KANSAS CITY, Mo. – A Kansas City man pleaded guilty in federal court for his role in a scheme in which the conspirators stole hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of merchandise from beauty and liquor stores across six states, according to the United State's Attorney.

Gary Bailey, 24, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Greg Kays, to one count of conspiring to transport and possess stolen property and one count of interstate transportation of stolen property.

By pleading guilty, Bailey admitted that between March 2023 and January 2024, he participated in burglarizing at least 23 stores across Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Bailey and his co-conspirators brought the stolen product back to Kansas City, before either selling it, giving it away to family or friends, or consuming the product themselves. The loss to these 23 victim businesses exceeded $418,000.

On April 22, 2025, co-conspirator Donald Bennett pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to transport and possess stolen property, one count of interstate transportation of stolen property, and one count of money laundering.

As part of the plea agreement, Bailey must pay restitution to the victim businesses; the exact amount to be determined at his sentencing hearing. Under federal statutes, Bailey is subject to a sentence of up to 10 years in federal prison without parole. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes, as the sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled after the completion of a presentence investigation by the United States Probation Office.

<p>KANSAS CITY, Mo. – A Kansas City man pleaded guilty in federal court for his role in a scheme in which the conspirators stole hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of merchandise from beauty and liquor stores across six states, according to the United State's Attorney.</p><p>Gary Bailey, 24, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Greg Kays, to one count of conspiring to transport and possess stolen property and one count of interstate transportation of stolen property.</p><p>By pleading guilty, Bailey admitted that between March 2023 and January 2024, he participated in burglarizing at least 23 stores across Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Bailey and his co-conspirators brought the stolen product back to Kansas City, before either selling it, giving it away to family or friends, or consuming the product themselves. The loss to these 23 victim businesses exceeded $418,000.</p><p>On April 22, 2025, co-conspirator Donald Bennett pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to transport and possess stolen property, one count of interstate transportation of stolen property, and one count of money laundering.</p><p>As part of the plea agreement, Bailey must pay restitution to the victim businesses; the exact amount to be determined at his sentencing hearing. Under federal statutes, Bailey is subject to a sentence of up to 10 years in federal prison without parole. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes, as the sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled after the completion of a presentence investigation by the United States Probation Office.</p>

Man admits stealing $400K worth of goods in Nebraska, 5 other states

LINCOLN, Neb. — Nebraska lawmakers could get another chance to vote on a bill that would scale back scheduled increases to the state's minimum wage after approving a motion May 22 to reconsider a failed vote from the previous week.

The bill, LB258, introduced by Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln, would replace a voter-approved plan to annually adjust the minimum wage based on the Midwest Consumer Price Index with a fixed annual increase of 1.75%. Voters passed the current law in November 2022, setting the minimum wage to rise incrementally to $15 an hour by Jan. 1, 2026, with inflation-based adjustments thereafter. The wage is currently $13.50 an hour.

In addition to changing the adjustment formula, LB258 would establish a $13.50-an-hour youth minimum wage for workers ages 14 and 15, and apply the same rate through 2026 to the 90-day training wage for employees under age 20. Both the youth and training wages would increase by 1.5% annually starting in 2027, with youth wages rising every five years beginning in 2030. Emancipated minors would be excluded from the youth wage provision.

The bill fell two votes short of the required 33-vote supermajority for final passage on May 14, failing 31-17. Measures that alter laws enacted by ballot initiative require a two-thirds majority in the Legislature.

Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, who supported the bill but did not vote during the May 14 roll call, filed the motion to reconsider, citing the absence of another supporter at the time. Ballard said while rare, reconsideration is allowed under legislative rules and has precedent, including in 1984.

“I think this is the right motion, it is well in order and it’s the right thing for this Legislature,” Ballard said during debate.

Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha opposed the move, calling it “shameful” and a break from legislative norms.

“Proponents of this measure lost fair and square and now they want a do-over,” Hunt said.

The motion to reconsider passed on a 33-16 vote. No new date has been set for a second vote on final passage of LB258.

<p>LINCOLN, Neb. — Nebraska lawmakers could get another chance to vote on a bill that would scale back scheduled increases to the state's minimum wage after approving a motion May 22 to reconsider a failed vote from the previous week.</p><p>The bill, LB258, introduced by Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln, would replace a voter-approved plan to annually adjust the minimum wage based on the Midwest Consumer Price Index with a fixed annual increase of 1.75%. Voters passed the current law in November 2022, setting the minimum wage to rise incrementally to $15 an hour by Jan. 1, 2026, with inflation-based adjustments thereafter. The wage is currently $13.50 an hour.</p><p>In addition to changing the adjustment formula, LB258 would establish a $13.50-an-hour youth minimum wage for workers ages 14 and 15, and apply the same rate through 2026 to the 90-day training wage for employees under age 20. Both the youth and training wages would increase by 1.5% annually starting in 2027, with youth wages rising every five years beginning in 2030. Emancipated minors would be excluded from the youth wage provision.</p><p>The bill fell two votes short of the required 33-vote supermajority for final passage on May 14, failing 31-17. Measures that alter laws enacted by ballot initiative require a two-thirds majority in the Legislature.</p><p>Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, who supported the bill but did not vote during the May 14 roll call, filed the motion to reconsider, citing the absence of another supporter at the time. Ballard said while rare, reconsideration is allowed under legislative rules and has precedent, including in 1984.</p><p>“I think this is the right motion, it is well in order and it’s the right thing for this Legislature,” Ballard said during debate.</p><p>Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha opposed the move, calling it “shameful” and a break from legislative norms.</p><p>“Proponents of this measure lost fair and square and now they want a do-over,” Hunt said.</p><p>The motion to reconsider passed on a 33-16 vote. No new date has been set for a second vote on final passage of LB258.</p>

Vote on state minimum wage may be reconsidered

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/sofia-resnick/">Sofia Resnick</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/charlotte-rene-woods/">Charlotte Rene Woods</a>&nbsp;<br><a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/"><i>States Newsroom</i></a>

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. — Abortion pills — and questions over their inherent safety — were back in federal court Monday. Unlike a lawsuit rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court last year, plaintiffs this time are not anti-abortion activists arguing medication abortion should be banned, but abortion providers arguing the remaining restrictions should be lifted to match the drug’s 25-year record of safety and efficacy.

The suit seeks to make abortion pills more accessible by removing several existing restrictions on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s mifepristone-misoprostol regimen first approved in 2000. The drug was approved under the FDA’s drug safety program called Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), provisions of which have been steadily eliminated over time but not fully.

On behalf of independent providers in Virginia, Montana, and Kansas, Center for Reproductive Rights senior counsel Linda Goldstein argued the FDA’s most recent evaluations did not properly assess whether remaining restrictions are still medically necessary. She argued that the biggest risks the FDA has identified with mifepristone — serious bleeding and infection — are not exclusive to the drug but with all pregnancy terminations, including spontaneous miscarriages, which she said affected about 25% of all pregnancies. Beyond abortion, for which the drug has captured attention, mifepristone is also used to treat miscarriages so that they conclude safely to help prevent infection.

“The FDA has acknowledged that staying pregnant is more dangerous than not staying pregnant,” said Goldstein, arguing that at minimum the FDA should be required to explain why drugs that pose similar risks are not subject to the same restrictions.

She noted that of the 20,000 drugs the FDA has approved,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=20%2C000+drugs+the+FDA+has+approved%2C+only+73+have+REMS+provisions&amp;oq=20%2C000+drugs+the+FDA+has+approved%2C+only+73+have+REMS+provisions&amp;gs_lcrp=EgRlZGdlKgYIABBFGDkyBggAEEUYOdIBBzMyNGowajmoAgCwAgE&amp;sourceid=chrome&amp;ie=UTF-8" target="_blank">only 73</a>&nbsp;have REMS provisions, and that mifepristone has proven to be a safe drug over time. About 7.5 million U.S. patients have taken it as of the end of last year, Goldstein said. As of December 2024, the FDA has reported&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/questions-and-answers-mifepristone-medical-termination-pregnancy-through-ten-weeks-gestation#:~:text=As%20of%20December%2031%2C%202024,several%20fatal%20cases%20of%20severe" target="_blank">36 patient deaths</a>&nbsp;associated with mifepristone since it was first approved in 2000.

Whole Woman’s Health Alliance v. FDA is the first time the U.S. Department of Justice is arguing a position on mifepristone in court since the Trump administration took office. Justice Department attorneys said current regulations are necessary for the most common form of pregnancy termination to be considered safe. When asked by the judge, DOJ attorney Noah Katzen did not confirm or deny whether or not the FDA still considers the drug to be safe and effective overall.

“That is what the FDA determined in the past,” Katzen said during the hearing at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia in Charlottesville, where the case was originally filed in 2023.

Katzen, the FDA’s former associate chief counsel until 2021 and currently a trial attorney for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said the FDA has found that the evidence was “not sufficient” to conclude the REMS are no longer necessary.

U.S. District Judge Robert S. Ballou, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, appeared more sympathetic to plaintiffs’ argument that some of the requirements appear arbitrary in that they don’t apply to other drugs with equal or greater risk, including drugs his parents have taken.&nbsp;

Ballou did not rule at the end of Monday’s hearing but said he would as soon as possible.

After the hearing, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance founder and president Amy Hagstrom Miller told States Newsroom she took note of Katzen’s response about whether the FDA considers mifepristone to be safe and effective.

“It was an interesting choice of words,” she said.

This<a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67347356/whole-womans-health-alliance-v-united-states-food-and-drug-administration/https:/www.courtlistener.com/docket/67347356/whole-womans-health-alliance-v-united-states-food-and-drug-administration/" target="_blank">&nbsp;lawsuit</a>&nbsp;is among several federal cases involving mifepristone. Earlier this month, the Trump administration filed a brief in the case Missouri v. FDA, requesting the court<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-administration-asks-dismiss-suit-3-gop-states-trying-limit-abortion-pill" target="_blank">&nbsp;dismiss three states’ lawsuit</a>&nbsp;to restrict mifepristone on procedural grounds, but did not comment on the merits of the case or explicitly defend the FDA’s current medication abortion policy.

While the Missouri v. FDA lawsuit seeks to reinstate regulations loosened between 2016 and 2021, the Whole Woman’s Health v. FDA lawsuit takes aim at restrictions that require: medical professionals who prescribe mifepristone to register with the drug manufacturer; pharmacies to apply for special certification and maintain copious records, and patients to review and sign a counseling form.

On behalf of plaintiffs, which include Whole Woman’s Health Alliance in Virginia and other states, All Families Healthcare and Blue Mountain Clinic in Montana, and Trust Women in Kansas, Goldstein argued that these existing rules are burdensome and make these medications harder to access by limiting the number of providers and pharmacies who can provide and dispense it and impede access to time-sensitive care.

Goldstein noted the “political climate” surrounding mifepristone and pointed to how abortion opponents seek either rescinding of FDA approval for mifepristone or a return to the in-person dispensing requirements. She added how efforts to make abortion medication more&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2024/06/28/mcclellan-spanberger-work-to-repeal-parts-of-19th-century-law-that-could-ban-abortion-nationally/" target="_blank">difficult to obtain</a>&nbsp;are outlined in Project 2025 — the conservative Heritage Foundation’s playbook.

Before and especially since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, anti-abortion groups have tried to convince courts that abortion pills, in addition to ending the lives of embryos and fetuses, harm pregnant people at rates that warrant being pulled from the market or at the very least heavily restricted.

During his presidential campaign and since taking office, President Donald Trump and his health appointees have messaged strategically on medication abortion, on the one hand promising to retain its access while also open to examining new evidence suggesting it is unsafe.

Just last week, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he would direct the FDA to review abortion pill safety and potentially change its drug label, following the release of an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/hhs-agrees-review-mifepristone-safety-based-anti-abortion-white-papers" target="_blank">anti-abortion white paper</a>&nbsp;commissioned by far-right funders, whose analysis has been widely criticized by reproductive health scientists and is outflanked by hundreds of studies showing a very low rate of serious adverse events.

Hagstrom Miller called the current restrictions “politically motivated” and said overturning them would be especially significant for Virginia, which as the least restrictive state in the South, has seen an uptick in people traveling from elsewhere to receive care.

“They’re not related to the safety of the medication,”&nbsp;Hagstrom Miller&nbsp;said, of the current restrictions. “We just want to ensure that the most popular method for abortion in Virginia and beyond is protected no matter who sits at the White House and who sits in the FDA.”

Virginia is in the process of amending its state constitution to enshrine abortion and other reproductive health care procedures or medications. The&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2025/02/13/virginia-moves-to-protect-reproductive-and-voting-rights-but-the-fight-is-far-from-over/" target="_blank">constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;passed the legislature on party-line votes this year and must pass again next year before appearing on ballots for voters statewide. Its continued success or failure hinges on the outcome of the state’s competitive House of Delegates elections — where Democrats hold a slim majority.

While governors don’t have a say in constitutional amendments, the issue is a&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2025/04/02/virginia-march-for-life-tees-up-constitutional-amendment-ahead-of-this-years-elections/" target="_blank">divergence</a>&nbsp;between gubernatorial candidates Lt. Gov.&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2025/05/08/earle-sears-morally-opposed-to-virginias-reproductive-rights-amendment-note-shows/" target="_blank">Winsome Earle-Sears</a>&nbsp;and Democratic challenger former Congresswoman&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2024/06/28/mcclellan-spanberger-work-to-repeal-parts-of-19th-century-law-that-could-ban-abortion-nationally/" target="_blank">Abigail Spanberger</a>. This means that should the amendment fail and partisan control of the House shift, whoever is the next governor could advance or block potential future efforts to walk back Virginia’s current abortion access laws.&nbsp;

“It’s really important that we protect that safe access to medication abortion no matter where people live — Virginia is playing a key role in the South right now,”&nbsp;Hagstrom Miller said.

<p>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/sofia-resnick/">Sofia Resnick</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/charlotte-rene-woods/">Charlotte Rene Woods</a>&nbsp;<br><a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/"><i>States Newsroom</i></a></p><p>CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. — Abortion pills — and questions over their inherent safety — were back in federal court Monday. Unlike a lawsuit rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court last year, plaintiffs this time are not anti-abortion activists arguing medication abortion should be banned, but abortion providers arguing the remaining restrictions should be lifted to match the drug’s 25-year record of safety and efficacy.</p><p>The suit seeks to make abortion pills more accessible by removing several existing restrictions on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s mifepristone-misoprostol regimen first approved in 2000. The drug was approved under the FDA’s drug safety program called Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), provisions of which have been steadily eliminated over time but not fully.</p><p>On behalf of independent providers in Virginia, Montana, and Kansas, Center for Reproductive Rights senior counsel Linda Goldstein argued the FDA’s most recent evaluations did not properly assess whether remaining restrictions are still medically necessary. She argued that the biggest risks the FDA has identified with mifepristone — serious bleeding and infection — are not exclusive to the drug but with all pregnancy terminations, including spontaneous miscarriages, which she said affected about 25% of all pregnancies. Beyond abortion, for which the drug has captured attention, mifepristone is also used to treat miscarriages so that they conclude safely to help prevent infection.</p><p>“The FDA has acknowledged that staying pregnant is more dangerous than not staying pregnant,” said Goldstein, arguing that at minimum the FDA should be required to explain why drugs that pose similar risks are not subject to the same restrictions.</p><p>She noted that of the 20,000 drugs the FDA has approved,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=20%2C000+drugs+the+FDA+has+approved%2C+only+73+have+REMS+provisions&amp;oq=20%2C000+drugs+the+FDA+has+approved%2C+only+73+have+REMS+provisions&amp;gs_lcrp=EgRlZGdlKgYIABBFGDkyBggAEEUYOdIBBzMyNGowajmoAgCwAgE&amp;sourceid=chrome&amp;ie=UTF-8" target="_blank">only 73</a>&nbsp;have REMS provisions, and that mifepristone has proven to be a safe drug over time. About 7.5 million U.S. patients have taken it as of the end of last year, Goldstein said. As of December 2024, the FDA has reported&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/questions-and-answers-mifepristone-medical-termination-pregnancy-through-ten-weeks-gestation#:~:text=As%20of%20December%2031%2C%202024,several%20fatal%20cases%20of%20severe" target="_blank">36 patient deaths</a>&nbsp;associated with mifepristone since it was first approved in 2000.</p><p>Whole Woman’s Health Alliance v. FDA is the first time the U.S. Department of Justice is arguing a position on mifepristone in court since the Trump administration took office. Justice Department attorneys said current regulations are necessary for the most common form of pregnancy termination to be considered safe. When asked by the judge, DOJ attorney Noah Katzen did not confirm or deny whether or not the FDA still considers the drug to be safe and effective overall.</p><p>“That is what the FDA determined in the past,” Katzen said during the hearing at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia in Charlottesville, where the case was originally filed in 2023.</p><p>Katzen, the FDA’s former associate chief counsel until 2021 and currently a trial attorney for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said the FDA has found that the evidence was “not sufficient” to conclude the REMS are no longer necessary.</p><p>U.S. District Judge Robert S. Ballou, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, appeared more sympathetic to plaintiffs’ argument that some of the requirements appear arbitrary in that they don’t apply to other drugs with equal or greater risk, including drugs his parents have taken.&nbsp;</p><p>Ballou did not rule at the end of Monday’s hearing but said he would as soon as possible.</p><p>After the hearing, Whole Woman’s Health Alliance founder and president Amy Hagstrom Miller told States Newsroom she took note of Katzen’s response about whether the FDA considers mifepristone to be safe and effective.</p><p>“It was an interesting choice of words,” she said.</p><p>This<a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67347356/whole-womans-health-alliance-v-united-states-food-and-drug-administration/https:/www.courtlistener.com/docket/67347356/whole-womans-health-alliance-v-united-states-food-and-drug-administration/" target="_blank">&nbsp;lawsuit</a>&nbsp;is among several federal cases involving mifepristone. Earlier this month, the Trump administration filed a brief in the case Missouri v. FDA, requesting the court<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-administration-asks-dismiss-suit-3-gop-states-trying-limit-abortion-pill" target="_blank">&nbsp;dismiss three states’ lawsuit</a>&nbsp;to restrict mifepristone on procedural grounds, but did not comment on the merits of the case or explicitly defend the FDA’s current medication abortion policy.</p><p>While the Missouri v. FDA lawsuit seeks to reinstate regulations loosened between 2016 and 2021, the Whole Woman’s Health v. FDA lawsuit takes aim at restrictions that require: medical professionals who prescribe mifepristone to register with the drug manufacturer; pharmacies to apply for special certification and maintain copious records, and patients to review and sign a counseling form.</p><p>On behalf of plaintiffs, which include Whole Woman’s Health Alliance in Virginia and other states, All Families Healthcare and Blue Mountain Clinic in Montana, and Trust Women in Kansas, Goldstein argued that these existing rules are burdensome and make these medications harder to access by limiting the number of providers and pharmacies who can provide and dispense it and impede access to time-sensitive care.</p><p>Goldstein noted the “political climate” surrounding mifepristone and pointed to how abortion opponents seek either rescinding of FDA approval for mifepristone or a return to the in-person dispensing requirements. She added how efforts to make abortion medication more&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2024/06/28/mcclellan-spanberger-work-to-repeal-parts-of-19th-century-law-that-could-ban-abortion-nationally/" target="_blank">difficult to obtain</a>&nbsp;are outlined in Project 2025 — the conservative Heritage Foundation’s playbook.</p><p>Before and especially since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022, anti-abortion groups have tried to convince courts that abortion pills, in addition to ending the lives of embryos and fetuses, harm pregnant people at rates that warrant being pulled from the market or at the very least heavily restricted.</p><p>During his presidential campaign and since taking office, President Donald Trump and his health appointees have messaged strategically on medication abortion, on the one hand promising to retain its access while also open to examining new evidence suggesting it is unsafe.</p><p>Just last week, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he would direct the FDA to review abortion pill safety and potentially change its drug label, following the release of an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/hhs-agrees-review-mifepristone-safety-based-anti-abortion-white-papers" target="_blank">anti-abortion white paper</a>&nbsp;commissioned by far-right funders, whose analysis has been widely criticized by reproductive health scientists and is outflanked by hundreds of studies showing a very low rate of serious adverse events.</p><h2>Significant for the South&nbsp;</h2><p>Hagstrom Miller called the current restrictions “politically motivated” and said overturning them would be especially significant for Virginia, which as the least restrictive state in the South, has seen an uptick in people traveling from elsewhere to receive care.</p><p>“They’re not related to the safety of the medication,”&nbsp;Hagstrom Miller&nbsp;said, of the current restrictions. “We just want to ensure that the most popular method for abortion in Virginia and beyond is protected no matter who sits at the White House and who sits in the FDA.”</p><p>Virginia is in the process of amending its state constitution to enshrine abortion and other reproductive health care procedures or medications. The&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2025/02/13/virginia-moves-to-protect-reproductive-and-voting-rights-but-the-fight-is-far-from-over/" target="_blank">constitutional amendment</a>&nbsp;passed the legislature on party-line votes this year and must pass again next year before appearing on ballots for voters statewide. Its continued success or failure hinges on the outcome of the state’s competitive House of Delegates elections — where Democrats hold a slim majority.</p><p>While governors don’t have a say in constitutional amendments, the issue is a&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2025/04/02/virginia-march-for-life-tees-up-constitutional-amendment-ahead-of-this-years-elections/" target="_blank">divergence</a>&nbsp;between gubernatorial candidates Lt. Gov.&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2025/05/08/earle-sears-morally-opposed-to-virginias-reproductive-rights-amendment-note-shows/" target="_blank">Winsome Earle-Sears</a>&nbsp;and Democratic challenger former Congresswoman&nbsp;<a href="https://virginiamercury.com/2024/06/28/mcclellan-spanberger-work-to-repeal-parts-of-19th-century-law-that-could-ban-abortion-nationally/" target="_blank">Abigail Spanberger</a>. This means that should the amendment fail and partisan control of the House shift, whoever is the next governor could advance or block potential future efforts to walk back Virginia’s current abortion access laws.&nbsp;</p><p>“It’s really important that we protect that safe access to medication abortion no matter where people live — Virginia is playing a key role in the South right now,”&nbsp;Hagstrom Miller said.</p>

Abortion providers challenge FDA’s remaining mifepristone restrictions in federal court

<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/VP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@VP</a>, and <a href="https://twitter.com/SecDef?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecDef</a> salute as The Star-Spangled Banner is played at Arlington National Cemetery <a href="https://t.co/NVetqZxCyr">pic.twitter.com/NVetqZxCyr</a></p>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1927025135065702443?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">President <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a> lays a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier 🇺🇸 <a href="https://t.co/YLyDQyQdXM">pic.twitter.com/YLyDQyQdXM</a></p>&mdash; Margo Martin (@MargoMartin47) <a href="https://twitter.com/MargoMartin47/status/1927027306377187555?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">President <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/VP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@VP</a>, and <a href="https://twitter.com/SecDef?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecDef</a> arrive at Arlington National Cemetery 🇺🇸 <a href="https://t.co/OLzMz3yRAR">pic.twitter.com/OLzMz3yRAR</a></p>&mdash; Margo Martin (@MargoMartin47) <a href="https://twitter.com/MargoMartin47/status/1927027406709137553?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> arrives at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, alongside <a href="https://twitter.com/VP?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@VP</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/SecDef?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecDef</a>. <a href="https://t.co/QxZtoOizEW">pic.twitter.com/QxZtoOizEW</a></p>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1927024701437616232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/SecVetAffairs?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecVetAffairs</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DNIGabbard?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DNIGabbard</a>, and <a href="https://twitter.com/epaleezeldin?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@epaleezeldin</a> — all military veterans — arrive at Arlington National Cemetery alongside <a href="https://twitter.com/SecretaryTurner?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecretaryTurner</a>, who served the military in special projects, including by helping transition veterans into civilian life. <a href="https://t.co/pogzdKrbQp">pic.twitter.com/pogzdKrbQp</a></p>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1927023666518171789?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

🎥.Memorial Day ceremony at Tomb of the Unknown Soldier 

<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">&quot;I&#39;m not happy with what Putin&#39;s doing. He&#39;s killing a lot of people. I don&#39;t know what the hell happened to Putin... I don&#39;t like what Putin is doing, not even a little bit. He&#39;s killing people. Something happened to this guy. And I don&#39;t like it.&quot;<br><br>-- President Trump <a href="https://t.co/KWZK1Xq6Wo">pic.twitter.com/KWZK1Xq6Wo</a></p>&mdash; Howard Mortman (@HowardMortman) <a href="https://twitter.com/HowardMortman/status/1926771596439519717?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 25, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="zxx" dir="ltr"><a href="https://t.co/qjmxgOb4Mt">pic.twitter.com/qjmxgOb4Mt</a></p>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1926803020370579753?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

🎥Trump makes wild new statement on Russian leader Vladimir Putin

&nbsp;JACKSON COUNTY—Law enforcement are investigating a Nebraska man on multiple allegations after a traffic stop.

Just before 2:30p.m. May 23, a sheriff's deputy&nbsp;conducted a traffic stop on a Subaru Forester for a traffic infraction on U.S. 75 Highway near 126th&nbsp;Road, according to Sheriff Tim Morse.

&nbsp; After the traffic stop was completed, the driver, Michael Glebavicius, 55, of Omaha, Nebraska, was arrested following a search of the vehicle. During the search, methamphetamine, marijuana and numerous items of drug paraphernalia were located.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Glebavicius was&nbsp;booked into the Jackson County Jail on requested charges of possession of methamphetamine, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and criminal carrying of a weapon.

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1747947275336.png" alt="Glebavicius" />
                        <figcaption>Glebavicius</figcaption>
                    </figure><p>&nbsp;JACKSON COUNTY—Law enforcement are investigating a Nebraska man on multiple allegations after a traffic stop.</p><p>Just before 2:30p.m. May 23, a sheriff's deputy&nbsp;conducted a traffic stop on a Subaru Forester for a traffic infraction on U.S. 75 Highway near 126th&nbsp;Road, according to Sheriff Tim Morse.</p><p>&nbsp; After the traffic stop was completed, the driver, Michael Glebavicius, 55, of Omaha, Nebraska, was arrested following a search of the vehicle. During the search, methamphetamine, marijuana and numerous items of drug paraphernalia were located.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>Glebavicius was&nbsp;booked into the Jackson County Jail on requested charges of possession of methamphetamine, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and criminal carrying of a weapon.</p>

Sheriff: Man jailed for weapons violation, transporting meth in Kansas

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jacob-fischler/">Jacob Fischler</a>

The massive tax and spending bill passed by U.S. House Republicans would likely result in 3.2 million people losing food assistance benefits, and saddle states with around $14 billion a year in costs, according to a new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Democrats have argued the bill, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-republicans-push-through-massive-tax-and-spending-bill-slashing-medicaid" target="_blank">the House passed</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2025145" target="_blank">215-214</a>&nbsp;early Thursday without any Democrats in support, would cut programs for the needy to fund tax breaks for high earners.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-05/Klobuchar-Craig-Letter-SNAP_5-22-25.pdf" target="_blank">CBO document, issued late Thursday,&nbsp;</a>responded to a request to the office from the top Democrats on the Senate and House Agriculture committees, Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Rep. Angie Craig, both of Minnesota, and somewhat bolsters that claim. The panels oversee federal food aid programs.

“This report is truly devastating,” Craig said in a Friday statement to States Newsroom. “As a mother and someone who at times relied on food assistance as a child, these numbers are heartbreaking. It is infuriating that Republicans in Congress are willing to make our children go hungry so they can give tax breaks to the already rich.”

A provision in the bill to tighten work requirements, including by excluding single parents of children older than 6 and by raising the age of adults to whom the work requirements apply, of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, would result in 3.2 million people losing access to the program in an average month, the CBO report said.

Of those, 1.4 million would be people who currently have a state waiver from work requirements that would be disallowed under the bill and 800,000 would be adults who live with children 7 or older, the report said.

In a Friday statement, Ben Nichols, a spokesman for the House Agriculture Committee led by Pennsylvania Republican Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson, said the proposed change would be more fair to the people SNAP is supposed to help and noted the program is the only state-administered entitlement program that is paid fully by the federal government.

“No one who is able-bodied and working, volunteering, or training for 20 hours a week will lose benefits,” Nichols wrote.

Republicans want to use the legislative package to extend the 2017 tax law and its cuts, increase spending on border security and defense by hundreds of billions of dollars, overhaul American energy production, restructure higher education aid and cut spending.

The cost-share changes, which would require states for the first time to pay for a portion of SNAP benefits, would also limit participation and add a massive line item to state budgets, according to the CBO.

Starting in 2028, states would be responsible for paying 5% to 25% of SNAP benefits, with a state’s share rising with its payment error rate. The federal government currently pays for all SNAP benefits.

Under the House bill, which will likely undergo substantial changes as the Senate considers it in the coming weeks, states collectively would be responsible for just less than $100 billion from 2028 to 2034, about $14 billion per year.

States would respond in a variety of ways, CBO Director Phillip Swagel wrote, including potentially dropping out of the program.

“CBO expects that some states would maintain current benefits and eligibility and others would modify benefits or eligibility or possibly leave the program altogether because of the increased costs,” he wrote.

The office took a “probabilistic approach to account for a range of possible outcomes” to determine what the effect on households would be and estimated that 1.3 million people would lose benefits because of state responses to the new cost-share.

Nichols, with the House Agriculture Committee, disputed the CBO’s estimate regarding the cost share change. The lowest state cost-share of 5% would be available for states with error rates below 6%. Every state has hit that mark at some point in the last decade, he said.

With that favorable of a cost-share, the Republican committee members did not believe states would drop out of the program, he added.

“We reject the hypothetical assumption that some states may not chip into 5 percent of a supplemental nutrition program,” Nichols wrote. “Every state is capable of paying for a portion SNAP… Federal policy should encourage states to administer the SNAP program more efficiently and effectively, and this bill does just that.”&nbsp;

CBO’s forecasters determined the impacts of the work requirements and cost-share provisions separately, meaning some people potentially losing benefits could have been counted in both categories.

The House vote Thursday sent the measure to the Senate, where the debate over SNAP benefits may fall along similar party lines.

Republicans who hold control in that chamber are planning to employ the budget reconciliation process, which allows them to skirt the Senate’s usual 60-vote requirement for legislation.

During the House Agriculture Committee’s debate over its portion of the legislation, Republicans on the panel said the work requirement and state cost-share measures were needed reforms to SNAP that would protect the program for those it was meant to serve, while limiting the costs associated with benefits to adults who were able and unwilling to work or in the country illegally.

In a Friday statement, Sara Lasure, a spokeswoman for Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman, an Arkansas Republican, also said the panel would seek reforms to the program but did not offer specifics.

“The Senate Agriculture Committee is in the process of crafting its budget reconciliation package and will work as good stewards of taxpayer dollars to make commonsense reforms to SNAP that encourage employment,” she wrote in an email.

Klobuchar, in a statement after House passage Thursday, blasted the House bill and indicated she would oppose efforts to cut SNAP benefits.

“House Republicans are pulling the rug out from under millions of families by taking away federal assistance to put food on the table,” she said. “They’re doing that even as President Trump’s tariff taxes raise food prices by more than $200 for the average family, all to fund more tax breaks for the wealthy. That’s so very wrong —and we will fight against it in the Senate.”

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1689674819900.png" alt="Photo USDA" />
                        <figcaption>Photo USDA</figcaption>
                    </figure><p>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jacob-fischler/">Jacob Fischler</a></p><p>The massive tax and spending bill passed by U.S. House Republicans would likely result in 3.2 million people losing food assistance benefits, and saddle states with around $14 billion a year in costs, according to a new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.</p><p>Democrats have argued the bill, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-republicans-push-through-massive-tax-and-spending-bill-slashing-medicaid" target="_blank">the House passed</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2025145" target="_blank">215-214</a>&nbsp;early Thursday without any Democrats in support, would cut programs for the needy to fund tax breaks for high earners.</p><p>The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-05/Klobuchar-Craig-Letter-SNAP_5-22-25.pdf" target="_blank">CBO document, issued late Thursday,&nbsp;</a>responded to a request to the office from the top Democrats on the Senate and House Agriculture committees, Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Rep. Angie Craig, both of Minnesota, and somewhat bolsters that claim. The panels oversee federal food aid programs.</p><p>“This report is truly devastating,” Craig said in a Friday statement to States Newsroom. “As a mother and someone who at times relied on food assistance as a child, these numbers are heartbreaking. It is infuriating that Republicans in Congress are willing to make our children go hungry so they can give tax breaks to the already rich.”</p><p>A provision in the bill to tighten work requirements, including by excluding single parents of children older than 6 and by raising the age of adults to whom the work requirements apply, of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, would result in 3.2 million people losing access to the program in an average month, the CBO report said.</p><p>Of those, 1.4 million would be people who currently have a state waiver from work requirements that would be disallowed under the bill and 800,000 would be adults who live with children 7 or older, the report said.</p><p>In a Friday statement, Ben Nichols, a spokesman for the House Agriculture Committee led by Pennsylvania Republican Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson, said the proposed change would be more fair to the people SNAP is supposed to help and noted the program is the only state-administered entitlement program that is paid fully by the federal government.</p><p>“No one who is able-bodied and working, volunteering, or training for 20 hours a week will lose benefits,” Nichols wrote.</p><p>Republicans want to use the legislative package to extend the 2017 tax law and its cuts, increase spending on border security and defense by hundreds of billions of dollars, overhaul American energy production, restructure higher education aid and cut spending.</p><h2>Toll on states</h2><p>The cost-share changes, which would require states for the first time to pay for a portion of SNAP benefits, would also limit participation and add a massive line item to state budgets, according to the CBO.</p><p>Starting in 2028, states would be responsible for paying 5% to 25% of SNAP benefits, with a state’s share rising with its payment error rate. The federal government currently pays for all SNAP benefits.</p><p>Under the House bill, which will likely undergo substantial changes as the Senate considers it in the coming weeks, states collectively would be responsible for just less than $100 billion from 2028 to 2034, about $14 billion per year.</p><p>States would respond in a variety of ways, CBO Director Phillip Swagel wrote, including potentially dropping out of the program.</p><p>“CBO expects that some states would maintain current benefits and eligibility and others would modify benefits or eligibility or possibly leave the program altogether because of the increased costs,” he wrote.</p><p>The office took a “probabilistic approach to account for a range of possible outcomes” to determine what the effect on households would be and estimated that 1.3 million people would lose benefits because of state responses to the new cost-share.</p><p>Nichols, with the House Agriculture Committee, disputed the CBO’s estimate regarding the cost share change. The lowest state cost-share of 5% would be available for states with error rates below 6%. Every state has hit that mark at some point in the last decade, he said.</p><p>With that favorable of a cost-share, the Republican committee members did not believe states would drop out of the program, he added.</p><p>“We reject the hypothetical assumption that some states may not chip into 5 percent of a supplemental nutrition program,” Nichols wrote. “Every state is capable of paying for a portion SNAP… Federal policy should encourage states to administer the SNAP program more efficiently and effectively, and this bill does just that.”&nbsp;</p><p>CBO’s forecasters determined the impacts of the work requirements and cost-share provisions separately, meaning some people potentially losing benefits could have been counted in both categories.</p><h2>Move to the Senate</h2><p>The House vote Thursday sent the measure to the Senate, where the debate over SNAP benefits may fall along similar party lines.</p><p>Republicans who hold control in that chamber are planning to employ the budget reconciliation process, which allows them to skirt the Senate’s usual 60-vote requirement for legislation.</p><p>During the House Agriculture Committee’s debate over its portion of the legislation, Republicans on the panel said the work requirement and state cost-share measures were needed reforms to SNAP that would protect the program for those it was meant to serve, while limiting the costs associated with benefits to adults who were able and unwilling to work or in the country illegally.</p><p>In a Friday statement, Sara Lasure, a spokeswoman for Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman, an Arkansas Republican, also said the panel would seek reforms to the program but did not offer specifics.</p><p>“The Senate Agriculture Committee is in the process of crafting its budget reconciliation package and will work as good stewards of taxpayer dollars to make commonsense reforms to SNAP that encourage employment,” she wrote in an email.</p><p>Klobuchar, in a statement after House passage Thursday, blasted the House bill and indicated she would oppose efforts to cut SNAP benefits.</p><p>“House Republicans are pulling the rug out from under millions of families by taking away federal assistance to put food on the table,” she said. “They’re doing that even as President Trump’s tariff taxes raise food prices by more than $200 for the average family, all to fund more tax breaks for the wealthy. That’s so very wrong —and we will fight against it in the Senate.”</p>

More than 3 million would lose SNAP benefits under GOP bill, nonpartisan report says

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1748101992053.png" alt="After his address, President Trump was given a photo of the class of 2025 -image courtesy CSPAN" />
                        <figcaption>After his address, President Trump was given a photo of the class of 2025 -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
                    </figure><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">President Trump Addresses the Army Academy’s Class of 2025 <a href="https://t.co/fmzvdGxCUx">https://t.co/fmzvdGxCUx</a></p>&mdash; The White House (@WhiteHouse) <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1926277258576085165?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 24, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> at West Point: &quot;You could have done anything you wanted... Instead of stock options... you chose honor and you chose sacrifice. Instead of business suits and dress shoes, you chose muddy boots and fatigues... You&#39;re amazing people.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/SRi05anFw4">pic.twitter.com/SRi05anFw4</a></p>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1926317215545999653?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 24, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a>: &quot;As you receive your commissions as Second Lieutenants, each of you continues down the same hallowed path walked by the titans and legends of U.S. Military lore.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/IHjEOq4L9I">pic.twitter.com/IHjEOq4L9I</a></p>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1926284957627867494?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 24, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> at West Point: Every cadet on the field before me should savor this morning — because this is a day you will never forget. In a few moments, you will become graduates of the most ELITE and storied military academy in human history. <a href="https://t.co/hTkMgBnJkF">pic.twitter.com/hTkMgBnJkF</a></p>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1926283717745488061?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 24, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">💯 Trump: &quot;The job of the US Armed Forces is NOT to host drag shows.&quot;<br><br>The Military&#39;s job is to DOMINATE any foe and ANNIHILATE any threat.&quot; <br><br>&quot;You are respected more than any army anywhere in the world!&quot;<a href="https://t.co/l4pdbVnCFo">pic.twitter.com/l4pdbVnCFo</a></p>&mdash; Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) <a href="https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1926303082138292392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 24, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

🎥Trump has fun with West Point cadets at commencement

&nbsp;A controversial report released&nbsp; Thursday on American health and wellness from Health and Human Services Secretary&nbsp;Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/WH-The-MAHA-Report-Assessment.pdf">Click here to read the full</a> report

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1748002472470.png" alt="President Trump looks on as RFK, Jr. shares details during the MAHA report press conference Thursday-image courtesy White House" />
                        <figcaption>President Trump looks on as RFK, Jr. shares details during the MAHA report press conference Thursday-image courtesy White House</figcaption>
                    </figure><p>&nbsp;A controversial report released&nbsp; Thursday on American health and wellness from Health and Human Services Secretary&nbsp;Robert F. Kennedy Jr.</p><p><a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/WH-The-MAHA-Report-Assessment.pdf">Click here to read the full</a> report</p><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">🎥LIVE NOW: MAHA Commission Event<a href="https://t.co/grqwvw5rHx">https://t.co/grqwvw5rHx</a></p>&mdash; HHS.gov (@HHSGov) <a href="https://twitter.com/HHSGov/status/1925643966659150060?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">It was a privilege to join President <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a> at the White House, representing our farmers and ranchers.<br><br>America’s farmers are the original conservationists and champions of Making America Healthy Again. None of this would be possible without their dedication to taking… <a href="https://t.co/AdWRkZzZMn">pic.twitter.com/AdWRkZzZMn</a></p>&mdash; Dr. Roger Marshall (@RogerMarshallMD) <a href="https://twitter.com/RogerMarshallMD/status/1925660292987420816?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The MAHA Report ➡️ Poor Diet <a href="https://t.co/xYpxpeHP17">pic.twitter.com/xYpxpeHP17</a></p>&mdash; The White House (@WhiteHouse) <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1925655978810159427?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The MAHA Report ➡️ Environmental Chemical Exposure <a href="https://t.co/SN8S76QsSA">pic.twitter.com/SN8S76QsSA</a></p>&mdash; The White House (@WhiteHouse) <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1925656335460270145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The MAHA Report ➡️ Environmental Chemical Exposure <a href="https://t.co/SN8S76QsSA">pic.twitter.com/SN8S76QsSA</a></p>&mdash; The White House (@WhiteHouse) <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1925656335460270145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The MAHA Report ➡️ The Path Forward <a href="https://t.co/qeUvIm6L57">pic.twitter.com/qeUvIm6L57</a></p>&mdash; The White House (@WhiteHouse) <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1925658277771083911?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

Read RFK Jr.'s MAHA report: A dark picture of U.S. children's health

<i>Story By&nbsp;Nebraska Farm Bureau</i>

LINCOLN, Neb. – The Nebraska’s State FFA Convention brought hundreds of FFA students and their advisors from across the state to Lincoln. Each year the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation selects two recipients for their FFA Advisor of the Year award. This award honors FFA advisors for outstanding work in their local communities.

Emilye Yowell from Meridian Public Schools and Ben Robison from Alma Public Schools were honored at the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;State FFA Convention on Thursday, April 3 in Lincoln. The winning advisors received a plaque and a $1,000 donation to their&nbsp;<a href="https://www.morningagclips.com/tag/ffa/">FFA</a>&nbsp;chapter.

The teachers were nominated by their students and chosen based upon their school and community involvement, leadership development in their classroom, and their ability to keep their students involved in agriculture.

“The&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation is proud to support these exceptional educators. They go above and beyond for their students and the industry they love, and the future of&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;agriculture is bright thanks to their work,” said Megahn Schafer, executive director of the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation.

Yowell is the FFA Advisor for the Meridian FFA Chapter. Students in Meridian FFA say Yowell is committed to student success. She equips students to try new things and ask big questions. Yowell has led multiple career development teams to state and helped students see the many opportunities FFA and agriculture have to offer.

“I am extremely thankful to be receiving this award and thankful for my wonderful officer team for nominating me. Advisors often put in a lot of work behind the scenes that does not get recognized, and it is a great feeling to know that this does not go unnoticed by my members,” said Yowell.

Robison is the Advisor for the Alma FFA&nbsp;Chapter. Robison prioritizes creating leadership and learning opportunities for students, encouraging them to grow and maximize their potential. Robison knows that Supervised Agricultural Experiences (SAEs) are incredibly valuable to building well-rounded students. That’s why he has students start their SAE project as freshman. Not only does this provide students with the most amount of time to grow in this project but provides them with an opportunity to apply for awards. Students at Alma are thankful for Robison’s commitment to a strong community and growing strong leaders.

“Being nominated by my FFA members for the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation Advisor of the Year is an incredible honor. It means so much to know that my dedication and passion for agricultural education have made a positive impact on my students, and I’m proud to support their growth and success in FFA,” said Robison.

The mission of the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation is to engage youth, educators, and the general public to promote an understanding of the vital importance of agriculture in the lives of all Nebraskans. The&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. For more information about the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation, visit&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nefbfoundation.org/">www.nefbfoundation.org</a>.

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1748000883952.jpeg" alt="Congratulations to the 2025 Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation FFA Advisors of the Year! Pictured from left are Ben Robison, Alma FFA advisor; Megahn Schafer, Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation executive director; and Emilye Yowell, Meridian FFA advisor. (Courtesy photo)" />
                        <figcaption>Congratulations to the 2025 Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation FFA Advisors of the Year! Pictured from left are Ben Robison, Alma FFA advisor; Megahn Schafer, Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation executive director; and Emilye Yowell, Meridian FFA advisor. (Courtesy photo)</figcaption>
                    </figure><p><i>Story By&nbsp;Nebraska Farm Bureau</i></p><p>LINCOLN, Neb. – The Nebraska’s State FFA Convention brought hundreds of FFA students and their advisors from across the state to Lincoln. Each year the Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation selects two recipients for their FFA Advisor of the Year award. This award honors FFA advisors for outstanding work in their local communities.</p><p>Emilye Yowell from Meridian Public Schools and Ben Robison from Alma Public Schools were honored at the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;State FFA Convention on Thursday, April 3 in Lincoln. The winning advisors received a plaque and a $1,000 donation to their&nbsp;<a href="https://www.morningagclips.com/tag/ffa/">FFA</a>&nbsp;chapter.</p><p>The teachers were nominated by their students and chosen based upon their school and community involvement, leadership development in their classroom, and their ability to keep their students involved in agriculture.</p><p>“The&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation is proud to support these exceptional educators. They go above and beyond for their students and the industry they love, and the future of&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;agriculture is bright thanks to their work,” said Megahn Schafer, executive director of the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation.</p><p>Yowell is the FFA Advisor for the Meridian FFA Chapter. Students in Meridian FFA say Yowell is committed to student success. She equips students to try new things and ask big questions. Yowell has led multiple career development teams to state and helped students see the many opportunities FFA and agriculture have to offer.</p><p>“I am extremely thankful to be receiving this award and thankful for my wonderful officer team for nominating me. Advisors often put in a lot of work behind the scenes that does not get recognized, and it is a great feeling to know that this does not go unnoticed by my members,” said Yowell.</p><p>Robison is the Advisor for the Alma FFA&nbsp;Chapter. Robison prioritizes creating leadership and learning opportunities for students, encouraging them to grow and maximize their potential. Robison knows that Supervised Agricultural Experiences (SAEs) are incredibly valuable to building well-rounded students. That’s why he has students start their SAE project as freshman. Not only does this provide students with the most amount of time to grow in this project but provides them with an opportunity to apply for awards. Students at Alma are thankful for Robison’s commitment to a strong community and growing strong leaders.</p><p>“Being nominated by my FFA members for the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation Advisor of the Year is an incredible honor. It means so much to know that my dedication and passion for agricultural education have made a positive impact on my students, and I’m proud to support their growth and success in FFA,” said Robison.</p><p>The mission of the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation is to engage youth, educators, and the general public to promote an understanding of the vital importance of agriculture in the lives of all Nebraskans. The&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. For more information about the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau Foundation, visit&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nefbfoundation.org/">www.nefbfoundation.org</a>.</p>

Nebraska Farm Bureau Foundation Announces 2025 FFA Advisors of the Year

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/4/1744677178521.png" alt="Harvard President Alan Garber- courtesy photo" />
                        <figcaption>Harvard President Alan Garber- courtesy photo</figcaption>
                    </figure><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This administration is holding Harvard accountable for fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus. <br><br>It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and benefit from their higher tuition payments… <a href="https://t.co/12hJWd1J86">pic.twitter.com/12hJWd1J86</a></p>&mdash; Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) <a href="https://twitter.com/Sec_Noem/status/1925612991703052733?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1747947898170.png" alt="Page 1&nbsp;" />
                        <figcaption>Page 1&nbsp;</figcaption>
                    </figure><figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1747947942503.png" alt="Page 2" />
                        <figcaption>Page 2</figcaption>
                    </figure>

Read the DHS letter to Harvard banning enrollment of foreign students

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/shauneen-miranda/">Shauneen Miranda</a>

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education must temporarily reinstate the hundreds of employees laid off earlier this year and cannot follow through on an executive order from President Donald Trump seeking to dismantle the agency, a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled Thursday.&nbsp;

The&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.282419/gov.uscourts.mad.282419.45.0.pdf" target="_blank">ruling</a>&nbsp;stems from a pair of March lawsuits — one from a slew of&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/democratic-attorneys-general-sue-trump-over-us-education-department-layoffs" target="_blank">Democratic attorneys general</a>, another from a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/two-teachers-unions-parents-advocates-sue-over-trump-dismantling-department-education" target="_blank">coalition of advocacy and labor groups</a>&nbsp;— and blocks three Trump initiatives, marking a major blow to the president’s education agenda as his administration seeks to dramatically reshape the federal role in education.

The lawsuits challenge some of the administration’s most consequential education initiatives so far: a reduction in force effort at the agency that gutted&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-education-department-cut-hundreds-staff-members" target="_blank">more than 1,300 employees</a>, Trump’s executive order calling on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-sign-order-directing-education-secretary-shut-down-her-own-department" target="_blank">facilitate the closure</a>&nbsp;of her own department and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-rehouse-student-loans-other-programs-amid-push-close-education-department" target="_blank">Trump’s proposal</a>&nbsp;to rehouse the student loan portfolio in the Small Business Administration and special education services in the Department of Health and Human Services.

“A department without enough employees to perform statutorily mandated functions is not a department at all,” U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun wrote in his 88-page memorandum and order granting a preliminary injunction.

“This court cannot be asked to cover its eyes while the Department’s employees are continuously fired and units are transferred out until the Department becomes a shell of itself,” wrote Joun, whom former President Joe Biden appointed.

Joun’s preliminary injunction took effect immediately and will remain until the merits of the consolidated case are decided.

A department spokesperson said the administration would immediately appeal the ruling. The agency has since&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.281941/gov.uscourts.mad.281941.130.0_1.pdf" target="_blank">filed an appeal</a>.

One of the cases comes from a coalition of Democratic attorneys general in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state and Wisconsin.

The other lawsuit was brought by the American Federation of Teachers, its Massachusetts chapter, AFSCME Council 93, the American Association of University Professors, the Service Employees International Union and two school districts in Massachusetts.

The department’s reduction in force plan&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/advocates-brace-trump-cuts-education-department-step-toward-elimination" target="_blank">prompted concerns from education advocates and leaders</a>&nbsp;over how the agency would be able to carry out its core responsibilities after roughly halving its workforce, including major cuts to key units including the Office of Federal Student Aid, Office for Civil Rights and the Institute of Education Sciences.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, one of the largest teachers unions in the country, celebrated the ruling in a Thursday statement.

“Today, the court rightly rejected one of the administration’s very first illegal, and consequential, acts: abolishing the federal role in education,” Weingarten said.

“This decision is a first step to reverse this war on knowledge and the undermining of broad-based opportunity. For America to build a brighter future, we must all take more responsibility, not less, for the success of our children.”

Joun’s order also bars the agency from carrying out the president’s directive to transfer the student loan portfolio and special education services out of the agency.

Trump announced the proposal, which had no accompanying executive order, at the opening of an Oval Office appearance with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The department had told States Newsroom earlier this week that it had nothing new to share at this time regarding the proposed transfer.&nbsp;

Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, said the agency “will immediately challenge this on an emergency basis.”

“Once again, a far-left Judge has dramatically overstepped his authority, based on a complaint from biased plaintiffs, and issued an injunction against the obviously lawful efforts to make the Department of Education more efficient and functional for the American people,” she said in a statement shared with States Newsroom.

“President Trump and the Senate-confirmed Secretary of Education clearly have the authority to make decisions about agency reorganization efforts, not an unelected Judge with a political axe to grind. This ruling is not in the best interest of American students or families.”

Thursday’s ruling came just a day after&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/democrats-us-house-spending-panel-grill-education-secretary-mcmahon-over-planned-cuts" target="_blank">McMahon took a grilling</a>&nbsp;from U.S. House Democrats over the drastic cuts and proposed changes at her department during a hearing in a panel of the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations.

McMahon appeared before the lawmakers to outline Trump’s fiscal year 2026 budget request, which calls for $12 billion in spending cuts at the department.

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1742573578411.png" alt="In March, President Trump shown with Education Secretary Linda McMahon, signed an Executive Order to Dismantle Department of Education" />
                        <figcaption>In March, President Trump shown with Education Secretary Linda McMahon, signed an Executive Order to Dismantle Department of Education</figcaption>
                    </figure><p>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/shauneen-miranda/">Shauneen Miranda</a></p><p>WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education must temporarily reinstate the hundreds of employees laid off earlier this year and cannot follow through on an executive order from President Donald Trump seeking to dismantle the agency, a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled Thursday.&nbsp;</p><p>The&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.282419/gov.uscourts.mad.282419.45.0.pdf" target="_blank">ruling</a>&nbsp;stems from a pair of March lawsuits — one from a slew of&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/democratic-attorneys-general-sue-trump-over-us-education-department-layoffs" target="_blank">Democratic attorneys general</a>, another from a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/two-teachers-unions-parents-advocates-sue-over-trump-dismantling-department-education" target="_blank">coalition of advocacy and labor groups</a>&nbsp;— and blocks three Trump initiatives, marking a major blow to the president’s education agenda as his administration seeks to dramatically reshape the federal role in education.</p><p>The lawsuits challenge some of the administration’s most consequential education initiatives so far: a reduction in force effort at the agency that gutted&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-education-department-cut-hundreds-staff-members" target="_blank">more than 1,300 employees</a>, Trump’s executive order calling on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-sign-order-directing-education-secretary-shut-down-her-own-department" target="_blank">facilitate the closure</a>&nbsp;of her own department and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-rehouse-student-loans-other-programs-amid-push-close-education-department" target="_blank">Trump’s proposal</a>&nbsp;to rehouse the student loan portfolio in the Small Business Administration and special education services in the Department of Health and Human Services.</p><p>“A department without enough employees to perform statutorily mandated functions is not a department at all,” U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun wrote in his 88-page memorandum and order granting a preliminary injunction.</p><p>“This court cannot be asked to cover its eyes while the Department’s employees are continuously fired and units are transferred out until the Department becomes a shell of itself,” wrote Joun, whom former President Joe Biden appointed.</p><p>Joun’s preliminary injunction took effect immediately and will remain until the merits of the consolidated case are decided.</p><p>A department spokesperson said the administration would immediately appeal the ruling. The agency has since&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.281941/gov.uscourts.mad.281941.130.0_1.pdf" target="_blank">filed an appeal</a>.</p><h2>Win for Democratic states</h2><p>One of the cases comes from a coalition of Democratic attorneys general in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state and Wisconsin.</p><p>The other lawsuit was brought by the American Federation of Teachers, its Massachusetts chapter, AFSCME Council 93, the American Association of University Professors, the Service Employees International Union and two school districts in Massachusetts.</p><p>The department’s reduction in force plan&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/advocates-brace-trump-cuts-education-department-step-toward-elimination" target="_blank">prompted concerns from education advocates and leaders</a>&nbsp;over how the agency would be able to carry out its core responsibilities after roughly halving its workforce, including major cuts to key units including the Office of Federal Student Aid, Office for Civil Rights and the Institute of Education Sciences.</p><p>Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, one of the largest teachers unions in the country, celebrated the ruling in a Thursday statement.</p><p>“Today, the court rightly rejected one of the administration’s very first illegal, and consequential, acts: abolishing the federal role in education,” Weingarten said.</p><p>“This decision is a first step to reverse this war on knowledge and the undermining of broad-based opportunity. For America to build a brighter future, we must all take more responsibility, not less, for the success of our children.”</p><p>Joun’s order also bars the agency from carrying out the president’s directive to transfer the student loan portfolio and special education services out of the agency.</p><p>Trump announced the proposal, which had no accompanying executive order, at the opening of an Oval Office appearance with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The department had told States Newsroom earlier this week that it had nothing new to share at this time regarding the proposed transfer.&nbsp;</p><h2>Judge ‘dramatically overstepped’</h2><p>Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, said the agency “will immediately challenge this on an emergency basis.”</p><p>“Once again, a far-left Judge has dramatically overstepped his authority, based on a complaint from biased plaintiffs, and issued an injunction against the obviously lawful efforts to make the Department of Education more efficient and functional for the American people,” she said in a statement shared with States Newsroom.</p><p>“President Trump and the Senate-confirmed Secretary of Education clearly have the authority to make decisions about agency reorganization efforts, not an unelected Judge with a political axe to grind. This ruling is not in the best interest of American students or families.”</p><p>Thursday’s ruling came just a day after&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/democrats-us-house-spending-panel-grill-education-secretary-mcmahon-over-planned-cuts" target="_blank">McMahon took a grilling</a>&nbsp;from U.S. House Democrats over the drastic cuts and proposed changes at her department during a hearing in a panel of the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations.</p><p>McMahon appeared before the lawmakers to outline Trump’s fiscal year 2026 budget request, which calls for $12 billion in spending cuts at the department.</p>

Court order blocks Trump from eliminating U.S. Education Department

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">Jennifer Shutt</a>&nbsp;AND&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/ashley-murray/">Ashley Murray</a>

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House early Thursday approved the “big, beautiful bill” that Republican leaders spent months negotiating with centrists and far-right members of the party — two distinct factions that hold vastly different policy goals — over intense opposition from Democrats.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2025145" target="_blank">215-214 vote</a>&nbsp;ships the package to the Senate, where GOP lawmakers are expected to rewrite much of it, before sending it back across the Capitol for final approval, a process likely to stretch through the summer.

President Donald Trump, who said he backed the House version, would then need to sign the legislation, which under the complicated process being used by Republicans can pass with just a majority vote in the GOP-controlled Senate.

Speaker Mike Johnson said minutes before the vote that he expects lawmakers to give the measure final approval before the Fourth of July.

“Now, look, we’re accomplishing a big thing here today, but we know this isn’t the end of the road just yet,” Johnson, R-La., said. “We’ve been working closely with leader (John) Thune and our Senate colleagues, the Senate Republicans, to get this done and delivered to the President’s desk by our Independence Day. That’s July 4. Today proves that we can do that, and we will do that.”

Ohio’s Warren Davidson and Kentucky’s Thomas Massie were the only Republicans to vote against passing the bill, which members debated throughout the night prior to the vote just after daylight in the nation’s capital. All Democrats, who dubbed it “one big ugly bill,” were opposed. Maryland GOP Rep. Andy Harris, chairman of the Freedom Caucus, voted “present.”

Massie spoke against the bill overnight, calling it “a debt bomb ticking.”

“I’d love to stand here and tell the American people: We can cut your taxes and we can increase spending, and everything’s going to be just fine. But I can’t do that because I’m here to deliver a dose of reality,” Massie said. “This bill dramatically increases deficits in the near term, but promises our government will be fiscally responsible five years from now. Where have we heard that before? How do you bind a future Congress to these promises?”

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text?s=6&amp;r=1&amp;q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22H.R.+1%22%7D" target="_blank">1,116-page package</a>&nbsp;combines 11 bills that GOP lawmakers debated and reported out of committee during the last several weeks.

The bill would make deep cuts to Medicaid spending, reducing the program by $625 billion over 10 years under the latest estimate by the Congressional Budget Office.

The budget measure would also raise the debt limit by $4 trillion.

<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/cbo-analysis-shows-us-house-gop-budget-measure-tilted-toward-upper-income-taxpayers" target="_blank">A new Congressional Budget Office analysis</a>&nbsp;released late Tuesday showed the package tilted toward the wealthy, projecting it would decrease resources for low-income families over the next decade while increasing resources for top earners.

Republicans hold especially thin majorities in the House and Senate, meaning that nearly every GOP lawmaker — ranging from centrists who barely won their general elections to far-right members who are more at risk of losing a primary challenge — needed to support the bill.

Balancing the demands of hundreds of lawmakers led to nearly constant talks during the last few days as Johnson struggled to secure the votes to pass the bill before his Memorial Day deadline.

Any deal Johnson made with far-right members of the party risked alienating centrist GOP lawmakers and vice versa.

An agreement finally came together Wednesday evening when&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-speaker-predicts-vote-soon-giant-budget-bill-stalled-hard-right-objections" target="_blank">GOP leaders released a 42-page amendment</a>&nbsp;that made changes to various sections of the package, including the state and local tax deduction, or SALT, and Medicaid work requirements and nixed the potential sale of some public lands.&nbsp;

<p>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">Jennifer Shutt</a>&nbsp;AND&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/ashley-murray/">Ashley Murray</a></p><p>WASHINGTON — The U.S. House early Thursday approved the “big, beautiful bill” that Republican leaders spent months negotiating with centrists and far-right members of the party — two distinct factions that hold vastly different policy goals — over intense opposition from Democrats.</p><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">PASSED: THE ONE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL ACT.<br><br>House Republicans just passed this HISTORIC piece of legislation FOR YOU. <a href="https://t.co/keVGJstR6c">pic.twitter.com/keVGJstR6c</a></p>&mdash; House Republicans (@HouseGOP) <a href="https://twitter.com/HouseGOP/status/1925505923822260229?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 22, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><p>The&nbsp;<a href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2025145" target="_blank">215-214 vote</a>&nbsp;ships the package to the Senate, where GOP lawmakers are expected to rewrite much of it, before sending it back across the Capitol for final approval, a process likely to stretch through the summer.</p><p>President Donald Trump, who said he backed the House version, would then need to sign the legislation, which under the complicated process being used by Republicans can pass with just a majority vote in the GOP-controlled Senate.</p><p>Speaker Mike Johnson said minutes before the vote that he expects lawmakers to give the measure final approval before the Fourth of July.</p><p>“Now, look, we’re accomplishing a big thing here today, but we know this isn’t the end of the road just yet,” Johnson, R-La., said. “We’ve been working closely with leader (John) Thune and our Senate colleagues, the Senate Republicans, to get this done and delivered to the President’s desk by our Independence Day. That’s July 4. Today proves that we can do that, and we will do that.”</p><p>Ohio’s Warren Davidson and Kentucky’s Thomas Massie were the only Republicans to vote against passing the bill, which members debated throughout the night prior to the vote just after daylight in the nation’s capital. All Democrats, who dubbed it “one big ugly bill,” were opposed. Maryland GOP Rep. Andy Harris, chairman of the Freedom Caucus, voted “present.”</p><p>Massie spoke against the bill overnight, calling it “a debt bomb ticking.”</p><p>“I’d love to stand here and tell the American people: We can cut your taxes and we can increase spending, and everything’s going to be just fine. But I can’t do that because I’m here to deliver a dose of reality,” Massie said. “This bill dramatically increases deficits in the near term, but promises our government will be fiscally responsible five years from now. Where have we heard that before? How do you bind a future Congress to these promises?”</p><p>The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text?s=6&amp;r=1&amp;q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22H.R.+1%22%7D" target="_blank">1,116-page package</a>&nbsp;combines 11 bills that GOP lawmakers debated and reported out of committee during the last several weeks.</p><p>The legislation would:</p><ul>
                        <li>Extend the 2017 tax law, including tax cuts for businesses and individuals;</li><li>Bolster spending on border security and defense by hundreds of billions of dollars;</li><li>Rework energy permitting;</li><li>Restructure higher education aid such as student loans and Pell Grants;</li><li>Shift some of the cost of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program food aid program for low income Americans to state governments; and</li><li>Overhaul Medicaid, the nation’s program for health care for low income people and some people with disabilities.</li>
                    </ul><p>The bill would make deep cuts to Medicaid spending, reducing the program by $625 billion over 10 years under the latest estimate by the Congressional Budget Office.</p><p>The budget measure would also raise the debt limit by $4 trillion.</p><p><a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/cbo-analysis-shows-us-house-gop-budget-measure-tilted-toward-upper-income-taxpayers" target="_blank">A new Congressional Budget Office analysis</a>&nbsp;released late Tuesday showed the package tilted toward the wealthy, projecting it would decrease resources for low-income families over the next decade while increasing resources for top earners.</p><p>Republicans hold especially thin majorities in the House and Senate, meaning that nearly every GOP lawmaker — ranging from centrists who barely won their general elections to far-right members who are more at risk of losing a primary challenge — needed to support the bill.</p><p>Balancing the demands of hundreds of lawmakers led to nearly constant talks during the last few days as Johnson struggled to secure the votes to pass the bill before his Memorial Day deadline.</p><p>Any deal Johnson made with far-right members of the party risked alienating centrist GOP lawmakers and vice versa.</p><p>An agreement finally came together Wednesday evening when&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-speaker-predicts-vote-soon-giant-budget-bill-stalled-hard-right-objections" target="_blank">GOP leaders released a 42-page amendment</a>&nbsp;that made changes to various sections of the package, including the state and local tax deduction, or SALT, and Medicaid work requirements and nixed the potential sale of some public lands.&nbsp;</p>

US House GOP push through massive tax and spending bill slashing Medicaid

LINCOLN, Neb - A proposal seeking to regulate and tax medical cannabis in Nebraska after approval of two ballot initiatives last November stalled on the first round of debate May 20 following a failed cloture motion.

The successful ballot measures protect qualified individuals from legal penalties for possessing and using medical cannabis when recommended by a health care practitioner and create the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission to oversee the industry.

The commission is required to establish criteria to accept or deny applications for registered cannabis establishments by July 1. Entities will be able to apply for licensure beginning Oct. 1.

LB677, as introduced by Blair Sen. Ben Hansen, would provide a regulatory framework for medical cannabis and establish licenses for cultivators, dispensaries, product manufacturers, transporters, testing facilities and “vertical” facilities — those that both cultivate and dispense products.

The bill would limit the number of licenses issued in each congressional district and give the commission through Oct. 1 to establish criteria for registering cannabis establishments. Entities could apply for licensure beginning Jan. 1, 2026.

Under the proposal, health care practitioners — defined as a physician, osteopathic physician, physician assistant or nurse practitioner — would be authorized to issue a written recommendation for up to five ounces of medical cannabis for individuals with qualifying medical conditions. Individuals under age 18 would need approval from a legal parent or guardian with authority to make health care decisions.

After receiving written notation from a health care provider, the bill would require an individual to apply for a registry card to identify them as a qualified patient or registered caregiver. The registry would be established directly through the commission and require an application fee of up to $45.

The use or possession of cannabis on school grounds, at a child care facility or home day care, in a jail, adult or juvenile correctional facility or youth rehabilitation and treatment center and while operating a vehicle would be prohibited under the bill. Schools would have the authority to establish regulations that allow for students to use non-smoked or vaporized medical cannabis in certain areas.

The measure also would enact a 4% sales tax on all medical cannabis products, with that revenue deposited into the Property Tax Credit Relief Fund.

Hansen said the bill seeks to ensure medical cannabis is safely provided to qualifying patients by requiring product testing, seed-to-sale tracking, childproof packaging and warning labels for pregnant individuals.

“I want to treat this about as close as we possibly can to a pharmaceutical medication,” he said. “Because if that’s the intent [of the ballot initiative], we need to treat it that way.”

An amendment offered by the General Affairs Committee would replace the bill with a modified proposal. Under the amendment, the sales tax would be increased to 5.5% and municipalities would be allowed to impose an additional 2% tax on dispensaries.

The committee amendment also would prohibit the consumption of medical cannabis by smoking and limit the amount of dried flower a patient may possess to two ounces. Additionally, the amendment would narrow the definition of “qualifying medical condition” to 15 conditions recommended by the Nebraska Medical Association, including:

• autism with frequent or self-injurious or aggressive behavior;

• Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis;

• spinal cord injury or a disease with residual neurological deficits;

• terminal illness with a probable life expectancy of under one year;

• severe or chronic pain lasting longer than six months that is not adequately managed, in the opinion of a health care practitioner, despite treatment attempts using conventional medications other than opioids or opiates or physical interventions.

The measure also includes a provision that would allow an out-of-state health care provider to recommend medical cannabis to a patient in Nebraska who they have been seeing for at least six months.

Hansen supported the committee amendment, saying it would help establish one of the most “comprehensive, regulated and restrictive” medical cannabis programs in the country.

Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha also supported the proposal. He said it is the Legislature’s responsibility to ensure that the medical cannabis measure passed by voters is safe, effective and medically sound. He said 47 other states already have implemented legislation to allow for the use of medical cannabis.

“Two things can be true at the same time — we can support access while also safeguarding against misuse or abuse,” Fredrickson said. “Let’s put the right guardrails in place and … help build a system that we can be proud of and put our patients first.”

Also supporting the bill and the committee amendment was Sen. Glen Meyer of Pender. He said several individuals had spoken to him regarding the relief they found through medical cannabis after other treatments and medications left them unable to perform everyday tasks.

“I would expect [that] intelligent people with good hearts, which I believe this body is, can find a way to provide relief with some medical marijuana,” Meyer said.

Speaking in favor of the proposal, Omaha Sen. Dunixi Guereca expressed concern about the potential for medical cannabis to become inaccessible if its regulation is left solely to the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission created by the initiative.

That commission will include the current three members of the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission and two members appointed by the governor, individuals who Guereca characterized as “anti-marijuana” advocates.

Sen. Jared Storm of David City introduced a series of procedural motions to extend debate on the bill. He said the Legislature should not take action until the Nebraska Supreme Court rules on a pending case challenging the validity of the ballot initiatives.

Storm also said LB677 as amended would not represent the will of Nebraska voters who chose to grant authority to implement rules and regulations for medical cannabis to the newly created commission and not the Legislature.

“I have sympathy for people who are struggling … but we have to get this right,” he said. “The people voted [and] as a legislator, I will carry out the will of the people.”

Norfolk Sen. Robert Dover agreed and added that the commission has not yet had the opportunity to carry out the provisions of the ballot initiative. He said the two gubernatorial nominees first must be confirmed by the Legislature before they can begin to establish a regulatory framework.

“Why would we as a Legislature start messing with a commission that hasn’t even started to do its work in the first place?” Dover said.

Also speaking in opposition to the measure, Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln expressed concern regarding the “broad” nature of the qualifying conditions laid out in the amendment. He worried that health care providers might exploit definitions such as “chronic pain” to provide medical cannabis to individuals who do not need it.

Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner also opposed the bill, saying the federal Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of a cannabis-derived medication for certain types of epilepsy and as a treatment for nausea caused by chemotherapy.

“While the agency has approved some cannabis-derived products for medical use, it currently prohibits the federal legalization and medical prescription of cannabis,” Ibach said. “Do we follow those FDA guidelines or do we find our own path?”

After eight hours of debate, Hansen filed a motion to invoke cloture, which ceases debate and forces a vote on the bill and any underlying amendments.

The motion failed on a 23-22 vote. Thirty-three votes were needed.

A failed cloture motion results in debate on a proposal ceasing for the day. LB677 is unlikely to be placed on the agenda again this session.

<p>LINCOLN, Neb - A proposal seeking to regulate and tax medical cannabis in Nebraska after approval of two ballot initiatives last November stalled on the first round of debate May 20 following a failed cloture motion.</p><p>The successful ballot measures protect qualified individuals from legal penalties for possessing and using medical cannabis when recommended by a health care practitioner and create the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission to oversee the industry.</p><p>The commission is required to establish criteria to accept or deny applications for registered cannabis establishments by July 1. Entities will be able to apply for licensure beginning Oct. 1.</p><p>LB677, as introduced by Blair Sen. Ben Hansen, would provide a regulatory framework for medical cannabis and establish licenses for cultivators, dispensaries, product manufacturers, transporters, testing facilities and “vertical” facilities — those that both cultivate and dispense products.</p><p>The bill would limit the number of licenses issued in each congressional district and give the commission through Oct. 1 to establish criteria for registering cannabis establishments. Entities could apply for licensure beginning Jan. 1, 2026.</p><p>Under the proposal, health care practitioners — defined as a physician, osteopathic physician, physician assistant or nurse practitioner — would be authorized to issue a written recommendation for up to five ounces of medical cannabis for individuals with qualifying medical conditions. Individuals under age 18 would need approval from a legal parent or guardian with authority to make health care decisions.</p><p>After receiving written notation from a health care provider, the bill would require an individual to apply for a registry card to identify them as a qualified patient or registered caregiver. The registry would be established directly through the commission and require an application fee of up to $45.</p><p>The use or possession of cannabis on school grounds, at a child care facility or home day care, in a jail, adult or juvenile correctional facility or youth rehabilitation and treatment center and while operating a vehicle would be prohibited under the bill. Schools would have the authority to establish regulations that allow for students to use non-smoked or vaporized medical cannabis in certain areas.</p><p>The measure also would enact a 4% sales tax on all medical cannabis products, with that revenue deposited into the Property Tax Credit Relief Fund.</p><p>Hansen said the bill seeks to ensure medical cannabis is safely provided to qualifying patients by requiring product testing, seed-to-sale tracking, childproof packaging and warning labels for pregnant individuals.</p><p>“I want to treat this about as close as we possibly can to a pharmaceutical medication,” he said. “Because if that’s the intent [of the ballot initiative], we need to treat it that way.”</p><p>An amendment offered by the General Affairs Committee would replace the bill with a modified proposal. Under the amendment, the sales tax would be increased to 5.5% and municipalities would be allowed to impose an additional 2% tax on dispensaries.</p><p>The committee amendment also would prohibit the consumption of medical cannabis by smoking and limit the amount of dried flower a patient may possess to two ounces. Additionally, the amendment would narrow the definition of “qualifying medical condition” to 15 conditions recommended by the Nebraska Medical Association, including:</p><p>• cancer;</p><p>• autism with frequent or self-injurious or aggressive behavior;</p><p>• Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis;</p><p>• epilepsy or epileptic seizures;</p><p>• HIV or AIDS;</p><p>• Huntington’s disease;</p><p>• Parkinson’s disease;</p><p>• spinal cord injury or a disease with residual neurological deficits;</p><p>• terminal illness with a probable life expectancy of under one year;</p><p>• Tourette’s syndrome; and</p><p>• severe or chronic pain lasting longer than six months that is not adequately managed, in the opinion of a health care practitioner, despite treatment attempts using conventional medications other than opioids or opiates or physical interventions.</p><p>The measure also includes a provision that would allow an out-of-state health care provider to recommend medical cannabis to a patient in Nebraska who they have been seeing for at least six months.</p><p>Hansen supported the committee amendment, saying it would help establish one of the most “comprehensive, regulated and restrictive” medical cannabis programs in the country.</p><p>Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha also supported the proposal. He said it is the Legislature’s responsibility to ensure that the medical cannabis measure passed by voters is safe, effective and medically sound. He said 47 other states already have implemented legislation to allow for the use of medical cannabis.</p><p>“Two things can be true at the same time — we can support access while also safeguarding against misuse or abuse,” Fredrickson said. “Let’s put the right guardrails in place and … help build a system that we can be proud of and put our patients first.”</p><p>Also supporting the bill and the committee amendment was Sen. Glen Meyer of Pender. He said several individuals had spoken to him regarding the relief they found through medical cannabis after other treatments and medications left them unable to perform everyday tasks.</p><p>“I would expect [that] intelligent people with good hearts, which I believe this body is, can find a way to provide relief with some medical marijuana,” Meyer said.</p><p>Speaking in favor of the proposal, Omaha Sen. Dunixi Guereca expressed concern about the potential for medical cannabis to become inaccessible if its regulation is left solely to the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission created by the initiative.</p><p>That commission will include the current three members of the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission and two members appointed by the governor, individuals who Guereca characterized as “anti-marijuana” advocates.</p><p>Sen. Jared Storm of David City introduced a series of procedural motions to extend debate on the bill. He said the Legislature should not take action until the Nebraska Supreme Court rules on a pending case challenging the validity of the ballot initiatives.</p><p>Storm also said LB677 as amended would not represent the will of Nebraska voters who chose to grant authority to implement rules and regulations for medical cannabis to the newly created commission and not the Legislature.</p><p>“I have sympathy for people who are struggling … but we have to get this right,” he said. “The people voted [and] as a legislator, I will carry out the will of the people.”</p><p>Norfolk Sen. Robert Dover agreed and added that the commission has not yet had the opportunity to carry out the provisions of the ballot initiative. He said the two gubernatorial nominees first must be confirmed by the Legislature before they can begin to establish a regulatory framework.</p><p>“Why would we as a Legislature start messing with a commission that hasn’t even started to do its work in the first place?” Dover said.</p><p>Also speaking in opposition to the measure, Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln expressed concern regarding the “broad” nature of the qualifying conditions laid out in the amendment. He worried that health care providers might exploit definitions such as “chronic pain” to provide medical cannabis to individuals who do not need it.</p><p>Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner also opposed the bill, saying the federal Food and Drug Administration has approved the use of a cannabis-derived medication for certain types of epilepsy and as a treatment for nausea caused by chemotherapy.</p><p>“While the agency has approved some cannabis-derived products for medical use, it currently prohibits the federal legalization and medical prescription of cannabis,” Ibach said. “Do we follow those FDA guidelines or do we find our own path?”</p><p>After eight hours of debate, Hansen filed a motion to invoke cloture, which ceases debate and forces a vote on the bill and any underlying amendments.</p><p>The motion failed on a 23-22 vote. Thirty-three votes were needed.</p><p>A failed cloture motion results in debate on a proposal ceasing for the day. LB677 is unlikely to be placed on the agenda again this session.</p>

Cloture attempt on medical cannabis regulation fails in Legislature

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/ashley-murray/">Ashley Murray</a>

WASHINGTON — Senators tasked with tax writing split along party lines Tuesday praising and grilling former Republican U.S. Rep. Billy Long of Missouri, President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Internal Revenue Service, the agency tasked with enforcing the largest source of U.S. revenue as the country faces record debt and interest costs.

Long, who served in Congress from 2011 to 2023 and previously spent multiple years as a talk radio host, testified to the Senate Finance Committee that he plans to get rid of “stinking thinking” at the IRS and implement a “comprehensive plan” to modernize the agency and “invest in retaining skilled members of the team.”

“This does not mean a bloated agency, but an efficient one where employees have the tools they need to succeed,” Long said.

The agency has lost more than 11,000 employees, or 11% of its workforce, either through deferred resignations or mass firing of probationary workers since Trump began his second term, according to a May 2&nbsp;<a href="https://www.tigta.gov/sites/default/files/reports/2025-05/2025ier017fr.pdf" target="_blank">report</a>&nbsp;from the agency’s inspector general. Trump said in December he intended to nominate Long for the IRS post.

Committee Chair Mike Crapo of Idaho opened the confirmation hearing expressing his confidence in Long, saying he will direct a “sea change” at the agency that will benefit taxpayers.

“President Trump called Congressman Long the ‘consummate people person.’ Congressman Long is very clear that he will make himself available to all IRS employees, no matter their seniority. Moreover, he wants to implement a top-down culture change at the agency,” Crapo said.

The confirmation hearing comes as lawmakers&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-right-wing-tanks-trumps-big-beautiful-bill-budget-committee" target="_blank">struggle to agree</a>&nbsp;on a budget reconciliation package, which will extend and expand Trump’s 2017 tax law and in turn widen IRS responsibilities.

Sen. James Lankford, an Oklahoma Republican, said he trusted Long’s work ethic and told him, “We’re going to do a tax bill here in the next couple of months. To be able to get that done, as we did it in 2017, there’ll be a lot of work the IRS has to do to be able to put guidance documents out, to be able to get clear instructions of what that means.”

Democrats approached the hearing with skepticism.

The nearly two-hour back-and-forth with Long followed recent revelations that he accepted donations to his defunct Senate campaign shortly after Trump nominated him as the IRS commissioner. Democratic senators on the panel have also&nbsp;<a href="https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/cortez_masto_wyden_letter_white_river_energy_corp.pdf" target="_blank">called for an investigation</a>&nbsp;into Long’s work with a company that peddled nonexistent tribal tax credits.

“Bottom line, the American people have the right to know whether the future IRS commissioner is a crook,” said Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the panel’s top Democrat.

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, a Nevada Democrat, pressed Long about $65,000 he allegedly received for his involvement promoting the fake tax credits for the companies Capital Edge Strategies and White River.

“Knowing that (the credits) are illegal, the IRS has said they’re illegal, how do you stand here before this committee and tell the chairman just a few minutes ago that you have no conflict of interest?” Cortez Masto asked.

Long replied that he’s in compliance with the Office of Government Ethics regarding his nomination and that he “did not have any perception whatsoever that these (credits) did not exist.”

Other Democrats on the panel questioned Long on Trump’s recent statements that he would pull Harvard University’s tax-exempt status over its refusal to comply with demands from the administration.

<figure>
                        <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1747859738526.png" alt=" Former U.S. Rep. Billy Long, nominee for Internal Revenue Service commissioner, testifies before the Senate Finance Committee at his confirmation hearing on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. (Screenshot from committee webcast)" />
                        <figcaption> Former U.S. Rep. Billy Long, nominee for Internal Revenue Service commissioner, testifies before the Senate Finance Committee at his confirmation hearing on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. (Screenshot from committee webcast)</figcaption>
                    </figure><p>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/ashley-murray/">Ashley Murray</a></p><p>WASHINGTON — Senators tasked with tax writing split along party lines Tuesday praising and grilling former Republican U.S. Rep. Billy Long of Missouri, President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Internal Revenue Service, the agency tasked with enforcing the largest source of U.S. revenue as the country faces record debt and interest costs.</p><p>Long, who served in Congress from 2011 to 2023 and previously spent multiple years as a talk radio host, testified to the Senate Finance Committee that he plans to get rid of “stinking thinking” at the IRS and implement a “comprehensive plan” to modernize the agency and “invest in retaining skilled members of the team.”</p><p>“This does not mean a bloated agency, but an efficient one where employees have the tools they need to succeed,” Long said.</p><p>The agency has lost more than 11,000 employees, or 11% of its workforce, either through deferred resignations or mass firing of probationary workers since Trump began his second term, according to a May 2&nbsp;<a href="https://www.tigta.gov/sites/default/files/reports/2025-05/2025ier017fr.pdf" target="_blank">report</a>&nbsp;from the agency’s inspector general. Trump said in December he intended to nominate Long for the IRS post.</p><h2>‘Top-down culture change’</h2><p>Committee Chair Mike Crapo of Idaho opened the confirmation hearing expressing his confidence in Long, saying he will direct a “sea change” at the agency that will benefit taxpayers.</p><p>“President Trump called Congressman Long the ‘consummate people person.’ Congressman Long is very clear that he will make himself available to all IRS employees, no matter their seniority. Moreover, he wants to implement a top-down culture change at the agency,” Crapo said.</p><p>The confirmation hearing comes as lawmakers&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-house-right-wing-tanks-trumps-big-beautiful-bill-budget-committee" target="_blank">struggle to agree</a>&nbsp;on a budget reconciliation package, which will extend and expand Trump’s 2017 tax law and in turn widen IRS responsibilities.</p><p>Sen. James Lankford, an Oklahoma Republican, said he trusted Long’s work ethic and told him, “We’re going to do a tax bill here in the next couple of months. To be able to get that done, as we did it in 2017, there’ll be a lot of work the IRS has to do to be able to put guidance documents out, to be able to get clear instructions of what that means.”</p><h2>Nonexistent tribal tax credits</h2><p>Democrats approached the hearing with skepticism.</p><p>The nearly two-hour back-and-forth with Long followed recent revelations that he accepted donations to his defunct Senate campaign shortly after Trump nominated him as the IRS commissioner. Democratic senators on the panel have also&nbsp;<a href="https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/cortez_masto_wyden_letter_white_river_energy_corp.pdf" target="_blank">called for an investigation</a>&nbsp;into Long’s work with a company that peddled nonexistent tribal tax credits.</p><p>“Bottom line, the American people have the right to know whether the future IRS commissioner is a crook,” said Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the panel’s top Democrat.</p><p>Long denies any wrongdoing.</p><p>Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, a Nevada Democrat, pressed Long about $65,000 he allegedly received for his involvement promoting the fake tax credits for the companies Capital Edge Strategies and White River.</p><p>“Knowing that (the credits) are illegal, the IRS has said they’re illegal, how do you stand here before this committee and tell the chairman just a few minutes ago that you have no conflict of interest?” Cortez Masto asked.</p><p>Long replied that he’s in compliance with the Office of Government Ethics regarding his nomination and that he “did not have any perception whatsoever that these (credits) did not exist.”</p><p>Other Democrats on the panel questioned Long on Trump’s recent statements that he would pull Harvard University’s tax-exempt status over its refusal to comply with demands from the administration.</p><p>Wyden characterized Long as a “MAGA devotee” and said that Trump wants to use the IRS “as a cudgel to beat his adversaries into submission.”</p><h2>14-page letter</h2><p>Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who sent Long&nbsp;<a href="https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/letter_from_senator_warren_to_billy_long_on_nomination_concerns.pdf" target="_blank">a 14-page letter</a>&nbsp;questioning his past, repeatedly asked Long about a statute prohibiting the president from ordering tax audits on specific people or businesses.</p><p>“Is it illegal for the President to instruct the IRS to remove nonprofit status from taxpayers?” Warren asked several times.</p><p>“I’m not going to have the answer that you need, I apologize,” Long said.</p><p>Senate Republicans on the panel questioned Long on how he can improve customer service for taxpayers — despite the party successfully fighting in 2023 to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IN12172" target="_blank">cut</a>&nbsp;new IRS funding under President Joe Biden in 2022.</p><p>Sen. Todd Young of Indiana said the agency is “behind the curve” on technology and that its customer service issues are “out of hand.”</p><p>“If confirmed, will you commit to developing a comprehensive IRS modernization plan that prioritizes customer service, identifies critical technology infrastructure needs and ensures greater transparency and audit practices? Yes or no?” Young asked.</p><p>“Yes,” Long replied.</p><p>“Excellent,” Young said.&nbsp;</p>