63 Comments
User's avatar
Joe Weicher's avatar

Republicans love work requirements for everybody but members of Congress.

Expand full comment
Marliss Desens's avatar

Yes! In the past 97 days (today would be 98), the House has been adjourned for 85 (make it 86 today) and has only "worked" for 12 days. And they are receiving full pay and benefits.

We need a giant bulletin board that shows the numbers every day.

Expand full comment
A Sarcastic Prophet's avatar

The Queens real estate mob boss sundowning while President and his sycophants in his administration and Congress are at best simply lazy and willfully ignorant but more likely have achieved their worst as amoral and evil. Either way, the least, the lost, the last and the little ones suffer. I’m giving what I can, but my tears fall in greater number than my dollar bills.

Expand full comment
Jerry Friedman's avatar

Judd et al

This sentence is confusing: “Further, Democrats are not opposed to a continuing resolution to secure health care for undocumented immigrants”

Expand full comment
NubbyShober's avatar

Confusing, yes.

But what is clear is that Trump ordered USDA to WITHOLD their $6billion reserve as sadistic blackmail, making forty-two million people go hungry, in order to make the Dems cave on the budget.

It's important to make the GOP's use of starvation as a political cudgel crystal clear to everyone you know, as counterprogramming to the drivel currently being put out by FOX News and RW media. That basically parrots the administration's line verbatim.

Expand full comment
Stacey E's avatar

He’s saying that this - which the GOP accuses the Dems of advocating for - isn’t the Dems’ position. The next sentence states the Dems’ actual position. The GOP claim of wanting a CR for health care for undocumented residents isn’t even a thing: you can’t continue something that doesn’t exist. And apologies if you got what he was saying but just thought it was confusingly written.

Expand full comment
Joe Weicher's avatar

Yeah, I had to read it twice, but Judd and his team do an incredible job producing this important newsletter day after day. Nobody’s perfect.

Expand full comment
Mimi Stratton's avatar

In context, it’s less confusing. In context, it is stated as what the Democrats are not for, as described in the previous paragraph. What they are for is seeking an extension of health care subsidies.

Expand full comment
kdsherpa's avatar

Obfuscation at its best.

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

And a distraction.

Expand full comment
Patrick's avatar

If one changed the word "opposed" to "opposing" it reads more clearly.

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

It muddies the water. Federal law disqualifies undocumented immigrants from federal healthcare coverage. Nothing is on the table to change that.

Some states fund coverage for undocumented immigrants which is an entirely different matter. (The NPR article makes a reference to state programs totally state funded.)

Expand full comment
John Cook's avatar

Where does one go to complain about the USDA propaganda in violation of the Hatch act. Someone somewhere has to be responsible to correct this violation of law.

Expand full comment
Bruce Brittain's avatar

You are, of course, exactly right. However, in this administration, a complaint about any department being inappropriately political falls on exactly zero ears.

Expand full comment
JenneJ's avatar

All the government website effected by the shut-down have a message blaming the Democrats in violation of the Hatch Act that apparently isn't a law, at all.

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

Is that sarcasm? Not enforcing a law doesn’t mean the law doesn’t exist. These violations are bigger & bolder than in his 1st term but violations just the same. Cheats, crooks and liars can always move faster than enforcement. https://www.commoncause.org/resources/heres-why-common-cause-filed-57-complaints-against-the-trump-administration-for-violating-federal-ethics-laws/

Expand full comment
JenneJ's avatar

What are you talking about, of course it does. A law not enforced has no bearing. What is the point of a law not enforced? In NC there is a law that two adults of opposite sex who are not married to eachother cannot cohabitate. That's a real law, but it's not enforced. So in NC is it illegal for me to live with my boyfriend? And if it is, who will arrest and prosecute me for it? No one. So, in effect or practice it's not really a law, is it?

The same holds true with the Hatch Act. A person can only be charged with violating the Hatch Act while they are in office (or shortly thereafter). Hatch Act violations are charged through the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), which today doesn't even have any one assigned to lead it. So, who in this administration is going to charge anyone in this administration with violating the Hatch Act? Apparently, no one. So, in effect and practice the Hatch Act holds no bearing.

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

The law exists. That’s the difference. To say ‘the Hatch Act that apparently isn’t a law at all” is at best misleading. It isn’t being enforced. There is nothing to gripe about if the law does not exist. If we apply your thinking to the bombing of boats in the Caribbean and Pacific, which have killed at least 60+ people, same story.

If we say any law he breaks doesn’t exist, we give permission. I refuse to roll over & agree to that. Enforcement does not determine whether a law exists.

BTW, laws on the books that have not been enforced can be enforced at the most inconvenient times. Civilians do not have immunity from SCOTUS.

But in 2006 a court decided the NC co-habitation law was unconstitutional. That it violated the right to privacy and liberty under the U.S. Constitution. NC like many places has not revoked the law. There are tons of old laws that remain on the books for the same reason. What the Mad Clown is doing is not the same.

Expand full comment
Becky Daiss's avatar

Much needed info as always. Just one quibble. Food insecurity sounds so benign, intentionally I presume. It's starvation.

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

SNAP is “supplemental” as in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Typically you don’t starve from losing supplemental food. The problem is for many it is more than supplemental especially when other food programs were cut in the spring (including school food programs), food prices are high & when there are layoffs etc.

Expand full comment
Jim from New Jersey's avatar

The wonder of it all is that 1 of every 9 Americans NEED food assistance at all. It is easy to get lost in all of these statistics but each statistic is actually a human being. While Judd has managed, once again, to report this issue more thoroughly than anyone else, i cant help but think most of us are actually eating while we read this post. When one person starves it is a tragedy but when 42 million go without food it is just a statistic. Shame on us.

Expand full comment
TC Hardenbergh's avatar

I was shocked to read this stat. Out in a crowd, I look around and wonder which of these people are on SNAP. The food bank in mid-Michigan is barely able to serve the increasing number of clients.

Expand full comment
Mike McCabe's avatar

The constant media barrage that helped insulate Trump from real consequences is going to bite him in the ass on this one.

Many people have become immune to most of the corruption from this administration because it is so consistent.

His blaming Democrats for everything is doing the same. Every time he speaks people are associating him with the shutdown. He is like the boy who cried wolf.

The same happened to Democrats in his first term. They screamed about everything so it just was more noise.

He is the face of this shutdown and the consequences of it.

Expand full comment
Susie in OH's avatar

Yes, because he is using the money to rebuild Washington in his image.

Expand full comment
Joseph Mangano's avatar

Putting this on the official USDA website? Wild. Not only are there falsehoods in this statement, but it takes two to tango.

Expand full comment
Stacey E's avatar

Omg you should see the statement from Brooke Rollins that USDA emailed out last night TWICE, once under an “in case you missed it” banner. So full of blatant lies, it was almost comical. Almost.

Expand full comment
Katy Bolger's avatar

Joseph IF YOU HAVENT SEEN THIS: go to this official WH page, scroll down to the timeline slideshow and see what this administration has done to the country with its propaganda. https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/the-white-house/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment
Katy Bolger's avatar

This is a good time to go to the grocery store and buy $? worth of groceries for your local food bank. If you don't know where that is, it's because poor and hungry people are hidden. Just Google it, there's a food bank in a church basement near you.

Expand full comment
Shawn Miller's avatar

Easier and more helpful—make a financial donation to the food bank—they know what is needed most.

Expand full comment
Ginger's avatar

... of course the dems will have to broadcast the missing paragraph year over year as proof its always been in the bills because the r's will have some excuse why it's not in the current bill...I didn't realize that you can be a coward and cruel and evil at the same time... of course we have a "president" who at 5yo was throwing rocks at a baby in a play pen outside... where were the psychiatrists then? maybe we wouldn't be in this mess... it's still in the laps of the 6 maga supremes.. we wouldn't be in this epic destruction of our constitution..they knew exactly what they were/are doing

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

They are lying about what is in the bill. It is in the bill deliberately for these situations. The courts have not been fooled so now they say they want the court to explain how it can be legal.

Expand full comment
Steven Margles's avatar

“Food insecurity and hunger can cause “poor concentration, decreased cognitive function, fatigue, depression, and behavioral problems” Clearly Mr. Trump is a victim of food insecurity.

Expand full comment
Katy Bolger's avatar

As a former NYC high school teacher I can tell you what food insecurity looks like and it ain't Trump. He has never missed a meal in his fat life. Kids stuffing free food into their bags, or taking home large takeout containers filled with hot food served by the school - for their family to eat.

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

You forgot the “/s”

Expand full comment
Frank Millikan's avatar

Please call it the Big Billionaire Bill. That's what it is.

Expand full comment
kdsherpa's avatar

Absolutely MIND-BLOWING that a federal agency is using its website to blatantly lie. It is essentially state-funded propaganda. Citizens who don't know the facts will believe what they read, and blame the "innocent party", Democratic party, that is.

Expand full comment
Mojo86's avatar

Also, a violation of the Hatch Act. Similar to the messages this administration attempted (and succeeded in some cases) to disseminate at airports.

Expand full comment
Ann Sharon's avatar

Yes! because the Feds don’t control the airports which had their own policies & chose to follow them.

Expand full comment
Charlie Cooper's avatar

I am concerned that a big part of the Democrats' message regarding the shutdown is not getting through. Yes, the Democrats are demanding that higher Obamacare subsidies continue, and certainly the Republicans' proposal to eliminate the subsidies will add to the affordability crisis. But the Democrats should be more forceful in making the point that any agreement with the Republicans must be accompanied by public and ironclad agreement that Trump will adhere to the budget passed. Otherwise, the Republicans can pass a budget that includes the Dems' demands and then Trump can just refuse to spend the money. That applies to all the "discretionary" spending in the budget.

Expand full comment