Politics

After a Friday night flurry, Trump’s Cabinet is complete

Published

2 years ago

November 23, 2024

At 6:52 p.m. on Friday, President-elect Donald Trump announced his choice for Treasury secretary. Minutes later, he tapped a director for the Office of Management and Budget. Then came his picks for Labor secretary, deputy national security adviser and surgeon general.

The evening flurry lasted just over an hour, and in that time Trump announced nine high-ranking administration officials. And on Saturday afternoon, Trump announced Brooke Rollins as his pick for agriculture secretary, rounding out the core roles in his Cabinet with the spate of nominations.

It was the latest episode in a buzzing Trump transition that is starkly different from 2016, as the president-elect and his team — insulated from reporters at Mar-a-Lago — are making often surprising decisions at breakneck speed.

Just two and a half weeks since Election Day, Trump has announced names for 20 key administration roles, including leaders for all 15 executive agencies. He has yet to officially tap four remaining top positions, which include trade representative, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, administrator of the Small Business Administration and director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy — roles that can be elevated to cabinet level at the president’s discretion. Overall, Trump will have to make about 4,000 political appointments, approximately 1,200 of which will require Senate confirmation.

“America, the Trump Cabinet is officially complete,” Trump’s campaign account wrote in a now-deleted post on X, referring to the selection of the president’s core Cabinet positions.

The velocity and volume of this process stand in contrast to Trump’s last transition, when he leaned on his more experienced team to make a steady stream of establishment selections. This time around, that drip has at times escalated into a fire hose as Trump, armed with hindsight and empowered by the GOP, has named anti-establishment loyalists to top positions.

Treasury

In a transition process characterized by rapid-fire decisions, Trump took his time deliberating on who to choose to head the treasury. His ultimate selection, hedge fund manager Scott Bessent, was the heavy favorite in the days after the election, but the process was complicated after one of Trump’s transition heads, Howard Lutnick, started pushing hard to get the job.

Bessent’s and Lutnick’s camps spent days trying to undermine each other’s candidacy, according to people familiar with the situation. This tussle sometimes spilled out into public view, such as when Elon Musk posted on X that Lutnick would be the better choice over Bessent, who the Tesla CEO and Trump appointee characterized as a “business-as-usual” pick.

The infighting frustrated Trump, people familiar with the transition process said, and he decided to add more names to the mix. A day after announcing Lutnick would instead become Commerce secretary — with special authority over trade — he brought in former Federal Reserve board member Kevin Warsh and Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan for interviews at Mar-a-Lago on Wednesday afternoon.

Neither sold the president on the job, the people said — and Warsh is expected to be a candidate instead to chair the Fed when that position opens in May 2026 — leaving the path open for Bessent to ultimately clinch the nomination.

Labor

In selecting Oregon Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer to lead the Department of Labor, Trump defied expectations that his pick would take a hard line against unions. Transition officials had been in touch with Chavez-DeRemer for several weeks, according to three people familiar with the matter, and there was a sense among people involved that she was in a strong position to edge out Trump’s former deputy labor secretary Patrick Pizzella. Plus, Trump was eager to move quickly.

Conservative warnings about her support for the PRO Act — legislation that would strengthen union efforts — and strong pro-union stance didn’t ultimately phase Trump. She had notable backing, including from some GOP leaders who had raised her name directly with Trump. And Teamsters President Sean O’Brien was pushing Chavez-DeRemer’s name in private, arguing the largest union in North America was eager to work with the Trump administration to improve the lives of working people — including many who had voted for Trump and shifted the Republican power balance.

Trump met with Chavez-DeRemer Thursday at Mar-a-Lago ready to make up his mind. The interview went well, and he offered her the job in the room, according to another person familiar with the matter.

Unlike many of Trump’s picks, Chavez-DeRemer’s announcement was largely well-received on both sides of the aisle. Trade union groups praised her pro-labor record, and some Democratic members of Congress signaled an openness to the vetting process.

National security

Firebrand former Trump aide Sebastian Gorka was seen as a contender for deputy national security adviser. Instead, Trump named Gorka as deputy assistant to the president and senior director for counterterrorism within the White House National Security Council, elevating him to a powerful — but comparatively low-profile — role.

Former national security adviser John Bolton — a notorious Trump defector — on Friday slammed Gorka as a “con man,” saying on CNN “I wouldn’t have him in any U.S. government.”

Trump ultimately settled on Alex Wong, a more traditional national security adviser who worked on North Korea policy in Trump’s first administration, for the No. 2 spot on the National Security Council.

Surgeon General

Trump’s pick for surgeon general, physician and Fox News contributor Janette Nesheiwat, has been embraced by several public health leaders as a solid choice for the administration — especially against the backdrop of Trump choosing vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as his nominee to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.

Dr. Peter Hotez — a vaccine scientist and outspoken critic of the Trump administration’s response to Covid-19 and who has slammed the choice of Kennedy for HHS — said Nesheiwat was a good appointment in a post on X Friday night.

“She is very smart, thoughtful, interested in learning, and a compassionate doctor, and … a truly nice person,” he wrote.

Eric Bazail-Eimil, Daniel Payne, Meredith Lee Hill and Victoria Guida contributed to this report.

Politics

How SNAP could crunch the midterms

Published

1 day ago

October 10, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Under the political radar, the country’s food stamps program is undergoing a slow-motion transformation. The ramifications could bubble up into the midterms.

Changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program from Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act are rolling out in phases, from tougher work requirements to restrictions on non-citizens. Food stamp rolls already shrank by more than 5 million people nationwide as of this summer, as the hardest-hit state, Arizona, saw an outright majority of its food stamp recipients lose benefits.

The latest alteration clicked into place Oct. 1, when the share of administrative costs states and counties have to pay rose to 75% from 50%. An even bigger financial shift looms in a year, when states with high payment error rates will have to assume some benefit costs for the first time, a scenario that’s already rippling through state and local budget planning.

It all adds up to a new era in federal-state relations — and in the size and nature of the welfare state.

In a year when affordability worries top voters’ priority lists and grocery prices strain their wallets, Democrats think the SNAP shift gives them an opening to make Republicans pay politically after the GOP used social safety net cuts to food aid and Medicaid to help pay for last year’s tax cuts.

“People are getting kicked off these programs at the very moment they’re going to the polls to vote,” House Agriculture ranking member Angie Craig (D-Minn.) said. “I sure wouldn’t want to be a Republican headed into the November ballot.”

But Republicans think they have a compelling story to tell voters, trying to right-size a program that spends millions of dollars on erroneous payments. The SNAP changes align with the Trump administration’s broader push to crack down on fraud and make the government smaller or more efficient. Implementing stricter work requirements for welfare often polls well, and trying to move people toward work gets at the root causes of poverty, they argue.

“The premise is simple: Let’s make sure that this program is preserved for those truly in need, and that we aren’t squandering taxpayer dollars,” a senior USDA official told Playbook in an interview. “And let’s make sure that if folks are able-bodied, they are work training or volunteering for 20 hours per week.”

That doesn’t mean Republicans in competitive races are putting SNAP and Medicaid cuts front and center on the campaign trail. When they tout last year’s megalaw, new tax breaks typically lead the messaging. And 10 frontline GOP House campaigns didn’t respond to requests for interviews about how they can win on SNAP.

At the state and county level, some governments are scrambling to prepare for a massive cost shift, hitting at the same time as significant Medicaid changes. The resulting bureaucratic jumble has contributed to some of the SNAP losses this year, as recipients struggled to get through overtaxed call centers, some states cut staff, and others tightened their processes.

“It really sets up a change in the federal responsibility, and I view it as a slippery slope,” warned Barbara Guinn, New York’s commissioner of the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance. Her state is staring down a possible $1 billion added burden next year, though they’re advocating for a repeal of the benefits change. “Once they implement any kind of cost shift, I think it will be easier for them to take similar actions in the future.”

Whether to delay next year’s cost shift has already generated tensions over the farm bill in the Senate, where Democrats are demanding a longer postponement than Republicans’ offer of one year. Some Minnesota counties are considering significant property tax increases to pay for the extra costs, Craig said: “We’re going to be pushing hard for a two-year delay — at the request of, frankly, many of my Republican county commissioners, not just Democrats.”

Conservatives see the new calculus as a long overdue change to improve efficiency and incentivize program integrity. Improper payment rates are high in many states (though they comprise both over-payments and under-payments, and error rates are different from fraud). Those that reduce errors enough won’t have to take on paying the benefits. And even opponents of the changes think lower error rates are a worthy goal. SNAP rolls often ebb and flow with the economy, and the recent drop could reflect the job market pulling people out of need — or the removal of people who shouldn’t have been getting food stamps in the first place.

“There needs to be some level of accountability,” the USDA official said. States with high error rates “need to start to have skin in the game.”

But at a time when many households are already squeezed by inflation, the SNAP changes have correlated with higher numbers of Americans turning to charities to ward off hunger. The surge in people losing food aid came more quickly than expected. The unemployment rate hasn’t meaningfully changed. And the vast majority of large food banks in a recent NBC survey said they were grappling with higher demand, in part due to food stamp changes. Another rule kicking in the day after the midterms could lead to many retailers being bumped out of SNAP as places where low-income people can use their benefits.

For state governments, a set of sweeping operational changes are now underway to conform to new policy demands, often requiring more money or staffing at already under-resourced offices. And the budgetary stakes to get error rates lower are sky-high.

“It’s a really complicated, nuanced and confusing time for states who are trying to administer SNAP,” said Lauren Kallins, a senior legislative director at the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures, which has advocated for a delay in the benefits costs shift.

Politics

David Plouffe warns Dems: Don’t take North Carolina for granted

Published

1 day ago

October 10, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

National Democrats are increasingly shifting their attention away from North Carolina’s Senate race as polls show former Gov. Roy Cooper ahead, eyeing once long-shot races as possible pickups. But a veteran Democratic strategist who helped deliver the party’s last presidential victory in the state is urging donors not to take a win for granted.

David Plouffe, who managed behind Barack Obama’s narrow 2008 victory in North Carolina, urged Democratic donors and supporters not to grow complacent in the final weeks of Roy Cooper’s Senate campaign, according to audio obtained by Blue Light News.

“I think that this race … has I think been the best run race in the country,” Plouffe said on the call. “But that doesn’t mean that we can rest easy.”

He warned about North Carolina’s relatively fixed partisan makeup as a purple state, making it difficult for a candidate to dramatically expand their base of support.

“There’s certain states that elections happen within a bound, and this one will be that way as well,” he said.

In public polling, Cooper leads Republican Michael Whatley, who has struggled to boost his name recognition against the much better-known former governor. And as Democrats grow increasingly bullish on their candidate’s chances of flipping the seat — one of four pickups they need to take control of the Senate — national groups have begun shifting their money and attention to other contests, including most recently to Kansas.

But Plouffe said North Carolina needs to remain a priority.

“We have to win the ones we have to win,” he said on the call to Cooper’s finance committee.

Just days before Plouffe’s remarks, Senate Democrats’ top super PAC pulled back some of its spending in North Carolina, following a much bigger retreat by Republicans’ top super PAC in the state.

Plouffe cautioned that North Carolina has historically been a tough state for Democrats at the federal level, especially in recent years. The party hasn’t won a Senate race there since 2008, when Obama became the last Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state, winning by fewer than 15,000 votes. He lost the state in 2012.

“Even though we carried the electoral votes back then, we only did so by I think 14,000 votes. So it was our narrowest victory,” Plouffe said. “And in 2012, we tried to win North Carolina again with the help of so many people on this phone, and we just couldn’t get it done. And that tells you how difficult the state is.”

Plouffe also cast the stakes of Cooper’s race as extending beyond November, arguing that a Cooper victory could provide a blueprint for the party’s eventual 2028 presidential nominee.

“Democrats need to compete and win in North Carolina in 28,” he said. “And it’s one thing to look how a governor can win a state. The best route, the best scout that you receive, is how someone in a federal race won in a tough state, and that can show you the way.”