How Chicago has managed the migrant influx: A deep dive before Johnson's congressional hearing
The Brief
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson will testify before Congress about the city's sanctuary policies, following a request from the House Committee on Oversight and Reform.
Since August 2022, over 51,000 migrants have arrived in Chicago, leading to significant financial expenditures, with the city spending $638.7 million on migrant aid.
Chicago has faced controversies regarding the establishment of migrant shelters in various neighborhoods, including the West Town and Woodlawn areas.
CHICAGO - Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson will testify before Congress this week about the city's status as a sanctuary city.
The appearance follows a formal request from the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, which sent a letter to City Hall last month asking Johnson to participate in a public hearing on Capitol Hill.
The letter raised concerns about the impact of sanctuary policies in Chicago, as well as in New York, Boston and Denver.
RELATED:Why is Brandon Johnson testifying before Congress?
Johnson has said he would defend the people of Chicago and comply with the 2017 Illinois Trust Act, which prohibits local law enforcement from participating in federal immigration enforcement.
Ahead of Johnson's testimony, here's a detailed look at migrant arrivals and key developments since 2022.
By the numbers
Since Aug. 31, 2022, over 51,000 migrants have arrived in Chicago from the southern border.
From August 2022 to December 2024, the city reported 946 buses arriving with asylum seekers.
Of these, 602 buses arrived at the city's designated "Landing Zone," while 344 buses and two planes brought additional arrivals since November 2024.
As of December 2024:
Total Individuals Seeking Asylum Arriving via Texas Buses & Airplane: 51,648
Total Individuals Seeking Asylum Arriving via Airplane Since June 2023: 5,209
Total Bus Arrivals in Chicagoland Area Since 8/31/2022: 946
Total Individuals Resettled: 17,183
Total Individuals Reunited with Sponsors: 7,689
Total Shelter Census: 2,487
Total Awaiting Placement: 0
Money Spent
Chicago has allocated significant funds to support migrants arriving in the city since August 2022. As of February, Chicago has spent $638.7 million on migrant aid.
Funding sources include:
American Rescue Plan Act: $94 million
City Corporate Fund: $268,163,828
Cook County Asylum Seeker Grant: $36,620,606
Federal Health Grant: $1,568,730
FEMA Asylum Seeker Grants: $87,522,646
State Asylum Seeker Grants: $149,862,603
City officials and residents have debated the sustainability of such spending and its impact on local communities.
To address ongoing needs, the city launched the "One System Initiative" in December 2024, unifying migrant and homeless shelters into a single support network.
The transition included adding 3,800 beds to the Department of Family and Support Services' current capacity and eliminating 30-day shelter extensions.
Mayor Johnson described this initiative as a "cost-effective, equitable, and strategic approach" to addressing homelessness while responding to the decline in new migrant arrivals.
PREVIOUS STORY: Migrants in Chicago: State funds hotel stays for hundreds of asylum seekers amid 'unprecedented' influx
The city said a five-year plan was being created to enhance services for unhoused residents.
Funding has also been a contentious issue in Chicago, with many local groups questioning how the city could suddenly allocate millions of dollars for new arrivals while long-standing community needs go unmet.
In 2024, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker announced plans to spend an additional $182 million in state funds to address the growing number of migrants in Chicago and Cook County. Republican lawmakers pushed back, arguing that the state should prioritize its citizens over new arrivals.
Instead, Republicans called for increased funding for health care, law enforcement, and homeownership programs for residents.
RELATED:
Chicago aldermen push for more funding amid reports of migrants sleeping inside police stations
Chicago City Council approves $51M for migrant aid
Chicago mayor on migrant crisis: 'Entire country is now at stake' without significant assistance from Biden
Chicago's efforts to accommodate an influx of migrants sparked various controversies over the years, particularly concerning the establishment of shelters in different neighborhoods.
The backstory
In West Town, a building near Western and Ohio was repurposed to house migrant families in November 2023.
Despite legal challenges from local residents aiming to halt the move-in, a judge denied the request for a temporary restraining order.
Migrant families began relocating to the facility, which had undergone renovations to add more bathroom facilities. Prior to this, many of the migrants had been living in tents or police station lobbies.
READ MORE HERE
The backstory
The decision to convert the former Wadsworth Elementary School in Woodlawn into a migrant shelter was met with significant opposition.
Residents and local leaders expressed frustration over the lack of community consultation.
Alderman Jeanette Taylor highlighted that the city proceeded without engaging the community, leading to protests and activists camping outside the facility.
Concerns centered around resource allocation and the potential impact on the neighborhood.
The Wadsworth building once had more than 500 students in attendance when it was active. In February 2023, city officials said 250 adult migrants moved in.
READ MORE HERE
The backstory
Plans to erect a migrant tent shelter in Brighton Park led to heated community meetings.
Residents voiced strong objections, feeling excluded from the decision-making process.
Tensions escalated to the point where Alderman Julia Ramirez and her aide were physically attacked during a protest against the shelter.
In December 2023, Governor J.B. Pritzker halted construction after environmental reviews revealed significant contamination, including elevated levels of mercury and arsenic in the soil.
PREVIOUS STORY: Pressure mounts on Chicago mayor as costs for failed Brighton Park migrant site reach nearly $1M
Despite initial assurances from city officials that remediation efforts had rendered the site safe for temporary residential use, the state decided to discontinue plans for the shelter due to these environmental concerns.
Following the cancelation, several City Council members called for the resignation of officials involved in the failed project, criticizing the lack of transparency and collaboration with the community.
READ MORE HERE
What we know
In January 2024, Chicago officials announced that they were 'pausing' efforts to open additional shelters and relying on the state to create more beds.
To stay within its 'New Arrivals Mission' budget, a spokesperson for Mayor Brandon Johnson said at the time that the city was turning its focus to "outmigration and resettlement services."
As migrants found more permanent housing, officials said space was becoming available in the city's 28 shelters.
PREVIOUS ARTICLE: Chicago 'pauses' new migrant shelters
The backstory
A migrant shelter in the Pilsen neighborhood was linked to the majority of measles cases in an outbreak that began in early March 2024.
These cases marked the first reported instances of measles in Chicago since 2019. About half of the cases involved children under 5 years old.
By April 2024, the City of Chicago reported a significant decline in measles cases following the implementation of a vaccination campaign aimed at individuals lacking protection.
Measles, characterized by symptoms such as high fever, cough, runny nose, red or watery eyes, and a rash, is highly contagious. The rash typically appears three to five days after the onset of symptoms, and individuals exposed to measles may remain asymptomatic for one to two weeks.
The backstory
In December 2023, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson announced stricter penalties for bus companies that failed to comply with the city's guidelines when transporting migrants from the southern border.
The proposed rule aimed to impose penalties on private bus operators who did not comply with specified rules regarding the location and timing of migrant drop-offs. Violations of the established rules could result in fines ranging from $2,000 to $10,000.
MORE:Chicago looks to implement stricter rules for migrant bus operators
In response, some bus operators began bypassing Chicago, opting to drop off passengers in suburban areas instead.
Elburn: In December 2023, a bus carrying 38 migrants made an unannounced stop in Elburn. The village board responded by approving an ordinance to restrict "unscheduled intercity buses."
Lockport: Migrants were dropped off at a Metra station without prior notice in December 2023. Local police coordinated with the Office of Emergency Management and Communications to transport the migrants to Chicago.
Fox River Grove: A bus from Texas left 38 migrants at a Metra station after midnight, misleading them to believe they were in Chicago. Local authorities provided temporary shelter and facilitated their travel to the city.
Peotone and Kankakee: Migrants were found walking along highways after being dropped off without guidance. In Kankakee, a bus driver falsely informed passengers they had arrived in Chicago, leaving them stranded at a gas station.
Hinsdale: The village received 11 migrant buses over 11 days, prompting officials to impose fines of $750 per passenger for unannounced bus arrivals.
RELATED:Chicago-area migrant bus battle intensifies as more towns crack down
To manage the situation, several suburban municipalities implemented measures to regulate migrant accommodations.
Elk Grove Village introduced an ordinance prohibiting hotel and motel owners from housing individuals without medical documentation confirming they are free from contagious diseases within the past 60 days. This rule exempts those who have resided in the U.S. for at least a year.
Additionally, the ordinance restricts warehouse owners from converting their buildings into temporary housing facilities.
Similarly, Schaumburg enacted a tax on hotel stays exceeding 30 days to deter the prolonged housing of migrants in local hotels. This decision aimed to protect the village's convention business and address residents' concerns.
What's next
Mayor Johnson's upcoming testimony before Congress will likely address both the city's response to the migrant crisis and the broader impact of sanctuary city policies.
Dig deeper
One of the policies Johnson will likely discuss is the Welcoming City Ordinance, which stops city agencies and employees from getting involved in civil immigration enforcement or helping federal authorities with such efforts.
The ordinance outlines specific restrictions, including the following:
Agencies and agents cannot stop, arrest or detain individuals based solely on their immigration status or an administrative warrant, such as those found in the FBI's National Crime Information Center database.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents cannot access detainees or use city facilities for investigative purposes.
City employees are restricted from spending time responding to ICE inquiries about a person's custody status, release date, or contact information unless it is to determine whether a situation involves solely civil immigration violations.
Agencies are barred from entering agreements under federal law that allow local entities to enforce federal civil immigration law.
The transfer of individuals into ICE custody for the purpose of civil immigration enforcement is prohibited.
City resources cannot be used to assist civil immigration operations, such as setting up traffic perimeters or providing on-site support.
CPD has to follow certain protocols when ICE or other federal agencies ask for help.
Supervisors are responsible for figuring out if the request is about civil immigration enforcement. If it is, they have to decline the request and notify the Office of Emergency Management and Communications.
Chicago also has rules in place to limit how city agencies handle information about people's immigration or citizenship status.
For example, agencies can't ask for, keep, or share this information unless federal law, a court order, or a warrant says they have to. There are some exceptions, like if someone gives written permission or if the city's legal team needs it for certain legal matters.
Also, applications and forms for city services can't ask about someone's citizenship or immigration status. Departments need to check and update these forms every year to make sure they're following the rules.
Finally, federal agencies can't access city databases or data-sharing platforms if they're trying to enforce civil immigration laws.
The Source
The information in this article came from previous FOX 32 Chicago coverage along with information from the city of Chicago's website.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Trump aims to slash Pell Grants, which may limit low-income students' college access
For many students and their families, federal student aid is key for college access. And yet, the Trump administration's budget proposal for fiscal year 2026 calls for significant cuts to higher education funding, including reducing the maximum federal Pell Grant award to $5,710 a year from $7,395, as well as scaling back the federal work-study program. The proposed cuts would help pay for the landmark tax and spending bill Republicans in the U.S. Congress hope to enact. Roughly 40% of undergraduate students rely on Pell Grants, a type of federal aid available to low-income families who demonstrate financial need on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid. Work study funds, which are earned through part-time jobs, often help cover additional education expenses. More from Personal Finance:Social Security gets break from student loan collectionsIs college still worth it? It is for most, but not allWhat to know before you tap your 529 plan President Donald Trump's "skinny" budget request said changes to the Pell Grant program were necessary due to a looming shortfall, but top-ranking Democrats and college advocates say cuts could have been made elsewhere and students will pay the price. "The money we invest in post-high school education isn't charity — it helps Americans get good jobs, start businesses, and contribute to our economy," Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., told CNBC. "No kid's education should be defunded to pay for giant tax giveaways for billionaires." Nearly 75% of all undergraduates receive some type of financial aid, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. "Historically the Pell Grant was viewed as the foundation for financial support for low-income students," said Lesley Turner, an associate professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy and a research fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research. "It's the first dollar, regardless of other types of aid you have access to." Under Trump's proposal, the maximum Pell Grant for the 2026-2027 academic year would be at its lowest level in more than a decade. "The Pell reduction would impact the lowest-income families," said Betsy Mayotte, president of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors, a nonprofit. More than 92% of Pell Grant recipients in 2019-2020 came from families with household incomes below $60,000, according to higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz. If the president's cuts were enacted and then persisted for four years, the average student debt at graduation will be about $6,500 higher among those with a bachelor's degree who received Pell Grants, according to Kantrowitz's own calculations. "If adopted, [the proposed cuts] would require millions of enrolled students to drop out or take on more debt to complete their degrees — likely denying countless prospective low- and moderate-income students the opportunity to go to college altogether," Sameer Gadkaree, president and CEO of The Institute for College Access & Success, said in a statement. Already, those grants have not kept up with the rising cost of a four-year degree. Tuition and fees plus room and board for a four-year private college averaged $58,600 in the 2024-25 school year, up from $56,390 a year earlier. At four-year, in-state public colleges, the average was $24,920, up from $24,080, according to the College Board. The Pell program functions like other entitlement programs, such as Social Security or Medicare, where every eligible student is entitled to receive a Pell award. However, unlike those other programs, the Pell program does not rely solely on mandatory funding that is set in the federal budget. Rather, it is also dependent on some discretionary funding, which is appropriated by Congress. The Congressional Budget Office projected a shortfall this year in part because more students now qualify for a Pell Grant due to changes to the financial aid application, and, as a result, more students are enrolling in college. Although there have been other times when the Pell program operated with a deficit, slashing the award amount is an "extreme" measure, according to Kantrowitz. "Every past shortfall has been followed by Congress providing additional funding," he said. "Even the current House budget reconciliation bill proposes additional funding to eliminate the shortfall." However, the bill also reduces eligibility for the grants by raising the number of credits students need to take per semester to qualify for the aid. There's a concern those more stringent requirements will harm students who need to work while they're in school and those who are parents balancing classes and child care. "These are students that could use it the most," said the University of Chicago's Turner. "Single parents, for example, that have to work to cover the bills won't be able to take on additional credits," Mayotte said. "If their Pell is also reduced, they may have to withdraw from school rather than complete their degree," Mayotte said.
The Intercept
an hour ago
- The Intercept
Top U.S. General in Africa Paints Grim Picture of U.S. Military Failures in Africa
President George W. Bush created a new command to oversee all military operations in Africa 18 years ago. U.S. Africa Command was meant to help 'bring peace and security to the people of Africa.' The Trump administration now has AFRICOM on the chopping block as part of its sweeping reorganization of the military. According to the general leading the command, its mission is far from accomplished. Gen. Michael Langley, the head of AFRICOM, offered a grim assessment of security on the African continent during a recent press conference. The West African Sahel, he said last Friday, was now the 'epicenter of terrorism' and the gravest terrorist threats to the U.S. homeland were 'unfortunately right here on the African continent.' The embattled four-star general — who noted his days were numbered as AFRICOM's chief — was speaking from a conference of African defense chiefs in Kenya, where he had been imploring ministers and heads of state to help save his faltering command. 'I said: 'OK, if we're that important to [you], you need to communicate that,'' he explained, asking them to have their U.S. ambassadors make entreaties on behalf of AFRICOM. Current and former defense officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide candid assessments, were divided on whether Langley deserves a measure of blame for the dire straits the command finds itself in. One former defense official spoke highly of Langley, calling him 'an effective and transformational leader' who 'rapidly grew into the job and developed strong, fruitful relationships with members of Congress.' A current official, however, said almost the opposite, calling the four-star general a 'marble mouth' who did a poor job of making a case for his command, 'fumbled' relations with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and diminished AFRICOM's standing with legislators. Asked by messaging app if the latter assessment was accurate, a former Africa Command official sent a laughing emoji and replied 'no comment' followed by 'but yes.' (The official said he could be quoted as such.) Before 2008, when the command began operations, U.S. military activities in Africa were handled by other combatant commands. AFRICOM's creation reflected rising U.S. national security interests on the continent and a desire for a single command to oversee a proliferation of post-9/11 counterterrorism activities, predominantly in the West African Sahel and Somalia. Since U.S. Africa Command began operations, the number of U.S. military personnel on the African continent — as well as programs, operations, exercises, bases, low-profile Special Operations missions, deployments of commandos, drones strikes, and almost every other military activity — has jumped exponentially. AFRICOM 'disrupts and neutralizes transnational threats' in order to 'promote regional security, stability and prosperity,' according to its mission statement. That hasn't come to pass. Throughout all of Africa, the State Department counted 23 deaths from terrorist violence in 2002 and 2003, the first years of U.S. counterterrorism efforts in the Sahel and Somalia. By 2010, two years after AFRICOM began operations, fatalities from attacks by militant Islamists had already spiked to 2,674, according to the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, a Pentagon research institution. The situation only continued to deteriorate. There were an estimated 18,900 fatalities linked to militant Islamist violence in Africa last year, with 79 percent of those coming from the Sahel and Somalia, according to a recent analysis by the Africa Center. This constitutes a jump of more than 82,000 percent since the U.S. launched its post-9/11 counterterrorism efforts on the continent. 'The Sahel — that's where we consider the epicenter of terrorism — Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger are confronted with this each and every day; they're in crisis. The terrorist networks affiliated with ISIS and al-Qaeda are thriving, particularly in Burkina Faso,' said Langley. During his tenure, the U.S. was largely kicked out of the region, forced to abandon key nodes of its archipelago of West African bases and many secret wars across the Sahel that were largely unknown to members of Congress as they played out. Langley noted that, since the U.S. left Niger in September of last year, AFRICOM has observed a rise in violence across the Sahel. He neglected to mention that terrorism increased exponentially during the years of heaviest U.S. military involvement, leading to instability and disenchantment with the U.S. He also failed to note, despite having been previously grilled about it during congressional testimony, that the military juntas that booted the U.S. from West Africa were made up of U.S.-supported officers who overthrew the governments the U.S. trained them to protect. As violence spiraled in the region over the past decades, at least 15 officers who benefited from U.S. security assistance were key leaders in 12 coups in West Africa and the greater Sahel during the war on terror — including the three nations Langley emphasized: Burkina Faso (in 2014, 2015, and twice in 2022), Mali (in 2012, 2020, and 2021), and Niger (in 2023). At least five leaders of the 2023 coup d'état in the latter country, for example, received American assistance. U.S. war in Somalia which has ramped up since President Donald Trump retook office, also got top billing. The U.S. 'is actively pursuing and eliminating jihadists,' said the AFRICOM chief. 'And at the request of the Somali Government, this year alone AFRICOM has conducted over 25 airstrikes — double the number of strikes that we did last year.' The U.S. military is approaching its 23rd year of operations in Somalia. In the fall of 2002, the U.S. military established Combined Joint Task Force–Horn of Africa to conduct operations in support of the global war on terror in the region, and U.S. Special Operations forces were dispatched to Somalia. They were followed by conventional forces, helicopters, surveillance aircraft, outposts, and drones. By 2007, the Pentagon recognized that there were fundamental flaws with U.S. military operations in the Horn of Africa, and Somalia became another post-9/11 stalemate, which AFRICOM inherited the next year. U.S. airstrikes in Somalia have skyrocketed when Trump is in office. From 2007 to 2017, under the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, the U.S. military carried out 43 declared airstrikes in Somalia. During Trump's first term, AFRICOM conducted more than 200 air attacks against members of al-Shabab and the Islamic State. By the end of his first term, Trump was ready to call it quits on the sputtering conflict in Somalia, ordering almost all U.S. troops out of the country in late 2020. But President Joe Biden reversed the withdrawal, allowing the conflict to grind on — and now escalate under Trump. The Biden administration conducted 39 declared strikes in Somalia over four years. The U.S. has already carried out 33 airstrikes in Somalia in 2025, according to AFRICOM public affairs. At this pace, AFRICOM is poised to equal or exceed the highest number of strikes there in the command's history, 63 in 2019. Despite almost a quarter-century of conflict and billions of taxpayer dollars, Somalia has joined the ranks of signature forever-war failures. While fatalities from Islamist attacks dropped in Somalia last year, they were still 72 percent higher than 2020, according to the Africa Center. AFRICOM told The Intercept that the country's main militant group, al-Shabab, is now 'the largest al Qaida network in the world.' (Langley called them 'entrenched, wealthy, and large.') The command called ISIS-Somalia 'a growing threat in East Africa' and said its numbers had tripled from 500 to an estimated 1,500 in the last 18 months. The U.S. recently conducted the 'largest airstrike in the history of the world' from an aircraft carrier on Somalia, according to Adm. James Kilby, the Navy's acting chief of naval operations. That strike, by 16 F/A-18 Super Hornets, unleashed around 125,000 pounds of munitions. Those 60 tons of bombs killed just 14 ISIS members, according to AFRICOM. At that rate, it would take roughly 13,000,000 pounds of bombs to wipe out ISIS-Somalia and about 107,000,000 pounds to eliminate al-Shabab, firepower roughly equivalent to four of the atomic bombs the U.S. dropped on Hiroshima, Japan. Troubles loom elsewhere on the continent as well. 'One of the terrorists' new objectives is gaining access to West Africa coasts. If they secure access to the coastline, they can finance their operations through smuggling, human trafficking, and arms trading,' Langley warned, not mentioning that U.S. counterterrorism failures in the Sahel led directly to increased attacks on Gulf of Guinea nations. Togo — which sits due south of Burkina Faso — saw a 45 percent increase in terrorist fatalities in 2024, according to the Africa Center. Langley also referenced trouble in Africa's most populous nation. 'We're observing a rise in attacks by violent extremist organizations, not only in Niger but across the Sahel to include Nigeria,' Langley warned. He offered a somewhat garbled plan of action in response: 'The scale and brutality of some of these incidents are really troubling. So we're monitoring this closely and these events, and offering of sharing intel with the Nigerian and also regional partners in that area remains constant. We are committed to supporting one of the most capable militaries in the region, in Nigeria.' U.S. support to the Nigerian military has been immense, and Nigerian people have suffered for it — something else that Langley left unsaid. Between 2000 and 2022, alone, the U.S. provided, facilitated, or approved more than $2 billion in security aid to the country. In those same years, hundreds of Nigerian airstrikes killed thousands of Nigerians. A 2017 attack on a displaced persons camp in Rann, Nigeria, killed more than 160 civilians, many of them children. A subsequent Intercept investigation revealed that the attack was referred to as an instance of 'U.S.-Nigerian operations' in a formerly secret U.S. military document. A 2023 Reuters analysis of data compiled by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project, a U.S.-based armed violence monitoring group, found that more than 2,600 people were killed in 248 airstrikes outside the most active war zones in Nigeria during the previous five years. That same year, an investigation by Nigeria's Premium Times called out the government for 'a systemic propaganda scheme to keep the atrocities of its troops under wraps.' In his conference call with reporters, held as part of the 2025 African Chiefs of Defense Conference, Langley took only written, vetted questions, allowing him to skirt uncomfortable subjects. AFRICOM failed to provide answers to follow-up questions from The Intercept. During the call, Langley offered a farewell and a pledge. 'This will likely be my last, final Chiefs of Defense Conference as the AFRICOM commander. A nomination for my successor is expected soon,' Langley told The Intercept and others. 'But no matter who holds this position, the AFRICOM mission remains constant. AFRICOM will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with African partners into the future.' Langley's pleas at the conference suggested less certainty. For years, AFRICOM — and Langley in particular — has been paying lip service to a preference for 'African solutions for African challenges' or as Langley put it last week: 'It's about empowering African nations to solve African problems, not just through handouts but through trusted cooperation.' But he has seemed less than enamored with African solutions that include severing ties with the United States. In April, before the Senate Armed Services Committee, he accused Burkina Faso's leader, Captain Ibrahim Traoré, of misusing the country's gold reserves 'to protect the junta regime.' Langley partially walked back those comments last week and appeared to seek reconciliation. 'We all respect their sovereignty,' he said. 'So the U.S. seeks opportunities to collaborate with Burkina Faso on counterterrorism challenges.' For more than two decades, the U.S. was content to pour billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars into failed counterterrorism policies as deaths mounted across the continent. Today, the dangers of terrorism loom far larger, and the U.S. finds itself shunned by former partners. 'I've been charged by the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to mitigate threats to the U.S. homeland posed by terrorist organizations,' said Langley. 'It's about the mutual goal of keeping our homeland safe, and it's about long-term capacity, not dependence.' The current Pentagon official said that Langley had used up what good will he once had. 'I don't think many will be sad to see him go,' he told The Intercept. Langley's tenure may not have sown the seeds of AFRICOM's dissolution, he said, but if the command is ultimately folded into European Command — as some have proposed — he likely helped to hasten it. 'He's been part of this problem,' the official said. 'Maybe him leaving could be one solution.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
GOP's health care plan: We're all going to die, so whatever
If death and taxes are the only certainties, Joni Ernst is here to cut one and fast-track the other. 'We all are going to die," she said. You might think that's a line from a nihilistic French play. Or something a teenage goth said in Hot Topic. Or an epiphany from your stoner college roommate after he watched Interstellar at 3 a.m. But that was actually the Iowa Senator's God-honest response to concerns that slashing Medicaid to achieve President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' would lead to more preventable deaths. The full exchange at a May 30 town hall included one audience member shouting at the stage, 'People will die!' And Ernst responding, 'People are not — well, we all are going to die, so for heaven's sake.' That's not a health care policy — that's a horoscope for the terminally screwed. As you can imagine, the internet didn't love it, because losing your health should not trigger the equivalent of a shrug emoji from someone elected to serve the public good. But rather than walking it back, Ernst leaned in, filming a mock apology in a graveyard because nothing says, 'I care about your future,' like filming next to people who don't have one. Opinion: Nurses are drowning while Braun ignores Indiana's health care crisis Ernst's comments aren't just philosophical musings. She's justifying policy choices that cause real harm. If passed, this bill would, according to the Congressional Budget Office, remove health coverage for up to 7.6 million Americans. That's not just 'we all die someday' territory. That's 'some people will die soon and needlessly.' What makes this even more galling is that the people pushing these cuts have access to high-quality, taxpayer-subsidized healthcare. Congress gets the AAA, platinum, concierge-level government plan. Meanwhile, millions of Americans are told to try their luck with essential oils or YouTube acupuncture tutorials. Honestly, it felt more like performance art than policy: 'Sorry about your grandma getting kicked out of her assisted living facility. Please enjoy this scenic view of her future! LOL!' We're not asking you to defeat death, senator. Death is both inevitable and bipartisan. But there is a broad chasm between dying peacefully at 85 and dying in your 40's because your Medicaid plan disappeared and your GoFundMe didn't meet its goal. Fundamentally, governing is about priorities. A budget is a moral document. When a lawmaker tells you 'we're all going to die' in response to a policy choice, they're telling you 'I've made peace with your suffering as collateral damage.' And if a U.S. Senator can stand in a cemetery and joke about it, you have to wonder — who do our federal legislators think those graves are for? Opinion: Indiana DCS cut foster care in half — and now claims children are safer This isn't just about one comment or one bill. It's about a mindset that treats healthcare as a luxury rather than a right. If death is inevitable, then access to healthcare you can afford is what helps determine how long you have, how comfortably you live, and whether you get to watch your kids grow up. Healthcare isn't about escaping death. It's about dignity and quality of life while we are here. Ernst got one thing right: death will come for us all. But leadership, real leadership, is about helping people live as long and as well as they can before that day comes. You want to make jokes, Senator? Fine. But if your punchline is 'You're all going to die anyway,' don't be surprised when your constituents realize the joke's on them. Kristin Brey is the "My Take" columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Joni Ernst films graveyard video after telling sick people "we all die" | Opinion
