In this post, Robert Hubbell explains the budget impasse and its implications. This is really worth a read. It is very informative.

He writes:

On Wednesday, Elon Musk instructed congressional Republicans to walk away from a bipartisan agreement to fund government operations through March 2025. Congressional Republicans dutifully obeyed Musk even though he hasn’t a clue about the consequences of his actions. Musk ordered Republicans not to pass “any bill” until Trump is sworn in on January 20, 2025. If Republicans follow Musk’s command, there will be no government funding for a month (at least)–from Friday, December 20, 2024, through Monday, January 20, 2025.

If that happens, chaos will ensue.

The urge to pick a newsletter headline of “President Musk” or “The Musk Administration” was strong. But, in truth, Musk is not in charge; he is an agent provocateur of chaos. Musk lobbed a political hand grenade into the GOP congressional caucus and ran in the opposite direction.

There is much to unpack in today’s events, which will dominate the headlines for days (if not weeks). So, let’s examine today’s events to understand the chaos that Musk has inflicted on the GOP and the American people.

How the budget process is supposed to work.

There is a rhythm to the federal budgeting process that is more honored in the breach than in the observance. Understanding that rhythm is key to understanding just how disruptive Musk’s order to Republicans will be.

Congress has the “power of the purse.” “Section 9 of Article I states that funds may be drawn from the Treasury only pursuant to appropriations made by law.” See Congressional Research Service, Introduction to the Federal Budget Process.

The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 requires the President to gather requests from agencies for funding, which are then collated into a consolidated request for funds that is submitted to Congress. The President is required to submit the consolidated funding request at the beginning of the calendar year. President Biden submitted the FY 24-25 request in March 2024.

The federal fiscal year is October 1 through September 30. In a perfect world, the budget would be passed by Congress before the beginning of the fiscal year (i.e., October 1).

Taken together, the above deadlines drive the schedule set forth below:

For clarity, the “bipartisan” funding bill killed by Elon Musk on Wednesday was the bill for the fiscal year October 2024 through September 2025.

Continuing resolutions—a patchwork remedy when Congress fails to pass a budget

In reality, Congress rarely passes a budget “on time” to begin the new fiscal year (Oct – Sep). To keep the government running in the absence of a budget, Congress passes a “continuing resolution” that funds agencies at the funding levels of the prior fiscal year.

As of 2022, the federal government had operated under continuing resolutions for all but 3 of the last 46 years. See General Accounting Office, Federal Budget: Strategies to Manage Constraints of Continuing Resolutions

The current continuing resolution expires this Friday, December 20, at midnight.

What happened on Wednesday

On Wednesday, Speaker Mike Johnson and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries announced they had negotiated a continuing resolution that would have funded government operations until March 14, 2025.

The GOP House caucus is a fractious majority that has failed to pass budgets or continuing resolutions on their own at any point in the 118th Congress. So, Speaker Mike Johnson has relied on majority support from Democrats to pass continuing resolutions and budgets during the 118th Congress.

Because Mike Johnson needed help from Democrats to pass the bill, Democrats were able to include new spending in the continuing resolution for the following items (per CBS News)

  • Disaster relief “$110.4 billion in disaster aid: $29 billion for FEMA’s disaster relief fund; $8 billion for federal highways and roads; $12 billion for the Community Development Block grants and disaster relief.”
  • Baltimore Bridge Rebuilding
  • Health care policy extenders and reforms
  • Transparency in ticket and hotel prices
  • Transfer of ownership of RFK Stadium to the District of Columbia

As usual, some member of the GOP House caucus objected to the continuing resolution, but passage seemed assured because Hakeem Jeffries promised to deliver sufficient Democratic support.

Elon Musk tweets, “This bill should not pass.”

On Wednesday, Elon Musk tweeted that “This [bill] should not pass” and that “no bill” should pass until Trump is inaugurated on January 20, 2025. Musk also tweeted that

Any member of the House or Senate who votes for this outrageous spending bill deserves to be voted out in 2 years

It is not clear whether Elon Musk understands that the bill he killed was designed to keep the government open until March of 2025. In tweets throughout the day, Musk betrayed a shocking but unsurprising ignorance of the federal budget process or the consequences of the federal government not having money to operate. See Politico, Elon Musk fueled backlash to spending plan with false and misleading claims.

Per Politico,

Musk didn’t seem to think a government shutdown would have significant consequences for the country. He responded “YES” to a post that read, “Just close down the govt until January 20th. Defund everything. We will be fine for 33 days.” Another Musk post said a shutdown “doesn’t actually shut down critical function.

While it is true that some “critical functions” will continue during a shutdown, many critical government employees—like US military members—will not be paid even though they are expected to remain on duty. About 800,000 workers went without pay for a month during the last shutdown (2018). Although Musk could survive without a bi-weekly paycheck for a month, millions of Americans could not.

Trump reacts, rather than leads

Trump remained on the sidelines of the budget debate until after Musk tweeted “This bill should not pass.” Trump posted a statement that “Any Republican that would be so stupid as to do this should, and will, be Primaried.”

But then Trump threw a curveball. He also posted, “Unless the Democrats terminate or substantially extend the Debt Ceiling now, I will fight ’till the end.”

Increasing the debt ceiling is something that does not need to be done until June of 2025. But Trump doesn’t want a debt ceiling increase to happen on his watch. We know this because Trump said so in a post on Truth Social:

If Republicans try to pass a clean Continuing Resolution without all of the Democrat ‘bells and whistles’ that will be so destructive to our Country, all it will do, after January 20th, is bring the mess of the Debt Limit into the Trump Administration, rather than allowing it to take place in the Biden Administration,”

The reason that Trump wants to force a debt limit increase under Biden is that Trump needs a debt limit increase to pay for the proposed extensions of his 2017 tax cuts for millionaires and corporations. See The Hill, Lawmakers caught off guard by Trump debt ceiling demand.

Per The Hill,

And in a post on X, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) accused Trump of wanting Democrats “to agree to raise the debt ceiling so he can pass his massive corporate and billionaire tax cut without a problem.”

“Shorter version: tax cut for billionaires or the government shuts down for Christmas,” he added.

The fallout

  • Trump looks like he is subordinate to Elon Musk.
  • JD Vance has been “disappeared.”
  • Musk has—for now—seized momentum from Trump as the dominant political force in the second Trump administration.
  • It is difficult to see how Mike Johnson survives as Speaker—or why he would want to. Johnson has been humiliated and back-stabbed by Trump and Musk. Mike Johnson’s credibility with his own caucus and Democratic counterparts is non-existent. It is a waste of time to negotiate with Johnson.

The chaos caused by Musk foreshadows a second Trump administration with unelected, unaccountable billionaires mucking about in the people’s business. What could go wrong?

Heather Cox Richardson ably sums up the Republicans’ irresponsibility yesterday, as they tried to rewrite the events of January 6 and cowered at the feet of Elon Musk.

Loudermilk was himself involved in the story of that day after video turned up of him giving a tour of the Capitol on January 5 despite its being closed because of Covid. During his tour, participants took photos of things that are not usually of interest to visitors: stairwells, for example. Since then, he has been eager to turn the tables against those investigating the events of January 6.

Yesterday, Representative Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) released an “Interim Report on the Failures and Politicization of the January 6th Select Committee.” As the title suggests, the report seeks to rewrite what happened on January 6, 2021, when rioters encouraged by former president Donald Trump attacked the U.S. Capitol. Loudermilk chairs a subcommittee on oversight that sits within the Committee on House Administration. The larger committee—House Administration—oversees the daily operations of the House of Representatives, including the Capitol Police. Under that charge, former House speaker Kevin McCarthy permitted MAGA Republicans to investigate security failures at the Capitol on January 6.

Loudermilk turned the committee’s investigation of security failures into an attack on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, more commonly known as the January 6th Committee. Yesterday’s report singled out former representative Liz Cheney (R-WY), who has taken a strong stand against Trump’s fitness for office after his behavior that day, as the primary villain of the select committee. In his press release concerning the interim report, Loudermilk said that Cheney “should be investigated for potential criminal witness tampering,” and the report itself claimed that “numerous federal laws were likely broken by Liz Cheney” and that the FBI should investigate that alleged criminality.

The report seeks to exonerate Trump and those who participated in the events of January 6 while demonizing those who are standing against him, rewriting the reality of what happened on January 6 with a version that portrays Trump as a persecuted victim.

Trump’s team picked up the story and turned it even darker. At 2:11 this morning, Trump’s social media account posted: “Liz Cheney could be in a lot of trouble based on the evidence obtained by the subcommittee, which states that ‘numerous federal laws were likely broken by Liz Cheney, and these violations should be investigated by the FBI.’ Thank you to Congressman Barry Loudermilk on a job well done.”

To this, conservative writer David Frum responded: “After his successful consolidation of power, the Leader prepares show trials for those who resisted his failed first [violent attempt to overthrow the government].”

Liz Cheney also responded. “January 6th showed Donald Trump for who [he] really is—a cruel and vindictive man who allowed violent attacks to continue against our Capitol and law enforcement officers while he watched television and refused for hours to instruct his supporters to stand down and leave.” She pointed out that the January 6th committee’s report was based on evidence that came primarily from Republican witnesses, “including many of the most senior officials from Trump’s own White House, campaign and Administration,” and that the Department of Justice reached the similar conclusions after its own investigation.

Loudermilk’s report “intentionally disregards the truth and the Select Committee’s tremendous weight of evidence, and instead fabricates lies and defamatory allegations in an attempt to cover up what Donald Trump did,” Cheney wrote. “Their allegations do not reflect a review of the actual evidence, and are a malicious and cowardly assault on the truth. No reputable lawyer, legislator or judge would take this seriously.”

CNN aired clips today of Republican lawmakers blaming Trump for the events of January 6.

Last night, Trump also filed a civil lawsuit against pollster J. Ann Selzer, her polling company, the Des Moines Register, and its parent company Gannett over Selzer’s November 2 poll showing Harris in the lead for the election. Calling it “brazen election interference,” the suit alleges that the poll violated the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act. Robert Corn-Revere, chief counsel for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, told Brian Stelter, Katelyn Polantz, Hadas Gold, and Paula Reid of CNN: “This absurd lawsuit is a direct assault on the First Amendment. Newspapers and polling firms are not engaged in ‘deceptive practices’ just because they publish stories and poll results President-elect Donald Trump doesn’t like. Getting a poll wrong is not election interference or fraud.”

Conservative former representative Joe Walsh (R-IL) wrote: “Trump is suing a pollster and calling for an investigation of [Liz Cheney]. Don’t you dare tell me he’s not an authoritarian. And don’t you dare look the other way. Donald Trump is un-American. The resistance to him from Americans must be steadfast & fierce.”

This afternoon, Trump’s authoritarian aspirations smashed against reality.

The determination of the MAGA extremists in the House to put poison pills in appropriations measures over the past year meant that the Republicans have been unable to pass the necessary appropriations bills for 2024 (not a typo), forcing the government to operate with continuing resolutions. On September 25, Congress passed a continuing resolution that would fund the government through December 20, this Friday. Without funding, the government will begin to shut down…right before the holidays.

At the same time, a farm bill, which Congress usually passes every five years and which outlines the country’s agriculture and food policies including supplemental nutrition (formerly known as food stamps), expired in 2023 and has been continued through temporary extensions.

Last night, news broke that congressional leaders had struck a bipartisan deal to keep the government from shutting down. The proposed 1,500-page measure extended the farm bill for a year and provided about $100 billion in disaster relief as well as about $10 billion in assistance for farmers. It also raised congressional salaries and kicked the government funding deadline through March 14. It seemed like a last-minute reprieve from a holiday government shutdown.

But MAGA Republicans immediately opposed the measure. “It’s a total dumpster fire. I think it’s garbage,” said Representative Eric Burlison (R-MO). They are talking publicly about ditching Johnson and voting for someone else for House speaker.

Trump’s sidekick Elon Musk also opposed the bill. Chad Pergram of the Fox News Channel reported that House speaker Mike Johnson explained on the Fox News Channel that he is on a text chain with Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, both of whom are unelected appointees to Trump’s proposed “Department of Government Efficiency” charged with cutting the U.S. budget.

Johnson said he explained to Musk that the measure would need Democratic votes to pass, and then they could bring Trump in roaring back with the America First agenda. Apparently, Musk was unconvinced: shortly after noon, he posted, “Any member of the House or Senate who votes for this outrageous spending bill deserves to be voted out in 2 years!” Later, he added: “No bills should be passed Congress [sic] until Jan 20, when [Trump] takes office.”

This blueprint would shut down the United States government for a month, but Musk—who, again, does not answer to any constituents—seems untroubled. ″‘Shutting down’ the government (which doesn’t actually shut down critical functions btw) is infinitely better than passing a horrible bill,” he tweeted.

Pergram reported that Musk’s threats sent Republicans scrambling, and Musk tweeted: “Your elected representatives have heard you and now the terrible bill is dead. The voice of the people has triumphed! VOX POPULI VOX DEI.”

But Trump and Vice President–elect J.D. Vance seem to recognize that shutting down the government before the holidays is likely to be unpopular. They issued their own statement against the measure, calling instead for “a streamlined bill that doesn’t give Chuck Schumer and the Democrats everything they want.”

Then Trump and Vance went on to bring up something not currently on the table: the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is a holdover from World War I, when Congress stopped trying to micromanage the Treasury and instead simply gave it a ceiling for borrowing money. In the last decades, Congress has appropriated more money than the country brings in, thus banging up against the debt ceiling. If it is not raised, the United States will default on its debt, and so Congress routinely raises the ceiling…as long as a Republican president is in office. If a Democrat is in office, Republicans fight bitterly against what they say is profligate spending.

The debt ceiling is not currently an issue, but Trump and Vance made it central to their statement, perhaps hoping people would confuse the appropriations bill with the debt ceiling. ”Increasing the debt ceiling is not great but we’d rather do it on Biden’s watch. If Democrats won’t cooperate on the debt ceiling now”—again, it is the Republicans who threaten to force the country into default—“what makes anyone think they would do it in June during our administration. Let’s have this debate now.”

Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) explained: “Remember what this is all about: Trump wants Democrats to agree to raise the debt ceiling so he can pass his massive corporate and billionaire tax cut without a problem. Shorter version: tax cut for billionaires or the government shuts down for Christmas.”

President and Dr. Biden are in Delaware today, honoring the memory of Biden’s first wife, Neilia, and his one-year-old daughter Naomi, who were killed in a car accident 52 years ago today, but White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre issued a statement saying:

“Republicans need to stop playing politics with this bipartisan agreement or they will hurt hardworking Americans and create instability across the country. President-elect Trump and Vice President–elect Vance ordered Republicans to shut down the government and they are threatening to do just that—while undermining communities recovering from disasters, farmers and ranchers, and community health centers. Triggering a damaging government shutdown would hurt families who are gathering to meet with their loved ones and endanger the basic services Americans from veterans to Social Security recipients rely on. A deal is a deal. Republicans should keep their word.”

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo pointed out the relationship between Trump’s authoritarianism and today’s chaos on Capitol Hill. Trump elevated Musk to the center of power, Marshall observes, and now is following in his wake. Musk, Marshall writes, “is erratic, volatile, impulsive, mercurial,” and he “introduces a huge source of unpredictability and chaos into the presidency that for once Trump doesn’t control.”

Ron Filipkowski of MeidasNews captured the day’s jockeying among Trump’s budding authoritarians and warring Republican factions over whether elected officials should fund the United States government. He posted: “The owner of a car company is controlling the House of Representatives from a social media app.”

Richardson refers to Musk as “Trump’s sidekick.” It might be more accurate to refer to Trump as “Musk’s sidekick.” Musk is setting the agenda, Trump is obeying. The only other time in our history when a President ceded his authority was when Woodrow Wilson had a massive stroke and his wife filled in.

Emily Baumgaertner is a science writer for the New York Times. She wrote this article about the deadly diseases that have been vastly diminished–almost eliminated– because of vaccines that targeted them. She notes that resistance to vaccines has created a resurgence in these diseases. If RFK Jr. encourages fear of vaccines as Director of the Department of Health and Human Services, we can expect that these fatal scourges will return, imperiling the lives of millions of children.

She writes:

Some of President-elect Donald J. Trump’s picks for the government’s top health posts have expressed skepticism about the safety of childhood vaccines. It’s a sentiment shared by a growing number of parents, who are choosing to skip recommended shots for their children.

But while everyone seems to be talking about the potential side effects of vaccines, few are discussing the diseases they prevent.

It has been half a century or more since many of the inoculations became routine in the United States, and the experience of having these illnesses has been largely erased from public memory. Questions today about the risk-benefit ratio of vaccines might just be a product of the vaccines’ own success.

Here is what people should know about six once-common illnesses that vaccines have contained for decades.


Measles, a viral infection often spread by a cough or sneeze, is extraordinarily contagious: Nine out of 10 people around an infected person will catch measles if they have not been vaccinated. Measles can be contracted in a room up to two hours after a person with the disease has left it.

Measles is not a mild illness, particularly for children under 5. It can cause a high fever, coughing, conjunctivitis and rashes, and if it leads to pneumonia or encephalitis — brain swelling — it can quickly become lethal. Before the vaccine was licensed in the United States in 1963, almost every child had contracted measles by age 15. Tens of thousands of measles patients were hospitalized each year, and between 400 and 500 of them died.

Two doses of the MMR vaccine together are about 97 percent effective at preventing measles. But epidemiologists say a 95 percent vaccine coverage rate is necessary to prevent transmission of the virus in a community. Over the past four school years, the kindergarten vaccination rate has fallen below that threshold — in some communities, far below.

About 280,000 kindergarten students in the United States are now unprotected, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and measles — which was eliminated from the United States in 2000 — has since seen a resurgence. There have been 16 measles outbreaks in 2024, compared with four outbreaks in 2023. In communities where the spread is rampant, even a vaccinated child can occasionally contract the disease, though their symptoms are generally less severe.


The Greek word diphthera means leather — a fitting reference for a bacterial infection that creates a thick, gray membrane over the throat and tonsils, suffocating its victims. There was a time in the United States when up to eight children in a single family suffered that fate — a burden so grave that a science historian called it “childhood’s deadly scourge.”

The toxin driving the disease is produced by a strain of bacterium in respiratory droplets and works by killing healthy tissues, which can lead to difficulty breathing and swallowing, especially among young children with smaller airways. It can also gravely damage the cardiac and nervous systems, resulting in heart failure or paralysis.

Even with treatment, one in 10 people who have respiratory diphtheria die from it, according to the C.D.C.

The infection is now preventable in young children through multiple DTaP vaccine doses, and preteens and adults get boosters called Tdap. Thanks to vaccinations, cases in the United States have gone from more than 100,000 per year in the 1920s to — on average — less than one.

ImageDoctors and nurses swarmed over patients in iron lung respirators in the emergency polio ward at Haynes Memorial Hospital in Boston, Mass., in 1955.Credit…Associated Press


A fully developed tetanus infection can be an alarming sight: fists clenched, back arched, legs rigid from extreme, excruciating muscle spasms that last several minutes. Extreme fluctuations in blood pressure. A racing heart. Neck and stomach muscles tight enough to impair breathing.

Treatment for tetanus must be immediate, and up to 20 percent of people who become infected will die.

It all starts with a bacterium that lies dormant in soil and animal feces until it enters the body through broken skin like a cut. The microbe begins to grow, divide and release a toxin that impairs nerves.

Vaccines containing the tetanus toxoid began being administered to children in the U.S. in the 1940s, when there were more than 500 cases per year. Children are now protected through multiple doses of the DTaP vaccine, which also guards against diphtheria and pertussis (also known as whooping cough). Since 2000, the annual number of cases has been below 50.


The mumps virus, spread through saliva and respiratory droplets triggers a fever and swollen salivary glands in the ears — which is why patients often have a puffy jaw and cheeks — and can, in severe cases, cause deafness.

The disease is dangerously insidious: It can lie dormant for up to a month before symptoms appear, and most people are infectious before their salivary glands begin to swell. Complications are more common in adults than children, but they can include inflammation in the ovaries and testicles — which can cause infertility or sterility — or in the brain and spinal cord, which can put patients at risk of seizures and strokes.

The United States began vaccinating against mumps in 1967 and subsequently saw a 99 percent decrease in cases. But annual cases in the United States — which previously hovered between 200 and 400 — have surpassed 1,000 nine times since 2006. On three occasions, they surpassed 6,000.

ImageThe swelling of a 2-year-old male patient with mumps.Credit…Dr. P. Marazzi/Science Source


The first sign of rubella is often a rash on the face, and while the infection often remains mild in children, it can prove devastating for pregnant women whom the children infect.

When passed on to a fetus, rubella can cause a miscarriage or lead to severe birth defects, such as heart problems, liver or spleen damage, blindness, and intellectual disability. At least 32,000 babies worldwide are born annually with congenital rubella syndrome. About a third of them die before their first birthday.

Carol Burris, executive director of the Betwork for Public Education, describes the devastating advance of privatization in West Virginia. In 2019, the teachers of West Virginia banded together and went on strike, closing down every school in the state.

Burris writes:

West Virginia is closing its public schools. Seven schools will close in the next few years due to declining enrollment. These schools will join the 53 that closed in the past five years, and there are an additional 25 that counties have proposed or approved to close.

These numbers are not small in the context of West Virginia. The National Center for Education Statistics reported only 643 public schools with enrollment in the state in 2023-2024.

West Virginia’s population and student enrollment were in decline. In 2015, there were 277,452 students in West Virginia public schools. By 2020, enrollment was down to 253,930. In 2021, however, the drop seemed to level off—the public schools lost only 1,100 students the next year.

And then school privatization began.

In 2019, the legislature passed a charter law. It was cautious. Three charter schools were allowed to open as pilot schools under the control of districts, but none opened.

And then greed kicked in. The for-profit operators wanted to open schools in the state. In 2021, the legislature expanded the number of charters to ten a year, not including online schools, which they then approved. The authority to approve them was given to a politically appointed state board.

Six charter schools were rapidly approved, five of which are open.

Three of those five are run by for-profit corporations. In 2023-2024, those three for-profit-run charters enrolled 87% of the charter school students in the state. 

Charter schools in West Virginia operate on the “money follows the child” system, depleting school district budgets. That money accounts for a whopping 99% of state per-pupil funding, even though most charter students (70%) attend low-cost, low-quality online schools run by for-profits.

To add insult to injury to the state’s public schools, the U.S. Department of Education, under Secretary Cardona, awarded $12.2 million to the state’s charter board to open new charter schools or expand existing ones in West Virginia.

Over $905,000 was given to open a “classical” academy run by the notorious for-profit ACCEL. ACCEL already operates two of the state’s five charter schools. The new school will be operated on a sweeps contract, violating 2022 CSP regulations. Three of the existing five charter schools would be given funds to expand.

I registered a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education regarding West Virginia’s violation of its own regulations. I have not received a response. 

If that were not enough, this fall, the West Virginia legislature passed a law allowing charter schools to access the state building fund—giving them their own privileged funding stream.

In 2022, the same year that the law to expand charter schools was enacted, the state passed a voucher law called the Hope Scholarship, heralded by Ed Choice as one of the most expansive voucher laws in the country. That law gives vouchers to fund homeschooling, private schooling, tutoring, and “enrichment” activities for students who do not attend a public or charter school.

The scholarship is worth 100% of the average per-pupil state funding. There are no income limits. Beginning in 2026, any student, including a private school student or home-schooled student who has never attended public school, can apply.

In 2023-2024, West Virginians used a voucher. In 2024-2025, the number jumped to 10,000.

Let’s do the math.

During the 2021-2022 school year, there were 252,830 students in public schools. That was the year before charters and the voucher law. In 2023-2024, that number dropped to 243,560. 

Just when West Virginia enrollment had begun to stabilize, 2,277 students were siphoned off along with funding to charter schools, and 6,000 students received vouchers. In West Virginia, privatization through charter schools and vouchers is now the primary source of public school enrollment and funding decline.

As charter schools continue to expand, thanks in part to the federal Charter School Program, and vouchers become accessible to 100% of students in the state, school closings will accelerate. 

For the right-wing Libertarians who run education policy for the Republican Party, this is not a bug; this is the main feature. 

Who elected Elon Musk?

Yesterday he fired off 100+ tweets demanding that Republicans reject a budget deal that House Speaker Mike Johnson negotiated to keep the government funded until March.

Musk ridiculed the deal. He called it calling it “terrible,” “horrible,” “criminal,” “outrageous,” “unconscionable,” “crazy” and “an insane crime.” Trump and Vance came out against it. The Republican members of the House scurried for cover. The deal collapsed.

Trump is back to his established practice of sowing chaos.

Politico reported that Musk tweeted lies to panic House Republicans and cause a stampede.

Musk claimed that the bill would give members of Congress a 40% raise. Untrue. Their salaries ($174,000) have not gone up since 2009. The bill would have given them an increase of 3.8% or $6,600. Musk lied.

Musk reposted a claim that the bill included $3 billion for a new stadium in DC. Another lie. It transferred title of the existing RFK stadium to the DC government. No federal cost.

Musk claimed that the deal shielded the January 6 Committee from future investigations. Another lie.

Musk retweeted a post claiming that the bill funded “bioweapons labs.” Another lie.

Musk approvingly tweeted a post saying that the government should be shut down until Trump’s inauguration in 33 days.

Read the article.

Musk demonstrated that he is reckless and dangerous. He leads Trump around by the nose.

An arrogant, ignorant billionaire leading a doddering, confused old man.

Dan Patrick is the Lieutenant Governor of Texas, a powerful position in the state. He used to be a rightwing radio talk show host, a little Rush Limbaugh. Now he’s in a position to do real damage, not just blow off steam. He recently told the superintendents of rural schools that the state couldn’t afford to give them any new money, although not long ago Governor Greg Abbott bragged about a $30 billion surplus and about cutting property taxes.

Chris Tomlinson, opinion writer for The Houston Chronicle, eviscerated Dan Patrick’s homegrown bull in this article.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has laid out his plan for dismantling public schools, even if it means failing to produce a workforce that will keep Texas’ economy going.

The man who calls himself a Christian first, a conservative second and a Republican third exercises an iron fist over the Texas Senate. He recently told the Texas Association of Rural Schools & Texas Association of Midsize Schools not to expect a significant increase in state funding, which has been unchanged since 2019 despite rampant inflation.

Instead, Patrick has promised to divert taxpayer money to private, mostly Christian schools backed by his billionaire benefactors.

Texas Republicans are heading into the 89thLegislature in honey-badger mode, heedlessly pursuing ideological goals regardless of public opinion. Because just like the honey badger that has become an Internet meme, Patrick “don’t care.”

“We’re not underfunding you in our view,” Patrick told school superintendents on Dec. 6, my colleague Jeremy Wallace reported in his newsletter. “We are funding you the most we can.”

Correction: it’s the most he’s willing to do.

The state provides a basic allotment of $6,160 per student, which is $4,000 less than the national average. School districts are slashing budgets and laying off staff due to inflation. Advocates have asked for another $1,000 per student to keep providing essential services.

“I’m just being honest with you; there is no way we can increase the student allotment by $1,000,” Patrick said.

That’s a lie. The state left $30 billion unspent in 2023 when Patrick refused to increase school funding until lawmakers approved taxpayer funding for religious private schools. An extra $1,000 per student would cost $14 billion, well within the budget.

Patrick frequently claims he supports public schools, but actions speak louder than words. He criticizes teachers, prioritizes tax cuts and praises religious education, falling back on a clichéd conservative playbook.

Step One: Underfund and hamstring a government service, in this case, public schools, until it starts falling apart. Step Two: Blame underpaid, under-resourced public servants for the failure and proclaim only the private sector can help. Step Three: Send taxpayer money to your cronies to provide the service, with a significant markup, and make the public pay more for it.

The biggest campaign donors to Texas’s Republican leaders in recent years have loudly demanded an end to public education as we know it. They believe government-run schools indoctrinate students with the wrong ideas about justice, equality and tolerance. They want private schools to teach their values with taxpayer subsidies.

Oil billionaires Tim Dunn and Ferris Wilks have spent tens of millions backing Christian nationalist activists and candidates to pass a school voucher bill. Patrick is one of the largest beneficiaries of their largesse and has backed taxpayer money for Christian schools since he was a senator.

A Pennsylvania billionaire who hates public schools, Jeff Yass, gave Gov. Greg Abbott $6 million, the largest campaign donation in state history, to punish rural Republican lawmakers who opposed school vouchers in 2023. Most of those lawmakers either retired or lost their seats in the GOP primary.

Abbott and Patrick say they have the votes necessary to pass a school voucher bill next year. Past promises to boost funding for public schools now appear off the table.

Public schools are much more than a benefit for parents; they create Texas’s workforce. Future success at work is directly tied to quality pre-kindergarten and good schools.

Private schools do not face the same regulation or scrutiny as public schools. Private schools are free to teach whatever the sponsoring group wants outside of a few minimum requirements. Private school students are not required to take the state’s standardized STAAR Test.

Polls show most Texans support public schools and want the state to spend more. But with a handful of donors writing multimillion-dollar checks, Patrick has entered the honey-badger stage of one-party rule.

Most Texans and major corporations think women should have more reproductive rights. Patrick don’t care.

Most Texans support legalized gambling to boost local economies. Patrick don’t care.

Most Texans support legalizing marijuana. Patrick don’t care; he wants to ban the $4 billion-a-year hemp industry.

Republicans have controlled every statewide office for 30 years. At the state and national level, conservatives control every branch of government. The GOP is feeling strong, like they honey badger.

Patrick wants Texas and the United States to be a Christian nation and Texas laws to reflect his interpretation of the Bible. Sabotaging public schools is a key step to fulfilling that dream.

David Pepper blasts the Republican legislators in Ohio for relieving private voucher schools of any burdens associated with transparency and accountability, while simultaneously threatening to close the public schools with the lowest test scores every year.

He writes about the dangerous shenanigans of the gang in the Legislature that hates public schools:

So the bill that impressed me was an attempt to do something about this growing black hole. 

Specifically, the bill would have:

2) required that private schools receiving vouchers administer the same standardized tests that public school students take, allowing an apples to apples comparison of the private school’s performance;

1) required that private schools receiving vouchers provide an annual report on how they are spending the public dollars they receive (and post that report on-line);

3) required that schools provide data on the income of students/families that receive vouchers along with other scholarships. (In states like Ohio, where they have removed all income limitations on vouchers recipients, the vast majority of voucher recipients were already attending, and could already afford, the private school they now use the voucher to pay for).

Again, these would be the bare minimum of safeguards for this out-of-control approach.

Which is, of course, exactly why the provisions were ultimately stripped out of the bill that ultimately passed the House Education Committee (where the original bill had been submitted).

Note: One of the points made by private school advocates was that the tests used to measure public school outcomes were not a good measure of the work they did.

So as the billions flow to private schools through vouchers, we taxpayers still don’t know how the funds are actually being spent. And we still don’t have an apples-to-apples comparison to see if all this unaccountable money is actually leading to improved or worse education results. (Other data show the answer is “worse”).

But for Public Schools…Shut them Down

So that’s the treatment of private schools receiving public dollars via vouchers. 

But wouldn’t you know it? For Ohio’s publicschools, constantly the target of attack and criticism, we see the exact opposite approach.

Rushing through the current “lame duck” Ohio legislative session is a brand new bill that takes seriously the same standardized tests the voucher-funded private schools convinced lawmakers they need not take (remember, they testified it’s not a good measure of their work). So seriously, the new bill proposes that all Ohio public school buildings that fall in the bottom five and 10 percent of two measures (both determined by standardized tests) for three years be shut down

Under the bill, local school boards would be forced either “to fire its principal and majority of staff or turn over operations to a private entity, charter, or another district.”

Public school advocates have pointed out many of the flaws of this approach, including that many of the entities that would “take over” these schools have no experience providing K-12 education at all. They’ve also pointed out that this approach bears similarities to the failed top-down approach from a 2015 bill which created Academic Distress Commissions for struggling districts. After stripping away local control, the Commissions did not generate improvements, and the approach was ultimately repealed.

But bigger picture, of course, is the differential treatment of the two systems: One type of publicly funded Ohio schools doesn’t have to provide even the bare minimum of accountability and transparency, while the other set would face turmoil and even shutdowns for failing to meet certain criteria not applied to the first group. 

It’s yet another blatant tipping of the scales towards privatizing public education.

Take Action

They are trying to rush this bill through the Ohio Senate’s Education Committee tomorrow. Here are steps you can take to stop it:

  • Contact your State Rep. Tell them the Ohio Senate is trying to pass a massive new school closure bill (SB 295) without any input from the House. Ask them, “Shouldn’t the House get a say on this issue??”
  • WHAT TO SAY:
    • SB 295 would remove local control from elected school board members and parents
    • The state should not be making big, closed-door decisions with little to no community involvement.
    • Our students deserve safe, equitable, fully-resourced, engaging schools in their own area! In most cases, closing local schools is bad for our communities and bad for Ohio. In ALL cases, parents and students should be heavily involved in the decision-making processes!
  • FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Kristy Greenberg is a veteran prosecutor in the U. S. Attorney’s office in New York. She is the former deputy chief of the criminal division of the Southern District of New York. She is currently a legal analyst for MSNBC.

She explains why President Biden was right to pardon his son Hunter. I agree with her. Can you imagine how the Trump administration would have demeaned and humiliated Hunter Biden once they got their clutches on him? With Trump zealots in charge of the Justice Department and the FBI, Hunter would not stand a chance. Already, Republicans in Congress are saying they are not finished with Hunter, despite the pardon. House Republicans have a blood lust going for Hunter.

Greenberg writes:

Critics have argued that President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter was political nepotism—bad for the country, selfish, the height of privilege. But the actual story is the very opposite of nepotism: Hunter Biden was treated worse than an ordinary citizen because of his family connections. It’s good for the country when the president acts against injustice; President Biden rightly condemned the injustice of his son’s prosecution. His pardon was necessary to prevent Donald Trump’s Justice Department from targeting Hunter for years to come.

I worked as a federal criminal prosecutor for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York for 12 years, during which time I supervised and prosecuted many gun and tax cases. President Biden argues that the gun and tax charges Hunter was convicted of should never have been brought. I agree. When I served as deputy chief for the Southern District of New York’s Criminal Division, my job was to approve charging and non-prosecution decisions on gun and tax cases. I would not have approved the felony gun and tax charges brought against Hunter Biden; such charges are rarely—if ever—brought in similar circumstances.

Prosecutors charged Hunter with lying about his drug addiction when he purchased a firearm, and with possessing that firearm while he was a drug addict. They were wrong to do so. As a first-time offender with no criminal record or history of violent behavior who possessed a gun for only 11 days and didn’t use it, he did not pose a public-safety risk to warrant federal gun charges. The public interest is served by treating addiction, not weaponizing it. In a gross display of addiction-shaming, prosecutors used Hunter’s own words from his memoir about overcoming drug addiction against him at trial. They forced his former romantic partners to testify and dredge up details of his addiction. The prosecution’s trial presentation was cruel and humiliating.

Nor should prosecutors have charged Hunter with failing to pay $1.4 million in taxes during the period when he suffered from drug addiction. The IRS’s primary goal—to recover unpaid taxes—was satisfied when Hunter fully repaid the taxes he owed with interest and penalty. Felony tax charges are unwarranted here given that the tax amount is not exorbitant, his nonpayment occurred while he was using illegal drugs, and he fully repaid his taxes. A civil resolution or tax-misdemeanor charges would have been appropriate.

Notably, there had been a fair non-felony plea deal between Trump-appointed Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss and Hunter, but congressional Republicans worked to crush it. They opened an investigation into the DOJ’s plea negotiations, held hearings with testimony from IRS case agents and prosecutors, and attempted to intervene in the case before the plea. Amid intense political pressure from Republicans, Weiss killed the deal, requested and obtained special-counsel status, and charged Hunter with gun and tax felonies. As President Biden stated in announcing Hunter’s pardon, a number of his opponents in Congress took credit for bringing political pressure on the process. President Biden is correct that Hunter was treated differently; most criminal defendants do not have members of Congress interfering in their cases to lobby for harsher treatment. That is not how our criminal-justice system is supposed to work.

If there were reason to believe that Hunter had committed any of the more serious crimes that reportedly were under investigation—bribery, money laundering, or illegal foreign lobbying, I would be far less sympathetic to the president’s pardon. But Hunter was never charged with these more serious offenses. Weiss investigated Hunter for six years; that’s an unusually long time for a criminal investigation focused on one individual. If after six years Weiss still does not have a real case against Hunter, then it doesn’t exist. (Complicating matters is the fact that this past February, Weiss charged Alexander Smirnov—a former FBI informant and the GOP’s star witness against Hunter—for falsely accusing President Biden and Hunter of receiving bribes from Ukrainian businessmen.)

The absence of a credible case against Hunter does not mean that a Trump DOJ wouldn’t bring bogus charges against him. During his campaign, Trump vowed that, if elected, he would appoint a special prosecutor to “go after” “the Biden crime family.” In nominating Pam Bondi for attorney general and Kash Patel for FBI director, Trump has further signaled how serious he is about using the DOJ as an instrument of personal revenge. At the 2020 Republican convention, Bondi argued that President Biden and his son were corrupt. Recently, Patel proposed using the law “criminally or civilly” against Trump’s political rivals. When he announced the pardon, President Biden stated, “In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me—and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.” He’s right.

Now is not the time to cling to norms that Trump is poised to shatter. Political prosecutions are coming, and I fear that our democratic institutions will not withstand them.

That’s why President Biden’s pardon should not be his last. President Biden should use his pardon power to protect others from political prosecution just as he used it to protect his son. He should condemn Trump’s plan for political prosecutions. He should pardon Trump’s political enemies preemptively to stymie the Trump DOJ’s politically motivated investigations. In particular, public servants who have drawn Trump’s ire for doing their job should not have to spend precious time and money defending themselves against Trump’s lies. Nor should they have to endure the reputational hit, the safety risk, or the emotional toll of political prosecutions. President Biden alone has the power to stop other needless political prosecutions before they begin. He should use it.

For years, the City of New York has tried to force its public service retirees to give up their Medicare and move to a private Medicare Advantage plan. Many retirees understood that MA means privatization. Any serious medical needs required prior approval by the insurance company; it also meant that the insurance company could decline to pay. Retirees were furious, but it seemed hopeless, especially when a few powerful unions, including the United Federation of teachers, supported the city’s plan.

Marianne Pizzitola, who retired as an Emergency Medical Technician for the Fire Department, organized resistance to the plan. She found other retirees who were opposed to giving up Medicare and educated others about the downside of making the change. Marianne created an organization called the NYC Organization of Retired Public Service Workers.

The organization lobbied elected officials, litigated, and kept up the pressure.

Today, they won! They stood up the government of the City of New York, against overwhelming odds. And they won!

Brad Lander, the Comptroller of the City of New York sent out this letter this evening:

Dear New Yorkers,

Massive news for New York City retirees: Today the New York Court of Appeals rejected shifting retirees to a Medicare Advantage plan.

Today’s ruling is the final win for the 250,000 some retirees fighting to keep the health care they worked for and were promised! Seniors will continue to have access to all providers who accept Medicare, a victory for our public sector retirees.

The City’s Medicare Advantage plan would have constrained our retirees to a smaller network with more restrictive requirements on care. Many public servants entered the municipal workforce with the promise of middle-class wages, pensions, and a retirement plan. The shift to anything less than that full promise was a hard pill to swallow.

When the Medicare Advantage contract was submitted to my office last year, we declined to register it, knowing that litigation raised doubts about the City’s authority to enter into the contract. As a matter of public policy, beyond the scope of our office’s specific Charter responsibility for contract registration, I was seriously concerned about the privatization of Medicare plans, overbilling by insurance companies, and barriers to care under Medicare Advantage.

It is vital that all our seniors—and all New Yorkers—get quality health coverage as a basic human right. At the same time, given the growing costs of health care for both retirees and active employees, we cannot ignore that there are real cost questions facing the City when it comes to health care.

Thanks,

Brad 

The Guardian reports that Elon Musk may not get the highest security clearance, due to his drug use and contacts with foreign nationals.

The space entrepreneur Elon Musk is unlikely to receive government security clearances if he so applied, even as his SpaceX launch company blasts military and spy agency payloads into orbit, according to a report on Monday.

The billionaire, a close ally of Donald Trump, who is set to join the incoming administration as an efficiency expert and recently became the first person to exceed $400bn in self-made personal wealth, is reported by the Wall Street Journal to have been advised by SpaceX lawyers not to seek highest-level security clearances owing to personal drug use and contacts with foreign nationals.

Musk currently holds a “top-secret” clearance that took years to obtain after he discussed use of marijuana on a 2018 podcast with Joe Rogan, according to the outlet. But that may not be enough to have access to information about US government payloads in his rockets.

Typically, candidates undergoing federal security screenings by the department of defense may not receive clearance if the agency expresses concerns about drug or alcohol use, criminal conduct, psychological conditions, sexual behavior or allegiance to the US.

According to the Journal, Musk’s lawyers outlined scenarios in which he might inadvertently disclose secrets to foreign officials with whom he regularly speaks, including the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, with whom he is reported to have been in regular contact since 2022.

Musk’s use of another semi-legal drug, ketamine, in pursuit of what friends call “pure creativity”, along with reports of LSD, ecstasy and magic mushrooms, could also be an issue.

Musk lawyers told the Journal there had been “false facts” in a WSJ report about Musk’s drug patterns and he was “regularly and randomly drug tested at SpaceX and has never failed a test”.

SpaceX lawyers and executives reportedly concluded that if the company sought a higher level of clearance than Musk currently holds, he risked being turned down and potentially stripped of the clearances he currently holds.