Federal cuts aren't efficient, they're dangerous
West Virginia has declined to join other states suing the Trump administration to block the cancellation of AmeriCorps programs. (AmeriCorps photo)
'The needs will go unmet.'
That's what Habitat for Humanity of Kanawha and Putnam executive director Andrew Blackwood told West Virginia Watch in April when asked about the cuts the Trump administration made to AmeriCorps that month. In total, an estimated 32,000 AmeriCorps service members were told to stop working.
AmeriCorps members, of course, often do vital service work in distressed areas for low pay. You name it, and an AmeriCorps member has probably done it. After school programs, disaster clean up, home repair, the list goes on. It's an important service program that steps in to fill gaps that our local and state governments and nonprofits simply can't afford to do.
That's why it was so disappointing that West Virginia didn't join the multistate lawsuit to challenge the program's termination. Our attorney general J.B. McCuskey, who early into his role has already joined lawsuits to challenge other states' own laws, couldn't be bothered to provide a comment to West Virginia Watch.
A spokesperson for Gov. Patrick Morrisey, who would be the first to tout his bona fides in suing the Obama and Biden administrations when he was West Virginia's attorney general, said, 'The governor believes most matters can be solved through collaboration and communication rather than lawsuits. The governor will continue to fight to protect all West Virginians and will work diligently to help all those impacted.'
Well that's great and all. But I wonder if he would repeat that now, after a judge ruled that the AmeriCorps members can return in the 24 states and Washington D.C. that sued the administration in April. Those two dozen states will now have the young (although many older Americans join AmeriCorps, too), eager people returning to work and helping the communities they've chosen to make home, doing projects, supporting their neighbors.
A win for them; a loss for us. Unfortunately because of our elected leaders' decision not to join the lawsuit, West Virginia won't be one of those states.
To be fair, the governor's office has a point. Most matters should be resolved through collaboration.
But it never should have gotten to this point in the first place.
This year we've seen story after story of programs, grants, employees and offices being cut all across the country. Some people, organizations, cities or states sue. Others hope that their senators, congress members or governor will get down on their knees and beg the administration to spare their states from the cuts and pain. Sometimes, sometimes, it works. Usually it hasn't.
We're not a healthy, efficient democracy if you have to routinely beg someone to change their mind after, arguably illegally, killing your job, grant or anything else. Here in West Virginia we've seen a grant terminated that would help the state address its long history of PFAS contamination. Our very own Department of Environmental Protection wanted that grant. They applied for it. They won it. Then, they saw it taken away.
Health professionals who work on black lung disease and other issues at NIOSH in Morgantown had their jobs cut. It took congressional and advocate pressure, and ultimately, a lawsuit, to get Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to change his mind.
That should never have happened. But it did. I could go on with things in West Virginia or what I've seen and heard from friends in other states.
We already live in a state where some of our most basic services for some of our most vulnerable people are heavily reliant on the work of volunteers and government grants. The reality is our politics today makes simple 'collaboration' a pipe dream, especially when doing so would require members of a certain political party to publicly acknowledge that these vital services are more than just the woke ideologies they want them to be.
So many of these vital services — from efforts to improve our drinking water, protect miners' health and feed families to programs that provide coaching for our kids, improve homes and safeguard our national parks — face political threats.
It's going to be hard to ignore the ramifications of these cuts and the impacts they have on average West Virginians for long. The legal system has, unfortunately, proven to be one of the only effective tools we have to stave off the worst of these consequences.
We can't let it go on like this forever. This can't become a genie that stays out of the lamp. If we allow future administrations, whether they're Democrat, Republican or another party, to casually and unilaterally upend systems, no one will be safe. What's to stop a Democratic president from attacking programs that are seen to help 'red states?'
Our electeds must do a better job at speaking up — and actually doing something — for the West Virginians who stand to lose the most when funding for programs that serve our state are cut. The madness has to end, and it's their job to stop it.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Axios
16 minutes ago
- Axios
Focus groups: North Carolina swing voters mostly OK with Trump's LA response
A majority of North Carolina swing voters in our latest Engagious / Sago focus groups supported President Trump's deportations and activation of the National Guard and Marines in Los Angeles, despite some concerns about civil rights and government overreach. The big picture: These Biden-to-Trump voters' desire to eject undocumented migrants from the U.S. — and their critical views of California and Democrats — shape how they see this massive test of executive power playing out far from their own hometowns. Seven of 12 panelists said they support the president's activation of the National Guard and Marines in L.A. despite Gov. Gavin Newsom's and local officials' objections. Three disapproved; two didn't have an opinion. Eight of the 12 said they believe Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens. Why it matters: "Democrats who doubt their party remains out of touch with swing voters will be stunned by what these North Carolinians told us about immigration," said Rich Thau, President of Engagious, who moderated the focus groups. How it works: Axios observed two Engagious / Sago online focus groups Tuesday night with North Carolinians who said they voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and Donald Trump in 2024. The panelists included nine independents and three Republicans. While a focus group is not a statistically significant sample like a poll, the responses show how some voters are thinking and talking about current events. What they're saying: "The stance California has on illegal immigration only enables all these people, and they're not going to stop it," said Gregory D., 43, of Greensboro. "So we need to bring it up another level. It needs to stop. California doesn't want to stop it." "It's in the best interest of the nation that we call this, I don't know, uprising, call it what you want, but yeah, that needs to get nipped in the bud, just like George Floyd and all that sh*t should have," said Alex H., 44, of Charlotte. Butch F., 58, of Mebane, said he believes illegal immigrants got government assistance that reduced North Carolinians' access to disaster funds. Gerius J., 33, of Charlotte, said he's for diversity but wants to "do it the right way. Get the right paperwork, the right documentation." He said Democrats "have always wanted illegals to come here," and if anyone objects, "you're the bad guy. And as a U.S. citizen, I'm not the bad guy. I just want things to be done the right way." The other side: Karen L., 61, of Wilmington, said of Trump's immigration actions, "When he first started out, it seemed like he was really going after the criminals — like, the ones committing murder and rape — and he was getting all of them. And we don't want them here if they're [here] illegally, especially. But now ... it's way too extreme, and he's violating civil rights, and he's causing more chaos than anything." Rachid O., 46, of Raleigh, said the administration should prioritize arresting and deporting criminals, above all undocumented immigrants. Many undocumented immigrants pay taxes "so they contribute to the country," he said. Between the lines: Shifting the focus to combating illegal immigration may help him with some voters who have cooled on his performance in other areas. Several panelists voiced concerns about the economy, tariffs and political corruption and objected to Trump's moves to cut university research, or possible Medicaid cuts in the spending and tax-cut bill before Congress. "It's getting harder and harder to afford things," said Kimberly S., 37, of Sanford. "We are just kind of told, 'Hey, you just got to bear with us just a little bit more,' and it doesn't feel like it's getting any easier." Shauna S., 54, of Harrisburg, said when it comes to tariffs, "There's no plan, and it's been erratic. It appears to be an opportunity to manipulate the markets, and I really want someone to investigate where and who's actually gaining financially every time these tariffs are being threatened and then removed. I'm just curious what's really happening."


Axios
16 minutes ago
- Axios
Israel's strike on Iran was 8 months in the making
Israel's stunning and sprawling operation overnight targeting Iran's nuclear facilities, missile sites, scientists and generals followed eight months of intensive clandestine preparations. Why it matters: The operation launched a new war in the Middle East that could draw in the U.S., demolished any hopes of a nuclear deal, and dealt arguably the biggest single blow to the Iranian regime since the 1979 revolution. And it is only just beginning. Driving the news: Israel is attempting to "eliminate" Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities in an operation expected to last at least several days, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced. Other Israeli officials said it could take weeks. Israel attempted — just in the opening hours — to assassinate nuclear scientists it claims had the know-how to make a nuclear bomb. Around 25 scientists were targeted and at least two are confirmed dead so far. Israel also targeted the entire top brass of Iran's military. The commander of the Revolutionary Guard and military chief of staff were both confirmed dead, along with another senior general. The Israeli operation didn't just include air strikes. Israel's Mossad intelligence service has operatives on the ground conducting covert sabotage operations on missile and air defense sites, officials said. Israel is expected to keep pounding Iran's underground nuclear facilities in the coming days, along with other targets. Behind the scenes: The idea for an operation simultaneously targeting Iran's missile and nuclear programs — which Netanyahu has described as existential threats to Israel — took hold after Iran struck Israel in October, during a cycle of tit-for-tat escalation between the countries. Motivated both by Iran's fast-growing missile arsenal and its weakened air defenses following Israel's retaliation, Netanyahu ordered the military and intelligence services to begin planning. The Israeli military said another factor was intelligence about nuclear weaponization research and development that indicated Iran could build a bomb more quickly if it elected to do so. The planned opening in the coming weeks of a new underground enrichment facility that would be immune to even massive U.S. bunker busters added to the urgency. Friction point: Even as President Trump pursued a nuclear deal, Israel was preparing for this strike — gathering intelligence, positioning assets and eventually conducting drills. Those preparations alarmed some in the White House, who worried Netanyahu might move even without a green light from Trump. Netanyahu assured Trump he wouldn't. The White House, for its part, told Netanyahu that if Israel attacked Iran, it would do so alone. Trump himself said several times in recent days, including several hours before the strikes, that he opposed an Israeli strike that could "blow up" the negotiations. The intrigue: But in the hours after the attack began, Israeli officials briefed reporters that this was all coordinated with Washington. Two Israeli officials claimed to Axios that Trump and his aides were only pretending to oppose an Israeli attack in public — and didn't express opposition in private. "We had a clear U.S. green light," one claimed. The goal, they say, was to convince Iran that no attack was imminent and make sure Iranians on Israel's target list wouldn't move to new locations. Netanyahu's aides even briefed Israeli reporters that Trump had tried to put the brakes on an Israeli strike in a call on Monday, when in reality the call dealt with coordination ahead of the attack, Israeli officials now say. State of play: The U.S. side has not confirmed any of that. In the hours before and after the strike, the Trump administration distanced itself from the Israeli operation in public statements and private messages to allies. Secretary of State Marco Rubio swiftly stated that Israel's attack was "unilateral" with no U.S. involvement. Hours later, Trump confirmed he knew the attack was coming but stressed the U.S. had no military involvement. The degree of U.S. intelligence, logistical and defensive support for Israel's operation remains to be seen. What to watch: Israel is now bracing for Iran to unleash hundreds of ballistic missiles and drones toward Israel, and perhaps also U.S. bases in the region.


Axios
17 minutes ago
- Axios
Padilla episode triggers five-alarm fire for Democrats
Democrats spooked by President Trump's state-sanctioned shows of force have shifted into five-alarm fire mode, warning he's pushing American democracy to the brink. Why it matters: They're pointing to what happened yesterday to Alex Padilla, California's senior senator, as a crossing-the-Rubicon moment. Driving the news: The jarring scene of Padilla, a Democrat, being forcefully removed from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference after interrupting it — and then being dragged to the ground and handcuffed — felt like kerosene on the nation's political fire. To Trump's most loyal allies, Padilla's actions were merely an exercise in political theater. Back in D.C., House Speaker Mike Johnson was among the Republicans blaming Padilla, saying that "at a minimum," the senator should be censured. To Democrats, the episode crystallized fears about Trump's willingness to crush dissent, and shatter democratic norms and institutions. "This is the stuff of dictatorships. It is actually happening," said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). A few Republicans were just as alarmed. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who's repeatedly proved her independent streak, told reporters the incident was "shocking at every level. It's not the America I know." Padilla wasn't arrested, but the fallout from the incident promises to endure as Congress continues to wrestle with Trump's giant tax and spending bill. Zoom in: To fully understand the alarm that's gripping Democrats over the Padilla incident, consider two factors: 1. It took place in a mostly Democratic city where Trump's immigration agents are using military-style tactics to conduct raids and make arrests in mostly Hispanic communities and workplaces. Padilla is one of the nation's highest-ranking Hispanic public officials, and is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration panel. 2. Trump's over-the-top-enforcement seems to be about more than immigration. When Padilla interrupted Noem during her press conference to try to ask a question, the DHS secretary had just said that her agents were in Los Angeles "to liberate this city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this governor and this mayor have placed on this country."