Calls for help to Senator Rounds triple as DOGE cuts hit South Dakotans
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — The Trump administration has said DOGE is targeting waste and fraud in the federal government.
However, some of the cuts are impacting South Dakotans. Senator Mike Rounds says his staff saw three times more people reaching out to his office with concerns and questions in the month of February.
Rosie's Cafe to close after 41 years
Senator Rounds says his office is currently working on 139 different cases involving South Dakotans impacted by cuts being made by Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency. Rounds says waste and fraud need to be rooted out, but he would prefer Doge use a scalpel approach rather than a hammer. Rounds' office has fielded a lot of concerns as Federal Programs are cut back, for instance a nurse called after a National Institutes of Health website for cancer patients was taken down.
'She called in and said what am I supposed to do, I come to work, we've got people who are in cancer treatments and use the protocols on the website and its gone, shut down… help! So we went in and made come contacts and I don't know if it was our office or somebody else's office but, clearly someone was able to get in and the website has been put back up and is operational again,' said Rounds.
Senator Rounds cited a lot of misinformation floating around on the internet. For instance concerns that social security could be cut. He is confident that won't happen.
'Nobody is cutting any benefits, anything like that,' said Rounds. 'There have been some cases of fraud and abuse that they are finding. that means more money in the trust fund, remain in the trust fund, those are good things. That's one of the things DOGE has found . But we are not cutting benefits for social security recipients.'
As more cuts some in Washington DC, Rounds encourages South Dakotans with concerns to reach out to his office.
'And we will do our best to directly handle those situations on a case by case basis,' he said.
While his staff fielded about three times the volume of calls and messages in the month of February, Rounds says some of those were from people wanting to give their input on President Trump's cabinet nominees. He also expects the number of calls for help in March to be higher than normal.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No More Student Visas? No Problem.
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Just how mad is Beijing about President Donald Trump's decision to revoke student visas for Chinese nationals? Not as mad as it says, and not as mad as one might expect. Publicly, China's leadership will likely complain that Trump's action is yet another attempt to thwart the country's rise. But in reality, Beijing would probably just as soon keep its smartest kids at home. Late last month, the U.S. State Department announced that it would 'aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields,' and that it would 'enhance scrutiny' of the applications it received in the future. The new visa policy, a spokesperson said, is meant to prevent China from exploiting American universities and stealing intellectual property. A spokesperson for the foreign ministry quickly registered Beijing's objection to the new policy. But when Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke with Trump by phone last week, either he didn't raise the new visa policy or his foreign ministry didn't regard his comments on the matter worth including in its official summary of the call, which suggests that the issue is not a top priority in Beijing's negotiations with Washington. One reason for this underwhelming response may be that re-shoring its university students serves Beijing's current agenda. China first opened to the world in the 1980s; in the decades that followed, securing a Western education for its elite helped the country bring in the technology and skills it needed to escape poverty. China was 'sending people out, learning from other places, finding the best quality wherever it was, and bringing that quality back to China,' Robin Lewis, a consultant for U.S.-China education programs and a former associate dean at Columbia University, told me. Now that period has given way to one of nationalism and self-reliance, which means promoting China's own companies, products, technologies—and universities. [Rose Horowitch: Trump's campaign to scare off foreign students] Xi has consistently stressed the importance of education in sustaining China's rise. His government has invested heavily in China's schools and lavished resources on science and technology programs, with some success. Some of China's top institutions, such as Tsinghua University in Beijing, have gained international recognition as serious competitors in scientific research. China would like to have its own Harvards, rather than sending its elite students to the United States, for political and cultural reasons as well as economic ones. Chinese authorities have long worried that the hundreds of thousands of students it exports to America will absorb undesirable ideas about democracy and civil liberties—and that they will access information about China that is suppressed at home, such as the story of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. In fact, many young Chinese who study in the United States seem to enjoy American freedoms and seek to stay rather than return to serve the motherland. Beijing has tried to deal with this in part by monitoring the activities of its students in the U.S. and attempting to hold them firmly to the party line, including by harassing the families back home of those who stray. Within China, authorities can more easily confine students inside the government's propaganda bubble, which in recent years has become more airtight. Domestic media seek to portray the U.S. as unsafe, especially for Asians, by highlighting incidents of racial discrimination, violence, and disorder. One story published last year by the state news agency Xinhua, under the headline 'Chinese Students' Dreams Turned Into Nightmares at U.S. Doorstep,' tells the harrowing tale of a Chinese student detained and deported at an airport and claims that others had suffered the same fate. China's top spy agency, the Ministry of State Security, warned Chinese students at universities abroad against being recruited as foreign agents, and told of one such unfortunate national who was discovered and punished. Even before Trump's announcement, this climate of mutual distrust had led to a drop-off in Chinese students enrolled in American universities. The number had reached an all-time high during the 2019–20 academic year, topping 372,000, according to the Institute of International Education. But that figure has fallen since—by a quarter, to 277,000, in the 2023–24 academic year. Now India, with more than 331,000 enrolled, sends more students to American institutions than China does. The Trump administration appears to believe that curtailing Chinese access to American technology, money, and, in this case, education will give the U.S. the edge over its closest competitor. In some areas, this might work: Restricting the export of advanced U.S. semiconductor technology to China seems to have helped hold Beijing's chip industry back. So why not do the same with higher education? A case can be made that keeping Chinese students out of some of the world's top research institutions will hold back their skills acquisition and, with it, the country's progress. [Adam Serwer: Trump is wearing America down] In practice, though, the effect of this policy could be hard to gauge. The engineers behind the Chinese AI firm DeepSeek, which wowed Silicon Valley by developing a competitive chatbot on the cheap, were mainly locally trained. And the skills that Chinese students can't find at home they can seek in any number of places. There may be only so many Harvards, but Chinese students can receive a good education—and a warmer reception—in countries other than the United States. Universities in Japan and Hong Kong are already trying to capitalize on Trump's harassment of international students to lure them. The idea that any American policy can effectively dampen Chinese ambition may be far-fetched. 'People wake up in the morning and it's all about education here. There is nothing more important,' James McGregor, the chair for China at the consulting firm APCO, told me. 'You're going to stop Chinese people from learning the top skills in the world? No. They'll just deploy them somewhere else.' For now, the Trump team can't seem to decide whether it wants to get tough on China or make deals with China, and the new student-visa policy reflects this confusion. 'Chinese students are coming. No problem,' Trump said in a briefing after his call with Xi. 'It's our honor to have them, frankly.' China's leadership surely knows that many Chinese families still aspire to send their young-adult children to American universities. But Beijing is much more single-minded than Washington about the future of relations between the two countries: Xi appears to see Washington as the primary impediment to China's rise, and ties to the U.S. as a vulnerability best eliminated. From that viewpoint, relying on Harvard to train China's most promising students is a national-security risk. That means that Trump may be doing Xi a favor. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tim Walz lets loose in rant-filled talk with liberal think tank
Former Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz has built a reputation for his off-the-cuff comments. The Democratic Minnesota governor made no exception during a Center for American Progress (CAP) event on Friday morning called, "What's Next: Conversations on the Path Forward." Walz said China might be the voice of "moral authority" following Israel's strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and military leaders. "Now, who is the voice in the world that can negotiate some type of agreement in this? Who holds the moral authority? Who holds the ability to do that? Because we are not seen as a neutral actor, and we maybe never were," Walz said of the U.S.' role in de-escalating tensions in the Middle East. Tim Walz Hopes It Rains On Trump's Military Parade: 'I'm Just Going To Confess' According to Walz, the U.S. once attempted "to be somewhat of the arbitrator" in those negotiations during the Iran Nuclear Deal, but he said Americans must face the reality that the "neutral actor" with the "moral authority" to lead negotiations in the Middle East "might be the Chinese." Read On The Fox News App Tim Walz Floats China As 'Neutral Actor' With 'Moral Authority' To Negotiate Middle East Peace Walz didn't elaborate on why China would be that world leader. The Minnesota Democrat also admitted he is hoping for rain during President Donald Trump's military parade. "I have never so hoped for rain in my life," Walz said. Trump is hosting a massive Flag Day military parade on Saturday to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are expected to gather in the nation's capital to witness the historic parade, which also coincides with the president's 79th birthday. "This is not Pyongyang on a Saturday," Walz said, referring to the capital of North Korea, which is a communist, totalitarian dictatorship. Walz has joined many Democrats, including those planning to protest on Saturday, in criticizing Trump's military parade by drawing comparisons to China and North Korea's military parades. Trump's military parade on Saturday comes amid escalated conflict in the Middle East, after Israel launched air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and military leaders, and Iran responded by launching missiles toward Israeli territory. Walz was ridiculed earlier this year for celebrating Tesla's stock drop as protests raged on, rejecting Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). "On the iPhone, they've got that little stock app. I added Tesla to it to give me a little boost during the day — $225 and dropping," Walz said at the time. Walz on Friday said that speaking out against Musk and Tesla "worked" because it started to hurt the billionaire personally. The Democrat, who rose to the national stage as former Vice President Kamala Harris' running mate during her brief 2024 presidential campaign, criticized Trump along his usual attack lines on Friday. Walz said Trump is "incompetent at governing," and America is in a "dangerous time" under Trump's leadership, which he said is "marching towards authoritarianism" following the chaotic incident in which authorities forcibly removed Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., at a Department of Homeland Security press conference on Thursday. The former vice presidential candidate also said he was successful in labeling Trump "weird" during the 2024 presidential campaign. "I thought instead of making him a scary authoritarian wannabe who is incredibly dangerous, which I believe he is, I just thought, what a weird dude doing some of this stuff," Walz said. Walz added he "got a bunch of heat" for "inciting violence because I said we should bully the c--- out of Donald Trump." Earlier this year, the Minnesota governor said Harris chose him as her running mate, in part, because, "I could code talk to White guys watching football, fixing their truck" and "put them at ease," describing himself as the "permission structure" for White men from rural America to vote for Democrats. "I think I'll give you pretty good stuff, but I'll also give you 10% problematic," he added. Walz laughed off criticism over inconsistencies in his background on the 2024 campaign trail, describing himself as a "knucklehead."Original article source: Tim Walz lets loose in rant-filled talk with liberal think tank
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Shame of Trump's Parade
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Today—250 years since the Continental Army officially formed to fight for the independence of the American colonies against the British monarchy—marks a milestone in President Donald Trump's effort to politicize the U.S. military. Though they are rare, military parades have happened before in Washington, D.C. For the most part, these have been celebrations of military achievements, such as the end of a war. But today is also Trump's birthday, and what he and his supporters have planned is a celebration of Trump himself. A mark of a free society is that its public institutions, especially its military, represent the body politic and the freedom-enabling equal rights that structure civic life. If service members and the public begin to believe that the military is not neutral but is in fact the servant of MAGA, this will threaten the military's legitimacy and increase the likelihood of violent conflict between the military and the public. Today's events bring us one step closer to this disaster. [Read: Trump's un-American parade] I have seen the politicization of the military firsthand. Last month, I resigned my tenured position as a philosophy professor at West Point in protest of the dramatic changes the Trump administration is making to academic programs at military-service academies. Following an executive order from January, the Department of Defense banned most discussions of race and gender in the classroom. West Point applied this standard to faculty scholarship as well. As a result, my research agenda—I study the relationship between masculinity and war, among other things—was effectively off limits. I consider what the Trump administration is doing to the military-service academies as a profound violation of the military's political neutrality. That destructive ethos is the same one apparent in the parade scheduled for today. Before Trump was reelected, the Army had planned significant celebrations across the country to mark this day, including the release of a commemorative postage stamp and a visit to the International Space Station by an Army astronaut. But according to The New York Times, arrangements for today's D.C. event, unlike the other plans, began only this year. The day is scheduled to begin with a variety of family-friendly concerts, a meet and greet with NFL players, and military-fitness competitions, all on the National Mall. If all goes to plan, the celebrations will culminate with what organizers are calling a 'grand military parade' that starts near the Pentagon, crosses the Potomac River, and ends near the White House. The parade is anticipated to involve 6,700 active-duty soldiers and a massive display of Army equipment: dozens of M1A1 Abrams tanks and Stryker armored personnel carriers, along with more than 100 other land vehicles, 50 helicopters, and a B-25 bomber. Trump is scheduled to give remarks after the parade and receive a flag delivered from the air by the U.S. Army Parachute Team known as the Golden Knights. A fireworks show is set to follow later tonight. The organizers have made it abundantly clear that today's purpose is to directly laud Trump and his politics. In promotional materials, they tell us, 'Under President Trump's leadership, the Army has been restored to strength and readiness.' They credit his 'America First agenda' for military pay increases, enlarged weapons stockpiles, new technologies, and improvements in recruitment, declaring that he has 'ensured our soldiers have the tools and support they need to win on any battlefield.' Monica Crowley, the State Department's chief of protocol and a former Fox News host, went on Steve Bannon's podcast WarRoom to say that the concurrence of the U.S. Army's anniversary and Trump's birthday is 'providential.' She called it 'meant to be. Hand of God, for sure.' She added, 'It is really a gift, and we want to be sure that we celebrate in a manner that is fitting, not just of this extraordinary president but of our extraordinary country.' She also expressed hope that the crowd would serenade the president with 'Happy Birthday.' Clearly, Trump isn't merely the guest of honor; he is the reason for the party. During his first administration, members of Trump's own Cabinet often thwarted his efforts to corrupt the Pentagon. This time, Trump has appointed a secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, who is willing to tear down the boundaries separating politics and the management of national defense. Trump and Hegseth claim to be purging the military of politicization instilled by previous administrations and resetting the DOD around the nonpartisan matter of readiness for war. But in reality, they have used this rationale as a cover to insert an unprecedented level of political partisanship into the military. Other events in recent months have pointed in this same direction. For instance, in February, the administration fired the top lawyers for the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The only meaningful justification given for the move was Hegseth's claim that the fired lawyers might be roadblocks to the president's agenda—a frightening admission. In January, the administration banned transgender people from serving in the military, not because they allegedly pose a threat to unit cohesion or because their medical treatment is unusually expensive, but because they are supposedly bad people ('not consistent with the humility and selflessness required of a service member'). At present, transgender soldiers who have met all performance standards are being discharged simply because of the administration's bigotry against them. [Read: A parade of ignorance] The administration has also inserted its politics into all the military-service academies—the reason I left West Point last month. Trump and Hegseth have denied the validity of ideas that are taken seriously in a variety of disciplines and banned them from the classroom, including, as I noted above, matters pertaining to race and gender. Books and other works, most of which are by women and people of color, have been removed from the curriculum. The academic programs of the service academies are now structured around the Trump administration's ideological worldview. Faculty and cadets wonder if they are allowed to entertain perspectives inconsistent with the administration's politics. In May, Hegseth led an evangelical prayer service in the Pentagon's auditorium. Standing at a lectern with the Department of Defense seal, Hegseth led the audience in prayer to 'our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ.' The main speaker at this service was Hegseth's pastor, Brooks Potteiger, of the Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship, in Goodlettsville, Tennessee. This church restricts all leadership positions to men, declares homosexuality immoral, and asserts that women should not serve in combat. Of course, there is nothing wrong with a secretary of defense acknowledging his religious faith. What's objectionable is the use of his authority to push his personal religious views on subordinates, especially as the director of a major institution of the secular state. The president now routinely speaks to uniformed service members in his red MAGA hat, using his trademark rhetoric centering himself and belittling, even demonizing, his critics. He openly suggests a special alliance between him and the military. At Fort Bragg on Tuesday, for instance, Trump encouraged uniformed soldiers to cheer his political agenda and boo his enemies. This is all extremely dangerous. Keeping the military a politically neutral servant of the constitutional order, not of the president or his political ideology, is vital to ensuring the security of civil society. Up until a week ago, the blurring of the boundaries between the administration's ideology and the military had not yet manifested as an attempt to employ the military directly on Trump's—or the Republican Party's—behalf. The steps taken until that point had been mostly symbolic. (The one possible exception was the deployment of the military at the southern border in what is essentially a law-enforcement matter.) But these symbolic expressions of military politicization have paved the way for that endgame—presidential orders that deploy the military for directly partisan ends. In just the past week, the Trump administration responded to protests against the enforcement of his immigration policies with military deployments. The likelihood that the administration will try to use the military against its political opponents is now very high. If that comes to pass, we will then learn just how successful Trump's efforts to politicize the military have been. Illustration Sources: RoyalFive / Getty; Tasos Katopodis / Getty; WoodysPhotos / Getty; gerenme / Getty; JohnnyPowell / Getty; Win McNamee / Getty. Article originally published at The Atlantic
