Connect with us

The Dictatorship

What the government shutdown means for workers and the economy

Published

on

What the government shutdown means for workers and the economy

WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal government shutdown is quickly approaching the second longest on record with no end in sight. Some lawmakers are predicting it could become the longest, surpassing the 35 days from President Donald Trump’s first term.

The Trump administration is using the current shutdown to buttress priorities it favors while seeking to dismantle those it doesn’t. Nevertheless, Democrats are insisting that any funding bill include help for millions of Americans who will lose health insurance coverage or face dramatically higher monthly premiums if Congress does nothing.

The shutdown began Oct. 1. Here’s a look at its impact so far on workers, the economy and the services the government provides.

Furloughs and firings

The federal government employed nearly 2.3 million civilian employees as of March 31. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that about 750,000 of those employees would be furloughed each day during a shutdown. That means they don’t report to work until the shutdown ends. Others are considered “excepted” and do go to work, helping to protect life and property and perform other essential services.

Both groups of workers will get paid, but on a retroactive basis. That means they are facing the prospect of missing a full paycheck later this month after receiving a partial one earlier for work performed in late September.

The nation’s 1.3 million active-duty service members got a temporary reprieve. They were looking at missing a paycheck on Wednesday. But Trump directed the Pentagon to redirect money. A second reprieve looks unlikely.

Of note for taxpayers, the government tab for paying furloughed workers while they are at home comes to roughly $400 million a day, according to a CBO estimate provided at the request of Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa.

AP AUDIO: Shutdown impact: What it means for workers, federal programs and the economy

AP correspondent Julie Walker reports on the government shutdown, what it means for workers, federal programs and the economy.

The administration is also trying to fire thousands of federal workers in agencies that don’t align with its priorities. Republican leaders in Congress have said that’s part of the fallout from a shutdown. Past presidents, however, did not use shutdowns to engage in mass firings.

The Republican administration has announced one reduction in force affecting 4,100 workers, with the biggest cuts happening at the departments of Treasury, Health and Human Services, Education and Housing and Urban Development.

White House budget chief Russ Vought said in an interview on “The Charlie Kirk Show” that many more are planned.

“I think we’ll probably end up being north of 10,000,” Vought said.

“We want to be very aggressive where we can be in shuttering the bureaucracy,” Vought said. “Not just the funding, but the bureaucracy, that we now have an opportunity to do that.”

A federal judge has temporarily blocked the firings, saying the cuts appeared to be politically motivated and were being carried out without much thought. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday that the administration was “100%” confident that it will prevail on the merits in subsequent legal action.

Lawmakers acknowledge that many federal workers live paycheck to paycheck and will face some financial stress during the shutdown. Food banks in some communities have boosted efforts to help them. The Capital Area Food Bank, for example, said it would hold additional food distributions in the Washington region beginning Monday to support federal workers and contractors.

Economic Impact

Past shutdowns have had slight impacts on the economy, reducing growth in the quarter during which the shutdown occurs, but growth increases slightly in the following three months to help make up for it.

One estimate from Oxford Economics said a shutdown reduces economic growth by 0.1 to 0.2 percentage points per week. A shutdown that lasts the entire quarter, which has never occurred, would reduce growth for those three months by 1.2 to 2.4 percentage points.

Some industries are hurt worse than others.

The U.S. Travel Association said the travel economy is expected to lose $1 billion a week as travelers change plans to visit national parks, historic sites and the nation’s capital, where many facilities such as Smithsonian Institution museums and the National Zoo are now closed to visitors.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce noted that the Small Business Administration supports loans totaling about $860 million a week for 1,600 small businesses. Those programs close to new loans during the shutdown. The shutdown also has halted the issuance and renewal of flood insurance policies, delaying mortgage closings and real estate transactions.

The Federal Aviation Administration has reported air controller shortages in cities across the United States, from airports in Boston and Philadelphia, to control centers in Atlanta and Houston. Flight delays have spread to airports in Nashville, Tennessee, Dallas, Newark, New Jersey and more.

Political fallout

The party that insists on conditions as part of a government funding bill generally doesn’t get its way. That was the case in 2013 and 2018 for Republicans. It remains to be seen how things will shake out this time, but neither side appears to be budging.

So far, the public is rather split on who is to blame for the impasse. Roughly 6 in 10 U.S. adults say Trump and Republicans in Congress have “a great deal” or “quite a bit” of responsibility for the shutdown, while 54% say the same about Democrats in Congress, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Perceptions could change depending upon how much the White House uses the shutdown to eliminate Democratic priorities and Democratic-leaning states and cities.

The administration has put on hold roughly $18 billion to fund a new rail tunnel beneath the Hudson River between New York City and New Jersey and an extension of the city’s Second Avenue subway. It canceled $7.6 billion in grants that supported hundreds of clean energy projects in 16 states, all of which voted for Democrat Kamala Harris in last year’s presidential election. The administration cited reasons apart from the shutdown for the funding changes.

In the end, there does not appear to be an easy way out of the shutdown. Republicans insists any negotiations on health care occur after the government is fully open for business. “We’re not conducting negotiations in a hostage situation,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D.

Across the Capitol, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said Democrats “are not going to bend and we’re not going to break because we are standing up for the American people.”

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

No plan B: Trump is flailing to find an off-ramp for the Iran war

Published

on

This is an adapted excerpt from the March 24 episode of “All In with Chris Hayes.”

Donald Trump’s war on Iran is in its fourth week. Gas prices are up $1 a gallon in much of the country. Stocks continue to fall on fears of global supply shortages.

The death toll is growing. Thirteen American service members have lost their livesand more than 1,200 Iranians have been killed, along with upward of 1,000 people in Lebanonmore than 150 in the surrounding Gulf states and 17 Israelis. That’s not accounting for the millions who are displaced and the thousands who have been injured, including hundreds of U.S. troops.

But according to the president who launched the war, it’s all over.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump expected a fast and easy win.

“We’ve won this. This war has been won,” he told reporters Tuesday in the Oval Office. “The only one that likes to keep it going is the fake news.”

However, during those same remarks, Trump was all over the place — talking about an epic victory, ongoing peace negotiations and personal gifts.

It was all completely counter to his posture over the weekend, when he threatened to “obliterate” Iranian civilian power plants — essentially teasing a war crime — if Iran did not stop blocking oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuzsomething Iran was not doing before Trump attacked them.

But now, he has supposedly pressed pause on that bombing plan for five days because, he said, the negotiations are going well.

When he first announced that in a social media post Monday, it sent oil prices down 10% and boosted stocks.

However, those markets reversed themselves Tuesday after the Iranians said they have not engaged in any serious high-level negotiations with the Americans, and they claimed Trump was making things up to help oil prices. The Israelis said the same thing. (That’s not to say you should take Iran’s word for it, or Israel’s, but you shouldn’t take the White House’s word, either.)

It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump expected a fast and easy win. He had no plan B, and now he is flailing to find some kind of fallback position.

On Monday, sources from the administration told Politico that they have their eyes on a future U.S.-backed leader of Iran: Mohammad ⁠Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of the Iranian parliament.

“He’s a hot option,” one unnamed U.S. source — who seems to really wants a deal — told Blue Light News. “He’s one of the highest. … But we got to test them, and we can’t rush into it.”

But on Tuesday, that “hot option” trolled Trump for what he called a “jawboning campaign” to stabilize oil prices. In a social media postGhalibaf wrote: “[L]et’s see if they can turn that into ‘actual fuel’ at the pump — or maybe even print gas molecules!”

Call it the fog of Trumpian war: a million contradictory messages flying around, constantly wildly pinging bits of news that don’t make sense together.

Right now, we have reports that Trump’s negotiators, including his envoy Steve Witkoff and Vice President JD Vance, are traveling to Pakistan for informal talks with an Iranian official.

At the same time, unnamed U.S. officials have told The New York Times that the Saudi crown prince is pushing Trump to continue the war until Iran’s government collapses — something the Saudis publicly deny.

In fact, The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Saudi officials are holding talks in Riyadh with their Arab counterparts to find a diplomatic off-ramp from the war.

On Tuesday evening, U.S. officials said the Pentagon was poised to deploy 3,000 troops of the 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East. That is in addition to two Marine expeditionary units on their way to the region and the 50,000 U.S. troops already stationed there.

Also on Tuesday, Iranian-backed militias in Iraq are claiming that U.S. strikes there killed 30 of their members.

But, according to Trump, the peace talks are going great, right?

All eyes everywhere have been on the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran responded to the U.S. attack by striking oil tankers and shutting down 20% of the world’s supply of oil and liquefied natural gas. It is now essentially running a toll operation in the strait.

Some countries, such as China, Japan and India, are negotiating deals with Iran to get its oil out. Which is to say, Iran is shipping more oil and making more money than it was under the U.S. sanctions in place before Trump attacked it.

It’s clear the president sees what’s happening, so now he is trying to share control of the strait with Iran. Trump told reporters the strait would be “jointly controlled” by “maybe” him and “the next ayatollah.”

The administration really thought this was going to be another Venezuela. They told themselves that, and they were egged on to believe it by the staunchest advocates of the war, such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Sen. Lindsey GrahamR-S.C.

But in Iran, a decapitation strike did not lead to mass uprisings. It did not lead to regime change. It led to the situation in which Iran’s regime is intact, even if militarily degraded, and they now have explicit control of the Strait of Hormuz — a huge pressure point.

It really looks like the U.S. is backed into a corner: It can sue for peace because of the oil tanker situation, but they do not have much leverage, or it can escalate the war. That may be why we’re seeing all these contradictory developments.

In Iran, a decapitation strike did not lead to mass uprisings. It did not lead to regime change. It led to the situation in which Iran’s regime is intact.

Trump issued an ultimatum he had to walk back from because he said there were deep peace negotiations, which then later proved to be completely fabricated.

Now, more U.S. troops are set to be deployed for a possible ground invasion in the Middle East, despite reports that the U.S. has supposedly sent a 15-point plan to Iran through Pakistan to end the war.

It almost looks as if Trump is trying to wave the peace card to keep a lid on oil futures and financial marketsjust long enough to have ground troops in position — and just in time for the markets to close for the weekend on Friday, when Trump’s “pause” on bombing Iranian power plants is set to end.

That could be the plan Trump now settles on, weeks into a deadly war where there was obviously, very clearly, no real plan at all.

Allison Detzel contributed.

Chris Hayes hosts “All In with Chris Hayes” at 8 p.m. ET Tuesday through Friday on MS NOW. He is the editor-at-large at The Nation. A former fellow at Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics, Hayes was a Bernard Schwartz Fellow at the New America Foundation. His latest book is “The Sirens’ Call: How Attention Became the World’s Most Endangered Resource” (Penguin Press).

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Jury finds Meta and YouTube liable in landmark social media trial, awards $6 million

Published

on

Jury finds Meta and YouTube liable in landmark social media trial, awards $6 million

A California state jury found Meta and YouTube liable in a landmark social media case on Wednesday, awarding $3 million in compensatory damages to a plaintiff who brought the case and putting the Instagram maker’s liability at 70% and the Google company’s at 30%.

The jurors later decided to award a total of $3 million in punitive damages, with Meta to pay $2.1 million and YouTube $900,000. The verdict was reached on the jury’s ninth day of deliberation.

A 2023 complaint accused social media companies of fueling an unprecedented mental health crisis for American children through “addictive and dangerous” products. Plaintiffs accused the companies of deliberately tweaking their products to exploit kids’ undeveloped brains to “create compulsive use of their apps.”

The civil case was brought by several plaintiffs against several companies, but this state court trial, which featured testimonyfrom Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, involved a plaintiff described by her initials as “K.G.M.” in court papers against Instagram and YouTube.

In the 2023 complaint, K.G.M. said she was a 17-year-old in California who started using social media at a much younger age, though her mother told her not to and used third-party software to try to prevent the daughter’s social media use. The complaint alleged that the corporate defendants designed their products in ways that let kids evade parental controls and that the companies knew, or should’ve known, that K.G.M. was a minor.

The plaintiff alleged that Instagram’s and other companies’ addictive designs led her to develop “a compulsion to engage with those products nonstop” and to see “harmful and depressive content, urging K.G.M. to commit acts of self-harm, as well as harmful social comparison and body image.”

She alleged that she suffered bullying, depression, anxiety and body dysmorphia through Instagram and that Meta did nothing in response to a report about it. “Meta allowed the predatory user to continue harming minor Plaintiff K.G.M., including through the use of explicit images of a minor child,” the complaint said, adding that the company’s “defective reporting mechanisms and/or deliberate failure to act caused emotional and mental health harms to K.G.M. in addition to and separate from any third-party conduct.”

The companies, which have denied wrongdoingsaid Wednesday that they plan to appeal.

Jillian Frankel contributed from Los Angeles.

Subscribe to theDeadline: Legal Newsletterfor expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration’s legal cases.

Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro,” a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Democrat vows to turn ‘Epstein files into Epstein trials’ after release of new depositions

Published

on

Democrat vows to turn ‘Epstein files into Epstein trials’ after release of new depositions

The House Oversight Committee on Tuesday released hours of deposition footage from its interviews with two former close associates of Jeffrey Epsteinattorney Darren Indyke and accountant Richard Kahn. Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., a member of the committee, joined “The Weeknight” to discuss the interviews and the efforts to hold any accomplices of the late sex offender accountable.

“What is remarkable is that even in death, his closest associates and co-conspirators are still covering for him,” Stansbury said.

During their depositions, both Indyke and Kahn insisted they had no knowledge of Epstein’s illegal behavior. The New Mexico Democrat cast doubt on those claims, taking particular issue with Indyke’s testimony, during which she said it was possible that Epstein’s former attorney may have “perjured himself.”

“He claimed that he had no knowledge of all of these nefarious activities, and yet he literally has spent decades of his life at the center of this controversy,” she said. “I’m sorry, I’m not buying it.”

Stansbury told MS NOW she believed it was important for the public to understand that both Indyke and Kahn “stand to make tens of millions of dollars off of their execution” of Epstein’s will. She added that “the way the will is structured, there is a survivor fund, and at the end of that, they get to basically keep whatever is left over.”

“We don’t know what was written into whatever contracts, but it’s clear that they have a financial interest,” she said.

Stansbury said the pair’s depositions should be part of a greater effort from lawmakers and law enforcement across the country to pursue accountability for Epstein’s victims, even after his death. She highlighted how her home state, New Mexico, was doing just that.

“That is why we are going to continue to seek justice in this case, and it’s why in New Mexico, not only did we pass a truth commission, but one of the updates that we want to tell people about is that we plan to pursue convictions against individuals who were implicated in these crimes who were not prosecuted by the federal government,” she said. “We want to turn these Epstein files into Epstein trials — and that’s exactly what we plan to do.”

You can watch Stansbury’s full interview in the clip at the top of the page.

Allison Detzel is an editor/producer for MS NOW. She was previously a segment producer for “AYMAN” and “The Mehdi Hasan Show.”

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending