SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
rosa delauro
Federal Workers Union Denounces Trump's Threat of 'Illegal Mass Firings' Amid Shutdown Fight
“Instead of coming to the table to negotiate lowering costs and addressing the healthcare crisis Republicans created, the White House is staging harmful charades like this that will impact all Americans," said Sen. Rosa DeLauro.
Sep 25, 2025
The largest federal workers union on Thursday denounced the White House's threat of mass firings in the event of a government shutdown next week as "political games" and an attempt to distract from a simple fact: The Republican Party needs Democrats to vote for its funding bill, so it must agree to reverse massive healthcare cuts in order to get Democratic support.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released a memo Wednesday night, telling federal agencies to prepare for mass layoffs if the government shuts down on October 1.
The office, headed by Russell Vought—who co-authored the right-wing agenda Project 2025 and helped push for the firing of tens of thousands of other federal employees by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—said agencies should consider firing workers involved in programs that are not funded by other laws such as the GOP's One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) and that are "not consistent with the president’s priorities.”
Even after government funding is eventually reinstated following a potential shutdown, said the OMB, agencies should plan to retain the smallest possible number of employees needed to operate.
“While politicians are playing games, real Americans’ jobs, paychecks, and access to vital services are being threatened by a looming government shutdown. Now, White House OMB Director Russell Vought has announced his intention to pursue another DOGE-like round of illegal mass firings in the event of a shutdown, adding to the chaos," said Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees.
An OMB official told Politico that “Social Security, Medicare, veterans benefits, military operations, law enforcement, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and air traffic control" would not be impacted by the mass firings threatened in the memo.
The threat came just a week before the October 1 deadline to pass legislation to keep the government funded.
Republicans have proposed a continuing resolution to keep the government funded through November 21.
The Democratic Party has proposed a plan to keep the government running through October 31 with legislation that reverses Medicaid cuts included in the OBBBA and extends Affordable Care Act subsidies that set to expire due to provisions in the law.
Neither proposal passed in the Senate last week before lawmakers left for recess. GOP leaders including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) have refused to meet with Democrats to negotiate on the healthcare cuts, and President Donald Trump this week canceled talks with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY)—baselessly claiming on his Truth Social platform that the Democrats had made demands including "transgender operations for everybody" in a government funding bill.
On Wednesday, Schumer called Vought's memo "an attempt at intimidation" and said the mass firings threatened by the OMB would not stand up in court.
"Donald Trump has been firing federal workers since day one—not to govern, but to scare," said Schumer. "This is nothing new and has nothing to do with funding the government. These unnecessary firings will either be overturned in court or the administration will end up hiring the workers back, just like they did as recently as today.”
But since the Republicans are "happy to downsize and to shed federal government employees," warned Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith, they have "an asymmetric weapon against congressional shutdown threats."
Vought's memo concluded by placing the responsibility for a shutdown on Democrats, asserting that their refusal to support legislation that's expected to result in healthcare premiums that are 75% higher for millions of families would be to blame for the mass firings.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement that the memo displayed "Russ Vought's trademark chaos."
“Instead of coming to the table to negotiate lowering costs and addressing the healthcare crisis Republicans created, the White House is staging harmful charades like this that will impact all Americans,” DeLauro said.
Kelley added that "the truth is simple: Republicans cannot fund the government without Democratic votes."
"That means the only path forward is compromise," said Kelley. "The president and congressional leaders must sit down and negotiate in good faith to keep the lights on for the American people. Nothing less is acceptable."
“Federal employees are not bargaining chips," he added. "They are veterans, caregivers, law enforcement officers, and neighbors who serve their country and fellow Americans every day. They deserve stability and respect, not pink slips and political games."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House GOP Accused of 'Waging War on America's Wildlife' With Proposed Spending Cuts
"This budget proposal shows yet again the extremes to which anti-wildlife members of Congress will go to sacrifice endangered species," said one conservationist.
Jul 14, 2025
As Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives begin work on spending legislation for fiscal year 2026, conservationists and congressional Democrats are blasting a key appropriations bill released Monday.
"House Republicans are once again waging war on America's wildlife in yet another giveaway to their industry allies," said Stephanie Kurose, deputy director of government affairs at the Center for Biological Diversity, in a statement. "Extinction isn't inevitable, it's a political choice. The Appropriations Committee has one job to do, which is to fund the government, not decide whether our most vulnerable animals get to survive."
The bill that the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee is set to consider on Tuesday morning would not only slash funding for the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—by 23%—and the Fish and Wildlife Service, but also strip Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections from animals including gray wolves, the center noted.
"This budget proposal shows yet again the extremes to which anti-wildlife members of Congress will go to sacrifice endangered species," declared Robert Dewey, vice president of government relations at Defenders of Wildlife. "The bill is loaded with riders that attack the Endangered Species Act and would put some of America's most iconic species, including the grizzly bear and wolverine, at serious risk of extinction."
"The bill and all who support it are compromising the crucial habitats, outdoor recreation areas, and natural resources that Americans and wildlife rely on."
The legislation would block funding for listing the greater sage-grouse as well as money to protect the northern long-eared bat, the lesser prairie-chicken, and captive fish listed under the ESA. It would also block the Biden administration's rules for the landmark law.
"By blocking protections for public lands while also providing short-sighted lease sales for the benefit of oil and gas corporations, the bill and all who support it are compromising the crucial habitats, outdoor recreation areas, and natural resources that Americans and wildlife rely on," Dewey said.
Democrats on the committee put out a statement highlighting that, along with attacking wildlife, worsening the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, and jeopardizing public health by favoring polluters, the GOP legislation would hike utility bills, promote environmental discrimination against rural and poor communities, and cut national park funding.
"With the release of the FY26 Interior bill, it's clear House Republicans are once again pushing an agenda that accelerates the climate crisis, upends our national parks system, and leaves local communities to fend for themselves—all while undermining the power of the Appropriations Committee and of Congress," said Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), ranking member on the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.
"We are still living with the fallout of last year's failure to negotiate a full-year funding bill. Instead of correcting course, the bill released today delivers more of the same: It cuts water infrastructure funding, slashes EPA programs, and wipes out environmental justice and climate initiatives. It even blocks the EPA from completing its risk assessment on PFAS in sewage sludge," she continued, referring to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also called forever chemicals. "On top of the environmental attacks, Republicans are taking aim at the arts and cultural institutions that enrich communities and drive local economies."
Pingree asserted that "any arguments that these irresponsible cuts are somehow fiscally responsible ring hollow in the wake of Republicans adding $3.4 trillion to the national deficit thanks to their disastrous so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' I urge my Republican colleagues to come to the table and support the essential work of this subcommittee: Protecting public health, conserving our lands and waters, investing in resilience, and ensuring that every community—from rural Maine to urban centers—has access to a healthy environment and a vibrant cultural life."
House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) pointed out that President Donald Trump "promised to address the cost-of-living crisis, but instead, he and House Republicans are making it worse."
"House Republicans' 2026 Interior funding bill raises utility bills and energy prices to benefit billionaires and big corporations," DeLauro said. "Republicans are threatening the air we breathe and the water we drink and taking steps that damage our public lands, promote dirty energy, and hinder our ability to confront the climate crisis."
"In addition to these dangerous cuts, Republicans' proposal would mean fewer trips to national parks and less access to museums and the arts," she warned. "House Republicans are more focused on lining the pockets of big oil companies than lowering prices for working-class, middle-class, rural, and vulnerable families; protecting our public health; and preserving the planet."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressives, Democrats Vow Fight as Senate GOP Aims to Claw Back Billions in Federal Funding
Republicans plan to utilize a rare process called "rescission" to skirt Congress' power of the purse and illegally allow Trump to withhold hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding to critical programs.
Jul 10, 2025
The U.S. Senate will soon vote on whether President Donald Trump can claw back billions of dollars that have already been appropriated by Congress.
Last month, the House narrowly voted to allow Trump to rescind $9.4 billion in funds that were meant to fund global health initiatives—including AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis prevention—and public broadcasters like PBS and NPR.
It's far from the first time that this Republican-controlled Congress has voted on massive budget cuts, but progressive groups and some Democratic lawmakers say this vote has another frightening dimension to it.
These funds were among the more than $420 billion appropriated by Congress that Trump illegally impounded, or refused to spend, at the start of his term.
In a letter sent Wednesday to members of Congress, a coalition of more than 100 groups—including Public Citizen, the AFL-CIO, and Greenpeace—warned that by voting to approve these rescissions of federal funds, they would be giving Trump tacit approval to unconstitutionally take away Congress' authority to spend money.
"This rescissions proposal does not ask Congress, as required by the Impoundment Control Act, to approve the entirety of the federal spending that has been illegally frozen by the Trump administration," the letter notes. "The administration is merely trying to establish a veil of legitimacy while it continues unconstitutional actions that it began more than 100 days ago."
The groups went on to warn that allowing the president to unilaterally cut funding that he doesn't approve of "risks irreparable damage to the regular bipartisan appropriations process."
"Despite the political back-and-forth, Congress eventually reaches a bipartisan agreement on government funding every year, one way or another," they said. "The basis for that bipartisan agreement is that both parties must agree to compromises to achieve any of their goals. If a party with a political trifecta can simply rescind funding for the parts of appropriations bills they compromised on, they undermine congressional checks and balances and the basis for future bipartisan dealmaking on an already politically fraught process."
Under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, presidents are forbidden from unilaterally refusing to spend funds. However, Congress is allowed to pass a "rescission" bill within 45 days of canceling them if the president requests it.
Trump would be the first president since Bill Clinton in 1999 to successfully have funds rescinded by Congress, and it would be the largest rescission in four decades.
But as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities points out, there is a key difference: "The administration illegally impounded the funds at issue for months before proposing the [rescission] package" and that it is "unlawfully withholding much larger amounts of funding that it has not proposed for rescission."
According to a tracker created by the office of Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who sit on the House and Senate appropriations committees, respectively, the Trump administration is blocking congressionally appropriated funds for programs including:
- Research into Alzheimer's disease, women's health, cancer, diabetes, and other illnesses;
- Natural disaster relief;
- School lunch assistance for children;
- Early childhood education through the Head Start Program; and
- Birth control and cancer screenings for over 800,000 patients
Russell Vought, the head of the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has openly indicated a desire to use rescission to cut all of this spending "without having to get an affirmative vote" from Congress.
According to The New York Times, Vought is planning to use an even more arcane and illegal maneuver known as "pocket rescission" to avoid spending the funds. As Tony Romm reported in June:
Under the emerging plan, the Trump administration would wait until closer to Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year, to formally ask lawmakers to claw back a set of funds it has targeted for cuts. Even if Congress fails to vote on the request, the president’s timing would trigger a law that freezes the money until it ultimately expires.
Some Senate Democrats have indicated they'd be willing to risk a government shutdown to prevent the rescission bill from passing.
In a letter published Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) wrote that the prospect of the rescissions bill passing had "grave implications."
"[I]t is absurd for [Republicans] to expect Democrats to act as business as usual and engage in a bipartisan appropriations process to fund the government, while they concurrently plot to pass a purely partisan rescissions bill to defund those same programs negotiated on a bipartisan basis behind the scenes," Schumer wrote.
Murray called out Vought directly on Wednesday at a markup session on the next round of bills in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
"For us to be able to work in a bipartisan way effectively, that requires us to work with each other. To not just write bipartisan funding bills—but to defend them from partisan cuts sought by the president and the OMB director," she said during her opening remarks. "We cannot allow bipartisan funding bills with partisan rescission packages. It will not work."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular