Sunday, November 02, 2025

‘I can’t eat’: Millions risk losing food aid during US shutdown

By AFP
November 1, 2025


Eric Dunham (Center) is one of several Houston residents receiving free lunch bags at a restaurant in the Texas metropolis as funding lapses for the US program that provides food benefits for millions of Americans - Copyright AFP Mark Felix


Moisés ÁVILA

Approximately one in eight Americans receive food stamp benefits from the US government, a program at risk of losing its funding as of Saturday due to the government shutdown.

One such beneficiary is Eric Dunham, a 36-year-old man who became disabled after an accident and needs help from the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to live.

“If I don’t get food stamps I can’t eat,” Dunham told AFP, explaining that after all his expenses, he has just $24 left over per month.

“That’s it,” the father of two teenagers said. “The rest goes to child support.”

Since the federal government shuttered on October 1 due to ongoing budget disagreements between Republicans and Democrats in Congress, President Donald Trump’s administration has announced it would no longer be able to fund SNAP as of Saturday — the first cessation since the program began six decades ago.

A federal judge stepped in Friday and ordered the government to use emergency funds to keep SNAP running, and Trump said he aimed to comply. But many recipients have had their aid disrupted amid the bureaucratic tug-of-war.

Dunham — who works in the service industry, though in a reduced capacity since his accident — was able to receive some sandwiches and drinks on Saturday afternoon distributed by Petit Beignets and Tapioca, a restaurant in northwest Houston.

“There’s a lot of layoffs going around, and on top of that, we have the government shutdown and the SNAP benefits — nobody knew what was going to happen, and I made sandwiches for someone who comes and has SNAP benefits, and at least can have one meal for sure,” the restaurant’s owner Nhan Ngo, 37, said.

Though Dunham could not use his SNAP card to repay Ngo, he gave him a surprise hug as a show of thanks.

– ‘Not something extraordinary or luxurious’ –

Elsewhere in the city, thousands of people who did not receive their food stamps or fear they will not get them in the near future lined up in cars outside NRG Stadium, where the Houston Food Bank is distributing fruit and non-perishable food items.

The food bank’s president Brian Greene told AFP that the SNAP stoppage affects “about 425,000 households just in the Houston area.”

“So every community is trying to step up to help these families get by in the meantime.”

Despite the judicial order to resume funding SNAP during the shutdown, “it would take several days for the states to restart the program,” Greene explained. “They all had to stop because they were out of money.”

The gap in benefits impacted Sandra Guzman, a 36-year-old mother of two, who had placed an order for her food stamps last week but was told there were none available. She had to seek food aid elsewhere in the meantime.

“This is not something extraordinary or luxurious, this is something basic as getting food for my kids,” Guzman told AFP. “I’ll say food stamps represent 40 percent… of my expenses.”

– Trump’s ballroom or food aid –

Mary Willoughby, a 72-year-old Houston resident, waited in line outside the stadium with her granddaughter to receive food. She thinks if the aid freeze lasts, it could cause widespread chaos.

“We need our food stamps. We need our social security. We need our Medicare… If you cut all that out, it’s going to be nothing but a big war right now because people are gonna start robbing,” she said.

“We need the help.”

Another person in line, Carolyn Guy, 51, said she found it absurd that the Trump administration was paying millions to build a new White House ballroom while claiming there was no money to fund SNAP benefits.

“Why are you taking our stuff from us? We work hard,” she said. “You can take our food stamps, but here you’re getting ready to build a ballroom? Doesn’t make sense to me.”


Despite Court Rulings, Trump Refuses to Pay Out Food Stamp Benefits to Tens of Millions

“The administration has chosen to hold food for more than forty million vulnerable people hostage to try to force Democrats to capitulate without negotiations,” says one Georgetown law professor.




People attend the People’s Pantry Food drive to replenish food banks ahead of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) lapse at the USDA Headquarters, on the National Mall, Washington, DC, on October 30, 2025.

(Photo by Oliver Contreras/AFP)


Stephen Prager
Nov 01, 2025
COMMON DREAMS

Two federal judges have said the Trump administration cannot use the government shutdown to suspend food assistance for 42 million Americans. But hours into Saturday, when payments were due to be disbursed, President Donald Trump appears to be defying the ruling, potentially leaving millions unable to afford this month’s grocery bills.

A pair of federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled Friday that the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) freeze on benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps, was unlawful and that the department must use money from a contingency fund of $6 billion to pay for at least a portion of the roughly $8 billion meant to be disbursed this month.
RECOMMENDED...



25 State AGs Sue Trump Over Refusal to Fund Food Assistance for Poor



‘It Does Not Have to Be This Way’: Child Hunger Set to Surge as Trump Withholds SNAP Funds

“There is no doubt that the six billion dollars in contingency funds are appropriated funds that are without a doubt necessary to carry out the program’s operation,” said US District Judge McConnell of Rhode Island in his oral ruling. “The shutdown of the government through funding doesn’t do away with SNAP. It just does away with the funding of it. There could be no greater necessity than the prohibition across the board of funds for the program’s operations.”

McConnell added: “There is no doubt, and it is beyond argument, that irreparable harm will begin to occur if it hasn’t already occurred in the terror it has caused some people about the availability of funding for food for their family.”

SNAP benefits are available to people whose monthly incomes fall below 130% of the federal poverty line. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children. According to USDA research, cited by the Washington Post, those who receive SNAP benefits rely on it for 63% of their groceries, with the poorest, who make below 50% of the poverty line, relying on it for as much as 80%.

McConnell shot down the administration’s contention that the contingency funds may be needed for some other hypothetical emergency in the future, saying “It’s clear that when compared to the millions of people that will go without funds for food versus the agency’s desire not to use contingency funds in case there’s a hurricane need, the balances of those equities clearly goes on the side of ensuring that people are fed.”

While the judge in Massachusetts, Indira Talwani, ruled that Trump merely had to use the contingency funds to fund as much of the program as possible, McConnell went further, saying that in addition, they had to tap other sources of funding to disburse benefits in full, and do so “as soon as possible.” Both judges gave the administration until Monday to provide updates on how it planned to follow the ruling.

However, after the ruling on Friday, Trump insisted on social media that “government lawyers do not think we have the legal authority to pay SNAP with certain monies we have available, and now two courts have issued conflicting opinions on what we can and cannot do.”

He added: “I do NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT. Therefore, I have instructed our lawyers to ask the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible.”

Attorney and activist Miles Mogulescu pointed out in Common Dreams that, “until a few days ago, even the Trump administration agreed that these funds should be used to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown.”

On September 30, the day before the shutdown began, the USDA posted a 55-page “Lapse of Funding” plan to its website, which plainly stated that if the government were to shut down, “the department will continue operations related to... core nutrition safety net programs.”

But this week, USDA abruptly deleted the file and posted a new memo that concocted a new legal reality out of whole cloth, stating that “due to Congressional Democrats’ refusal to pass a clean continuing resolution (CR), approximately 42 million individuals will not receive SNAP benefits come November 1st.”

As Mogulescu notes: “The new memo cited absolutely no law supporting its position. Instead, it made up a rule claiming that the ‘contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exist.'”

Sharon Parrott, the president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, who previously served as an official in the White House Office of Management, said last week that it’s “unequivocally false” that the administration’s hands are tied.

“I know from experience that the federal government has the authority and the tools it needs during a shutdown to get these SNAP funds to families,” Parrott said. “Even at this late date, the professionals at the Department of Agriculture and in states can make this happen. And, to state the obvious, benefits that are a couple of days delayed are far more help to families than going without any help at all.”

She added: “The administration itself admits these reserves are available for use. It could have, and should have, taken steps weeks ago to be ready to use these funds. Instead, it may choose not to use them in an effort to gain political advantage.”

In hopes of pressuring Democrats to abandon their demands that Congress extend a critical Affordable Care Act tax credit and prevent health insurance premiums from skyrocketing for more than 20 million Americans, Republicans have sought to use the shutdown to inflict maximum pain on voters.

Trump has attempted to carry out mass layoffs of government workers, which have been halted by a federal judge. Meanwhile, his director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, has stripped funding from energy and transportation infrastructure projects aimed at blue states and cities.

“Terminating SNAP is a choice, and an overtly unlawful one at that,” says David Super, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown University. “The administration has chosen to hold food for more than forty million vulnerable people hostage to try to force Democrats to capitulate without negotiations.”


Federal judge forces Trump admin to fund food stamps through November


.S. President Donald Trump reacts in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 19, 2025. REUTERSKen Cedeno
October 31, 2025
ALTERNET

President Donald Trump's administration has been compelled to fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, also known as food stamps) through November, after a decision by a federal judge.

ABC News reported Friday that U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell (an appointee of former President Barack Obama) ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to use its contingency fund to partially fund SNAP through next month. The contingency fund is capable of covering roughly two-thirds of the SNAP funding shortfall. The decision comes as U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani (another Obama appointee) sided with Democratic attorneys general and governors from 25 states, in declaring the Trump administration's decision to not use the contingency fund "unlawful."

"The court is orally at this time, ordering that USDA must distribute the contingency money timely, or as soon as possible, for the November 1 payments to be made," Judge McConnell wrote in his ruling.

"There is no doubt, and it is beyond argument, that irreparable harm will begin to occur -- if it hasn't already occurred -- in the terror it has caused some people about the availability of funding for food for their family," he added.

Due to the ongoing government shutdown, approximately 42 million Americans were on track to lose their food assistance beginning Saturday. The Trump administration stated last week that even though there is a USDA contingency fund of roughly $6 billion to keep SNAP afloat, it wasn't going to tap into those funds, asserting that the money was to be used for emergencies like "hurricanes, tornadoes and floods."

The states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state and Wisconsin took the administration to federal court earlier this week. Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (D), Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) joined the suit through their respective offices, as their states have Republican attorneys general.

Top Republicans in the House and Senate have been insisting that Democrats vote for the Republican-written government funding bill if they want SNAP benefits to continue without interruption. However, doing so would mean tens of millions of Americans likely experience a significant increase in their heath insurance premiums when Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits expire at the end of 2025.

An extension would require 60 Senate votes due to filibuster rules, and Democrats — who have just 47 seats in the Senate — would need 13 Republicans to break rank and vote to extend the ACA credits. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), whose adult children are expecting their monthly premiums to double, has consistently laid blame for the shutdown at Republicans' feet and accused her party of not having an alternative plan to the ACA to lower Americans' healthcare costs. Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) suggested earlier this week that Greene write her own bill.

Click here to read ABC's full report.


Food stamps, the bulwark against hunger for over 40 mn Americans


By AFP
October 31, 2025


Concerns about SNAP drove volunteers to replenish food banks at the USDA Headquarters, in the National Mall, Washington - Copyright AFP Oliver Contreras


Myriam LEMETAYER

The ongoing budget deadlock in the United States is threatening food security of around 42 million Americans who receive food stamps at the start of each month to help get by.

The US Department of Agriculture had said that no money could be paid out on Saturday due to the shutdown.

But on Friday, a federal judge helped ease some of the uncertainty at the last minute by ordering the government to use emergency funds to ensure the continuity of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which has helped low-income Americans for more than 60 years.

The idea that SNAP assistance could be paused is “truly unprecedented,” Meredith Niles, a professor specializing in food policy at the University of Vermont, told AFP.

“This has never happened in more than 50 years of the program, despite numerous other government shutdowns,” she said.

Here’s how SNAP works, and what its absence could mean for those affected.

– How does it work?

While food stamps date back to the 1930s during the Great Depression, the SNAP program was created in 1964 and expanded nationwide in 1974, according to Niles from the University of Vermont.

Today, around one-in-eight Americans receive SNAP benefits each month based on income, according to the Department of Agriculture.

This costs the federal budget nearly $100 billion.

Beneficiaries have a payment card, similar to a debit card, which they can use in supermarkets, grocery stores, and some farmers’ markets. The cards are usually reloaded automatically on the first day of the month.

To qualify for SNAP, along with being low-income, recipients must meet certain requirements — which can vary from working at least 30 hours a week to being medically deemed unable to work due to disability.

“It is an important program for many Americans,” Niles said, adding that recipients receive an average of around $6 per person day.

Every day items like fruit, vegetables, canned goods, chips, and pasta are covered by SNAP, while alcohol and pre-prepared meals are not.

From January 2026, around ten states also plan to exclude the purchase of soft drinks using SNAP vouchers.

– Impact of SNAP pause –

Nationwide, around nine percent of grocery purchases are paid for using SNAP, according to Niles, with a quarter of all purchases using the vouchers made at the retail giant Walmart.

“We’re talking about billions and billions of dollars that aren’t going to be in the economy,” if SNAP payments are frozen in future, she added.

If SNAP payments are halted, Niles said she expects people will try to compensate by dipping into their savings, skipping meals, or deferring other expenses like repaying loans or attending medical appointments.

Households will receive retroactive benefits once the suspension is lifted and federal funding is made available again, according to a US Department of Agriculture document shared with AFP.

– Beyond party politics –

SNAP is an issue that transcends politics, with millions of Democrats and Republicans registered to receive the support.

Close to 24 million SNAP recipients live in states that voted for the current Republican President Donald Trump, while approximately 18 million beneficiaries live in places that voted Democrat in last year’s presidential race, according to AFP analysis.

In the event of non-payment, states have invited recipients to make use of food banks — which could be swiftly overwhelmed by the demand.

According to the latest available data, 13.5 percent of American households did not have guaranteed access to sufficient quantity and quality of food in 2023, the highest level since 2014.

In September of this year, the Department of Agriculture announced it would stop gathering the data for this report.


Trump gets immediately fact-checked on SNAP claim for ignoring 'deep red Southern states'



U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media aboard Air Force One as he departs for Florida from Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, U.S., October 31, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz

October 31, 2025
ALTERNET

Amid the administration’s refusal to tap contingency funds to sustain the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — and with two federal judges now ordering it to do so — President Donald Trump came under fire Friday for claiming that most SNAP recipients are Democrats.

Forty-two million Americans may lose their benefits starting on Saturday if the Trump administration does not act.

While there are no exact statistics on party affiliation, large numbers of SNAP users reside in deep red states.

According to WIRED, data collected by the USDA “shows that deep-red states like Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, and Louisiana are among those with the highest percentage of food stamp recipients.”

READ MORE: ‘Complicit in Evil’: GOP Firestorm Erupts Amid Heritage Head’s Carlson Defense


And according to Philip Bump, the former Washington Post columnist, “more members of vulnerable populations who receive SNAP benefits … live in districts that also voted for Trump.”

President Trump, however, offered a different perspective while speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on his way to Mar-a-Lago.

“And, you know, largely, when you talk about SNAP, you’re talking about largely Democrats, but I’m president. I wanna help everybody,” he said. “I want to help Democrats and Republicans, but when you’re talking about SNAP, if you look, it’s largely Democrats, they’re hurting their own people.”

Critics pushed back against the President’s claim.

“Florida has nearly 3 million SNAP recipients. Texas has 3.5 million. All those deep red Southern states have huge SNAP populations,” noted Punchbowl News co-founder John Bresnahan.

“This is not true at all. The loss of SNAP funding will hit red America hard, too,” observed MSNBC deputy managing editor of news Zack Stanton. “Even if it was true, it’s weird to be ok with Americans going hungry because they live in blue states.”

READ MORE: ‘Disturbing’: Johnson Scorched for Saying He’s Starving SNAP to ‘Pressure’ Democrats

“He’s trying to say—of course—that SNAP is for poor non white people, mostly living in the cities he wants militarily occupy. But, as it happens, SNAP is also for lots of poor white people living in the rural/small town areas Trump claims to care about,” wrote Dissent Magazine’s Richard Yeselson.

“And there it is. Trump openly reveals why he and other Republicans are cutting SNAP. The irony is that a lot of poor people in America who are on SNAP are rural Trump voters,” noted U.S. Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-PA).

“Trump is refusing to fund SNAP during the shutdown (something every other administration has done) because he wrongly believes that all families who rely on it are Democrats, and Democrats deserve to starve,” wrote The Lincoln Project.

“SNAP helps feed children, including one in four kids in America. Are children Democrats or Republicans? I don’t know BECAUSE THEY ARE CHILDREN. SNAP also helps veterans, seniors and people with disabilities,” commented U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA).



'Stop reproducing': Republicans 'can’t seem to decide' how to treat hungry voters


U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) leaves a bipartisan luncheon, weeks into the continuing U.S. government shutdown on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., October 23, 2025. REUTERS/Kylie Cooper

November 01, 2025
ALTERNET


With President Donald Trump proclaiming on Friday that “I do NOT want Americans to go hungry,” it appears that Trump’s Republican Party is indeed the party of the people.

But MSNBC producer Ja’han Jones said don’t be fooled. This is just one empathetic proclamation from one person at one particular moment. There’s still a whole party saying something else.

“Democrats have been in virtual lockstep in their support for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, and the need to continue aid to its beneficiaries, which include millions of children and working-class Americans,” said Jones. “Republicans, on the other hand, can’t seem to decide whether their message should be that SNAP recipients are the [Democrats’] victims of a shutdown …, or that they are lazy grifters finally getting the harsh wakeup call they deserve.”

The Trump administration may post messages cooing over “mothers, babies, and the most vulnerable among us” falling victim to Democrats’ stubbornness, but the administration’s “performative compassion hasn’t been embraced across the Republican Party or among conservative influencers,” said Jones.

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) ranted about “a lot of young men on SNAP that should be working,” despite data showing “39% of SNAP participants were children, 20% were elderly, and 10% were nonelderly individuals with a disability,” in 2023, and additional federal data confirming that millions of SNAP recipients are already working full time.

U.S. Rep. Clay Higgins, (R-La.) posted on X that SNAP beneficiaries should have been stocking up for the shutdown in advance — so it’s on them.

“Any American who has been receiving $4,200 per year of free groceries and does NOT have at least 1 month of groceries stocked should never again receive SNAP, because wow, stop smoking crack,” Higgins said.

Jones said MAGA influencers are even more judgmental, with Trump ally Mike Davis, “who previously clerked for Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch and assisted Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh during their confirmation hearings” saying in a social media post that “it’s outrageous 40MM people get food stamps.”

“Get off your fat, ghetto a——,” wrote Davis. “Get a job. Stop reproducing. Change your s—— culture.”

Politifact debunked the argument, promoted by people like Davis, falsely claiming the bulk of SNAP benefits go to non-white people and immigrants, but that doesn’t stop MAGA types like Conservative podcaster Adam Carolla from blithely suggesting that “nobody could benefit from a nice fast more than the SNAP recipients.”

“While some conservatives want to use the potential of SNAP recipients going hungry as a cudgel to force Democrats to give up their demands and end the government shutdown, that messaging is being clouded by more vocal conservatives who seem perfectly fine with — if not giddy about — the suffering of SNAP recipients, said Jones.

Jones added that, so far, the public does not appear to be buying Trump’s sympathetic act over the braying of his fellow Republicans. Recent polling data shows that a plurality of the country blames Republicans, not Democrats, for the shutdown.

Read the MSNBC report at this link.














Senate GOP leader slammed over 'performative outrage' after he blocked food stamp funding

U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) pushes his glasses up as he speaks to reporters outside his office on the fourteenth day of the U.S. government shutdown on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., October 14, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz

Adam Lynch
October 31, 2025 
ALTERNET


Washington Monthly Editor Bill Scher recently deconstructed Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s (R-S.D.) explosion on the Senate floor last weekend as he labored to pin the shutdown of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) food benefits on Democrats.

“SNAP recipients shouldn’t go without food. People should be getting paid in this country. And we’ve tried to do that thirteen times! You voted ‘no’ thirteen times!” Thune said. “This isn’t a political game. These are real people’s lives that we’re talking about!”

But it was all performance, according to Scher.

“Look, it’s fair to tag Democrats for being the instigators of the government shutdown, but not for President Donald Trump’s decisions that maximize the shutdown’s pain and hurt people who do not need to be hurt,” Scher wrote. “Before the shutdown began almost a month ago, the Department of Agriculture, led by Secretary Brooke Rollins, made clear that the delivery of SNAP … need not be impacted.”

The details of that reality were "available here at this URL until at least October 10, according to the Internet Archive Wayback Machine," said Scher. Additionally, Thune blocked legislation by Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) that would have funded SNAP benefits.

“But Trump’s USDA has memory-holed it,” Scher said, adding that when visitors now visit that URL, they get a Republican attack ad against Democrats that Scher said “almost surely” violates the Hatch Act: “Senate Democrats have now voted 12 times to not fund the food stamp program, also known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Bottom line, the well has run dry. At this time, there will be no benefits issued November 01. We are approaching an inflection point for Senate Democrats. They can continue to hold out for healthcare for illegal aliens and gender mutilation procedures or reopen the government so mothers, babies, and the most vulnerable among us can receive critical nutrition assistance.”

But the truth is that SNAP has never been disrupted during past shutdowns, either during Republican or Democratic administrations, said Scher. They’ve always been provided by officials using available funding sources to prevent a break in benefits.

“Democrats shoulder no responsibility for Trump and Rollins cutting off SNAP benefits from those who need them to survive,” said Scher. “You can’t even argue Democrats should have expected SNAP to be affected because USDA declared ahead of the shutdown that it wouldn’t.”

Furthermore, the number of SNAP beneficiaries tops 40 million, “more than a tenth of the U.S. population,” said Scher. So, at least until very recently, the program enjoyed bipartisan support.

“Thune can save his performative rage for the people playing political games with people’s lives: Donald Trump and Agriculture Secretary Rollins,” Scher said.

Read the Washington Monthly report at this link.
Red state workers at risk for losing disability benefits as Trump admin rewrites the rules


Photo by Arron Choi on Unsplash

October 31, 2025 
ALTERNET

It’s never been easy to qualify for Social Security disability benefits. Christopher Tincher knows this firsthand.

Tincher began his working life in a coal mine in Aflex, Kentucky, as a teenager in the 1980s. As mines across the region shuttered, he turned to scraping grills at a Hardee’s, then cleaning office buildings at night, then stocking shelves and changing tires at a Walmart in Arkansas. Later, he was hired by a nearby town’s wastewater department. Often, he had to wade into sewage to fix equipment and clean out feces, needles and tampons entering the treatment facility.

In 2017, some of that liquid got into his work boots, which didn’t fit properly and had caused blisters to form. It soaked into his flesh, infecting his right foot all the way to the bone. Doctors cut his leg off below the knee so the infection wouldn’t spread.

Tincher was now a manual laborer on one leg, but he was denied disability benefits by the Social Security Administration the following year. On average, 65% of applicants are rejected, though some successfully appeal.

In Tincher’s case, it was partly because he was 48, and the agency’s rules give priority to disabled workers in their 50s, who are officially deemed to be nearing advanced age and therefore less able to switch careers or develop new skills.

Tincher got a prosthetic leg and went back to work, this time for a medical supplies delivery company. He did this for seven years, frequently in pain, he said. His other leg was almost always in a cast, due to further infected blisters and diabetic nerve damage, and his eyesight was rapidly deteriorating.

This February, he applied for disability again. He was desperate; he was in a wheelchair, and he’d had to move in with his son’s family in Cabot, Arkansas, because he couldn’t pay the rent on his trailer. And there just weren’t other, less physically demanding jobs available locally for someone with his experience: “About the best job I could’ve got would’ve been a door greeter at Walmart, but I don’t think they have those anymore,” he said.

Tincher is now 55, and reaching that age marker helped him qualify, in June, for just over $1,500 a month in Social Security Disability Insurance benefits. A three-time Donald Trump voter, he was approved just in the nick of time.

That’s because the Trump administration is rewriting the disability eligibility rules, ostensibly to modernize the program, in ways that will make it even harder for aging blue-collar workers like Tincher to get benefits. Hundreds of thousands just like him would become ineligible for aid.

These changes would fall disproportionately on some of Trump’s most loyal supporters in red states. Most affected would be 50- to 60-year-olds without a high school or college education who have, for decades, toiled in physically grueling jobs, including coal mining, logging, and factory and construction work. The five states where the highest proportions of people rely on these benefits are West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi and Alabama. Unlike New York, California and a few others, these states do not have their own disability insurance programs for workers to turn to amid federal cuts.

“The Trump administration does not think that simply being 50 years old is a disability,” said a senior administration official who would speak only on condition of anonymity. In the 1970s, when the current rules were written, the official said, many more jobs involved manual labor, but in the internet age that isn’t true anymore. Workers in their 50s with physical injuries are thus receiving disability benefits “when they don’t need to be,” given that they could get a more sedentary job in the modern economy.


The administration has also justified cuts like these on fiscal grounds: The federal budget deficit is massive, the Social Security retirement system could become insolvent in less than a decade and savings need to be found.

But the disability program is paid for, via payroll taxes, by its own trust fund, separate from the one for the retirement program. So reductions in disability payments would not help the retirement system stay afloat. Indeed, cutting eligibility for disability could result in more disabled workers claiming retirement benefits early, actuarial experts note, which would only increase pressure on the retirement system. Meanwhile, the money in the disability fund, which is projected to remain solvent through at least the end of this century, would just sit there, unused.

The Trump administration’s upcoming proposed regulation would make two hugely consequential changes to the Social Security Administration’s disability system, according to four SSA officials with knowledge of the plans. First, it would modernize the job listings that Social Security’s disability adjudicators and judges use to decide if there’s work available in the U.S. economy that a manual laborer could do despite physical impairments — like a low-skilled desk job at a computer or driving for Uber or DoorDash. Second, the new rule would almost entirely remove age as a criterion, in most instances making a 50-plus-year-old like Tincher no more eligible for assistance than a 20-something.

Under the current system, eligibility for benefits ticks up at ages 50, 55 and 60, as workers become more medically vulnerable and less adaptable. Disability adjudicators use a series of grids that consider an applicant’s age, work experience and education level to determine whether they may have the skills to do another, less strenuous job. (The adjudicators make a yes-or-no decision on eligibility; each person who qualifies then receives a set amount based on their lifetime earnings. Once the person starts receiving Social Security retirement benefits, they no longer receive disability payments.)

The regulation that would undo this framework is slated to be formally proposed by December, according to a federal bulletin, although that deadline could push into next year, multiple officials said. The draft, which is based in large part on a plan that the first Trump administration tried to enact in 2020 before running out of time, still needs to be reviewed and edited by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget. After that, it will undergo the standard process of allowing the public to submit comments and objections.

But in its current form, the regulation would slash at least 830,000 people’s eligibility for disability benefits, according to an initial estimate from the Urban Institute, an economic policy think tank. As many as 1.5 million could lose eligibility over the next decade, including the widows and children of workers. Disability attorneys and experts familiar with who most relies on the program contend that the numbers could be considerably higher.

Separately, the Trump administration is preparing a proposed regulation that would eliminate or sharply cut the Supplemental Security Income benefits of roughly 400,000 extremely poor and disabled people. This second regulation would reduce support for adults and children with severe disabilities who are living in low-income households, as well as elderly people living with their adult children on tight budgets.

Barton Mackey, a spokesperson for the Social Security Administration, confirmed in a series of emailed statements that the Trump administration is working on what he called “improvements to the disability adjudication process.” These changes would ensure that the disability system “remains current” and can be more efficiently administered, Mackey said, while also promoting “dignity in work.” (Mackey did not respond to a question about the change to the SSI program.)


Further “speculation on any proposed rule prior to it being published,” he said, “only serves to misguide public discourse and stoke fear in those who rely on disability benefits for economic stability.”

White House spokesperson Kush Desai, in response to detailed questions, said that “President Trump will always protect and defend Social Security for American citizens” and pointed to Trump’s recent remarks commemorating the 90th anniversary of Social Security.

Retirement benefits — the largest and most popular of Social Security’s programs — would not be cut under the new regulation. But union leaders and advocates for older Americans said that the likely changes to disability eligibility for aging workers would undermine the financial and retirement security of working-class people and their families. Those who are denied benefits in their 50s would be forced to draw down any savings they have, which could lead them to apply for Social Security’s retirement benefits at age 62 instead of 67. That, in turn, would diminish their and their spouses’ monthly benefit amount by up to 30% until the day they die. Losing eligibility for disability would also block these workers’ access to Medicare, which they’re currently eligible for at their age precisely because they’re disabled.

Disability benefits frequently save recipients from bankruptcy, foreclosure and homelessness, according to research by University of Chicago economists and others.


George Piemonte, a former president of the National Organization of Social Security Claimants’ Representatives, has spent 30 years working on disability cases across the South. He emphasized that that’s where these disability cuts would be most acutely felt. “They call it modernizing the program, but that’s political speak,” Piemonte said. “This is a matter of life and death. If these workers don’t get their benefits, some of them are not even going to live to retirement.”

Social Security officials under both Republican and Democratic administrations have long agreed that the disability program needs to be modernized in some practical ways.

For example, disability adjudicators continue to use a Dictionary of Occupational Titles, created in the 1930s and last updated in 1991, to determine whether there are jobs that exist in “significant” numbers in the national economy that an applicant with declining “residual functional capacity” could still do. The DOT, as it is called, is almost comically outdated: It includes “pneumatic tube operator” but not web designer. (Reporting by The Washington Post has helped bring attention to these issues in recent years.)

Under President Barack Obama, the Social Security Administration and the Bureau of Labor Statistics undertook a yearslong effort to replace the DOT with what would be called the Occupational Requirements Survey, an updated catalog of modern occupations as well as the levels of physical exertion and cognitive difficulty that each job can entail. Field economists surveyed employers across the country, asking how often their employees typically had to climb stairs or lift items of various weights and so on. That detailed dataset now exists, but it isn’t widely used yet; the new regulation would require its implementation.

“So, the technical part of all this has sort of already been accomplished,” said David Weaver, a former top Social Security Administration official who helped to develop the survey, known as the ORS, during the Obama years. (Weaver is now a professor of statistics at the University of South Carolina.)

“But,” he added, “conservative economist types want to also make it harder for certain workers to get disability benefits, which would be a policy choice.” The complexity of the potential changes — the draft of the Trump regulation is hundreds of pages long and has been called the “mega reg” by insiders — has helped to mask this, Weaver and others said.

“Simplifying and Modernizing the Disability Adjudication Process” is how Mark Warshawsky headlined his written remarks when he testified in 2023 before a congressional subcommittee examining the issue. Warshawsky, an architect of the disability overhaul during the first Trump administration as the deputy commissioner for retirement and disability policy at the Social Security Administration, testified that the current system wrongly “presumes a workforce with low levels of education which is largely involved in physical labor, works long hours, has little flexibility in work schedules, low adaptability, little access to assistive technology, never works from home, and retires early fairly often.” He also said that increasing eligibility starting at age 50 is not very scientific; for starters, it’s unfair to 49-year-olds. (Warshawsky, who is now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, declined an interview request from ProPublica.)

Warshawsky was unable to get the disability regulation across the finish line before Trump lost the 2020 election. But Russell Vought, the powerful head of Trump’s Office of Management and Budget and one of the originators of Project 2025, picked up on this first-term agenda item and has pursued it again this year.

The disability restructuring was “Russ Vought’s No. 1 priority for the Social Security Administration from Day 1,” said Leland Dudek, who was acting commissioner of the agency from February to May. In February, Dudek said, his staff met with Vought’s staff on multiple occasions; together, they “dug up what was done four years ago,” he said, indicating that the new proposed rule will be similar to a 2020 draft that was leaked to the press. (The senior Trump administration official said that Dudek is “disgruntled” and that the disability changes are no more of a priority for Vought than the rest of the administration’s “deregulatory agenda.” In the past, Vought has publicly pressed for fewer veterans and others to receive disability benefits.)

To opponents of the forthcoming regulation, including many still inside the Social Security Administration, Warshawsky and Vought’s conception of the modern economy neglects the fact that workers like Tincher grew up in a different world. They started their working lives at a time when most people didn’t have personal computers, when it wasn’t as common to get a high school education and when physical labor offered a path to eventual retirement security. To switch the rules now pulls the rug out from under them just as they’re reaching their most vulnerable years, officials and experts said.

“I believe disconnects occur when more highly educated policy people do not fully understand or appreciate what workers in physically demanding, labor-intensive occupations, such as longshoremen, have gone through,” said Steve Rollins, who was deputy associate commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s Office of Disability Policy during the latter years of the first Trump administration and associate commissioner through the Biden administration. Rollins oversaw the agency’s work on modernizing the disability program from 2019 to 2024.

What’s more, vocational experts said in interviews, even if 50- or 60-year-old former coal miners or factory workers are denied the disability benefits they say they need, they’re still likely to retire early, a finding backed by recent research. After all, if they try to get a desk job — assuming one is available in their rural or exurban community — they may feel they don’t have the education or training for it, and they may also be subject to age discrimination in the hiring process. As Michelle Aliff, a certified rehabilitation counselor who testifies at Social Security disability hearings nationwide as an impartial vocational expert, put it: “An oil field roustabout in his 50s isn’t going to just sit down at a computer for work without additional training.”

The Trump administration’s plan to transform the U.S. disability system, once finalized, would interact with other cuts to the social safety net that the president and Republicans in Congress have already authored. For example, under legislation dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and signed into law by Trump, work requirements will be added to Medicaid; people with disabilities will largely be exempt, but the best way to establish eligibility for that exemption is to qualify for Social Security’s disability program, which would become harder under the new rule. A disabled worker could instead turn to Obamacare’s individual exchanges for insurance coverage, but Republicans are allowing the tax credit that makes those premiums affordable to expire.

Tincher feels lucky he applied when he did. Being approved for disability has meant his copays are covered, he can finally afford groceries and he has time to help watch over his grandkids. Still, he also feels a tinge of guilt. “I wish every day I could still work,” he said. His dad, a coal miner, once told him to work until the day he died. “Having to ask for help is hard especially for men to do, men of my generation.”

All Tincher would say to the officials pushing the changes to the disability program, he said, is “you don’t know until you’re here, at this point in a working life.”

How close is Trump to full autocracy? New York Times examines 12 signs

October 31, 2025 
ALTERNET

Using case studies from dead democracies, the New York Times editorial board compiled a list of 12 markers of democratic erosion, with help from scholars who have studied the collapse of democracies. According to the board, under President Donald Trump the United States is staggeringly similar to such cases.

First, a modern authoritarian stifles dissent and speech. Like Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Trump and his allies have pressured television stations to stop airing comedians who hurt his feelings. He has also revoked the visas of foreign students for sharing their views on the genocide in Gaza and ordered investigations of liberal nonprofit groups.

Second, autocrats use the power of law enforcement to investigate and imprison people who oppose them, similar to how Trump has ordered his Justice Department to target people who have made him angry with “dubious” accusations, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and former F.B.I. Director James Comey. And Trump has also ordered investigations of Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), among others.

Third, a modern autocrat finds ways to neuter their nation’s legislature, similar to the way Trump commands a legion of lockstep allies in the modern Republican Party, who rubber stamp his every decision.

Number 4, according to the Times, is an autocrat’s need to use the military to control opposition in dissent. Trump deployed the National Guard in Los Angeles, over the outcry of local leaders, and he has made similar attempts in Portland, Ore. and Chicago.

Likewise, the Editorial Board draws similarities to Trump’s defiance of national courts and his penchant for declaring national emergencies to a push his agenda. Like despots elsewhere, Trump has “vilified transgender Americans and barred them from military service,” said the Board. “He has fired women and people of color from leadership posts and ended programs that promote workplace diversity.”

He has also labored to erase Black history by removing books on slavery and segregation from military libraries and pressuring Smithsonian museums to minimize those subjects.

“At the same time, he has suggested that white people and Christians are victims, which echoes the autocratic habit of claiming that majority groups are in fact oppressed,” said the Board.

Also, like a despot, Trump rails against accurate information to guide decision-making, and he works to suppress inconvenient truths. He has already fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics for truthfully reporting disappointing job growth, and he has shut down federal data collection efforts related to climate change.

Throw that in with No. 9: An authoritarian’s predictable effort to take over universities and suppress dissident scholars, which Trump has also begun to do by cutting millions of dollars in school grants and attempting to dictate hiring methods and school policies.

Nos. 10, 11, and 12 involve an authoritarian’s cult of personality; his effort to use government levers to personally enrich himself and his family; and his unending crusade to manipulate law to stay in power.

“Authoritarians change election rules to help their party, and they rewrite laws — or violate their spirit — to ignore term limits,” writes the Board, and although Trump’s biggest attempt to follow this playbook failed when he was “unable to undo his election defeat” in 2020, the Board says “he has shown worrisome signs of using his power to entrench the Republican Party’s hold on the government” through gerrymandering extremes and an executive order to interfere with state elections.

“These moves increase the chances that Republicans will keep control of Congress even if most voters want to oust them,” the Board writes, creating a one-party government similar to the single-party misery of the U.S.S.R, which eventually led to Putin.

“The clearest sign that a democracy has died is that a leader and his party make it impossible for their opponents to win an election and hold power. Once that stage is reached, however, the change is extremely difficult to reverse,” the Board said.

Read the New York Times report at this link.
















Trump’s war on the Constitution is much worse than 'cancel culture' — here's why

October 25, 2025
ALTERNET

During former President Joe Biden's four years in the White House, "Real Time" host Bill Maher and "The View's" Sunny Hostin had some major disagreements on "wokeness" and "cancel culture."

Maher, who is a scathing critic of President Donald Trump and the MAGA movement but also has an intense disdain for "political correctness," attacked "wokeness" and "cancel culture" as detrimental to the left and a departure from traditional liberalism. But Hostin objected to Maher using the word "woke," which originated in the African-American community, in a negative way and argued that "cancel culture" was really "consequence culture."

Following the fatal shooting of Turning Point USA's Charlie Kirk, many MAGA Republicans argued that retaliation against people who criticized Kirk wasn't "cancel culture," but rather, "consequence culture" — the same term liberal Hostin had used during the Biden years.

Quite a few Trump critics, both Democrats and right-wing Never Trump conservatives, are accusing Republicans of hypocritically promoting the type of "cancel culture" they accused liberals and progressives of. But The New Republic's Liza Featherstone, in an article published on October 24, stresses that the Trump Administration's assault on free speech is much worse than the "cancel culture" that came from the left in the past.

"The New York Times reported that in seeking to punish offensive speech, Republicans were 'trying to rebrand a practice they once maligned,'" Featherstone explains. "Former President Barack Obama made a similar comparison after Jimmy Kimmel was suspended amid the Trump Administration's threats to retaliate against media outlets. 'After years of complaining about cancel culture,' Obama wrote on X, 'the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level.'"

Featherstone continues, "Obama is right that the Trump Administration's attacks are 'new and dangerous,' but where he’s wrong — perhaps in a clumsy attempt to be evenhanded — is that they don't even belong in the same conversation as 'cancel culture.' This is organized state repression, veering crassly and thuggishly into a reign of terror."

Featherstone describes "cancel culture" of the past as "the prosecutorial and puritanical style of liberalism that became popular on the internet during the second half of the Obama Administration and intensified during Trump's first term."

"It was a bad vibe," Featherstone recalls. "Discursive mistakes — insensitive jokes, ill-conceived tweets — could attract a mob of internet denunciation. The term could be overused, at times seeming to imply that people were out of line in criticizing celebrities and other powerful people for abusive behavior. But at its worst, cancel culture undermined solidarities, encouraged the bullying of some vulnerable people, and drove others to the right. Even worse, some of its targets lost their livelihoods."

Featherstone continues, "As misguided as 'cancel culture' was, though, that’s not what Trump and his minions are up to today…. 'Cancel culture' never involved the machinery of the federal government, yet Trump's defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, is banning journalists from the Pentagon who won't agree to government-imposed restrictions on their reporting, and has deemed these new rules — rejected by every legitimate news outlet — necessary to regulate a 'very disruptive' press. Speaking of the Pentagon, Hegseth is also presiding over McCarthyite investigations within the agency to root out employees who aren't fans of Charlie Kirk. Then there is the misuse of law enforcement powers to punish anti-Trump public figures."

Featherstone emphasizes that while "it's not outlandish to suggest that aspects of left 'cancel culture' contributed to what we're seeing today," Trump's war on the First Amendment is considerably more dangerous.

"Conservatives are now using the liberal term 'consequence culture' to argue that irresponsible speech should have dire consequences for offenders' lives," Featherstone warns. "But to equate Trump’s current repression with 'cancel culture' is to trivialize it. While cancel culture was intolerant and unpleasant, Trump's policies are making complaints about it seem quaint."

Read Liza Featherstone's full article for The New Republic at this link.






Trump officials say Alaska is 'open for business — but no one's buying

November 01, 2025 


As Kristen Moreland waited for the livestream to buffer, her thoughts drifted to the years she’d devoted to defending Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the northeastern sweep of Alaska where the mountains give way to the coastal plain. On screen, the chatter of aides stilled as men in dark suits gathered behind a lectern. Then Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum announced plans to open the area, roughly the size of South Carolina, to drilling.

This story was originally published by Grist. Sign up for Grist's weekly newsletter here.

It marked another round in the decades-long tug-of-war over developing one of the country’s largest remaining protected areas — an effort that came to a head during President Donald Trump’s first term, and ground to a halt when President Joe Biden took office. Burgum also restored seven oil and gas leases that a state-funded corporation bid on during the final days of the first Trump administration, and that his successor later revoked.

Moreland, a Gwich’in leader and executive director of the tribal committee dedicated to protecting the Nation’s sacred coastal plain, sat stunned as the YouTube stream continued. The place she grew up — where generations have lived on the tundra alongside the caribou, weaving their history into the land — had been reduced to a line item on someone’s balance sheet. When Burgum said opening the refuge would benefit northern communities, “it felt like a slap in the face,” she said.

“They’ve never reached out to us to listen to how this would affect our livelihood,” she said. Moreland fears development will drive the herd that the Gwich’in rely on out of range and contaminate rivers in a region where hunting and fishing are a matter of survival. For her, it felt like erasure. “It’s another disrespectful action from decision-makers,” she said. “It ignores our voice as Gwich’in and violates our rights as Indigenous people.”

As the fight over development in the Arctic continues, federal officials are racing to fulfill Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda. Though the government is shut down and many employees are not getting paid, officials continue approving permits for extractive industries. In a wood-paneled Beltway office, Burgum framed his “sweeping package of actions” as a declaration that “Alaska is open for business.”

To that end, the administration also signed permits for the controversial 211-mile Ambler Road to mineral deposits, including one owned by Trilogy Metals — which the Trump administration now holds a 10 percent stake in — and authorized a land exchange that will allow for construction of a road through Izembek National Wildlife Refuge, at the tip of the Alaskan Peninsula. “I told the president it’s like Christmas every morning,” Republican Governor Mike Dunleavy said. “I wake up, I go to look at what’s under the proverbial Christmas tree to see what’s happening.”

Last week’s announcement may not end up being the gift the governor is hoping for.

The fight over drilling in the refuge began almost as soon as President Dwight D. Eisenhower established the site, once called Arctic National Wildlife Range, in 1960. The most recent volley began in 2017, when Trump signed a tax bill requiring two oil and gas lease sales there within seven years. When the first sale was held in 2021, the state corporation Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, or AIDEA, was the only major bidder. It hoped to keep drilling prospects in the region alive, despite weak industry interest. The sale ultimately generated less than $12 million — a fraction of the nearly $2 billion projected by the Tax Act for the last decade.

The Biden administration later found the leasing program’s environmental review inadequate. It conducted a new analysis, then canceled the leases in 2023, citing “fundamental legal deficiencies” and its failure to “properly quantify” greenhouse gas emissions. The second mandated sale, in early 2025, received no bidders. Compounding the challenge, major banks and insurers have refused to finance or underwrite projects in the refuge, citing environmental risks. Oil majors have also steered clear: In 2022, Chevron and the company that took over BP’s leases on private land within the refuge paid $10 million to walk away from them. That same year, Exxon Mobil told shareholders it has “no plans for exploration or development” there.

Still, this spring Trump issued an executive order calling for the reinstatement of AIDEA’s leases, and a federal court ruled that their cancellation was handled improperly. The state-funded investment firm remains the sole holder of leases in the refuge.

The problem is AIDEA doesn’t have the capital or technical expertise to build out these areas on its own. It has authorized spending nearly $54 million to develop them and move permitting for Ambler Road forward. That includes hiring consultants for seismic testing to map oil and gas deposits. But first it must get permission from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to harass polar bears, something that has sparked viral protests in the past. AIDEA authorized another $50 million for Ambler following Burgum’s announcement.

Ultimately, the state corporation is spending public money on infrastructure that private firms would normally fund, while sidestepping oversight, said Suzanne Bostrom, a senior staff attorney at Trustees for Alaska. The watchdog legal organization accused AIDEA of having redirected money toward refuge leases and Ambler from accounts within its Arctic Infrastructure Development Fund, and later its Revolving Fund, to avoid the need for legislative approval. Randy Ruaro, AIDEA’s executive director, wrote in an email that it was not legally required to seek authorization.

All of that aside, AIDEA’s track record is pretty grim. Financial records suggest the corporation lost at least $38 million on its last oil and gas venture, the Mustang field on the North Slope west of the refuge. After oil prices fell in 2020, the corporation foreclosed on the project. The state provided another $22 million in a 2023 bailout before AIDEA sold the field for an undisclosed sum. Bostrom says AIDEA has “no actual plan for seeing a return” on its spending in the refuge. In fact, the people of Alaska often lose money in its deals; one analysis found that almost half of the agency’s investments have been written off as worthless. The economists who crunched those numbers found the state would have come out about $11 billion ahead if that money had been put to work elsewhere.

In an email, Ruaro called the analysis a “hit piece” and said the corporation has recorded its best financial performance in six decades over the past two years. He said that analysis “failed to account for the billions of dollars generated in economic benefits” by the Red Dog Mine, which produces lead and zinc in northwest Alaska. The corporation poured $160 million — about one-third of the project’s startup costs — into infrastructure to support the operation. At the same time, AIDEA’s own consultants concluded that the mine would be built regardless, and the investment was unnecessary. “AIDEA loves to point to the Red Dog mine as a shining example of their success,” Bostrom said, but even taking those claims at face-value “doesn’t erase that AIDEA still has no viable financial plan in place to cover the cost of building the Ambler Road.”

Ultimately, any plans for the refuge and Ambler Road — which the Bureau of Land Management has said would harm Indigenous and low-income communities — raise questions about who benefits from such development. AIDEA has, for example, proposed financing the private Ambler road through Gates of the Arctic National Park with bonds repaid by tolls, a plan critics call unrealistic, given the cost could hit $2 billion. “It’s hugely problematic for the state to issue bonds with no viable plan for repayment,” Bostrom said. “That’s not a good investment decision.”

But Ruaro wrote that is only one of several options, and that he is “confident the mines … have billions of dollars in minerals needed by the nation.” He also said AIDEA now estimates the cost at $500 to $850 million, and said the road can be built in phases.

Even with prudent financial strategies, the economics of extraction remain precarious — especially as domestic oil prices dropped below $60 a barrel this summer. Given the average breakeven price of $62, new Arctic production may not be profitable — though it would extend the life of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline that carries crude from the North Slope. The U.S. is already the world’s top producer, and more output won’t necessarily lower consumer fuel prices, says Boston University’s Robert K. Kaufmann, because OPEC and other nations still influence global markets. (As to the “energy emergency” that Trump declared, Kaufmann said, “I want what he’s smoking.”) Instead, the leases will bring more production online when “any rational scientist is calling for reducing carbon emissions.

Despite the risks, some communities in the region support new oil and gas projects. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge sits within North Slope Borough, which is larger than 39 states. Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat — a nonprofit funded by the regional Alaska Native Corporation — notes that 95 percent of the borough’s tax revenue comes from the industry, funding things like schools and clinics. Fossil fuel royalties directly benefit Indigenous communities like Kaktovik, funding essential services. “When Uncle Doug [Burgum] calls, I answer,” Josiah Patkotak, the borough’s mayor, said in a statement praising the Interior secretary’s announcement.


It can be difficult to disentangle genuine local support from efforts quietly backed — or directly compensated — by the industry itself. During a legislative hearing earlier this year, state Representative Ashley Carrick said one person who testified as a community advocate was paid by AIDEA, something Ruaro confirmed to her that it routinely does. This can create the impression these projects are widely embraced.

“There’s this wide consensus that [Iñupiat] people all want the oil and gas projects. It’s not true,” said Nauri Simmonds, executive director of Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic. Many of those adversely impacted by drilling stay silent for fear of losing work or social standing, she said — and some who have spoken out have faced threats and violence.

Simmonds says what might be lost by developing the refuge can’t be counted in dollars. AIDEA now holds leases in a part of the refuge where the Porcupine caribou herd gathers to bear its young. The Gwich’in name for the region, where cool coastal winds protect the newborns from insects and heat, translates to “the sacred place where life begins.” Beyond its shelter, calves are 19 percent more likely to die. Scientists and Indigenous peoples fear the clamor of development will drive the herd away, severing a bond that has sustained people and animals alike for millenia. Even as climate change reshapes one of the country’s last undisturbed ecosystems, it is political forces that now endanger it most.

“One of the most wounding pieces is that this wouldn’t be something that the companies would have gone after on their own,” Simmonds said. “It is the enticements from Alaska, from the corporations, from the political landscape, that creates the appeal.”

Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org
How Hurricane Melissa got so dangerous so fast


CIRA / NOAA

October 28, 2025 


History is unfolding in the Atlantic Ocean right now. Hurricane Melissa has spun up into an extraordinarily dangerous Category 5 storm with maximum sustained winds of 175 mph, and is set to strike Jamaica Monday night before marching toward Cuba. This is only the second time in recorded history that an Atlantic hurricane season has spawned three hurricanes in that category. Melissa has already killed at least three people in Haiti and another in the Dominican Republic.

The threats to Jamaica will come from all sides. The island could see up to 30 inches of rain as the storm squeezes moisture from the sky, like a massive atmospheric sponge, potentially causing “catastrophic flash flooding and numerous landslides,” according to the National Hurricane Center. Melissa also will bulldoze ashore a storm surge of up to 13 feet — essentially a wall of water that will further inundate coastal areas. “No one living there has ever experienced anything like what is about to happen,” writes Brian McNoldy, a hurricane scientist at the University of Miami.

It will take some time for scientists to determine exactly how much climate change supercharged Melissa, but they can already say that the storm has been feeding on warm ocean temperatures made up to 800 times more likely by global heating. This is how climate change is worsening these tropical cyclones overall: The hotter the ocean gets — the seas have absorbed 90 percent of the extra heat that humans have pumped into the atmosphere — the more energy that can transfer into a storm. “The role climate change has played in making Hurricane Melissa incredibly dangerous is undeniable,” Marc Alessi, a climate attribution science fellow at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement.

Scientists can already estimate that climate change has increased Melissa’s wind speeds by 10 mph, in turn increasing its potential damage by 50 percent. “We’re living in a world right now where human-caused climate change has changed the environment in which these hurricanes are growing up and intensifying,” said Daniel Gilford, a climate scientist at the research group Climate Central. “Increasing temperatures of the atmosphere is increasing how much moisture is in the atmosphere, which will allow Melissa to rain more effectively and efficiently over the Caribbean, and could cause more flooding than otherwise would have occurred.”

Making Melissa extra dangerous is the fact that it’s undergone rapid intensification, defined as a jump in sustained wind speeds of at least 35 mph in a day, having doubled its speed from 70 to 140 mph in less than 24 hours. This makes a hurricane all the more deadly not only because stronger winds cause more damage, but because it can complicate disaster preparations — officials might be preparing for a weaker storm, only to suddenly face one far worse. Research has shown a huge increase in the number of rapid intensification events close to shore, thanks to those rising ocean temperatures, with Atlantic hurricanes specifically being twice as likely now to rapidly intensify.

At the same time, hurricanes are able to produce more rainfall as the planet warms. For one, the atmosphere can hold 7 percent more moisture per degree Celsius of warming. And secondly, the faster the wind speeds, the more water a hurricane can wring out, like spinning a wet mop. Accordingly, hurricanes can now produce 50 percent more precipitation because of climate change. “A more intense hurricane has stronger updrafts and downdrafts, and the amount of efficiency by which the storm can rain basically scales with how intense the storm is,” Gilford said. Making matters worse, Melissa is a rather slow-moving storm, so it will linger over Jamaica, inundating the island and buffeting it with winds.

As Melissa drops rain from above, its winds will shove still more water ashore as a storm surge. The coastlines of the Caribbean have already seen significant sea level rise, which means levels are already higher than before. (Warmer oceans have an additional effect here, as hotter water takes up more space, a phenomenon known as thermal expansion.) All of this means the baseline water levels are already higher, which the storm surge will pile on top of. “Just small, incremental, marginal changes in sea level can really drive intense changes,” Gilford said.

Jamaica has an added challenge in its mountainous terrain. Whereas water will accumulate on flat terrain, it behaves much more unpredictably when it’s rushing downhill because it easily gains momentum. “When you get a storm like this that is approaching the higher echelons of what we have observed, it’s harrowing, especially because it is pointing at a populated island with complex terrain,” said Kim Wood, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Arizona. “You’re dealing with a funneling effect, where that water, as it falls, will then join other water that’s coming down the mountainside and exacerbate the impacts.”

Maybe the only good news here is that the National Hurricane Center was able to accurately predict that Melissa would rapidly intensify. And in general, scientists have gotten ever better at determining how climate change is supercharging hurricanes, so they can provide ever more accurate warnings to places like Jamaica. But that requires continuous governmental support for this kind of work, while the Trump administration has slashed scientific budgets and jobs. “We couldn’t do this without continued investment in the enterprise that supports advances in not just science, but forecasting and communicating the outcomes of those forecasts,” Wood said.


Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org