that millions of Americans rely on while extending tax breaks for the richest households and businesses. The resolution grants $110 billion for border security and immigration enforcement, significantly less than the $175 billion allocated in the Senate’s version. Meanwhile, it raises the debt limit by $4 trillion in anticipation of a looming deadline later this year that could force Congress to act or risk defaulting on the nation’s obligations.

Deep Cuts to Healthcare, Food Assistance, and Education

The budget’s reconciliation instructions call for slashing $2 trillion in mandatory spending—a category that includes Medicare, Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and other essential safety-net programs. If lawmakers fail to achieve those cuts, the resolution mandates a proportional reduction in tax cuts. However, House conservatives have already demanded even steeper spending reductions.    The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities described the proposal as “an extreme giveaway to the wealthy at the expense of families who already have a hard time making ends meet.” The nonpartisan research group warned that the GOP plan would increase healthcare costs, make college more expensive, deepen economic inequality, and exacerbate poverty for tens of millions of Americans.

“For weeks, House Republicans have been circulating proposals that would take health coverage and food assistance away from millions of people and raise the cost of student loans to offset part of the cost of extending the expiring 2017 tax cuts,” officials at the center stated. “More than 36 million people could lose Medicaid coverage, over 40 million could see reductions in SNAP benefits, and millions of students may face higher borrowing costs to pay for college.” These proposals would have devastating real-world consequences. For families dependent on Medicaid, it could mean the inability to afford cancer treatments, insulin for diabetes, or basic medical care. Cuts to food assistance would force parents to skip meals so their children can eat. Those in rural communities and communities of color, who already face higher poverty rates, would be hit especially hard.

Additionally, the GOP budget could shift enormous costs to state, local, and tribal governments, already experiencing financial strain. Many of these governments would be unable to cover the gaps, leading to more severe economic consequences for low-income Americans.

Tax Breaks for the Wealthy While Millions Struggle

The spending cuts outlined in the resolution mirror the priorities of Project 2025, the right-wing policy blueprint crafted by the Heritage Foundation. While Trump distanced himself from the plan on the campaign trail, its core elements are now being pushed through Congress. One of the most alarming aspects is the proposal to impose lifetime caps on Medicaid benefits, which could leave millions without health coverage. The budget’s tax cuts overwhelmingly benefit the wealthiest Americans. The plan seeks to extend the expiring 2017 tax cuts for another decade, adding trillions to the deficit. Households earning over $743,000 per year, the top 1%—would receive an average tax break of $62,000 annually. Meanwhile, working-class Americans would see higher healthcare, education, and food costs.

Despite prioritizing tax relief for the ultra-rich, the budget proposal fails to extend the Affordable Care Act’s premium tax credits, which have helped 20 million Americans afford health insurance since 2021. If these credits expire, premiums will skyrocket for millions, including at least 3 million small business owners and self-employed workers. The Food Research and Action Center has also raised alarms about the proposal’s drastic changes to food assistance programs. The budget seeks to impose harsher work requirements for non-disabled adults without dependents and eliminate state flexibility in determining food stamp eligibility. Additionally, it aims to roll back updates to the Thrifty Food Plan, which modernized the SNAP benefits formula after decades of being outdated.

Republicans Push Forward Despite Widespread Opposition

The House GOP’s budget resolution now heads to the Budget Committee, where Republicans will need a majority vote to advance it to the full House. With a razor-thin majority of 218-215, they have little room for defections. The measure is unlikely to receive any Democratic support. Senate Republicans are also moving forward with their version of the budget, which includes more funding for border security. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., criticized House Republicans for cutting immigration enforcement funding to $110 billion instead of the $175 billion requested by Trump’s border czar Tom Homan. “They’re not listening to the administration as to what they need,” Graham said. “Now is not the time to go on the cheap to secure the border.”

Meanwhile, Democrats have blasted the GOP plan as a blatant attack on working-class Americans. “Republicans are pulling a fast one on working people by reaching into their pockets to pay for billionaire handouts,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. “Make no mistake: this GOP plan will raise the cost that American families pay for groceries, health care, and getting an education—all to fund tax cuts for the ultra-rich.” Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., the ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee, warned that the Republican proposal would drive up the national debt while making life harder for middle-class families. “This Republican plan isn’t just bad policy—it betrays the middle class,” Boyle said. “Their proposal slashes critical programs that millions of hardworking Americans rely on, all while adding trillions of dollars to the deficit to bankroll massive giveaways for giant corporations and billionaires like Elon Musk.”

The post House GOP pushes forward extreme budget plan appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

By Alexa Helwig, alexa.helwig@mail.house.gov

Congressman Greg Landsman (D-OH-01) while President Trump’s proposal for the United States to “take over” the Gaza Strip may or may not be serious, he still is an unserious person and it’s an unserious plan. 

“There are three huge problems with his ‘proposal,’ Landsman said. “First, he’s added a third list of places he would send American troops without any real consideration – Greenland, Panama and now Gaza.

“Second, the path to peace is through Saudi Arabia and other Arab Nations who will not work with us or Israel if this is the plan. The effort to normalize relations with Saudi Arabia and Israel, bring a coalition of Arab nations together to help rebuild Gaza and establish a legitimate governing authority in Gaza, is essential. Trump’s rhetoric undermines this path to peace.

“Third, we’re in the middle of a ceasefire and need that to hold so every single hostage, including Americans, are brought home.”

Landsman has traveled to Israel and the Middle East over a dozen times, including four times in his first term as a member of Congress. He also worked in Israel from 2015-2020, prior to becoming a member of Congress, supporting philanthropic efforts.

The post Rep. Landsman comments on President Trump’s proposal for Gaza  appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

By Randolph Hubach, Purdue University and Cody Mullen, Purdue University

Rural America faces many challenges that Congress and the federal government could help alleviate under the new Trump administration.

Rural hospitals and their obstetrics wards have been closing at a rapid pace, leaving rural residents traveling farther for health care. Affordable housing is increasingly hard to find in rural communities, where pay is often lower and poverty higher than average. Land ownership is changing, leaving more communities with outsiders wielding influence over their local resources.

As experts in rural health and policy at the Center for Rural and Migrant Health at Purdue University, we work with people across the United States to build resilient rural communities.

Here are some ways we believe the Trump administration could work with Congress to boost these communities’ health and economies.

1. Rural health care access

One of the greatest challenges to rural health care is its vulnerability to shifts in policy and funding cuts because of rural areas’ high rates of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.

About 25% of rural residents rely on Medicaid, a federal program that provides health insurance for low-income residents. A disproportionate share of Medicare beneficiaries – people over 65 who receive federal health coverage – also live in rural areas. At the same time, the average health of rural residents lags the nation as a whole.

Rural clinics and hospitals

Funding from those federal programs affects rural hospitals, and rural hospitals are struggling.

Nearly half of rural hospitals operate in the red today, and over 170 rural hospitals have closed since 2010. The low population density of rural areas can make it difficult for hospitals to cover operating costs when their patient volume is low. These hospital closures have left rural residents traveling an extra 20 miles (32 km) on average to receive inpatient health care services and an extra 40 miles (64 km) for specialty care services.

The government has created programs to try to help keep hospitals operating, but they all require funding that is at risk. For example:

• The Low-volume Hospital Adjustment Act, first implemented in 2005, has helped numerous rural hospitals by boosting their Medicare payments per patient, but it faces regular threats of funding cuts. It and several other programs to support Medicare-dependent hospitals are set to expire on March 31, 2025, when the next federal budget is due.
• The rural emergency hospital model, created in 2020, helps qualifying rural facilities to maintain access to essential emergency and outpatient hospital services, also by providing higher Medicare payments. Thus far, only 30 rural hospitals have transitioned to this model, in part because they would have to eliminate inpatient care services, which also limits outpatient surgery and other medical services that could require overnight care in the event of an emergency.

Services for pregnant women have also gotten harder to find in rural areas.

Between 2011 and 2021, 267 rural hospitals discontinued obstetric services, representing 25% of the United States’ rural obstetrics units. In response, the federal government has implemented various initiatives to enhance access to care, such as the Rural Hospital Stabilization Pilot Program and the Rural Maternal and Obstetric Management Strategies Program. However, these programs also require funding.

Expanding telehealth

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth – the ability to meet with your doctor over video – wasn’t widely used. It could be difficult for doctors to ensure reimbursement, and the logistics of meeting federal requirements and privacy rules could be challenging.

The pandemic changed that. Improving technology allowed telehealth to quickly expand, reducing people’s contact with sick patients, and the government issued waivers for Medicare and Medicaid to pay for telehealth treatment. That opened up new opportunities for rural patients to get health care and opportunities for providers to reach more patients.

However, the Medicare and Medicaid waivers for most telehealth services were only temporary. Only payments for mental and behavioral health teleheath services continued, and those are set to expire with the federal budget in March 2025, unless they are renewed.

One way to expand rural health care would be to make those waivers permanent.

Increasing access to telehealth could also support people struggling with opioid addiction and other substance use disorders, which have been on the rise in rural areas.

2. Affordable housing is a rural problem too

Like their urban peers, rural communities face a shortage of affordable housing.

Unemployment in rural areas today exceeds levels before the COVID-19 pandemic. Job growth and median incomes lag behind urban areas, and rural poverty rates are higher.

Rural housing prices have been exacerbated by continued population growth over the past four years, lower incomes compared with their urban peers, limited employment opportunities and few high-quality homes available for rent or sale. Rural communities often have aging homes built upon outdated or inadequate infrastructure, such as deteriorating sewer and water lines.

One proposal to help people looking for affordable rural housing is the bipartisan Neighborhood Homes Investment Act, which calls for creating a new federal tax credit to spur the development and renovation of family housing in distressed urban, suburban and rural neighborhoods.

Similarly, the Section 502 Direct Loan Program through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which subsidizes mortgages for low-income applicants to obtain safe housing, could be expanded with additional funding to enable more people to receive subsidized mortgages.

3. Locally owned land benefits communities

Seniors age 65 and older own 40% of the agricultural land in the U.S., according to the American Farmland Trust. That means that more than 360 million acres of farmland could be transferred to new owners in the next few decades. If their heirs aren’t interested in farming, that land could be sold to large operations or real estate developers.

That affects rural communities because locally owned rural businesses tend to invest in their communities, and they are more likely to make decisions that benefit the community’s well-being.

Congress can take some steps to help communities keep more farmland locally owned.

The proposed Farm Transitions Act, for example, would establish a commission on farm transitions to study issues that affect locally owned farms and provide recommendations to help transition agricultural operations to the next generation of farmers and ranchers.

About 30% of farmers have been in business for less than 10 years, and many of them rent the land they farm. Programs such as USDA’s farm loan programs and the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program help support local land purchases and could be improved to identify and eliminate barriers that communities face.

We believe that by addressing these issues, Congress and the new administration can help some of the country’s most vulnerable citizens. Efforts to build resilient and strong rural communities will benefit everyone.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Randolph Hubach, Purdue University and Cody Mullen, Purdue University

Read more:

• America’s dairy farms are disappearing, down 95% since the 1970s − milk price rules are one reason why
• Rural America’s economies are often left out by a design flaw in federal funding
• After wildfires, ranchers face 2-year delay to graze cattle on federal land – is it doing more harm than good?

Randolph Hubach receives funding from the National Institutes of Health and the Health Resources and Services Administration.

Cody Mullen receives funding from the Health Resources and Services Administration. He is affiliated with the National Rural Health Association. 

Feature Image: Rural America can be idyllic, but many communities still need support. Mint Images via Getty Images

The post Trump administration can boost rural healthcare and housing appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

President Donald Trump’s administration on Jan. 29 rescinded a Project 2025-inspired order that had abruptly frozen most federal grants and loans, a sweeping directive that threw social service programs like Head Start, student loans and Medicaid into disarray.

The initial order, issued earlier in the week, sparked widespread confusion and disruption, prompting a swift legal challenge.

On Jan. 28, a federal judge temporarily blocked the freeze, and by the next day, the White House pulled back the directive altogether. The order’s reversal came after mounting pressure from lawmakers, advocacy groups and affected organizations.

The White House insisted the move was intended to “end any confusion” following the court’s injunction, but critics called it a political miscalculation.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the administration backed down only because of public outcry.

“Americans fought back, and Donald Trump backed off,” Schumer said in a statement. “Though the Trump administration failed in this tactic, it’s no secret that they will try to find another, and when they do, it will again be Senate Democrats there to call it out, fight back, and defend American families.”

However, the administration made clear that its broader policies on federal funding remain intact. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote on X that this was “NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze,” but rather a rollback of the memo itself to “end any confusion” created by the court’s ruling. “The President’s executive orders on federal funding remain in full force and effect and will be rigorously implemented,” she added.

The initial freeze caused immediate uncertainty, particularly in Washington, D.C., and Republican-leaning states heavily reliant on federal funds.

Throughout Jan. 28, the White House attempted to clarify exemptions — such as Medicaid — but the damage had already been done.

Reports surfaced by people and organizations unable to access critical federal resources, heightening concerns about the real-world impact of the freeze.

The legal challenge that led to the order’s reversal was filed by Democracy Forward, a progressive nonprofit, which argued that the directive was an unconstitutional overreach that endangered millions of Americans.

“While we hope this will enable millions of people in communities across the country to breathe a sigh of relief, we condemn the Trump-Vance administration’s harmful and callous approach of unleashing chaos and harm on the American people,” said Skye Perryman, the organization’s CEO.

“Our team will continue to bring swift legal actions to protect the American people and will use the legal process to ensure that federal funding is restored.”

The uncertainty caused by the administration’s actions drew sharp criticism from organizations that rely on federal assistance.

Melicia Whitt-Glover, executive director of the Council on Black Health, warned that the confusion threatens health programs serving historically marginalized communities. “While the Council on Black Health is not fully reliant on federal funding, many of our partners are, and they now face disruptions that threaten their ability to continue their vital work. This impacts the communities we serve and exacerbates health inequities,” she said.

The administration’s actions have drawn scrutiny given the financial reliance of Republican-leaning states on federal aid. A MoneyGeek analysis found that seven of the 10 states most dependent on federal funding lean Republican, receiving an average of $1.24 for every dollar contributed, while blue states receive $1.14. 

New Mexico, a Democratic-leaning state, saw the highest return on federal spending at $3.42 per dollar contributed, while Delaware had the lowest at $0.46.

Public Citizen, a government watchdog group, called the original freeze an unnecessary crisis that harmed vulnerable Americans. Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the organization, said,  “The incompetence and cruelty of this order caused nationwide confusion and anxiety, as across the country regular Americans spoke out about the human impacts — the loss of jobs, essential services and harms to children among many other vulnerable populations.

“The White House overplayed their hand as they levied this Project 2025-inspired order and made it clear that they want to sow chaos and gut programs that help families. We will keep up the fight to make sure that does not happen.”

The post Trump Administration rescinds federal funding freeze appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .

By Laure Quinlivan, laurequinlivan@gmail.com

A standing room only crowd gathered at the Contemporary Arts Center on January 10 to celebrate the Investiture of Connie Pillich, the first woman ever elected Hamilton County Prosecutor. Cincinnati’s Mayor, faith and community leaders spoke at the ceremony.

Pillich also is the first Democrat to hold the office in 92 years and won despite a $2 million-dollar barrage of negative ads placed by her Republican opponent.  Hamilton County Democratic Party Executive Director Gwen McFarlin said Pillich’s victory came as no surprise to her.

“Connie is a great servant leader who is firm and fair,” says McFarlin.  “I felt in my heart that her message about time to clean house and change the good old boys club would resonate with the people, and it did.”

Pillich’s record of public service includes six years as a Representative in the Ohio legislature, where she was Vice Chair of the House Committee on Criminal Justice. There, she supported a bill that ultimately permitted DNA evidence to exonerate individuals wrongly convicted of violent offenses. 

Pillich told the crowd her 8-year military career as Captain in the U.S. Air Force was excellent preparation for leading with integrity.  She was awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal three times.

“My commanders in the military gave me challenging assignments, encouraged me to excel and commended me when I did,” said Pillich.

Pillich told attendees she felt a duty to seek the office to give Hamilton County citizens a prosecutor who prioritizes public service over politics.  “Justice is about treating people fairly,” said Pillich.  “My vision is to empower my lawyers to do great work and deliver justice with integrity.”

Prosecutor Pillich is interviewing lawyers to fill open assistant prosecutor positions.  Most of the current assistant prosecutors have reapplied to stay in their jobs under her regime.

Pillich says she will focus on staff training, including ethics training, and ensure the Prosecutor’s Office work is audited.  She plans to modernize the office with updated technology and equipment. Pillich’s goals include working to get illegal guns and fentanyl off the streets, cracking down on domestic abusers, and implementing data-driven approaches to tackle the opioid crisis.

Bishop Sonny James, of Keep it Real Worldwide Ministries, offered prayers led the crowd in a blessing for Prosecutor Pillich.  “Sister Connie Pillich you are called to such a time as this,” said Bishop James. “Think of this day when times seem rough, when people don’t show you respect or appreciation, and stay patient and confident in who God has made you and called you to be.”

Cincinnati Mayor Aftab Pureval was the emcee and admitted that early in his political career he was advised to model the Connie Pillich work ethic.

“She will do what needs to be done to get the job accomplished. And that is exactly the kind of change-maker leader we need in this moment, more than ever. Welcome to this historic swearing in,” said Mayor Pureval.

First District Court of Appeals Judge Marilyn Zayas administered the oath to Pillich, whom she bonded with 30 years ago as a fellow UC College of Law School student.

“We were in a very small group of two, we were young mothers in law school,” said Judge Zayas.

Connie Pillich is a graduate of the UC College of Law. She is married to Paul Forshey, a retired Procter & Gamble principal scientist, and they have two grown children. Forshey said the world travel plans he made for him and his wife will now have to wait. “She worked so hard making calls in our back room six hours a day and then going out at night to campaign events.  I’m not even sure she wanted this, but she felt it was her duty,” he said.

The post Connie Pillich becomes Hamilton County’s first female prosecutor appeared first on The Cincinnati Herald .