Where to get free food, deals for National Drive-Thru Day 2025
The first drive-thru is thought to have been Red's Giant Hamburg on Route 66 in Springfield, Missouri in 1947, according to the National Today site. In-N-Out Burger in California began offering drive-through services in 1948 in the Los Angeles area, and Jack in the Box joined the move to cater to car customers in 1951. (Jack in the Box also came up with the idea for National Drive-Thru Day, according to the National Day Calendar site.)
Drive-thru lanes really kicked into gear after McDonald's adopted the practice in opening its first take-out window in Arizona in 1975, according to Smithsonian magazine.
'Stranger' snacks: Chips Ahoy! releasing 'Stranger Things' cookies with surprise ingredient
Now there's more than 8,100 U.S. restaurants with drive-through lanes and that's expected to surpass 9,000 in 2026, according to Polaris Market Research.
"Drive-thru culture isn't just a trend – it's core to how Americans eat," said Polaris Market Research senior analyst Apurva Agarwal in a statement to USA TODAY. "Even as delivery apps surge, the drive-thru remains the fastest, most dependable way to grab a meal. Major chains are doubling down on technology to keep lines moving and customers loyal."
If you're in the mood for a mobile meal, here are some deals. Remember, check the social media accounts of your favorite local restaurants with drive-thru lanes for additional deals.
National Drive-Thru Day deals
Mike Snider is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can follow him on Threads, Bluesky, X and email him at mikegsnider & @mikegsnider.bsky.social & @mikesnider & msnider@usatoday.com
What's everyone talking about? Sign up for our trending newsletter to get the latest news of the day
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
6 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows Where House Prices Are Rising and Falling Fastest
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Despite dwindling sales, home prices continue to climb in much of the country and especially in the Northeast, where New York reported the highest year-over-year gain in May at 7.4 percent, according to the latest S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller Index. But even as prices continue inching up, they are doing so at a slower pace than ever since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The index found that all nine U.S. census divisions reported an overall annual price gain of 2.3 percent in May, down from 2.7 percent in April. The 10-city composite index reported an annual increase of 3.4 percent, down from 4.1 percent a month earlier, while the 20-city composite posted a 2.8 percent year-over-year gain, down from 3.4 percent in April. "May's data continued the years' slow unwind of price momentum, with annual gains narrowing for a fourth consecutive month," Nicholas Godec, Head of Fixed Income Tradables & Commodities at S&P Dow Jones Indices, said in a press release shared with Newsweek. "Seasonal momentum is proving weaker than usual, and the slowdown is now more than just a story of higher mortgage rates. It reflects a market recalibrating around tighter financial conditions, subdued transaction volumes, and increasingly local dynamics. With affordability still stretched and inventory constrained, national home prices are holding steady, but barely." Where Home Prices Are Rising—And Where They Are Falling The Northeast and the Midwest, where the shortage of homes remains most acute, experienced the highest price growth in May, according to the index. After New York, Chicago reported the second-biggest annual home price gain in May of all major U.S. metros analyzed by S&P and CoreLogic, up 6.1 percent. It was followed by Detroit with a year-over-year increase of 4.9 percent. At the other end of the spectrum there's the South, where metros in states like Florida and Texas, which have gone through a significant construction boom over the past few years, are reporting annual price drops. Tampa reported the steepest year-over-year price decline in May, at -2.42 percent. It was followed by Dallas and San Francisco both at -0.64 percent, and Denver at -0.01 percent. What Does The Index Tell Us About The State Of The Housing Market While prices are still rising at the national level, it is significant how much slower the pace of their growth has gotten in the past few months. This is happening mostly because the U.S. housing market has reached a breaking point in terms of affordability: even as demand remains high and millions of Americans dream of homeownership, many just cannot afford it at the moment. The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage is still hovering near the 7 percent mark, and experts do not expect rates to get lower than 6 percent any time soon. Property taxes are much higher than they used to be five years ago, and home insurance premiums are rising as the threat of natural disasters grows with climate change. Buyers' reluctance to engage in the market, which has been exacerbated by recent fears over the direction taken by the U.S. economy under the helm of President Donald Trump, has caused a pileup of unsold homes across the country—especially in areas where developers have built more new homes. This shrinking of demand is likely to lead to a normalization of the U.S. market after years of overheating, experts say—but low inventory across the country has been keeping prices up so far. Things may change as a result of a bipartisan housing package just moving through the legislature right now. Under the ROAD to Housing Act, lawmakers on both sides of the political spectrum are trying to boost the country's home supply and improve affordability.
The Hill
35 minutes ago
- The Hill
Medicaid was signed into law 60 years ago. Trump's big bill is chiseling it back
WASHINGTON (AP) — On this day in 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed legislation into law that launched Medicaid, creating a U.S. health care safety net for millions of low-income Americans in what would become one of the crowning achievements of his domestic legacy. A year earlier, he did the same for food stamps, drawing on President John F. Kennedy's first executive order for the development of 'a positive food and nutrition program for all Americans.' This summer, with the stroke of a pen, President Donald Trump began to chisel them back. The Republican Party's big tax and spending bill delivered not just $4.5 trillion in tax breaks for Americans but some of the most substantial changes to the landmark safety net programs in their history. The trade-off will cut more than $1 trillion over a decade from federal health care and food assistance, largely by imposing work requirements on those receiving aid and by shifting certain federal costs onto the states. While Republicans in Congress argue the trims are needed to rightsize the federal programs that have grown over the decades and to prevent rising federal deficits, they are also moving toward a long-sought GOP goal of shrinking the federal government and the services it provides. 'We're making the first changes to the welfare state in generations,' House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a recent podcast interview. As the tax breaks and spending cuts law begins to take shape, it is unleashing a new era of uncertainty for the safety net programs that millions of people in communities across the nation have grown to depend on, with political ramifications to come. Big safety net changes ahead Polling shows most U.S. adults don't think the government is overspending on the programs. Americans broadly support increasing or maintaining existing levels of funding for popular safety net programs, including Social Security and Medicare, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Local governments are scrambling to figure out how they will comply with the new landscape, calculating whether they will need to raise their own taxes to cover costs, trim budgets elsewhere or cut back the aid provided to Americans. 'The cuts are really big, they are really broad and they are deeply damaging,' said Sharon Parrott, president of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a research institute in Washington. 'The consequences are millions of people losing health care coverage,' she said. 'Millions of people losing food assistance. And the net result of that is higher poverty, more hardship.' At the same time, certain people who receive aid, including parents of teenagers and older Americans up to age 64, will have to prepare to work, engage in classes or do community service for 80 hours a month to meet new requirements. All told, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates 10 million more people will end up without health insurance. Some 3 million fewer people will participate in the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, known as SNAP. 'People are really concerned what this means for their fiscal health,' said Mark Ritacco, chief governmental affairs officer at the National Association of Counties, which held its annual conference the week after Trump signed the bill into law. The organization had pushed senators to delay the start dates for some Medicaid changes, and it hopes that further conversations with lawmakers in Congress can prevent some of them from ever taking hold. At its conference, questions swirled. 'We're talking about Medicaid and SNAP — these are people's lives and livelihoods,' Ritacco said. GOP bill trims back health care and food aid Republicans insist the law is adhering to Trump's vow not to touch Medicaid as the changes root out waste, fraud and abuse. A memo from the House GOP's campaign arm encourages lawmakers to focus on the popularity of its new work requirements and restrictions on benefits for certain immigrants. 'Those safety nets are meant for a small population of people — the elderly, disabled, young pregnant women who are single,' the House speaker said on 'The Benny Show.' He said the years since the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, came into law, 'everybody got on the wagon.' 'All these young, able-bodied, young men who don't have dependents, riding the wagon,' the speaker said. Medicaid then and now When President Johnson established Medicaid alongside Medicare — the health care program for seniors — as part of the Social Security Amendments of 1965, it was meant for low-income families as well as the disabled. And it quickly took off. Almost every state signed on to participate in Medicaid by 1970, according to the KFF, an organization focused on health policy. It soon went beyond covering its core population to include pregnant women, school-age children and not just the very poor but also those with incomes just over the federal poverty limit, which is now about $15,650 annually for a single person and $26,650 for a family of three. In the 15 years since the Affordable Care Act became law under President Barack Obama, Medicaid has grown substantially as most states opted to join the federal expansion. Some 80 million adults and children are covered. While the uninsured population has tumbled, the federal costs of providing Medicaid have also grown, to more than $880 billion a year. 'There are a lot of effects Medicaid has on health, but the most stark thing that it does is that it saves lives,' said Bruce D. Meyer, an economist and public policy professor at the University of Chicago who co-authored a pivotal study assessing the program. The law's changes will certainly save the federal government 'a substantial amount of money,' he said, but that will come at 'substantial increases in mortality. And you have to decide what you value more.' Food stamps, which had been offered toward the end of the Great Depression but were halted during World War II amid rationed supplies, launched as a federal program when Johnson signed the Food Stamp Act of 1964 into law. Today, SNAP provides almost $200 in monthly benefits per person to some 40 million recipients nationwide. Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who delivered the longest speech in House history while trying to stall the bill, said the changes will hurt households and communities nationwide. 'Who are these people?' Jeffries said. 'Ripping health care away from the American people. The largest cuts in Medicaid in American history. Ripping food out of the mouths of children, seniors and veterans who are going to go hungry as a result of this one big, ugly bill.'
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed ending rules that address the contribution of motor vehicles to climate change. In a statement, the EPA said that its proposal would 'repeal all resulting greenhouse gas emissions regulations for motor vehicles and engines, thereby reinstating consumer choice and giving Americans the ability to purchase a safe and affordable car for their family while decreasing the cost of living on all products that trucks deliver'. Transportation is the largest source of direct greenhouse gas emissions in the US and for years the EPA has pushed vehicle makers in the US to reduce their contribution with steps that have included strict tailpipe standards and target a big transition to EVs and plug-in hybrids by 2030. In his presidential election campaign, Donald Trump pledged to roll back 'electric vehicle mandates' and boost the oil and gas industry. He framed his policies as about restoring consumer choice. They were also supported by the oil and gas industry and climate change sceptics, as well as parts of the US auto industry who have said tailpipe standards are too strict and costly to meet. The EPA's 'endangerment finding' in 2009 determined that CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions are a form of air pollution that the agency can regulate under the Clean Air Act, because climate change harms human health. The EPA's latest proposal would revoke the endangerment finding, seen by many as a cornerstone of US federal rules designed to tackle multiple sources of greenhouse gases – such as motor vehicles. Although CAFE standards remain in place, the US Department of Transport is reviewing them and Congress has already voted not to enforce big fines for vehicle manufacturer non-compliance. It has also voted to end the State of California's so-called 'EPA waiver' that meant it adopted tougher greenhouse gas policies than federal rules. The Trump administration has also scrapped consumer EV tax credits. 'With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end sixteen years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,' said EPA Administrator Zeldin. 'In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year. We heard loud and clear the concern that EPA's GHG emissions standards themselves, not carbon dioxide which the Finding never assessed independently, was the real threat to Americans' livelihoods. If finalized, rescinding the Endangerment Finding and resulting regulations would end $1 trillion or more in hidden taxes on American businesses and families.' 'Thanks to President Trump's leadership, America is returning to free and open dialogue around climate and energy policy - driving the focus back to following the data,' said U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright. 'Today's announcement is a monumental step toward returning to commonsense policies that expand access to affordable, reliable, secure energy and improve quality of life for all Americans.' Administrator Zeldin also announced the agency would reconsider the Model Year 2027 and Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles regulation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles. "US EPA proposes axing greenhouse gas rules that apply to motor vehicles" was originally created and published by Just Auto, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
