Republicans slashed food aid. Grocers in small towns and rural areas are taking the hit.
Republican lawmakers, many of whom represent districts with substantial numbers of food aid recipients, defended their megabill, saying the cuts will ultimately help low-income families and their local communities.
'Grocers are good people, hard-working families, and they only make a 1 to 2 percent margin,' said House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.), a top negotiator in the plan to slash SNAP. 'A significant number of people who currently are on SNAP through unemployment will now be climbing a ladder of opportunity, which [means] they'll be able to have more resources to buy more food. So our grocers are going to do well with this.'
Thompson said grocers have been 'the victim of fear mongering by the Democrats' and the benefits restrictions will be a boon to their industry.
Democrats like Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) disagree and are exploring ways to mitigate the SNAP cuts through upcoming legislation and negotiations.
'We'll use every tool at our disposal,' said Brown, deputy ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee. 'I know there's been some conversation around a skinny farm bill, and I don't know, candidly, what that will look like. But if there's any opportunity to reverse course or to supplement funds, I will certainly do that.'
Several Republican and Democratic state officials have already warned that it will be difficult to backfill the loss of federal dollars. They will need to consider redirecting funds from existing programs, cutting benefits, raising taxes or finding some alternative method to protect their budgets.
'I don't think any state is going to cut [SNAP benefits],' Thompson said. 'If they do, the governors and state legislators that do the cuts are not going to be governors and state legislators for very long.'
Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) said that his state is bracing for 'tens of thousands of people' losing access to SNAP.
'The key here is that if we keep enough folks buying at local rural grocery stores, those local rural grocery stores have a higher chance to survive,' Vasquez said. 'We have to make sure folks either have money in their pocket and that states can make up the shortfall in SNAP cuts to preserve that access, or for other folks, provide alternate means to be able to feed them.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
28 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern seek 1st transcontinental railroad through a massive merger
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Union Pacific wants to buy Norfolk Southern in a $85 billion deal that would create the first transcontinental railroad in the U.S, and potentially trigger a final wave of rail mergers across the country. The proposed merger, announced Tuesday, would marry Union Pacific's vast rail network in the West with Norfolk's rails that snake across 22 Eastern states, and the District of Columbia. The nation was first linked by rail in 1869, when a golden railroad spike was driven in Utah to symbolize the connection of East and West Coasts. Yet no single entity has controlled that coast-to-coast passage. The railroads argue a merger would streamline deliveries of raw materials and goods nationwide by eliminating delays when shipments are handed off between railroads. The AP first reported the merger talks earlier this month a week before the railroads confirmed the discussions last week. Any deal would be closely scrutinized by antitrust regulators that have set a very high bar for railroad deals after previous consolidation in the industry led to massive backups and snarled traffic. If the deal is approved, the two remaining major American railroads — BNSF and CSX — will face tremendous pressure to merge to create a second transcontinental railroad so they can compete. The continent's two other major railroads — Canadian National and CPKC — may also get involved. The Canadian rails span all of that nation and feed into America. CPKC rails stretch south into Mexico Some big shippers like chemical plants in the Gulf may be wary of the deal due to fears of a monopoly that could would wield immense influence over rates, but other major rail customers, like Amazon and UPS, may be in favor if it means packages will arrive more quickly and reliably. Those big companies, along with unions and communities across the country that the railroads cross, will have a chance to weigh before the U.S. Surface Transportation Board. Consumers could benefit if the transcontinental rail does reduce shipping rates and delivery times. Union Pacific said that combined, the railroads would improve delivery times. There's speculation that this deal might win approval under the pro-business Trump administration, but the STB is currently evenly split between two Republicans and two Democrats. The board is led by a Republican, and Trump will appoint a fifth member before this deal will be considered. Union Pacific is offering $20 billion cash and one share of its stock to complete the deal. Norfolk Southern shareholders would receive one UP share and $88.82 in cash for each one of their shares as part of the deal that values NS at roughly $320 per share. Norfolk Southern closed at just over $260 a share earlier this month before the first reports speculating about a deal. Union Pacific's stock fell nearly 2% to $224.98 in premarket trading, while Norfolk Southern's stock dipped more than 3% to $277.40. Union Pacific CEO Jim Vena, who has championed a merger, said lumber from the Pacific Northwest and plastics produced on the Gulf Coast and steel made in Pittsburgh will all reach their destinations more seamlessly. 'It builds upon President Abraham Lincoln's vision of a transcontinental railroad from nearly 165 years ago, and will usher in a new era of American innovation,' Vena told investors Tuesday. U.S. railroads have already undergone extensive consolidation. There were more than 30 major freight railroads in the early 1980s. Today, six major railroads handle the majority of shipments nationwide. Western rival BNSF, owned by Berkshire Hathaway, has the war chest to pursue an acquisition of CSX, to the east, if it chooses. CEO Warren Buffett is sitting on more than $348 billion cash and the consummate dealmaker may want to swing for the fences one last time before stepping down as planned at the end of the year. Buffett recently threw cold water on reports that he had enlisted Goldman Sachs to advise him on a potential rail deal in an interview with CNBC, but he rarely uses investment bankers anyway. Buffett reached an agreement to buy the parts of the BNSF railroad he didn't already own for $26.3 billion after a private meeting with its CEO more than a decade ago. Yet there's widespread debate over whether a major rail merger would be approved by the Surface Transportation Board, which has established a high bar for consolidation in the crucial rail industry. That's largely due to the aftermath of a consolidation in the U.S nearly 30 years ago that involved Union Pacific. It merged with Southern Pacific in 1996 and the tie-up led to an extended period of snarled traffic on U.S. rails. Three years later, Conrail was divvied up by Norfolk Southern and CSX, which led to more backups in the East. 'We're committed to making sure that doesn't happen in this case,' said Norfolk CEO Mark George. He added that the railroads will spend the next two years planning for a smooth integration before this deal might get approved. Just two years ago, the STB approved the first major rail merger in more than two decades. In that deal, which was supported by big shippers, Canadian Pacific acquired Kansas City Southern for $31 billion to create the CPKC railroad. There were compelling factors in that deal, however, that combined the two smallest major freight railroads. The combined railroad, regulators reasoned, would benefit trade across North America. The deal announced Tuesday would merge the nation's largest freight railroad, with the smallest. Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern said they expect to submit their application for approval within the next six months and hope the deal would get approved by early 2027. They predict that they would be able to eliminate $1 billion in costs annually, but Vena said that every union worker at both railroads should still have a job. The railroads also predict they would be able to boost revenue by at least $1.75 billion each year by winning more business from trucking companies and other railroads. On Tuesday, Norfolk Southern reported a $768 million second-quarter profit, or $3.41 per share, as volume grew 3%. That's up from $737 million, or $3.25 per share, a year ago, but the results were affected by insurance payments from its 2023 East Palestine derailment and restructuring costs. Without the one-time factors, Norfolk Southern made $3.29 per share, which was just below the $3.31 per share that analysts surveyed by FactSet Research predicted.
San Francisco Chronicle
28 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Virginia judge bars Youngkin's university board appointments rejected by Senate Democrats
FAIRFAX, Va. (AP) — A judge ordered that eight public university board members tapped by Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin be removed from their posts in a victory for Virginia Senate Democrats who rejected the appointees in a June committee vote. Fairfax Circuit Court Judge Jonathan D. Frieden severed the newly appointed members from their governing-board seats at the University of Virginia, George Mason University and the Virginia Military Institute. His order came at the request of nine Virginia Senate Democrats who filed a lawsuit last month requesting immediate action against the heads of university boards, also known as rectors or presidents. The nine senators argued that despite the legislative committee rejecting the membership of the eight board members, the board chairs had continued acknowledging them as members, and Frieden agreed. 'Here, the public interest is served by protecting the power of the elected legislature to confirm or reject gubernatorial appointees,' Frieden wrote in an opinion letter about his order. An attorney representing the board rectors said in court that if unsuccessful, he intended to appeal Frieden's order. The case comes amid the White House's effort to reshape higher education, with a focus on DEI. Colleges in Virginia and across the U.S. have recently become a groundswell for political tension between academic leaders and the federal government, with boards at the center of those battles. The political and cultural divide in higher education has only escalated conflicts over who gets to have a seat at the table for critical board votes that could shape those institutions' future. In June, University of Virginia President Jim Ryan resigned after the Justice Department pushed for his removal. Earlier this month, the Trump administration initiated a civil rights investigation into George Mason University's hiring practices. The board at George Mason is having a meeting later this week. And earlier this year, the board at the Virginia Military Institute ousted its president, Retired Army Maj. Gen. Cedric T. Wins. His tenure as president was marked by the implementation of diversity initiatives, which faced pushback from some conservative alumni. Last month, the Virginia Senate Privileges and Elections committee met through an ongoing special session and opted against approving the eight university appointees made by Youngkin, notably including former Virginia attorney general Ken Cuccinelli II and Caren Merrick, Youngkin's former commerce secretary. According to the state Constitution, all gubernatorial appointments are subject to confirmation by the General Assembly. Following the vote, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Scott Surrovell wrote a letter to all board chairs, reminding them that appointees must be approved by the legislature. But Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares also wrote to the heads of the university boards, instead advising them that the appointed members should remain on the governing bodies because only a committee, not the whole state General Assembly, had voted to reject them. Mark Stancil, an attorney representing the Democratic senators, argued that the attorney general's guidance was incorrect. 'Their position flies in the face of the text of the Constitution, the text of the governing statute, and decades of longstanding practice," he wrote in a court filing. Christopher Michel, representing the rectors, countered that if the Constitution states that the legislature has the power to reject appointees, that would mean the full legislature rather than one committee. 'The General Assembly is a two-house body,' Michel said. Michel further questioned whether the Virginia senators met the legal requirements necessary to have board members immediately removed by a judge. He asserted that Virginia senators had sued the wrong people, and that the rectors did not represent the voted-down members themselves. In turn, Stancil argued to the court that rectors are responsible for holding meetings and counting votes. Frieden said in his letter that the rectors did have culpability in the case, writing: 'As the person presiding at those meetings, each ... is responsible for recognizing members who wish to speak and recognizing and announcing the votes of members.' Inside the courtroom, Surovell, state Sen. Kannan Srinivasan and Deputy Attorney General Theo Stamos sat among the benches. Surovell said to a group of reporters outside the courtroom that state Democrats had a responsibility to push back. 'These boards just don't seem very interested in following any law or listening to anything that the entity that controls them says,' he said. 'This hearing today is about making sure that we have a rule of law in Virginia — that the laws are followed and that the Senate is listened to.' ___
Los Angeles Times
28 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Women in legislatures across the U.S. fight for ‘potty parity'
For female state lawmakers in Kentucky, choosing when to go to the bathroom has long required careful calculation. There are only two bathroom stalls for women on the third floor of the Kentucky Statehouse, where the House and Senate chambers are located. Female legislators — 41 of the 138 member Legislature — needing a reprieve during a lengthy floor session have to weigh the risk of missing an important debate or a critical vote. None of their male colleagues face the same dilemma because, of course, multiple men's bathrooms are available. The Legislature even installed speakers in the men's bathrooms to broadcast the chamber's events so they don't miss anything important. In a pinch, House Speaker David Osborne allows women to use his single stall bathroom in the chamber, but even that attracts long lines. 'You get the message very quickly: This place was not really built for us,' said Rep. Lisa Willner, a Democrat from Louisville, reflecting on the photos of former lawmakers, predominantly male, that line her office. The issue of potty parity may seem comic, but its impact runs deeper than uncomfortably full bladders, said Kathryn Anthony, professor emerita at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's School of Architecture. 'It's absolutely critical because the built environment reflects our culture and reflects our population,' said Anthony, who has testified on the issue before Congress. 'And if you have an environment that is designed for half the population but forgets about the other half, you have a group of disenfranchised people and disadvantaged people.' There is hope for Kentucky's lady legislators seeking more chamber potties. A $300 million renovation of the 155-year-old Capitol — scheduled for completion by 2028 at the soonest — aims to create more women's restrooms and end Kentucky's bathroom disparity. The Bluegrass State is among the last to add bathrooms to aging statehouses that were built when female legislators were not a consideration. In the $392 million renovation of the Georgia Capitol, expanding bathroom access is a priority, said Gerald Pilgrim, chief of staff with the state's Building Authority. It will introduce female facilities on the building's fourth floor, where the public galleries are located, and will add more bathrooms throughout to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 'We know there are not enough bathrooms,' he said. There's no federal law requiring bathroom access for all genders in public buildings. Some 20 states have statutes prescribing how many washrooms buildings must have, but historical buildings — such as statehouses — are often exempt. Over the years, as the makeup of state governments has changed, statehouses have added bathrooms for women. When Tennessee's Capitol opened in 1859, the architects designed only one restroom — for men only — situated on the ground floor. According to legislative librarian Eddie Weeks, the toilet could only be 'flushed' when enough rainwater had been collected. 'The room was famously described as 'a stench in the nostrils of decency,'' Weeks said in an email. Today, Tennessee's Capitol has a female bathroom located between the Senate and House chambers. It's in a cramped hall under a staircase, sparking comparisons to Harry Potter's cupboard bedroom, and it contains just two stalls. The men also just have one bathroom on the same floor, but it has three urinals and three stalls. Democratic Rep. Aftyn Behn, who was elected in 2023, said she wasn't aware of the disparity in facilities until contacted by The Associated Press. 'I've apparently accepted that waiting in line for a two-stall closet under the Senate balcony is just part of the job,' she said. 'I had to fight to get elected to a legislature that ranks dead last for female representation, and now I get to squeeze into a space that feels like it was designed by someone who thought women didn't exist — or at least didn't have bladders,' Behn said. The Maryland State House is the country's oldest state capitol in continuous legislative use, operational since the late 1700s. Archivists say its bathroom facilities were initially intended for white men only because desegregation laws were still in place. Women's restrooms were added after 1922, but they were insufficient for the rising number of women elected to office. Delegate Pauline Menes complained about the issue so much that House Speaker Thomas Lowe appointed her chair of the 'Ladies Rest Room Committee,' and presented her with a fur covered toilet seat in front of her colleagues in 1972. She launched the women's caucus the following year. It wasn't until 2019 that House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones, the first woman to secure the top position, ordered the addition of more women's restrooms along with a gender-neutral bathroom and a nursing room for mothers in the Lowe House Office Building. As more women were elected nationwide in the 20th century, some found creative workarounds. In Nebraska's unicameral Legislature, female senators didn't get a dedicated restroom until 1988, when a facility was added in the chamber's cloakroom. There had previously been a single restroom in the senate lounge, and Sen. Shirley Marsh, who served for some 16 years, would ask a State Patrol trooper to guard the door while she used it, said Brandon Metzler, the Legislature's clerk. In Colorado, female House representatives and staff were so happy to have a restroom added in the chamber's hallway in 1987 that they hung a plaque to honor then-state Rep. Arie Taylor, the state's first Black woman legislator, who pushed for the facility. The plaque, now inside a women's bathroom in the Capitol, reads: 'Once here beneath the golden dome if nature made a call, we'd have to scramble from our seats and dash across the hall ... Then Arie took the mike once more to push an urge organic, no longer do we fret and squirm or cross our legs in panic.' The poem concludes: 'In mem'ry of you, Arie (may you never be forgot), from this day forth we'll call that room the Taylor Chamber Pot.' New Mexico Democratic state Rep. Liz Thomson recalled missing votes in the House during her first year in office in 2013 because there was no women's restroom in the chamber's lounge. An increase in female lawmakers — New Mexico elected the largest female majority Legislature in U.S. history in 2024 — helped raise awareness of the issue, she said. 'It seems kind of like fluff, but it really isn't,' she said. 'To me, it really talks about respect and inclusion.' The issue is not exclusive to statehouses. In the U.S. Capitol, the first restroom for congresswomen didn't open until 1962. While a facility was made available for female U.S. Senators in 1992, it wasn't until 2011 that the House chamber opened a bathroom to women lawmakers. Jeannette Rankin of Montana was the first woman elected to a congressional seat. That happened in 1916. Willner insists that knowing the Kentucky Capitol wasn't designed for women gives her extra impetus to stand up and make herself heard. 'This building was not designed for me,' she said. 'Well, guess what? I'm here.' Kruesi and Rush write for the Associated Press. AP writer Brian Witte in Annapolis, Md., contributed to this report.
