Messmer has no apparent plans for public events during two-week recess
EVANSVILLE — Members of Congress are back in their districts for a two-week recess — but if 8th District Rep. Mark Messmer is planning a mobile office hours event or a town hall, he's not publicizing them.
Messmer's congressional Facebook page is replete with messages celebrating such events as Air Force Reserve Day, National Gold Star Spouses Day, Palm Sunday and Passover. There are well wishes for families affected by severe weather in Princeton, photos of Messmer with a delegation of Japanese visitors to Toyota, an offer to help constituents navigate federal agencies and a call-out for high school students to compete in the Congressional Art Competition.
But there was no mention on Wednesday morning of any public events in the next two weeks.
Same deal on Messmer's X account and congressional website. No shortage of content, but also no mention of looming public events.
More: Anti-Messmer rally in Evansville targets Trump and Musk
Emails and phone messages from the Courier & Press to Messmer aides in Washington, D.C. and Evansville went unanswered on Monday.
Messmer, a Republican elected last year to succeed longtime Rep. Larry Bucshon, is not alone among Republicans in Congress, although he may stand out in the way one of his recent mobile office hours events blew up. Messmer's staff asked employees at the Boonville Public Library to call the police on constituents during a mobile office hours event — even though the mostly older attendees weren't breaking any rules, the library said.
If not holding town halls were the only accessibility issue swirling around Messmer, he wouldn't be so unusual among House Republicans.
Saying rowdy Democratic activists are packing town halls held by Republican House members in order to make GOP policies look unpopular, House Speaker Mike Johnson suggested in March that tele-town halls would be a good alternative for Republican members to hear from constituents.
NBC News reported Monday that, "according to press releases and publicly posted event notices, the majority of town halls and town hall-style events taking place over the congressional recess will be hosted by Democrats."
Messmer also has refused to speak to the Courier & Press, which serves by far the largest county in his 21-county district. Why? He sent the newspaper an email saying it reported he didn't debate his 2024 election opponents when he did.
More: Messmer revisits 2024 campaign to explain his silence
Messmer cited a single joint public appearance with his two opponents, an Aug. 25 Posey County Farm Bureau event that they called a candidate forum lacking any opportunity for rebuttal among candidates. Other than that event, which occurred three weeks after the Indiana Farm Bureau's political action committee endorsed Messmer, he would not appear on the same stage with his opponents.
It all baffles Robert Dion, a University of Evansville political scientist who says Messmer could blunt vocal opposition from opposition activists and reassure other constituents by biting the bullet and appearing in public often — not going radio silent.
"It's kind of surprising that there's been this much unhappiness about his performance, but he's not helping," Dion said. "He could run a charm offensive if he wanted to."
Dion, who moderated two of Bucshon's town hall meetings, said Messmer could refute the perception that he hides from the public by engaging with constituents and media and by holding frequent town hall meetings.
"Even if there were a few testy exchanges, if you make frequent visits to the district, including open town halls — if you make those a routine occurrence, then they lose any sort of novelty or power," Dion said. "The more you do it, the easier it gets."
Messmer could ask attendees to write down their questions and have a moderator read them aloud, a tactic the UE political scientist said shaved several decibel points off the more confrontational questions directed at Bucshon.
Dion said any seasoned politician — Messmer served 16 years in the Indiana Legislature — should know how to handle the public confrontations, press scrutiny and harsh criticism that comes with holding elected office. Like most members of Congress, Messmer is regularly trolled on social media by people who — as Dion acknowledged — didn't vote for him and never will.
The UE political scientist quoted the Federalist Papers, a collection of essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay in 1787 and 1788:
"As it is essential to liberty that the government in general, should have a common interest with the people; so it is particularly essential that the branch of it under consideration, should have an immediate dependence on, & an intimate sympathy with the people," the Federalist Papers state.
"The House member is the one member of the federal government who is closest to the people, the most reachable," Dion said. "And Messmer seems to be the opposite of that. He's unreachable."
This article originally appeared on Evansville Courier & Press: Messmer has no apparent plans for public events during two-week recess
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
25 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
President Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
WASHINGTON — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the borderor sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.'
USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned
Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned Disputes inside the GOP about parts of Trump's major tax bill threaten approval in the Senate and past compromises reached by the Republican-led House. Show Caption Hide Caption Elon Musk 'disappointed' with Trump's tax bill Elon Musk told CBS he is 'disappointed' with President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful' tax bill. Republicans begin debate in the narrowly divided Senate with factions seeking to increase spending cuts or curbing tax breaks, which threaten the compromise needed for approval back in the House. Trump's billionaire adviser Elon Musk complicated the debate by urging lawmakers to kill the bill. Congressional leaders insist approval is still possible despite the fissures in the narrow Republican majorities in each chamber and the unified opposition of Democrats. WASHINGTON – Will President Donald Trump's 'big beautiful bill' go bust? The second-term president's highest-priority legislation is under attack from some Senate Republicans – and from his former billionaire adviser Elon Musk – for costing too much. Complaints are also mounting from Republicans who are opposed to cutting Medicaid health insurance and other popular programs used by many Americans, especially as a way to help pay for tax breaks that would benefit some of the country's highest-income earners. With Republicans holding the slimmest of majorities in both chambers of Congress and with Democrats showing no sign of wanting to help Trump notch a major win to begin his new administration, lawmakers from Trump's own party are sounding apprehensive about threading the needle before their self-imposed July 4 deadline to get something to the president's desk for signature into law. More: Trump and Musk's bromance ends after personal attacks over criticism of tax bill 'We're anxious to get to work on it," Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, told reporters earlier in the week as Republicans and Musk started publicly airing their complaints about the effort. Adding to the challenge: Some of the very House GOP members who last month voted in favor of their 1,100-page version of Trump's tax and policy plan started finding faults of their own that they say meant they'd probably have been a 'no' if they had the chance to do it again. Presidents often aim high to start terms Presidents often try in their first year to build on the momentum of their elections to get major legislation approved. For Joe Biden, it was an infrastructure bill. For Barack Obama, it was overhauling healthcare insurance. For George W. Bush, it was overhauling public education. Trump leapt into action in 2025 with an unprecedented pace of executive orders: 157 through May 23. When he turned to legislation, he persuaded Republican congressional leaders to package all his priorities into one bill, rather than splitting taxes and border security into two different bills, to complete the debate in one fell swoop. More: Everything's an 'emergency': How Trump's executive order record pace is testing the courts Lawmakers often shy away from piling too much into one bill because each contentious provision spurs its own opposition. But faced with the prospect of unanimous Democratic opposition, Trump opted for a strategy that focuses on GOP priorities such as tax relief and border security while personally lobbying reluctant Republicans to stay in line. 'Americans have given us a mandate for bold and profound change,' Trump told Congress in a speech March 4. 'I call on all of my Republican friends in the Senate and House to work as fast as they can to get this Bill to MY DESK before the Fourth of JULY,' he added in a social media post about three months later, on June 2. Musk opposition makes waves Trump's efforts worked in the Republican-led House, which after several days of negotiations and an all-night floor debate voted 215-214 in favor of a plan that had the full backing of the White House. Getting the measure through the Senate - even with the GOP in charge needing just a simple majority of 51 votes - is proving to be its own elusive challenge. Musk, the former head of Trump's bureaucracy-slashing Department of Government Efficiency, spent this past week unloading on the House-passed bill for spending too much money. He called the legislation "pork-filled" and a "disgusting abomination," and urged lawmakers to "KILL the BILL." More: The post-fight fallout from Trump-Musk battle could get even uglier While Musk's barrage ignited a war with Trump and left many Republicans cringing, deficit hawks in the GOP said they appreciated the world's richest man also pushing for deeper spending cuts from the U.S. government. "I welcome people like Elon Musk that try to hold our feet to the fire," said Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Missouri. "We often disappoint our voters when we don't do the cuts that we campaign on, when we're not fiscally responsible." But Rep. Don Bacon, R-Nebraska, who served in the Air Force for 30 years, said the division between Trump and Musk wasn't a good look for his party, especially when it's trying to advance the primary piece of legislation on the president's agenda. "It's just not helpful," Bacon said. "When you have division, divided teams don't perform as well." 'The opposite of conservative': Sen. Paul on bill Several pockets of Republican senators have voiced concerns about the House-passed legislation. Each group has their issue that they want addressed, and each one presents a hurdle for Trump and GOP leaders like Thune as they try to cobble together a winning 51-vote coalition that can also make it back through the House for another final vote. The Senate factions include one group seeking to cut more spending because the Congressional Budget Office said the House-passed plan would add $2.4 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years. Others are worried about cutting Medicaid, the federal health insurance program for low-income families. And another handful of senators say they are worried about the House-passed bill rolling back renewable energy tax credits for solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear energy. "There are many of us who recognize that what came out of the House was pretty aggressive in how it seeks to wind down or phase out many of the energy tax credit provisions," said Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska. "I happen to think that we've got tax policies that are working to help advance our energy initiatives around the country, as diverse and as varied as they are. Wouldn't we want to continue those investments? 'This bill is the opposite of conservative, and we should not pass it,' added Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, in a June 4 social media post that raised concerns about the nation's debt limit. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley is one of the outspoken Republicans taking issue with the House-passed bill's provisions that would cut nearly $800 billion during the next decade from Medicaid and, according to the Congressional Budget Office, cost 7.8 million people their health insurance. "I don't want to see rural hospitals close and I don't want to see any benefits cut in my state," Hawley said. Trump and his allies contend spending cuts of $1.6 trillion are the most ever approved in a House bill and that the tax cuts will spur economic growth to offset the costs. Trump got personal this week in calling Paul's ideas 'crazy' in a social media post and said the people of Kentucky 'can't stand him.' More: Trump lashes out at Sen. Rand Paul over opposition to big tax bill House Speaker Mike Johnson, a staunch Trump ally, told reporters June 4 that few people are going to like everything in an 1,100-page bill. But the Louisiana Republican said the measure he helped craft in the House was carefully calibrated to gain wide support. "I hope everybody will evaluate that – in both parties, and everybody – and recognize, 'Wow, the benefits of this far outweigh anything that I don't like out it,'" Johnson said. Senate dropping local tax deductions would be 'radioactive': Rep. Lalota Any changes made by the Senate will force another vote in the House before the bill can become law - and that's where the math can get tricky. Republican senators are talking about tinkering with a key compromise that Trump and Johnson signed off on in the House that raised the federal deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) from $10,000 to $40,000 for people earning less than $500,000 per year. That provision is important to GOP lawmakers from high-tax states such as California, New York and New Jersey who supported the House bill that passed through the 435-seat chamber by only a one-vote margin. More: Senate Republicans plan to amend SALT tax deduction in Trump's sweeping bill The Senate aims to cut back that provision. But Rep. Nick Lalota, R-New York, told reporters on June 4 that revisiting the tax issue "would be like digging up safely-buried radioactive waste." House members scouring through the bill they voted on weeks ago are also finding unfamiliar provisions in the version that they say they would have opposed. For example, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, said in a social media post June 3 that the Senate needs to strip out language she hadn't noticed earlier that would prevent states from regulating artificial intelligence. Rep. Mike Flood, R-Nebraska, said he opposed a section that aims to hinder federal judges from enforcing their court orders. Trump sought the provision to prevent judges from blocking policies largely spelled out via his executive orders. Senate could drop contentious provisions House members risked supporting Even though Republicans control both chambers of Congress, the Senate could drop or fail to approve contentious parts that GOP House colleagues in competitive districts already went out on a limb to support. It's happened many times before - with sizable political consequences. The concept even has a name: Getting BTU'd. That refers to a 1993 House vote on a controversial energy tax during the first year of Bill Clinton's presidency based on British thermal units. House Democrats lost 54 seats in the 1994 election – and control of the chamber for the first time in 40 years – in part because of supporting the BTU tax that the Senate never debated. John Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, has said a book about such votes could be called 'Profiles in Futility.' Another example was the 2009 American Clean Energy and Security Act, a bill which Obama supported as president that aimed to limit the emissions of heat-trapping gases from power plants, vehicles and other industrial sources. The Democrat-controlled House narrowly approved the measure 219-212 but the Senate never took it up. Critics said it would raise the cost of energy. The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a non-profit libertarian think tank that opposed the measure, counted 28 House Democrats from coal states who lost their seats in the 2010 mid-term election after voting for the bill. Fast forward to 2025 and Republicans are the ones facing a similar dynamic. Musk, who contributed about $290 million of his personal fortune to help Republicans including Trump win last November, slammed House lawmakers who voted for the president's legislative package.'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong,' Musk wrote June 3 on social media. But House Republicans who voted for the legislation, including some who also demanded deeper spending cuts when it was in their hands, said they're not worried about the package falling apart and coming back to haunt them. They say that's because they did fight for more budget cuts. "This wasn't a hard vote. It was hard going through the process to get more, and you can always do better," said Rep. Ralph Norman, R-South Carolina. "But look at what Donald Trump's done, the great things that are contributing to cutting the deficit." Rep. David Schweikert, R-Arizona, who represents a competitive toss-up district, noted that he's introduced multiple bills to trim federal spending. "If Mr. Musk wants to be helpful, what he should do is start to understand that those of us in a 50-50 district who have shown up with actual policy solutions that offset every penny of this bill," he said. Leaving Washington for the weekend, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force Once on June 6 that he wasn't worried about Musk and that he remained confident he'd get "tremendous support" in the Senate to pass the bill. 'I don't know of anybody who's going to vote against it," the president said, before adding: "Maybe Rand Paul." For his part, Johnson told reporters June 4 that he wasn't concerned about House Republicans losing seats in 2026. Predicting that the Senate would find the necessary votes on the president's tax bill, the speaker said he expects Americans will see the benefits of Trump's efforts before the next election. 'Am I concerned about the effect of this on the midterms? I'm not," Johnson said. "I have no concern whatsoever. I am absolutely convinced that we are going to win the midterms and grow the House majority because we are delivering for the American majority and fulfilling our campaign promises." Contributing: Reuters
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal cuts ripple through bioscience hub in Hamilton
Protesters march in downtown Hamilton. (Photo by Kathryn Houghton for KFF Health News). HAMILTON — Scientists are often careful to take off their work badges when they leave the campus of one of the nation's top research facilities, here in southwestern Montana's Bitterroot Valley. It's a reflection of the long-standing tension caused by Rocky Mountain Laboratories' improbable location in this conservative, blue-collar town of 5,000 that was built on logging. Many residents are proud of the internationally recognized research unfolding at the National Institutes of Health facility and acknowledge that Rocky Mountain Labs has become an economic driver for Hamilton. But a few locals resent what they consider the elitist scientists at the facility, which has employed about 500 people in recent years. Or they fear the contagious pathogens studied there could escape the labs' well-protected walls. That split widened with the COVID-19 pandemic and the divisions that emerged from mask mandates and vaccine development. In 2023, Matt Rosendale, a Republican who was then a U.S. representative from Montana, falsely tied the lab to the origins of covid in an attempt to cut its funding. Now, Hamilton is a prime example of how the Trump administration's mass federal layoffs and cancellation of research grants are having ripple effects in communities far from Washington, D.C. On an April afternoon, hundreds of people filled the sidewalks at an intersection of Hamilton's usually quiet downtown, waving signs that read 'Hands Off Federal Workers' and 'Stop Strangling Science.' Some driving by honked in support, rolled their windows down, and cheered. Others flipped off the rallygoers and cast insults at them. A passing bicyclist taunted protesters with chants of 'DOGE' — short for the Department of Government Efficiency, the federal initiative led by billionaire Elon Musk to cut costs that has driven mass layoffs and slashed programs. Kim Hasenkrug, a former Rocky Mountain Labs researcher of 31 years, who retired in 2022, joined the crowd. He slammed President Donald Trump's promise to let Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 'go wild' on health issues. 'We're beginning to see what 'going wild' looks like,' Hasenkrug said. 'These cuts will not streamline research. They will throttle it.' As of early May, 41 Rocky Mountain Labs workers had been let go or told their contracts would end this summer, and nine more had retired early, according to researchers employed by the facility. KFF Health News spoke with 10 current or former Rocky Mountain Labs workers who requested anonymity to speak about information that has not been publicly released. The federal government has also slashed billions of dollars for research, including at least $29 million in grants to Montana recipients, ranging from university scientists to the state health department. That's according to HHS data confirmed by KFF Health News. Scientists who remain in Hamilton said research has slowed. They've struggled to buy basic gear amid federal directives that changed how orders are placed. Now, more cuts are planned for workers who buy and deliver critical, niche supplies, such as antibodies, according to researchers at the labs. The Department of Health and Human Services didn't respond to repeated requests for more information on the government's cuts to research, including questions about the changes in Hamilton. Deputy press secretary Emily Hilliard said the department is committed to the 'continuity of essential research.' Some within the lab feel as if they've become public enemies or outcasts, unable to defend themselves without risking their jobs. Postdoctoral scientists just starting their careers are seeing options dwindle. Some workers whose employment contracts expire within days or weeks have been in the dark about whether they'll be renewed. At least one Rocky Mountain Labs scientist moved to another country to research infectious disease, citing 'current turmoil,' according to an email sent from the scientist to co-workers that was reviewed by KFF Health News. 'The remaining staff has been discredited, disrespected, and discouraged from remaining in public service,' Hasenkrug said. The National Institutes of Health is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world. It has 27 institutes and centers focused on understanding illness and disabilities and improving health. The agency's research has helped lead to vaccines against major diseases — from smallpox to COVID — and has been behind the majority of medicines approved for the U.S. market. That research also generated more than $94.5 billion in new economic activity nationwide, according to United for Medical Research, a coalition of research groups and advocates. The Trump administration aims to eliminate roughly 1,200 jobs at the NIH and shrink its budget by 40%. The administration's budget proposal to cut NIH funding calls the agency's spending 'wasteful,' deems its research 'risky,' and accuses it of promoting 'dangerous ideologies.' It's a dramatic political turnabout for the NIH, which for decades enjoyed bipartisan support in Washington. From 2015 to 2023, its annual budget grew by more than $17 billion. As of 2023, Rocky Mountain Labs was one of only 51 facilities in the world with the highest level of biosafety precautions, according to the Global BioLabs mapping project. In April, HHS indefinitely stalled work at another of those labs, the Integrated Research Facility in Frederick, Maryland, Wired reported. Kennedy has said the nation should pause funding infectious disease research, and the White House has said it plans to intensify scrutiny of gain-of-function research, which involves altering a pathogen to study its spread. Hamilton, in Ravalli County, is a place of scientists, ranchers, and outdoor recreationists. Here, 1 in 8 people live below the federal poverty line. Nearly 70% of county residents who participated in the 2024 presidential election voted for Trump, and Trump signs still dot U.S. Highway 93 leading to town. In the thick of the COVID pandemic, the sheriff and county commissioners refused to enforce a statewide mandate to mask in public spaces while Rocky Mountain Labs researchers worked to understand the virus. The lab's work dates to 1900, and even early on it was controversial. Rocky Mountain spotted fever was killing people in the valley. Researchers found the cause — ticks — and worked to eradicate the disease-carrying bugs by requiring ranchers to treat their cattle. That created resentment among locals who 'already harbored a healthy distrust of government-imposed programs,' according to an NIH account. The tension came to a head in 1913 when a 'dipping vat' used to chemically treat cattle was blown up with dynamite and another damaged with sledgehammers. Now, some residents and local leaders are worried about the economic consequences of an exodus of federal workers and their salaries. Most of the county is government-managed public land, and the first wave of federal cuts hit U.S. Forest Service workers who do everything from clear trails to fight wildfires. Rocky Mountain Labs generates hundreds of millions of dollars for the local economy by creating more work for industries including construction and bringing more people into the city's shops, a 2023 University of Montana study found. The rural community is also a base for international vaccine developer GSK due to the lab's presence. Kathleen Quinn, a vice president of communications for the company, said GSK's business with government agencies 'continues as usual' for now amid federal changes and that it's 'too early to say what any longer-term impact could be.' 'Our community is impacted more than most,' said City Councilor Darwin Ernst. He spoke during an overflowing March town hall to discuss the federal government cuts. Hundreds of people turned out on the weeknight asking city councilors to do something. Ernst, a former researcher at the lab who now works as a real estate broker and appraiser, said in an interview he's starting to see more homes enter the market, which he attributed to the atmosphere of uncertainty and former federal workers' having to find jobs elsewhere. 'Someone recently left with her entire family. Because of the layoffs, they can't afford to live here,' he said. 'Some people retire here but that's not everyone.' Jane Shigley said she's been a Hamilton resident for more than 30 years and initially thought the government would find 'some inefficiencies, no big deal.' But now she's worried about her hometown's future. 'Something's going on that we can't control,' Shigley said. 'And the people that it's happening to aren't allowed to talk to us about it.' The City Council sent a letter to federal officials in April asking for formal consultation prior to any significant changes, given Hamilton's 'interdependence' with Rocky Mountain Labs and the federally controlled lands surrounding Hamilton. As of May, city leaders hadn't received a response. People in town are split on how badly the federal cuts will affect Hamilton. Julie Foster, executive director of the Ravalli County Economic Development Authority, said the community survived the decline of logging, and she thinks Rocky Mountain Labs will survive, too. 'It will be here. There may be bumps in the road, but this is a resilient place,' Foster said. Even amid the cuts, Rocky Mountain Labs is in the process of a building expansion that, so far, hasn't stopped. And researchers' work continues. This spring, scientists there helped make the first identification in Montana of a species of tick known to carry Lyme disease. KFF Health News correspondent Rae Ellen Bichell contributed to this report. KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
