Latest news with #BrookeRollins
CBS News
21 hours ago
- Business
- CBS News
Michigan joins over 20 states in suing USDA over access to SNAP food stamp recipient records
Michigan is among nearly two dozen states that are suing the federal government over a pending rule that seeks extensive access to the personal records of food stamp recipients. A total of 22 states have signed onto the suit, which was filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the U.S. Department of Agriculture. "USDA's actions are unprecedented, threaten the privacy of millions of families, and ignore long-standing restrictions on the use and redisclosure of SNAP data," said the statement from Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's office. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, is the modern version of what was once called food stamps. The program is meant for lower-income people who complete an application and meet a series of eligibility requirements. While the SNAP program is federally funded, it has long been administered by the states, and the records of recipients are generally handled at that level. Michigan currently directs about $254 million in SNAP benefits a month through the Michigan Bridge Card network. Eligible recipients can use their individual or household allocations via the electronic benefits card toward purchasing food at most supermarkets and other participating retailers. Fruits, vegetables, meat and dairy products can be purchased with SNAP benefits. Paper products and cleaning supplies are among the ineligible grocery items. In May, the USDA issued a notice that it will require states and territories to share records of SNAP benefits and allotments with the federal government. While those instructions are on hold, according to the USDA, they do ask for personally identifiable information such as names, addresses, Social Security numbers and other records about applicants and recipients. The USA is also seeking information "sufficient to calculate the total dollar value" of SNAP benefits that participants received on and after Jan. 1, 2020. "For years, this program has been on autopilot, with no USDA insight into real-time data. The Department is focused on appropriate and lawful participation in SNAP, and today's request is one of many steps to ensure SNAP is preserved for only those eligible," USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said in her announcement. The lawsuit said the federal government has never previously asked for such detailed records on SNAP recipients. Quality control checks normally ask for sample data, and both inspections and audits would seek a limited range of information specifically allowed by law. "SNAP applicants provide their private information on the understanding, backed by long-standing state and federal laws, that their information will not be used for unrelated purposes," Nessel's office said. "USDA's actions are unprecedented, threaten the privacy of millions of families, and ignore long-standing restrictions on the use and redisclosure of SNAP data."
Politico
2 days ago
- Business
- Politico
USDA's reorg rollout
Presented by With help from Jordan Wolman QUICK FIX — 'What are we trying to accomplish?': USDA chief Brooke Rollins is rolling out her department's reorganization plan — but not without some concern. — President Donald Trump secured a major trade deal with the European Union, narrowly avoiding a trade war that would hit U.S. farmers hard. — Republicans' plans to cut SNAP spending inspired one food policy wonk to run for Congress. IT'S MONDAY, JULY 28. Welcome to Morning Agriculture. I'm your host Grace Yarrow. Do you have any lunch plans? Send tips and thoughts on USDA's reorg to gyarrow@ and follow us at @Morning_Ag for more. Want to receive this newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to POLITICO Pro. You'll also receive daily policy news and other intelligence you need to act on the day's biggest stories. Driving the day WHAT'S NEXT FOR USDA REORG: The Senate Agriculture Committee will hear from USDA's No. 2 official Wednesday about the department's reorganization plan, which includes shifting much of its Washington-area staff to five hubs around the country. The hearing — featuring Deputy Agriculture Secretary Stephen Vaden — comes after the panel's top two lawmakers expressed disappointment that Congress wasn't consulted before the announcement. As you'll recall: On Thursday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins unveiled her plan to significantly shrink the size of the department's D.C.-based employees and close several USDA buildings in the capital region. Committee Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) and ranking member Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) both called for a hearing shortly after the plan was made public to better understand the details of Rollins' decision. 'I'm more concerned about just the efficiency,' Boozman said in a brief interview with MA last week. 'What are we trying to accomplish?' More details: Rollins said Friday that her 'best guess' is that 50 to 70 percent of USDA workers based in the Washington area will relocate to the five new hubs. Rollins, speaking on Fox News' 'America's Newsroom,' said USDA may fill vacant positions with people based in the areas of Salt Lake City; Fort Collins, Colorado; Indianapolis; Kansas City, Missouri; and Raleigh, North Carolina. 'Our best guess is that perhaps 50 to 70 percent of our Washington, D.C., staff will want to move — they will actually take that relocation,' she said. Pack your bags: Rollins suggested that the USDA workers based in the capital region who don't relocate should seek jobs in the private sector. 'The economy is beginning to thrive again,' she said. 'The golden age is here. President Trump's vision was always to move people out of these government jobs, where maybe it isn't the most productive use, into the private sector.' Rollins said in a video announcement to staff that employees will be notified of where they'll be expected to move in the 'coming months.' Some Republican senators — and Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis — have also noted that current residents of the five USDA hub cities would be willing to take the new job opportunities. 'Especially with the loss of federal jobs in other areas, we welcome the new Department of Agriculture jobs being moved to Colorado,' Polis said. But Rob Larew, president of the National Farmers Union, warned that the reorganization would result in 'significant staff turnover' and loss of institutional knowledge of career staff — especially given that around 15,000 department employees have already left or taken buyouts this year. You'll recall: Rollins' long-awaited reorganization plan, which was first reported by POLITICO, calls for moving more than half of USDA's 4,600 Washington-area staff 'closer to' farmers, ranchers and foresters. More than 90 percent of USDA's nearly 100,000 employees already work outside the Beltway. Some related reading: The Trump administration this spring sought the ability to conduct mass layoffs at more than a dozen agencies, according to a new court filing that reveals what parts of the federal government were in the crosshairs of the White House's cost-cutting efforts — and which could be again now that the Supreme Court has cleared a legal block to staff reductions across the federal government. According to a Thursday court declaration filed in the Northern District of California, the administration sought the go-ahead to lay people off at 17 agencies and departments, including at USDA. Read the full story from our Sam Ogozalek here. MAHA MOMENT OUT NOW: FDA Commissioner Marty Makary defended the Trump administration's efforts to crack down on artificial food dyes, despite criticism from some Make America Healthy Again advocates that doing so doesn't address the root cause of chronic health issues. 'We want to create a different standard, and we want to have eyes on these new chemicals,' Makary said in an interview with POLITICO's Dasha Burns for 'The Conversation.' 'I think you win more bees with honey than fire.' Don't miss the full episode with Makary here. TRADE CORNER A BIG DEAL: President Donald Trump announced a preliminary trade agreement with the European Union Sunday, skirting a trade war that threatened to hurt farmers and opening new market opportunities for U.S. agriculture. The agreement locks in U.S. tariffs of 15 percent on most imports from the EU, fending off Trump's threat to raise tariffs on most EU goods to 30 percent on Aug. 1. Details are still to come for major food and ag industries, including the alcohol industry which relies heavily on trade to meet U.S. consumer demand. Trump promised in remarks Sunday that agriculture is among the top two winning industries of the deal. 'I think maybe cars would be the one that would go the biggest. And the second would be agriculture, the farmers,' he said. Relief for farmers? The EU's 27 nations drew up a list of U.S. goods — including soybeans and Kentucky bourbon — that would face retaliatory tariffs of up to 30 percent. Those were due to enter force from Aug. 7 onward, absent a deal between the two leaders. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stressed the significance of the $1.7 trillion transatlantic trade relationship — the world's largest — and appealed to Trump to do the biggest deal that either of them have ever done, as our colleagues write. 'We have a trade deal between the two largest economies in the world, and it's a big deal. It's a huge deal,' she said. Worth watching: Trump also said that steel and aluminum from the EU would continue to be subject to 50 percent tariffs — which could impact input prices for farmers who rely on steel-based equipment or manufacturers that use the materials to package their goods. 2026 Watch CAMPAIGNING ON SNAP CUTS: A food aid policy wonk is running for Congress in response to Republicans' recent cuts to the nation's largest anti-hunger program. Salaam Bhatti has entered a crowded Democratic primary to eventually challenge GOP Rep. Rob Wittman in Virginia's 1st District, a seat that national Democrats have deemed a priority for flipping. He's arguing that the megalaw, which President Donald Trump signed earlier this month, will 'upend' lives as it forces millions of families off the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. And he thinks he's the best messenger on how to move forward in the face of those cuts. How he got here: Bhatti's experience growing up in a low-income family and relying on school meals to get by inspired him to work in the food aid space. While at the Virginia Poverty Law Center, he helped lead a bipartisan push to expand SNAP access to more than 25,000 Virginia households. Bhatti most recently served as SNAP director at the Food Research & Action Center, an anti-hunger nonprofit, where he tried to warn lawmakers against slashing the program in Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' He faces an uphill battle — given his lack of name recognition and donor base — in order to beat his primary opponents, let alone Wittman, who won his race last year by about 13 percentage points. 'The bill pushed me over the edge,' Bhatti told our Jordan Wolman in an interview. 'I've always wanted to run for office. I never wanted to force it, but the way that the working class has been neglected in Congress required a working class champion to come in and fight.' This interview has been edited for length and clarity. While working at the Virginia Poverty Law Center, how did you get state Republicans to support expanding SNAP eligibility? Anti-hunger advocates, when it comes to working with Republicans, don't really have the power. So we brought in banks, health insurance companies, county organizations, city organizations, people who can talk about the budget, and the grocery stores as well. And so we were all able to say, 'Hey, listen, we all agree hunger is bad. It impacts all of us in some different way. So let's let them know that SNAP expansion is helping working families, and it's going to bring this much money into your district, into the stores, and that's going to have a great ripple effect.' When the elected officials heard all that ... that really helped propel them to vote for the bill. Your experience with SNAP in particular is significant. What about the bill's changes to SNAP do you feel is so devastating? The bill has the potential to end SNAP. There is a provision in there that shifts the cost of the benefit to the states. When it comes to figuring out where that money is going to come from, there's only three options. One is to increase taxes. Two is to shift money from other programs. No other agency is going to give up their already underfunded money. And third is to bring the SNAP expansion down to default levels and reduce how many people are receiving [benefits]. And if even that's not enough, then complete withdrawal from the program. And you think that's a possibility in Virginia. It's absolutely a possibility in Virginia. And other states, too. Read the full Q&A exclusively for Pro subscribers here. Transitions The Pet Food Institute has promoted Atalie Ebersole to vice president of government relations and Dana Waters to director of international affairs. Row Crops — Capping off all the other horrors in wartime Gaza is the food-distribution situation that has prevailed since late May. More than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed while seeking aid in Gaza since late May, according to the United Nations. (The Atlantic) — After ICE raided a Nebraska meatpacking plant, the company's leaders are wondering how to stay afloat with only half their workforce. (The New York Times) — Your açaí bowl or smoothie is about to get extra pricey, unless the Trump administration and Brazilian government reach a deal to avoid a 50 percent tariff on imports from Brazil that kicks in Aug. 1. (Reuters) — The Commerce Department on Friday announced its final decision raising anti-dumping duties on most Canadian lumber imports to 20.56 percent, to offset unfairly low prices and Canadian government subsidies, our Ari Hawkins writes. THAT'S ALL FOR MA! Drop us a line and send us your agriculture job announcements or events: gyarrow@ marciabrown@ jwolman@ sbenson@ rdugyala@ and gmott@
RNZ News
3 days ago
- Business
- RNZ News
Australian Prime Minister says easing of curbs on US beef not prompted by Trump
By Sam McKeith , Reuters The review had been in the works for 10 years, Albanese said (file image). Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says a decision to ease rules on US beef imports was not prompted by US President Donald Trump. This week, Trump said the US would sell "so much" beef to Australia , after Canberra announced the relaxation of restrictions, potentially smoothing trade talks with Washington. In place since 2003, the curbs were due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy - or mad cow disease - which could kill cattle, as well as people who eat infected beef. When asked if the easing had anything to do with Trump, Albanese said: "No, this has been a process that has been there for 10 years, the review process." "This wasn't a political decision," Albanese said to Australian Broadcasting Corp television, adding that Trump had not raised the issue with him in a phone call. The comments come after US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins called the easing a win for Trump. In April, Trump singled out the beef trade disparity with Australia, after Australia's beef exports to the US surged last year, reaching AU$4 billion (NZ$4.36b) amid a slump in US beef production. By contrast, Australia's agriculture minister said the rules were relaxed, after a "rigourous science and risk-based assessment" concluded US measures to monitor and control cattle movement were effectively managing biosecurity risks. News of Australia changing its policy was first reported by the Australian Financial Review . The report said Australia would use the easing of rules to argue its case for the US to wind back 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminium, and Trump's threat to impose a 200 percent tariff on pharmaceuticals. The National Party - part of Australia's conservative opposition coalition - said "biosecurity should not be political" and called for an independent scientific panel to review the decision. A loosening of beef import rules is not expected to boost US shipments significantly, because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter, whose prices are much lower, according to analysts. Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tons of beef worth US$2.9b (NZ$4.82b) to the United States, with just 269 tons of US product moving the other way. - Reuters
Reuters
4 days ago
- Business
- Reuters
Australia's PM says easing of curbs on US beef not prompted by Trump
SYDNEY, July 27 (Reuters) - Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Sunday that a decision to ease rules on beef imports from the U.S. was not prompted by U.S. President Donald Trump. Trump this week said the U.S. would sell "so much" beef to Australia after Canberra announced the relaxation of restrictions, potentially smoothing trade talks with Washington. In place since 2003, the curbs were due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, which can kill cattle as well as people who eat infected beef. When asked on Sunday if the easing had anything to do with Trump, Albanese said "No, this has been a process that has been there for 10 years, the review process". "This wasn't a political decision," Albanese said in remarks on Australian Broadcasting Corp television, adding that Trump had not raised the issue with him in a phone call. The comments come after U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins called the easing a win for Trump. In April, Trump singled out the beef trade disparity with Australia after Australia's beef exports to the U.S. surged last year, reaching A$4 billion amid a slump in U.S. beef production. By contrast, Australia's agriculture minister said the rules were relaxed after a "rigorous science and risk-based assessment" concluded that U.S. measures to monitor and control cattle movement were effectively managing biosecurity risks. News of Australia changing its policy was first reported by the Australian Financial Review. The report said Australia will use the easing of rules to argue its case for the U.S. to wind back 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium and Trump's threat to impose a 200% tariff on pharmaceuticals. Collins said the decision was a purely scientific one. A loosening of beef import rules is not expected to boost significantly U.S. shipments because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower, according to analysts.
E&E News
5 days ago
- Business
- E&E News
USDA chief says potentially half of its DC staff may not relocate for reorganization
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said Friday that her 'best guess' is that 50 to 70 percent of USDA workers based in the Washington area will relocate to the department's five new hubs around the country. Details: Rollins, speaking on Fox News' 'America's Newsroom,' said USDA may fill vacant positions with people based in the areas of Salt Lake City; Fort Collins, Colorado; Indianapolis; Kansas City, Missouri; and Raleigh, North Carolina, where the department wants to grow its footprint as part of a reorganization plan she announced Thursday. 'Our best guess is that perhaps 50 to 70 percent of our Washington, D.C., staff will want to move — they will actually take that relocation,' she said. Advertisement Rollins suggested that the USDA workers based in the capital region who don't relocate should seek jobs in the private sector.
