PBS CEO and President Paula Kerger and NPR CEO and President Katherine Maher are scheduled to testify to at a hearing of the U.S. House Oversight Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency on Wednesday at 7 a.m. PT. 

The testimony comes amid criticism from Republicans in Congress about news coverage from the outlets, and calls for federal funding cuts for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 

You can watch this live stream of the testimony from the PBS NewsHour YouTube page: 

PBS NewsHour will also have further coverage of the hearing on its website. 

Washington’s economic future is uncertain, a financial forecast released Tuesday shows. The projection from the state Economic and Revenue Forecast Council reflects lower-than-expected state tax collections over the next four years, possible federal funding cuts and the Trump administration’s proposed tariffs.

Tax collections will be up about $54 million through June of this year, according to the forecast. But in the budget cycle ending in 2027, the state can expect about $479 million less revenue than anticipated in a forecast from last November. Revenue is expected to fall another $420 million between June 2027 and 2029.

State economists blame the declining revenue on reduced consumer spending and lower income. The federal government’s actions add another layer of uncertainty, said Dave Reich, executive director of the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council. “We don’t know exactly what’s going to happen,” he told the Council Tuesday. “We’re in a changed world.”

The dip in state revenue is not surprising to state budget writers, but it won’t make their job this legislative session any easier.

Lawmakers already face as much as a $15 billion shortfall over the next four years, due to lower-than-anticipated revenue and costly new programs planned to go into effect over the next few years. Because Washington requires lawmakers to balance budgets four years out, they’ll need to find a way to close that gap.

Senate Ways and Means Chair June Robinson (D-Everett) said Tuesday’s forecast was expected. “While it doesn’t change the broader fiscal challenges we face, it reinforces the need for a balanced and sustainable approach as we finalize the 2025-27 operating budget,” she said in a statement.

In total, the revenue forecast gives lawmakers nearly $71 billion to work with when writing their budget for the next two years. Between 2027 and 2029, the state can expect about $76.4 billion in revenue.

Democratic lawmakers will release their budget proposals early next week and will have until April 27 to finalize them.

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans have already released their budget proposal, which includes no new taxes and focuses on trimming spending.

“Legislative budget writers should take heed and show restraint going forward, especially with the uncertainty about actions at the federal level that could affect our situation,” Republican budget leader Sen. Chris Gildon (R-Puyallup) said in a statement.

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown sued the Adams County Sheriff’s Office on Monday, alleging it broke state law by aiding the federal government in immigration enforcement. 

Brown argues the county is violating a 2019 state law called the “Keep Washington Working Act,” which prohibits local law enforcement from aiding the federal government in arresting or deporting undocumented immigrants. That includes asking someone about their immigration status unless it is relevant to the investigation and arresting someone solely because of their immigration status. 

According to the lawsuit, Adams County has held people in custody based only on their immigration status, helping federal immigration agents question people in custody and routinely sharing residents’ confidential personal information.  

“Washington has the right and the responsibility to decide for itself how to use its own resources to keep residents safe and the economy strong,” Brown wrote in the lawsuit.  

Brown argues that Washington’s law protects undocumented people who may be reluctant to call police to report crimes for fear that they could be deported. 

His lawsuit is the second in recent months against the county over its failure to follow this state law.  

Brown alleges that Adams County has consistently violated the law since 2022 but has been working with the state in recent years on a good-faith settlement. 

But after President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, those talks stopped, according to Brown. 

The lawsuit, filed in Spokane County Superior Court, is the latest legal battle between Brown and the actions of the Trump administration. 

Adams County recently hired lawyers from America First Legal, an organization founded by Trump aide Stephen Miller.  

In a press release last month, the organization claimed Washington’s 2019 law was “harmful, dangerous and illegal.”  

“Our nation’s immigration laws reflect the democratic will of the people, and it is outrageous that the State of Washington has been working to subvert it while at the same time facilitating the invasion of our country,” James Rogers, America First Legal senior counsel, said in a statement.

This article originally appeared in the Washington State Standard.

U.S. Sen. Patty Murray will skip President Donald Trump’s speech before a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, saying in a statement he is “spitting in the face of the law.”

Murray, a member of the Senate Democratic leadership, is the highest-ranking member of Congress to announce she’ll skip the president’s address, his first before Congress in his second term.

Murray said she instead plans to meet with constituents harmed by the Trump administration’s actions, including the firings of thousands of federal workers and the halting of federal funding. 

She said in a statement that “the state of the union might be great for corrupt billionaires like Elon Musk as Trump guts our foremost consumer protection agency, and even for dictators like Putin, who are cheering on the dismantling of USAID and the betrayal of our allies.

“But the rest of the country is in a state of emergency as Elon fires the experts responding to bird flu or managing our nuclear weapons stockpile, all while Republicans sprint to tear apart Medicaid and kick families off their health care to pass massive tax giveaways for billionaires,” Murray continued.

In his first six weeks in office, Trump has moved to drastically widen the power of the executive branch, drawing alarm bells from Democrats who argue his actions are unconstitutional as well as numerous court injunctions. The dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development and Trump’s alignment with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Russia’s war with Ukraine are among the causes for concern Murray alluded to. 

Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy and Virginia Rep. Don Beyer are two other Democrats passing on the speech.

Other lawmakers hope to make a statement with their invited guests. Some are bringing fired federal workers or those affected by funding cuts Trump has proposed.

Dr. Paul Lange, a urologist who founded the Institute for Prostate Cancer Research at the University of Washington, will accompany Washington Sen. Maria Cantwell. 

His invitation is meant to speak to the importance of maintaining federal dollars for the National Institutes of Health. Trump wants to cut what are called “indirect costs” that help institutions pay for facilities and other behind-the-scenes work that supports research.

Cantwell’s office attributed declining prostate cancer death rates to the early detection tests he helped develop with the aid of federal funding.

Lange said a cure for prostate cancer is now “within reach.”

“But cuts to federal support for medical research would delay lifesaving advancements for all medical diseases including all forms of cancer,” Lange said in a statement.

 “Specifically, if President Trump’s administration cuts research funding for prostate cancer, the world’s dream of a cure will be impeded.  There are men currently in their 20s and 30s — men who could be saved by this cure — who will die instead.”

Rep. Emily Randall, D-Bremerton, is bringing Ashley Jones, president of the Washington Association of Birth Centers. Randall, who represents the 6th Congressional District, said in a statement they would “make it clear to the President: Keep your hands off our health care.”

“Ashley and her team provide a vital resource to the people of Washington’s 6th, often serving as a bridge between our most rural neighbors and the vital pre- and post-natal health care they need,” Randall continued. “I will continue to fight back against this administration’s chaotic and cruel attacks on Washingtonians’ access to health care.”

Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Sunnyside, will be joined by a Yakima County commissioner, Amanda McKinney. Rep. Michael Baumgartner, R-Spokane, is bringing a local teacher. Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Medina, will attend without a guest. 

Other members of Washington’s delegation were expected to make announcements about their guests by Tuesday morning.

Trump’s speech, the first before Congress in his second term, is set for 6 p.m. Pacific Time on Tuesday.

The Washington State Standard originally published this story on March 3, 2025.

With just a few days remaining before the Feb. 11 special election, some of Seattle’s most prominent businesses are spending big to oppose a new tax to fund social housing.  

The People for Responsible Social Housing PAC has raised more than $434,000 and spent more than $515,000 opposing Proposition 1A and supporting Proposition 1B, according to data from the Washington Public Disclosure Commission. The bulk of the spending has been on campaign mailers along with other digital advertising.  

Microsoft and Amazon each contributed $100,000. The Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce gave $35,000 in cash and $5,400 through in-kind services. T-Mobile, timber company Weyerhaeuser, Puget Sound Energy, Alaska Airlines and the Seattle Kraken ownership group contributed $5,000-$20,000 as well.  

Voters must go through a two-step process to decide if and how to fund social housing, a form of mixed-income, publicly owned affordable housing. They must first vote Yes or No on whether to fund social housing at all. They then choose between Prop 1A or Prop 1B.  

If passed, Prop 1A would levy a 5% “excess compensation” tax on employer payroll expenses for each Seattle-based employee paid over $1 million in annual compensation. Employers would pay a 5% tax on any dollar over $1 million in total employee compensation.  

The tax would generate an estimated $50 million a year that would go to the newly created Seattle Social Housing Developer to pay for construction of housing meant for lower-income to upper-middle-income residents. Higher-income residents would pay higher rents, which would help subsidize the lower rents paid by lower-income residents.  

Seattle voters approved the creation of the Seattle Social Housing Developer in the February 2023 election, which had been put on the ballot through a citizens’ initiative led by advocate group House Our Neighbors. The same group collected signatures to put the excess compensation tax to a vote this Feb. 11.  

The Let’s Build Social Housing PAC has raised more than $239,000 this year to support Prop 1A, with $125,000 from the Inatai Foundation and $60,000 from Participatory Budgeting Oregon. Labor unions IBEW Local 46 and UFCW 3000 contributed, along with advocacy orgs and nonprofits such as 350 Seattle and Washington Community Action Network. Almost half of the 2025 contributions came from individual donors. The PAC raised more than $353,000 in 2024 during the campaign to get 1A on the ballot, 87% of which came from individual contributors.  

In September, the Seattle City Council voted to place a competing measure on the ballot. 

Instead of creating a new tax, Prop 1B draws from the existing Jumpstart payroll tax. It also caps the income limits for social-housing residents at a lower level than outlined in the Seattle Social Housing Developer charter voters approved in 2023.   

Seattle’s Chamber of Commerce has led the campaign against creating a new business tax with Prop 1A. The Chamber has called into question the Social Housing Developer’s ability to handle $50 million a year in revenue, since the newly created organization currently has only one staff member and a volunteer board of directors. Up to 5% of revenue from either Prop 1A or Prop 1B could be used for the developer’s administrative costs, including staffing.  

New polling from the Northwest Progressive Institute, a left-leaning think tank, found that voters are nearly evenly split between Props 1A and 1B, with 33% preferring 1A, 31% preferring 1B and 17% not sure.  

Ballots must be returned before 8 p.m. on Tuesday, Feb. 11. 

A federal judge in Seattle locked in an injunction Thursday that stops a Trump administration attempt to deny birthright citizenship to kids born in the United States to undocumented parents. 

Late last month, U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour granted a temporary restraining order that lasted 14 days. Thursday’s injunction stops Trump’s executive order to deny birthright citizenship to children of undocumented parents until the case is resolved or a higher court overrules Coughenour.  

The judge slammed Trump’s executive order, saying it is obviously unconstitutional. “It’s become more apparent that the rule of law is an impediment to his goals,” Coughenour said.  

He said the only legal way to remove birthright citizenship is through changing the 14th Amendment. 

“This reminds the country that we don’t have a king. We have a president,” Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said after the hearing.  

State Assistant Attorney General Lane Polozola told Coughenour at Thursday’s hearing that Trump is arguing that “some people who are born here are less than other.” The 14th Amendment’s purpose “is to protect our citizens from inflamed political passions,” added Matt Adams, an attorney for the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, the state’s ally in the litigation.  

Federal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Drew Ensign’s counter-argument is that birthright citizenship applies only to people subject to American legal jurisdiction, noting that tribes in the 19th century were not covered by the 14th Amendment, and had to have their citizenship nailed down in a law passed shortly afterwards. He argued that children of undocumented citizens fell into this category. 

“It’s a strange legal theory not supported by the Supreme Court,” Brown said. 

The 14th Amendment, which was created after the abolition of slavery following the Civil War, begins: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”  

The Migration Policy Institute, which advocates for immigration and integration policies, estimates that Washington had about 250,000 undocumented immigrants as of 2019. About 38% of those families have at least one U.S. citizen child under 18. The group did not have information about adult U.S. citizen children of undocumented immigrants. 

The Washington Post said it is unclear how many U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants are in the United States or are born each year. About 4.4 million U.S.-born children under 18 were estimated to be living with an undocumented parent in 2022, according to the Pew Research Center. Pew estimated that at least 1.3 million adults have parents who are undocumented, though it noted the method of data collection for that statistic was likely incomplete. 

Right now, there are two parallel challenges to Trump’s executive order. 

Washington is leading a coalition of Oregon, Arizona and Illinois in challenging the order in federal court in Seattle. The Northwest Immigrant Rights Project is also part of this lawsuit, representing two expecting mothers — Honduran Cherly Norales and El Salvadoran Alicia Chavarria, both living in Seattle — and a proposed class including pregnant people in Washington who would be impacted by the president’s order. 

Eighteen other states are pursuing a similar lawsuit in federal court in Maryland. The U.S. District Court judge in Maryland, Judge Deborah Boardman, granted a similar injunction on Wednesday. The two lawsuits will proceed independently.  

This story was originally published by the Washington State Standard. 

President Donald Trump on Monday nominated Joe Kent, a former Army Special Forces soldier and two-time Republican candidate for a congressional seat in southwest Washington, to be director of the National Counterterrorism Center. 

“As a soldier, Green Beret, and CIA officer, Joe has hunted down terrorists and criminals his entire adult life,” Trump wrote on X. “Joe will help us keep America safe by eradicating all terrorism, from the jihadists around the World, to the cartels in our backyard.” 

A short time later, Kent responded on the social media platform. 

“It’s an honor to serve our nation again, time to keep our nation safe & strong!” he wrote. 

Trump’s announcement comes three months after Kent lost a second bid for a U.S. House seat to Democratic Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez. 

The first run came in 2022. Kent, an ardent Trump supporter, beat incumbent Republican U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler in the 3rd Congressional District primary. He and other conservative Republicans targeted Herrera Beutler for her vote to impeach Trump in 2021. 

But that fall, Kent couldn’t hold the seat for Republicans, losing to Gluesenkamp Pérez, a relative unknown, by 2,629 votes in what was considered one of the biggest upsets of that year’s elections. 

In their rematch in November, Gluesenkamp Pérez beat Kent by 16,000 votes. 

Kent is an Oregon native. He grew up in Portland and at 18 enlisted in the U.S. Army. He had 11 combat deployments and served as a Ranger and Special Forces soldier. He has a degree in strategic studies and defense analysis from Norwich University. In 2020 he served as a foreign affairs advisor to the Trump campaign. 

In 2019 his wife, Shannon Kent, a Navy cryptologic technician, was killed by an Islamic State group suicide bomber in northeastern Syria. Kent remarried in 2023 and lives in Yacolt.  

Kent would lead an agency founded in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks and tasked with gathering and analyzing information to help thwart terrorism. He would oversee a staff of more than 1,000 people and answer to the director of national intelligence. 

The appointment is subject to Senate confirmation. 

During his 2022 run for Congress, Kent drew scrutiny for links to far-right groups and his embrace of election conspiracy theories. 

“He’s a destructive choice to lead the National Counterterrorism Center,” Washington state Democratic Party chair Shasti Conrad said in a statement on Monday. “Someone who called for defunding the FBI and promotes conspiracy theories cannot be trusted with our national security.” 

Washington state Republican Party chair Jim Walsh applauded Trump’s selection of Kent. “Excellent news!” he posted on social media. 

The Washington State Standard originally published this story Feb. 3, 2025. 

This story was originally published by the Washington State Standard.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Wednesday rescinded a memo issued less than 48 hours earlier that had called for a spending freeze on numerous federal grant and loan programs.

The original memo, released Monday evening by the Office of Management and Budget, led to widespread confusion and frustration by organizations like Meals on Wheels and grantees that rely on funding from the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, as well as members of Congress from both political parties.

Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., released a statement on Wednesday afternoon that the Trump administration reversing course was the right decision.

“This is an important victory for the American people whose voices were heard after massive pressure from every corner of this country — real people made a difference by speaking out,” Murray wrote. “Still, the Trump administration—through a combination of sheer incompetence, cruel intentions, and a willful disregard of the law — caused real harm and chaos for millions over the span of the last 48 hours which is still ongoing.”

OMB’s decision to rescind the memo Wednesday followed the White House making public assurances Tuesday that the spending freeze wouldn’t impact Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and direct food assistance programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

Two separate lawsuits seeking to block the OMB memo from taking effect on Tuesday evening at 5 p.m. were filed in federal district court.

The lawsuit filed by the National Council of Nonprofits, American Public Health Association and Main Street Alliance led to a federal district court judge placing a temporary hold on the planned spending freeze until Feb. 3 at 5 p.m.

A separate federal judge is set to hear arguments from Democratic state attorneys general Wednesday afternoon over whether he should issue a temporary restraining order that would also block the OMB memo from taking effect while the court case continues.

It wasn’t immediately clear how OMB rescinding its Monday evening memo would impact those two lawsuits, though they would likely be dropped.

The Washington State Standard originally published this story on Jan. 29, 2025.

This story was originally published by the Washington State Standard.

WASHINGTON — A federal district judge ruled Tuesday the Trump administration must wait until at least next week before it can move forward with pausing federal spending on trillions in grants and loans, though she emphasized the short-term administrative stay might not continue after a Feb. 3 hearing.

District Judge Loren L. AliKhan’s decision temporarily blocks the Office of Management and Budget from moving forward with plans to stop payments on multiple federal programs, which it announced late Monday.

The two-page memo from the Office of Management and Budget announcing the freeze led to significant confusion throughout the day Tuesday among members of Congress — including Republicans — about what programs were affected and frustration the White House appeared to be eroding lawmakers’ constitutional spending authority.

AliKhan’s ruling came less than 24 hours after news broke of the Trump administration’s planned action.

AliKhan said after hearing arguments from an attorney for the organizations that filed the lawsuit earlier Tuesday, and from an attorney representing the federal government, that “anything that was due to be paused as of 5 p.m. today to open funding on grants is stayed.”

AliKhan, appointed to the bench by former President Joe Biden, added that any funding impacted by separate executive orders is not covered by the temporary administrative stay she issued. She ordered for both sides in the case to file briefs to her later this week, and scheduled a hearing for Feb. 3 at 11 a.m. Eastern.

Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits, one of the organizations that filed the suit, said shortly afterward there are several steps ahead to fully block OMB’s actions.

“A lot more work to do in the courts … to ensure that this reckless action, or attempted action by OMB, can’t move forward in the long term,” Yentel said.

Confusion on Medicaid

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt sought to downplay the impact of the spending freeze during her first-ever briefing, saying it wouldn’t apply to individual assistance programs, like Social Security or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or welfare benefits.

She was unable to answer questions about the effect on Medicaid benefits but a later White House memo claimed they would continue without interruption. Nonetheless, Democratic U.S. senators reported Medicaid portals in all 50 states were down on Tuesday.

Leavitt said the White House counsel’s office had signed off on the temporary spending pause and believed it was legal and constitutional, but she later told reporters she didn’t know the full scope of the impact and would have to circle back after the briefing ended.

“I have not seen the entire list because this memo was just sent out, so I will provide you all with updates as we receive them,” Leavitt said. 

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, said in a brief interview she supports the Trump administration reviewing federal spending to look for ways to improve efficiency, but said the OMB’s action was too broad.

“This is far too sweeping and will have an adverse effect on the delivery of services and programs,” Collins said. “I do appreciate that the administration did not apply it to Social Security, Medicare, direct benefit programs. But nevertheless, it does have a large impact on the provision of services and programs.”

Collins said she had concerns about the Head Start program being listed among those that will have a spending freeze. 

“There are a lot of federal programs that appear to be swept up in this order, and I think the administration needs to be more selective and look at it one department at a time, for example,” Collins said. “But make sure important direct service programs are not affected.”

Multiple memos

The original OMB memo sent out late Monday evening appeared to apply to large swaths of federal financial assistance, including grants and loans, though a memo footnote said it should not be “construed to impact Medicare or Social Security benefits.” It did not mention an exemption for Medicaid.

“Financial assistance should be dedicated to advancing Administration priorities, focusing taxpayer dollars to advance a stronger and safer America, eliminating the financial burden of inflation for citizens, unleashing American energy and manufacturing, ending ‘wokeness’ and the weaponization of government, promoting efficiency in government, and Making America Healthy Again,” the OMB memo states.

A separate memo from OMB lists off the programs that will be paused temporarily while it reviews which federal spending it deems appropriate.

The list includes the Department of Agriculture’s tribal food sovereignty program, Head Start, the Veterans’ Affairs Department’s suicide prevention and legal services grants, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance, or LIHEAP, program, and numerous sexual assault prevention programs within the Department of Justice.

A third document from OMB, sent to Capitol Hill, claimed that Medicaid would not be affected. However, some senators reported the Medicaid portal was inaccessible on Tuesday afternoon.

“In addition to Social Security and Medicare, already explicitly excluded in the guidance, mandatory programs like Medicaid and SNAP will continue without pause,” the OMB document states. “Funds for small businesses, farmers, Pell grants, Head Start, rental assistance, and other similar programs will not be paused. If agencies are concerned that these programs may implicate the President’s Executive Orders, they should consult OMB to begin to unwind these objectionable policies without a pause in the payments.”

Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden posted on social media that his staff had “confirmed reports that Medicaid portals are down in all 50 states following last night’s federal funding freeze.”

“This is a blatant attempt to rip away health insurance from millions of Americans overnight and will get people killed,” Wyden wrote.

Yentel, of the groups that sued, said while Leavitt argued that the memo did not impact those in need of direct assistance, OMB did not define who counts as “direct assistance.”

She said during a briefing with reporters that the memo leaves “a lot of room to who defines direct assistance to Americans.” Yentel said she would consider one of the programs impacted, Head Start, as direct assistance.

Order prompts legal challenges

Numerous organizations — including the National Council of Nonprofits, American Public Health Association and Main Street Alliance — filed a lawsuit in federal court Tuesday ahead of the temporary pause taking effect.

Democratic attorneys general were also preparing to file a lawsuit, challenging the legality of the temporary spending pause on grants and loans.

New York state Attorney General Letitia James said during a virtual press conference announcing the lawsuit that Trump had overstepped his presidential powers by instituting the temporary spending pause.

“This president has exceeded his authority, he has violated the Constitution and he has trampled on a co-equal branch of government,” James said.

She said Democratic attorneys general filing the lawsuit were not trying to be “adversarial” or seeking to block Trump’s agenda.

“This is a question of the Constitution and the rule of law. And all of us took an oath to obey the Constitution and to uphold it,” James said.

New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin said during the press briefing that the lawsuit wasn’t “about nibbling at the edges of the president’s authority.”

“We’re talking about ignoring the entirety of the United States Constitution,” Platkin said.

Attorneys general from New York, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia plan to file the lawsuit.

Appropriators protest

The top Democrats on the U.S. House and Senate Appropriations committees sent a letter to acting OMB Director Matthew J. Vaeth, expressing alarm about how the stop in payments would affect people throughout the country and challenging the legality of the executive branch trying to overrule the legislative branch on spending decisions.

House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., wrote that the scope of the halt in funding, which was approved by Congress on a bipartisan basis, “is breathtaking, unprecedented, and will have devastating consequences across the country.”

“While we may have strong policy disagreements, we should all be united in upholding our nation’s laws and the Constitution,” DeLauro and Murray wrote.

“We will be relentless in our work with members on both sides of the aisle and in both chambers to protect Congress’s power of the purse,” they added. “The law is the law — and we demand you in your role as Acting OMB Director reverse course to ensure requirements enacted into law are faithfully met and the nation’s spending laws are implemented as intended.”

Power of the purse lies with Congress

Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the Constitution gives Congress the so-called “power of the purse” by granting it the authority to approve federal spending. 

Congress has passed several laws regarding that constitutional authority, including the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, which says that the president cannot simply refuse to spend money Congress has appropriated.

Trump’s pick for OMB Director, Russ Vought, has repeatedly called that law unconstitutional and said he believes the president does have the authority to simply ignore sections of spending law that have been passed by Congress and signed into law.

The Senate has yet to confirm Vought to the role of White House budget director, but is likely to do so in the weeks ahead.

Sharon Parrott, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank, posted on social media that the OMB memo’s “vague and contradictory language makes it hard to know if funding is imperiled for public schools, community health centers, state and local law enforcement, veterans’ housing, health care through Medicaid, public services on tribal lands, etc.”

“This confusion & apparent withholding of funding isn’t a political game – real estate, local, & tribal governments, school districts, nonprofits, & private charities delivering services we all depend on, funded with taxpayer dollars, can’t function without resources and clarity,” Parrott wrote. “Congress has enacted legislation that requires the Executive Branch to fund public services, and the Trump Administration seems determined to subvert Congress, its hand-waving about following the law notwithstanding.”

Parrott worked at OMB as associate director of the Education, Income Maintenance, and Labor Division during then-President Barack Obama’s second term.

Jenny Young, vice president of communications and chief of staff at Meals on Wheels America, said the OMB memo “could presumably halt service to millions of vulnerable seniors who have no other means of purchasing or preparing meals.”

“And the lack of clarity and uncertainty right now is creating chaos for local Meals on Wheels providers not knowing whether they’re going to be reimbursed for meals served today, tomorrow, who knows how long this could go on,” Young said. “Which unfortunately means seniors may panic not knowing where their next meals will come from. This adds insult to injury as these programs are already underfunded to begin with. Largely speaking, local providers don’t have the ability to absorb a blow like this, especially if it persists for any extended period of time.”

Young said the Older Americans Act Nutrition Program, which provides some of Meals on Wheels funding, is a grant program administered by the Administration on Aging.

Members of Congress react

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said he was talking with staff at OMB to “try to get more information on how this works.”

Graham said he wouldn’t delay a committee vote Thursday to send Vought’s nomination to the Senate floor.

“We need more information about this, but we also need a guy in charge,” Graham said.

Kansas Republican Sen. Jerry Moran, a senior appropriator and chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, said during a brief interview that leadership at the VA was supposed to talk with OMB officials on Tuesday afternoon to figure out how exactly they were supposed to carry out the spending freeze for certain grant and loan programs.

“We’re trying to get additional information about what it means on grants,” Moran said. “I just came from a veterans’ hearing where that was the topic of conversation. And my understanding is the VA leadership is meeting with OMB to learn the details, and then I’ll have more of a response.”

Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee, echoed similar remarks that she wanted more information on how much the memo impacted those federal programs.

North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven, a senior appropriator, said he isn’t too concerned about the temporary pause to federal grant and loan programs.

“He’s taking a look at a lot of the spending as he should; reviewing it, finding out what makes sense and what doesn’t,” Hoeven said. “Just because it gets paused doesn’t mean it won’t get funded. And hopefully the ones that are funded are funded in a better way, more in line with our priorities.”

Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst said she wasn’t worried about the impact of the temporary pause to grants and loans at the Defense Department and VA.

“I think they will take a look at it, they will release the funds as they find it necessary,” Ernst said. “So I think there’s a big flurry in the press right now, but I think that President Trump is doing the right thing by scrutinizing our spending.”

‘Take a deep breath’

North Carolina GOP Sen. Thom Tillis, an advocate for federal disaster aid, said he was skeptical that the freeze would immediately impact people in need of disaster relief.

“I can’t imagine that the president would knowingly cut off housing assistance for people displaced from their homes,” he said. “We need to get to the facts versus the fear.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said during a press conference that he expected additional information from the Trump administration about the pause.

“They’re providing additional clarity and guidance on that, and hopefully they will further clarify what exactly will be impacted,” he said. “But I don’t think it’s unusual for an administration to pause.”

Sen. James Risch of Idaho added: “This is a work in progress. Everybody take a deep breath, stay calm. Every one of these programs is gonna be looked at.”

Ariana Figueroa, Shauneen Miranda and Ashley Murray contributed to this report. 

The Washington State Standard originally published this story on Jan. 28, 2025.

The Franklin County Public Utility District will transition to a district-based election after reaching a settlement with plaintiffs of a voting-rights lawsuit, the UCLA Voting Rights Project and the Morfin Law Firm announced in a news release Monday.

A group of voters in southeastern Washington’s Franklin County alleged that the agency’s electoral voting system violated the Washington Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting strength of Latino residents who live in the public utility district, which provides various services, including electric service and broadband, for county residents.

Currently, the Pasco-based agency’s three commissioners are elected in a hybrid system — districts are used in the primary and then transition to at-large for the general election. Under the settlement, the Franklin County PUD will transition to an entirely district-based election in 2026.

The PUD will use district boundaries created in a 2022 update of its map, with District 3 having a high concentration of Latino residents.

Attorneys from the UCLA Voting Rights Project and the Morfin Law Firm notified the Franklin County PUD in June 2024 of the alleged voting rights violation, urging the Franklin PUD to adopt a district-based system. They filed suit in September.

The settlement is the latest push by advocates to enable Latino voters to vote for the candidate of their choice at all election levels. In 2022, Franklin County settled a different lawsuit that contended that the election system for its county commissioners violated state voting rights law. That settlement led to the implementation of a district-based system last year.

“Latino voters in Franklin County have continued to vindicate their voting rights by challenging at-large methods of election and changing election systems to districts,” said plaintiff Gabriel Portugal, president of the Tri-Cities LULAC, the local chapter of the civil rights organization, in the news release. This change will have an impact on all people in Franklin County.”