By:&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/author/khardy/">Kevin Hardy</a>

Fearing a financial ‘death spiral,’ transit providers say they need more support.

Compared with major American cities, the ridership on public buses in Minot, North Dakota, can seem relatively minuscule.

But the 82,000 rides taken each year allow people without cars to get to work, help those with disabilities get around and connect patients with crucial health care.

“The value of those rides is unmeasurable, because the people that are using our system need our system,” said Brian Horinka, the city’s transit superintendent.

Like in many cities — from sprawling metropolitan areas to smaller and rural communities — the financial future of public transit is questionable in Minot, population 48,000. While increasing, ridership remains below pre-pandemic levels. Federal funding and state budgets remain uncertain, while inflation is pinching transit services.

For example, Horinka said he’s looking to buy a new 30-foot heavy-duty bus. He expects it will cost up to $700,000 because of inflation. Just five years ago, a similar model could be had for about $400,000, he said.

“We’re in dire straits, from a financial standpoint,” he said.

North Dakota’s four largest cities, including Minot, asked lawmakers for millions in extra grant dollars this year to keep transit buses rolling. The state&nbsp;<a href="https://ndlegis.gov/assembly/69-2025/regular/documents/25-1109-05000.pdf" target="_blank">enacted a new law</a>&nbsp;awarding $2 million in grants — a welcome reprieve, but far less than the $15 million initially requested.

Republican state Rep. Dan Ruby, a sponsor of the legislation, said cities will likely need to increase local funding for bus systems.

“I don’t think it’s enough,” he said. “I think it is going to just be somewhat of a stopgap for some of them to be able to function.”

The law also calls for a study to develop a proposed funding formula for fixed-route bus systems. Ruby said he would prefer a permanent funding model that doesn’t require cities to continually rely on legislative grants.

“We also want to make sure that they’re not sitting on funds or running inefficiently just because they have the funding,” he said. “That’s the key to get support from most of the legislators, to show that they really do have a need and there’s no way to find any more cuts in their operations without affecting the people that need the rides.”

It’s indicative of discussions occurring in state capitals across the country as public transit faces existential funding challenges.

Public transit systems in major cities including Chicago, Dallas and San Francisco face the potential of deep service cuts without more funding. But the problems also extend to smaller systems that connect people in rural America and smaller cities.

In Pennsylvania, Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro said the transit financial crisis affects residents in all 67 of the commonwealth’s counties.

“Let me just say, we face a dire situation for mass transit agencies all across Pennsylvania, from Pittsburgh to Philly and rural communities in between,”&nbsp;<a href="https://penncapital-star.com/government-politics/shapiro-says-pa-mass-transit-agencies-face-dire-situation-and-criticizes-trump-tariffs/" target="_blank">Shapiro said at a news conference in April.</a>

Transit funding has been stuck in a partisan battle in Harrisburg.

In November, to stave off cuts, Shapiro&nbsp;<a href="https://penncapital-star.com/transportation-infrastructure/shapiro-directs-153m-in-federal-highway-funds-to-stop-septa-death-spiral/" target="_blank">ordered the transfer of more than $150 million</a>&nbsp;in federal highway funds to the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, known as SEPTA, which serves the greater Philadelphia area with bus and regional rail lines. He’s also backed legislation to increase transit funding, which has found support in the Democratic-controlled state House but so far has not advanced in the GOP-controlled state Senate.

Late last month, House Republican Leader Jesse Topper proposed&nbsp;<a href="https://www.reptopper.com/News/36086/Press-Releases/Amid-Chronic-Budget-Issues--Topper-to-Introduce-Legislation-to-Privatize-Part-of-SEPTA-s-Operations" target="_blank">partially privatizing the Philadelphia-area transit agency&nbsp;</a>rather than increasing funding, which he said in a statement would “only serve to patch over the problems of a system chronically in crisis.”

“The same old, same old is clearly not working,” he said, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wesa.fm/politics-government/2025-05-01/transit-agencies-prt-septa-privatize-topper" target="_blank">a report by public radio station WESA.</a>

The transit agency has said it already operates one of the most efficient systems in the nation. On&nbsp;<a href="https://wwww.septa.org/fundingcrisis/" target="_blank">a special website&nbsp;</a>it created to call attention to its $213 million budget deficit, SEPTA said there’s “nothing left to cut from the budget but service.”

The authority has said it may be forced to cut services by 45% and raise fares by 20% without help from the state.

Democratic state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, who represents a portion of North Philadelphia, said that would be “catastrophic” for the region.

“It makes this not only a less appealing place to live for people who are considering moving here,” he said, “but it also makes it difficult to live for folks who call this area home.”

Kenyatta, who dismissed the idea of privatization, said the state has a moral and economic obligation to ensure sustainable funding for public transportation.

“We’ve done patches here and there,” he said. “And that patchwork approach is not one that inspires the type of confidence and allows our transit agencies to do the type of long-term planning that they need to do.”

Mass transit saw some of the most immediate impacts of COVID-19 as people worked from home and avoided public spaces.

The federal government provided nearly $70 billion in pandemic aid to transit programs, which saw revenues drop sharply because of reduced fare collections.

But with the rise of remote and hybrid work, ridership remains below pre-pandemic levels even as costs for labor and equipment skyrocket. A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-04-29/us-mass-transit-funding-crisis-threatens-commuters-travel?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc0NjE0OTczMiwiZXhwIjoxNzQ2NzU0NTMyLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJTVkhaT0FUMEcxS1cwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiI4QUQ0NTg2QkE2MTk0RkRGOEQyMkU3RDM5NzUyOUNCOCJ9.w3o4OPJC1dN3Bg7rJfaraes4Xb63p43Kk7j3XZrJ6VY&amp;leadSource=uverify%20wall" target="_blank">Bloomberg News analysis</a>&nbsp;estimates the nation’s largest transit systems are facing a $6 billion shortfall — only heightening fears of a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/11/15/1212879398/public-transit-ridership-down-covid-pandemic-death-spiral" target="_blank">so-called death spiral</a>&nbsp;in which a combination of service cuts and fare increases cause further erosion of riders and revenue.

In Oregon, Democratic lawmakers have proposed increasing the state’s dedicated transit payroll tax. Billed as “a starting point,” the plan would increase the tax from 0.1% to 0.18% — estimated to raise $269 million over each two-year budget cycle.

“That’s appreciated, but it’s nowhere near what it needs to be,” said Brian Vitulli, general manager of the Tillamook County Transportation District in western Oregon. “There could be some service reductions in the near future if we don’t get more funding.”

Aside from rising costs, Vitulli faces major hiring challenges: The district has 19 drivers but could use eight to 10 more. With too few drivers, bus service has been cut to six days a week.

For some riders, the transit services provide a lifeline. After last year’s closure of Tillamook’s only dialysis center, for example, the agency began offering rides to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.northcoastcitizen.com/news/tctd-steps-up-for-dialysis-patients/article_6fbac02e-766f-5c3e-a86b-ed9293b8d6be.html" target="_blank">other dialysis clinics well outside its service area.</a>

That has driven up costs and tied up drivers, making services such as the on-demand Dial-A-Ride less available for other residents.

“We’re kind of the only option for these dialysis patients,” he said. “And we’re kind of prioritizing those trips rather than somebody who just wants to go to the Elks Club for lunch or something.”

Vitulli also serves on the board of the Oregon Transit Association, which is lobbying instead for&nbsp;<a href="https://oregontransit.com/news/13489020" target="_blank">a 0.4% increase in the transit payroll tax phased in over eight years</a>. The association said the current 0.08% proposal could force transit providers across the state to cut services by as much as 25% in the next few years as inflation and decreased fare collections push many into deficits.

TriMet, which operates rail, bus and paratransit services across 533 square miles of the Portland region,&nbsp;<a href="https://news.trimet.org/2025/04/trimet-warns-of-cuts-to-transit-service-without-an-increase-in-transit-funding-in-2025-oregon-transportation-package/" target="_blank">said it would still need to cut services</a>&nbsp;even if the lawmakers’ proposed 0.08% funding increase were approved. The agency faces a deficit of nearly $75 million for the upcoming fiscal year.

Oregon lawmakers are broadly concerned about federal spending cuts, which could turn the state’s modest budget surplus into a gaping deficit,<a href="https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/03/19/oregon-lawmakers-share-38-billion-budget-framework-amid-federal-uncertainty/" target="_blank">&nbsp;the Oregon Capital Chronicle reported.&nbsp;</a>Nearly a third of the state’s budget comes from federal money.

Democratic state Rep. Susan McLain said budget uncertainty has heightened scrutiny of all state spending this session. She is one of the authors of&nbsp;<a href="https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/04/03/oregon-democrats-unveil-1-9-billion-transportation-funding-plan/" target="_blank">the state’s transportation proposal</a>, crafted after nearly two years of meetings across the state. Aside from increasing the transit payroll tax, it calls for boosting the gas tax and hiking vehicle registration costs to help pay for road improvements.

McLain, co-chair of the Joint Committee on Transportation, said budget negotiations are ongoing, with aims of having hearings later this month.

While the state wants to do more to ensure everyone can access medical care, schools and jobs, McLain noted that belt-tightening is imperative for all manner of agencies, including transit.

“We’re really trying to dig in and find ways to do more with less,” she said, “but also to make sure that we’ve got sufficient, adequate types of investment in areas that we value.”

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:khardy@stateline.org">khardy@stateline.org</a>.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1746784865461.png" alt=" Driver Jeremy Bellante assists Martin Boge into a Tillamook County Transportation District van before an out-of-town trip last month to dialysis treatment. The western Oregon transit service is warning of potential service cuts if the state does not provide more funding. (Courtesy of Tillamook County Transportation District)" />
 <figcaption> Driver Jeremy Bellante assists Martin Boge into a Tillamook County Transportation District van before an out-of-town trip last month to dialysis treatment. The western Oregon transit service is warning of potential service cuts if the state does not provide more funding. (Courtesy of Tillamook County Transportation District)</figcaption>
 </figure>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://stateline.org/author/khardy/">Kevin Hardy</a><h2>Fearing a financial ‘death spiral,’ transit providers say they need more support.</h2>Compared with major American cities, the ridership on public buses in Minot, North Dakota, can seem relatively minuscule.But the 82,000 rides taken each year allow people without cars to get to work, help those with disabilities get around and connect patients with crucial health care.“The value of those rides is unmeasurable, because the people that are using our system need our system,” said Brian Horinka, the city’s transit superintendent.Like in many cities — from sprawling metropolitan areas to smaller and rural communities — the financial future of public transit is questionable in Minot, population 48,000. While increasing, ridership remains below pre-pandemic levels. Federal funding and state budgets remain uncertain, while inflation is pinching transit services.For example, Horinka said he’s looking to buy a new 30-foot heavy-duty bus. He expects it will cost up to $700,000 because of inflation. Just five years ago, a similar model could be had for about $400,000, he said.“We’re in dire straits, from a financial standpoint,” he said.North Dakota’s four largest cities, including Minot, asked lawmakers for millions in extra grant dollars this year to keep transit buses rolling. The state&nbsp;<a href="https://ndlegis.gov/assembly/69-2025/regular/documents/25-1109-05000.pdf" target="_blank">enacted a new law</a>&nbsp;awarding $2 million in grants — a welcome reprieve, but far less than the $15 million initially requested.Republican state Rep. Dan Ruby, a sponsor of the legislation, said cities will likely need to increase local funding for bus systems.“I don’t think it’s enough,” he said. “I think it is going to just be somewhat of a stopgap for some of them to be able to function.”The law also calls for a study to develop a proposed funding formula for fixed-route bus systems. Ruby said he would prefer a permanent funding model that doesn’t require cities to continually rely on legislative grants.“We also want to make sure that they’re not sitting on funds or running inefficiently just because they have the funding,” he said. “That’s the key to get support from most of the legislators, to show that they really do have a need and there’s no way to find any more cuts in their operations without affecting the people that need the rides.”It’s indicative of discussions occurring in state capitals across the country as public transit faces existential funding challenges.Public transit systems in major cities including Chicago, Dallas and San Francisco face the potential of deep service cuts without more funding. But the problems also extend to smaller systems that connect people in rural America and smaller cities.<h2>Partisan debates over transit funding</h2>In Pennsylvania, Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro said the transit financial crisis affects residents in all 67 of the commonwealth’s counties.“Let me just say, we face a dire situation for mass transit agencies all across Pennsylvania, from Pittsburgh to Philly and rural communities in between,”&nbsp;<a href="https://penncapital-star.com/government-politics/shapiro-says-pa-mass-transit-agencies-face-dire-situation-and-criticizes-trump-tariffs/" target="_blank">Shapiro said at a news conference in April.</a>Transit funding has been stuck in a partisan battle in Harrisburg.In November, to stave off cuts, Shapiro&nbsp;<a href="https://penncapital-star.com/transportation-infrastructure/shapiro-directs-153m-in-federal-highway-funds-to-stop-septa-death-spiral/" target="_blank">ordered the transfer of more than $150 million</a>&nbsp;in federal highway funds to the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, known as SEPTA, which serves the greater Philadelphia area with bus and regional rail lines. He’s also backed legislation to increase transit funding, which has found support in the Democratic-controlled state House but so far has not advanced in the GOP-controlled state Senate.Late last month, House Republican Leader Jesse Topper proposed&nbsp;<a href="https://www.reptopper.com/News/36086/Press-Releases/Amid-Chronic-Budget-Issues--Topper-to-Introduce-Legislation-to-Privatize-Part-of-SEPTA-s-Operations" target="_blank">partially privatizing the Philadelphia-area transit agency&nbsp;</a>rather than increasing funding, which he said in a statement would “only serve to patch over the problems of a system chronically in crisis.”“The same old, same old is clearly not working,” he said, according to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wesa.fm/politics-government/2025-05-01/transit-agencies-prt-septa-privatize-topper" target="_blank">a report by public radio station WESA.</a>The transit agency has said it already operates one of the most efficient systems in the nation. On&nbsp;<a href="https://wwww.septa.org/fundingcrisis/" target="_blank">a special website&nbsp;</a>it created to call attention to its $213 million budget deficit, SEPTA said there’s “nothing left to cut from the budget but service.”The authority has said it may be forced to cut services by 45% and raise fares by 20% without help from the state.Democratic state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, who represents a portion of North Philadelphia, said that would be “catastrophic” for the region.“It makes this not only a less appealing place to live for people who are considering moving here,” he said, “but it also makes it difficult to live for folks who call this area home.”Kenyatta, who dismissed the idea of privatization, said the state has a moral and economic obligation to ensure sustainable funding for public transportation.“We’ve done patches here and there,” he said. “And that patchwork approach is not one that inspires the type of confidence and allows our transit agencies to do the type of long-term planning that they need to do.”<h2>Transit’s pandemic ‘death spiral’</h2>Mass transit saw some of the most immediate impacts of COVID-19 as people worked from home and avoided public spaces.The federal government provided nearly $70 billion in pandemic aid to transit programs, which saw revenues drop sharply because of reduced fare collections.But with the rise of remote and hybrid work, ridership remains below pre-pandemic levels even as costs for labor and equipment skyrocket. A recent&nbsp;<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-04-29/us-mass-transit-funding-crisis-threatens-commuters-travel?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTc0NjE0OTczMiwiZXhwIjoxNzQ2NzU0NTMyLCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJTVkhaT0FUMEcxS1cwMCIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiI4QUQ0NTg2QkE2MTk0RkRGOEQyMkU3RDM5NzUyOUNCOCJ9.w3o4OPJC1dN3Bg7rJfaraes4Xb63p43Kk7j3XZrJ6VY&amp;leadSource=uverify%20wall" target="_blank">Bloomberg News analysis</a>&nbsp;estimates the nation’s largest transit systems are facing a $6 billion shortfall — only heightening fears of a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/11/15/1212879398/public-transit-ridership-down-covid-pandemic-death-spiral" target="_blank">so-called death spiral</a>&nbsp;in which a combination of service cuts and fare increases cause further erosion of riders and revenue.In Oregon, Democratic lawmakers have proposed increasing the state’s dedicated transit payroll tax. Billed as “a starting point,” the plan would increase the tax from 0.1% to 0.18% — estimated to raise $269 million over each two-year budget cycle.“That’s appreciated, but it’s nowhere near what it needs to be,” said Brian Vitulli, general manager of the Tillamook County Transportation District in western Oregon. “There could be some service reductions in the near future if we don’t get more funding.”Aside from rising costs, Vitulli faces major hiring challenges: The district has 19 drivers but could use eight to 10 more. With too few drivers, bus service has been cut to six days a week.For some riders, the transit services provide a lifeline. After last year’s closure of Tillamook’s only dialysis center, for example, the agency began offering rides to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.northcoastcitizen.com/news/tctd-steps-up-for-dialysis-patients/article_6fbac02e-766f-5c3e-a86b-ed9293b8d6be.html" target="_blank">other dialysis clinics well outside its service area.</a>That has driven up costs and tied up drivers, making services such as the on-demand Dial-A-Ride less available for other residents.“We’re kind of the only option for these dialysis patients,” he said. “And we’re kind of prioritizing those trips rather than somebody who just wants to go to the Elks Club for lunch or something.”Vitulli also serves on the board of the Oregon Transit Association, which is lobbying instead for&nbsp;<a href="https://oregontransit.com/news/13489020" target="_blank">a 0.4% increase in the transit payroll tax phased in over eight years</a>. The association said the current 0.08% proposal could force transit providers across the state to cut services by as much as 25% in the next few years as inflation and decreased fare collections push many into deficits.TriMet, which operates rail, bus and paratransit services across 533 square miles of the Portland region,&nbsp;<a href="https://news.trimet.org/2025/04/trimet-warns-of-cuts-to-transit-service-without-an-increase-in-transit-funding-in-2025-oregon-transportation-package/" target="_blank">said it would still need to cut services</a>&nbsp;even if the lawmakers’ proposed 0.08% funding increase were approved. The agency faces a deficit of nearly $75 million for the upcoming fiscal year.Oregon lawmakers are broadly concerned about federal spending cuts, which could turn the state’s modest budget surplus into a gaping deficit,<a href="https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/03/19/oregon-lawmakers-share-38-billion-budget-framework-amid-federal-uncertainty/" target="_blank">&nbsp;the Oregon Capital Chronicle reported.&nbsp;</a>Nearly a third of the state’s budget comes from federal money.Democratic state Rep. Susan McLain said budget uncertainty has heightened scrutiny of all state spending this session. She is one of the authors of&nbsp;<a href="https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2025/04/03/oregon-democrats-unveil-1-9-billion-transportation-funding-plan/" target="_blank">the state’s transportation proposal</a>, crafted after nearly two years of meetings across the state. Aside from increasing the transit payroll tax, it calls for boosting the gas tax and hiking vehicle registration costs to help pay for road improvements.McLain, co-chair of the Joint Committee on Transportation, said budget negotiations are ongoing, with aims of having hearings later this month.While the state wants to do more to ensure everyone can access medical care, schools and jobs, McLain noted that belt-tightening is imperative for all manner of agencies, including transit.“We’re really trying to dig in and find ways to do more with less,” she said, “but also to make sure that we’ve got sufficient, adequate types of investment in areas that we value.”Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at&nbsp;<a href="mailto:khardy@stateline.org">khardy@stateline.org</a>.&nbsp;

Deep cuts to bus and rail services loom across big cities, small towns

Lincoln, Ne - Lawmakers gave first-round approval this week to six components of the state’s roughly $10.8 billion budget package. The state budget is structured on a two-year basis, with the budget enacted during legislative sessions held in odd-numbered years.

<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/dist02" target="_blank">Sen. Robert Clements</a>, chairperson of the&nbsp;<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/app" target="_blank">Appropriations Committee</a>, said members were facing a $396 million shortfall after a late-April meeting of the Nebraska Economic Forecasting Advisory Board lowered revenue forecasts for the current and upcoming two fiscal years.

“The state’s been hit with $630 million of reductions of revenues — $350 million more of Medicaid expense [and] $280 million in forecast revenues — and we have absorbed those without making drastic cuts,” Clements said.

The passage of two bills by the Legislature earlier this session brought that number down to $262 million, he said, and the committee has identified additional cuts and transfers that will be offered as amendments on the next round of debate in order to balance the state’s budget.

Clements said the end result would be an approximately $3 million surplus and a $690 million balance in the Cash Reserve, also known as the state’s “rainy day fund.” The Cash Reserve balance would be equal to roughly 12.4% of state expenses, which Clements said is within an “acceptable range.”

Sen. Jason Prokop of Lincoln, a member of the committee, supported the budget package, which he said reflected “difficult tradeoffs” that had to be made given the state’s changed economic landscape after the forecasting board lowered revenue projections.

“What this budget does is respond to the moment we’re in and balance our checkbooks while keeping a modest reserve, and [it] does all of this in the context of declining revenues and high pressure to deliver on property tax relief,” Prokop said. “This budget reflects the reality of governing and the hard work that comes with making choices.”

<a href="http://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/search_by_number.php?DocumentNumber=LB261&amp;Legislature=109th" target="_blank">LB261</a>, introduced by Speaker John Arch of La Vista on behalf of Gov. Jim Pillen, is the mainline budget bill. An Appropriations Committee amendment, adopted 38-5, replaces the bill and contains funding recommendations for state operations and aid programs.

Clements said the measure would require additional amendment on the second round of debate in order to result in a balanced budget. But, he said, the bill would do so without making across-the-board cuts to state agencies.

Among other provisions, the committee amendment would maintain funding for biomedical research at $15 million annually in each of the next two fiscal years. It also would increase funding to the University of Nebraska by roughly $13 million — less of an increase than the committee originally settled on.

Kearney Sen. Stan Clouse supported LB261 and the committee amendment, acknowledging the difficult task of balancing the budget in the face of shortfalls. He noted the importance of maintaining funding for biomedical research and the university in general.

“The University of Nebraska is one of the largest economic engines that we have in the state,” Clouse said.

Also included in the committee amendment are provisions of the following nine bills:• LB55, sponsored by Adams Sen. Myron Dorn, which would appropriate $1.5 million from the Hospital Quality Assurance and Access Assessment Fund to the state Department of Health and Human Services for reimbursement to certain mental health providers;• LB57, also introduced by Dorn, which would appropriate $1.4 million in cash funds from the Medicaid Managed Care Excess Profit Fund to increase the rural single occupancy daily rate to match the urban single occupancy daily rate of $73.91;• LB173, sponsored by Prokop, which would appropriate $5 million in general funds for each of the next two fiscal years to aid community colleges for dual enrollment purposes;• LB452, also introduced by Prokop, which would appropriate $500,000 in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funds in each of the next two fiscal years for court-appointed special advocate aid;• LB505, sponsored by Prokop, which would appropriate $10 million in TANF funds in FY2025-26 for grants to nonprofits to provide food assistance;• LB580, introduced by Omaha Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh, which would reappropriate funds in the Lead Service Line Cash Fund for grants to metropolitan utilities districts for lead service line replacements;• LB581, also sponsored by Cavanaugh, which would appropriate $500,000 in FY2025-26 from the Health Care Cash Fund for grants to a nonprofit entity for construction costs related to a new facility;• LB621, introduced by Sen. Robert Dover of Norfolk, which would appropriate $500,000 in FY2026-27 from the Health Care Cash Fund to DHHS for expanded health care access to the Nebraska Medicine Midtown Health Center; and• LB627, also sponsored by Dover, which would appropriate $250,000 in general funds in FY2025-26 for a study related to a residential facility for nursing and allied health professionals and state legislative intent to appropriate $750,000 each year for 20 years to the University of Nebraska starting in FY2027-28.

Several lawmakers questioned the need to make cuts or hold agency funding flat in order to close the state’s budget gap as outlined in the committee amendment.

Lincoln Sen. Jane Raybould suggested that a different approach would be to pause the staggered implementation of corporate and individual income tax cuts approved in 2023, or to delay fund transfers related to large infrastructure projects such as the proposed Perkins County Canal.

“There can be no denying that when we passed the accelerated income tax rate reductions in 2023, we were setting ourselves up for a structural imbalance,” Raybould said.

Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln agreed, calling the budget shortfall a “self-inflicted wound” created by lawmakers cutting tax revenue in order to provide property tax relief. In doing so, he said, the Legislature created a false need to cut programming and possibly raise sales taxes, which disproportionately impact lower-income Nebraskans.

“Do you want to try to make up the hole in our budget on the backs of everyday working people … or do we potentially freeze the corporate tax cuts at 4.99% and recognize upwards of $50 million to $120 million dollars in the next year and the year following that?” Dungan said.

North Platte Sen. Mike Jacobson pushed back on that argument. He said the budget shortfall resulted from events beyond lawmakers’ control for the most part, including a $90.3 million reduction in the share of the state’s Medicaid costs that are federally funded.

“This hasn’t been reckless spending; this hasn’t been due to tax cuts,” Jacobson said. “This has been due to a slowdown in the economy and loss of federal support.”

An amendment offered by Omaha Sen. Dunixi Guereca to LB261 would provide $300,000 in each of the next two fiscal years from the Health Care Cash Fund to an entity “providing health care screening, sports competitions, educational opportunities and leadership training for people with developmental or intellectual disabilities.”

Guereca said the funds would ensure that Special Olympics impacts more communities in the western part of Nebraska. Twenty-nine other states provide tax dollars to Special Olympics, he said, and the amendment would not impact the sustainability of the Health Care Cash Fund.

Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner said the amendment was a “responsible” use of tobacco settlement funds and would allow Special Olympics to expand access to programs and services across the state.

Clements opposed the amendment, saying it was unclear how the entity used the $500,000 in one-time funds they received during the last budget cycle. As a nonprofit, he said, Special Olympics should reach out to donors rather than seeking additional state funding.

Ralston Sen. Merv Riepe said he would support the amendment if the state were “rolling in cash,” but that providing state funding to one specific nonprofit would set a bad precedent.

The Guereca amendment was adopted on a 29-7 vote.

Omaha Sen. Macheala Cavanaugh offered an amendment that she described as an alternative to the mainline budget bill. The proposal would replace the Appropriations Committee amendment and, among other provisions, would set aside $452 million currently directed to property tax relief for state aid to schools instead.

The amendment also would direct a percentage of the property tax credit to counties to help them defer jail and other costs. The result, she said, would “automatically” lower property taxes.

“[This amendment] is a balanced budget that looks at the resources available to us and how we can do the most good for the most Nebraskans while maintaining our obligations across the state,” Cavanaugh said.

Sen. Glen Meyer of Pender offered and later withdrew an amendment that would add his LB382 to the mainline budget bill. Those provisions would provide funding for area agencies on aging. Meyer withdrew the amendment on the understanding that his desired change to his proposal would be taken up separately after the budget debate.

Following eight hours of debate and a successful cloture motion from Arch, lawmakers advanced LB261 to select file on a 37-6 vote May 6.

LB264, also introduced by Arch at the request of the governor, would provide for fund transfers, change provisions governing the administration and use of funds and repeal previous expansions to aid and incentive programs.

A committee amendment, adopted 34-7, would make dozens of additional transfers from state agency cash funds and others to the state General Fund totaling $10.5 million in the current fiscal year and $149.8 million across the next two fiscal years.

Those transfers would include $27.7 million from the Water Recreation Enhancement Fund, $20.5 million from the Economic Development Cash Fund and $15 million from the Economic Recovery Contingency Fund.

The amendment also would transfer $132 million from the cash reserve to the state General Fund and add the provisions of LB451, sponsored by Prokop. Those provisions would transfer the first $1 million in the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund to the Capitol Restoration Cash Fund each year on Nov. 1, from 2026 to 2035.

Clements offered an amendment that would make nearly three dozen additional transfers from state agency cash funds to shore up general funds. The additional transfers were needed following the economic forecasting board projections, he said, and were made thoughtfully so as not to impact agency functions.

“This has been probably the most difficult [budget process] that I’ve had to lead,” Clements said. “And we’ve been trying to keep agency services from being slashed and that’s why there were a lot of cash fund transfers.”

Omaha Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh disagreed with his assessment. Calling the transfers “reckless and irresponsible,” she said many of them could have been avoided if lawmakers had not chosen to make funding property tax relief their overriding priority in previous legislative sessions.

“Everything on here is to fund property taxes,” she said.

Lincoln Sen. Danielle Conrad also questioned the transfers and the impact of the overall proposal on the state’s working families.

“The point of a budget is not just to put together a number,” she said. “The point is putting together a budget to do the most good.”

An amendment to LB264 offered by Lincoln Sen. Jane Raybould would transfer $500 million from the Perkins County Canal Project Fund to the General Fund.

Raybould said the Perkins County Canal project could take up to 20 years to complete and that funds set aside for it would be a better way to balance the state budget than taking more than $100 million from the state’s cash reserve.

Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil opposed Raybould’s amendment. He said the state earmarked funds for the canal when it had a one-time influx of federal pandemic funds and needs to protect that investment in the state’s future water needs.

“We made smart decisions when we had the revenue a couple of years ago … and we need to stick to those decisions that we made,” Murman said.

Senators adopted a technical amendment offered by Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward on a 34-0 vote, which she said would fix an issue with special education reimbursement recently discovered by the state auditor.

Syracuse Sen. Bob Hallstrom offered and later withdrew an amendment that would have eliminated the transfer of $4 million each from the Rural Workforce Housing Fund and the Middle Income Workforce Housing Fund to the General Fund. Hallstrom said he would refile the proposal on the next round of debate.

Senators advanced LB264 on a 34-6 vote May 7 after eight hours of debate and a successful cloture motion offered by Arch.

Lawmakers also advanced LB534, sponsored by&nbsp;<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/bui" target="_blank">Business and Labor Committee</a>&nbsp;chairperson Sen. Kathleen Kauth of Omaha, which would provide for payment of claims against the state. If a person sues the state of Nebraska, he or she files a claim with the State Claims Board. Approved claims exceeding $50,000 must be reviewed by the Legislature.

As introduced, LB534 includes:• three indemnification claims totaling $432,500;• two settlements totaling $482,700 reached by the state attorney general to be paid out of the state’s General Fund;• three Workers’ Compensation Court claims totaling $665,000 to be paid out of the Workers’ Compensation Revolving Fund; and• six tort claims totaling $1.396 million out of the State Insurance Fund.

The bill also includes approximately $1.767 million in agency write-offs approved by the State Claims Board.

Kauth said the measure reflects “good faith” settlements made by the State Claims Board and the attorney general.

“These are debts the state owes the victims of accidents, officers who died in the line of duty, the cost of publishing the ballot initiatives and the victims of brutal murders,” she said.

A committee amendment, adopted 36-0, would add the following additional claims:• a $49,826 additional tort claim;• a $395,000 indemnification claim;• six additional workers’ compensation claims totaling $595,000; and• two line of duty claims and a miscellaneous claim totaling $712,991.

Following adoption of the committee amendment, senators voted 37-0 to advance LB534 to select file May 8.

Lawmakers also gave first-round approval May 7 to three additional components of the budget package introduced by Arch:• LB260, which would make adjustments to appropriations in the current fiscal year, on a 41-0 vote;• LB262, which would appropriate funds for salaries of members of the Legislature, on a 40-1 vote; and• LB263, which would appropriate funds for salaries of constitutional officers, on a 38-0 vote.

By Unicamiral Update Staff<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1746789018855.jpeg" alt="Sen. Robert Clements discussing budget with group: photo by Bess Ghormley" />
 <figcaption>Sen. Robert Clements discussing budget with group: photo by Bess Ghormley</figcaption>
 </figure>Lincoln, Ne - Lawmakers gave first-round approval this week to six components of the state’s roughly $10.8 billion budget package. The state budget is structured on a two-year basis, with the budget enacted during legislative sessions held in odd-numbered years.<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/dist02" target="_blank">Sen. Robert Clements</a>, chairperson of the&nbsp;<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/app" target="_blank">Appropriations Committee</a>, said members were facing a $396 million shortfall after a late-April meeting of the Nebraska Economic Forecasting Advisory Board lowered revenue forecasts for the current and upcoming two fiscal years.“The state’s been hit with $630 million of reductions of revenues — $350 million more of Medicaid expense [and] $280 million in forecast revenues — and we have absorbed those without making drastic cuts,” Clements said.The passage of two bills by the Legislature earlier this session brought that number down to $262 million, he said, and the committee has identified additional cuts and transfers that will be offered as amendments on the next round of debate in order to balance the state’s budget.Clements said the end result would be an approximately $3 million surplus and a $690 million balance in the Cash Reserve, also known as the state’s “rainy day fund.” The Cash Reserve balance would be equal to roughly 12.4% of state expenses, which Clements said is within an “acceptable range.”Sen. Jason Prokop of Lincoln, a member of the committee, supported the budget package, which he said reflected “difficult tradeoffs” that had to be made given the state’s changed economic landscape after the forecasting board lowered revenue projections.“What this budget does is respond to the moment we’re in and balance our checkbooks while keeping a modest reserve, and [it] does all of this in the context of declining revenues and high pressure to deliver on property tax relief,” Prokop said. “This budget reflects the reality of governing and the hard work that comes with making choices.”Mainline budget<a href="http://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/search_by_number.php?DocumentNumber=LB261&amp;Legislature=109th" target="_blank">LB261</a>, introduced by Speaker John Arch of La Vista on behalf of Gov. Jim Pillen, is the mainline budget bill. An Appropriations Committee amendment, adopted 38-5, replaces the bill and contains funding recommendations for state operations and aid programs.Clements said the measure would require additional amendment on the second round of debate in order to result in a balanced budget. But, he said, the bill would do so without making across-the-board cuts to state agencies.Among other provisions, the committee amendment would maintain funding for biomedical research at $15 million annually in each of the next two fiscal years. It also would increase funding to the University of Nebraska by roughly $13 million — less of an increase than the committee originally settled on.Kearney Sen. Stan Clouse supported LB261 and the committee amendment, acknowledging the difficult task of balancing the budget in the face of shortfalls. He noted the importance of maintaining funding for biomedical research and the university in general.“The University of Nebraska is one of the largest economic engines that we have in the state,” Clouse said.Also included in the committee amendment are provisions of the following nine bills:• LB55, sponsored by Adams Sen. Myron Dorn, which would appropriate $1.5 million from the Hospital Quality Assurance and Access Assessment Fund to the state Department of Health and Human Services for reimbursement to certain mental health providers;• LB57, also introduced by Dorn, which would appropriate $1.4 million in cash funds from the Medicaid Managed Care Excess Profit Fund to increase the rural single occupancy daily rate to match the urban single occupancy daily rate of $73.91;• LB173, sponsored by Prokop, which would appropriate $5 million in general funds for each of the next two fiscal years to aid community colleges for dual enrollment purposes;• LB452, also introduced by Prokop, which would appropriate $500,000 in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funds in each of the next two fiscal years for court-appointed special advocate aid;• LB505, sponsored by Prokop, which would appropriate $10 million in TANF funds in FY2025-26 for grants to nonprofits to provide food assistance;• LB580, introduced by Omaha Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh, which would reappropriate funds in the Lead Service Line Cash Fund for grants to metropolitan utilities districts for lead service line replacements;• LB581, also sponsored by Cavanaugh, which would appropriate $500,000 in FY2025-26 from the Health Care Cash Fund for grants to a nonprofit entity for construction costs related to a new facility;• LB621, introduced by Sen. Robert Dover of Norfolk, which would appropriate $500,000 in FY2026-27 from the Health Care Cash Fund to DHHS for expanded health care access to the Nebraska Medicine Midtown Health Center; and• LB627, also sponsored by Dover, which would appropriate $250,000 in general funds in FY2025-26 for a study related to a residential facility for nursing and allied health professionals and state legislative intent to appropriate $750,000 each year for 20 years to the University of Nebraska starting in FY2027-28.Several lawmakers questioned the need to make cuts or hold agency funding flat in order to close the state’s budget gap as outlined in the committee amendment.Lincoln Sen. Jane Raybould suggested that a different approach would be to pause the staggered implementation of corporate and individual income tax cuts approved in 2023, or to delay fund transfers related to large infrastructure projects such as the proposed Perkins County Canal.“There can be no denying that when we passed the accelerated income tax rate reductions in 2023, we were setting ourselves up for a structural imbalance,” Raybould said.Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln agreed, calling the budget shortfall a “self-inflicted wound” created by lawmakers cutting tax revenue in order to provide property tax relief. In doing so, he said, the Legislature created a false need to cut programming and possibly raise sales taxes, which disproportionately impact lower-income Nebraskans.“Do you want to try to make up the hole in our budget on the backs of everyday working people … or do we potentially freeze the corporate tax cuts at 4.99% and recognize upwards of $50 million to $120 million dollars in the next year and the year following that?” Dungan said.North Platte Sen. Mike Jacobson pushed back on that argument. He said the budget shortfall resulted from events beyond lawmakers’ control for the most part, including a $90.3 million reduction in the share of the state’s Medicaid costs that are federally funded.“This hasn’t been reckless spending; this hasn’t been due to tax cuts,” Jacobson said. “This has been due to a slowdown in the economy and loss of federal support.”AmendmentsAn amendment offered by Omaha Sen. Dunixi Guereca to LB261 would provide $300,000 in each of the next two fiscal years from the Health Care Cash Fund to an entity “providing health care screening, sports competitions, educational opportunities and leadership training for people with developmental or intellectual disabilities.”Guereca said the funds would ensure that Special Olympics impacts more communities in the western part of Nebraska. Twenty-nine other states provide tax dollars to Special Olympics, he said, and the amendment would not impact the sustainability of the Health Care Cash Fund.Sen. Teresa Ibach of Sumner said the amendment was a “responsible” use of tobacco settlement funds and would allow Special Olympics to expand access to programs and services across the state.Clements opposed the amendment, saying it was unclear how the entity used the $500,000 in one-time funds they received during the last budget cycle. As a nonprofit, he said, Special Olympics should reach out to donors rather than seeking additional state funding.Ralston Sen. Merv Riepe said he would support the amendment if the state were “rolling in cash,” but that providing state funding to one specific nonprofit would set a bad precedent.The Guereca amendment was adopted on a 29-7 vote.Omaha Sen. Macheala Cavanaugh offered an amendment that she described as an alternative to the mainline budget bill. The proposal would replace the Appropriations Committee amendment and, among other provisions, would set aside $452 million currently directed to property tax relief for state aid to schools instead.The amendment also would direct a percentage of the property tax credit to counties to help them defer jail and other costs. The result, she said, would “automatically” lower property taxes.“[This amendment] is a balanced budget that looks at the resources available to us and how we can do the most good for the most Nebraskans while maintaining our obligations across the state,” Cavanaugh said.The amendment failed on a vote of 4-32.Sen. Glen Meyer of Pender offered and later withdrew an amendment that would add his LB382 to the mainline budget bill. Those provisions would provide funding for area agencies on aging. Meyer withdrew the amendment on the understanding that his desired change to his proposal would be taken up separately after the budget debate.Following eight hours of debate and a successful cloture motion from Arch, lawmakers advanced LB261 to select file on a 37-6 vote May 6.Fund transfersLB264, also introduced by Arch at the request of the governor, would provide for fund transfers, change provisions governing the administration and use of funds and repeal previous expansions to aid and incentive programs.A committee amendment, adopted 34-7, would make dozens of additional transfers from state agency cash funds and others to the state General Fund totaling $10.5 million in the current fiscal year and $149.8 million across the next two fiscal years.Those transfers would include $27.7 million from the Water Recreation Enhancement Fund, $20.5 million from the Economic Development Cash Fund and $15 million from the Economic Recovery Contingency Fund.The amendment also would transfer $132 million from the cash reserve to the state General Fund and add the provisions of LB451, sponsored by Prokop. Those provisions would transfer the first $1 million in the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund to the Capitol Restoration Cash Fund each year on Nov. 1, from 2026 to 2035.Clements offered an amendment that would make nearly three dozen additional transfers from state agency cash funds to shore up general funds. The additional transfers were needed following the economic forecasting board projections, he said, and were made thoughtfully so as not to impact agency functions.“This has been probably the most difficult [budget process] that I’ve had to lead,” Clements said. “And we’ve been trying to keep agency services from being slashed and that’s why there were a lot of cash fund transfers.”Omaha Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh disagreed with his assessment. Calling the transfers “reckless and irresponsible,” she said many of them could have been avoided if lawmakers had not chosen to make funding property tax relief their overriding priority in previous legislative sessions.“Everything on here is to fund property taxes,” she said.Lincoln Sen. Danielle Conrad also questioned the transfers and the impact of the overall proposal on the state’s working families.“The point of a budget is not just to put together a number,” she said. “The point is putting together a budget to do the most good.”Other amendmentsAn amendment to LB264 offered by Lincoln Sen. Jane Raybould would transfer $500 million from the Perkins County Canal Project Fund to the General Fund.Raybould said the Perkins County Canal project could take up to 20 years to complete and that funds set aside for it would be a better way to balance the state budget than taking more than $100 million from the state’s cash reserve.Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil opposed Raybould’s amendment. He said the state earmarked funds for the canal when it had a one-time influx of federal pandemic funds and needs to protect that investment in the state’s future water needs.“We made smart decisions when we had the revenue a couple of years ago … and we need to stick to those decisions that we made,” Murman said.The Raybould amendment failed 5-24.Senators adopted a technical amendment offered by Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward on a 34-0 vote, which she said would fix an issue with special education reimbursement recently discovered by the state auditor.Syracuse Sen. Bob Hallstrom offered and later withdrew an amendment that would have eliminated the transfer of $4 million each from the Rural Workforce Housing Fund and the Middle Income Workforce Housing Fund to the General Fund. Hallstrom said he would refile the proposal on the next round of debate.Senators advanced LB264 on a 34-6 vote May 7 after eight hours of debate and a successful cloture motion offered by Arch.Additional measuresLawmakers also advanced LB534, sponsored by&nbsp;<a href="http://news.legislature.ne.gov/bui" target="_blank">Business and Labor Committee</a>&nbsp;chairperson Sen. Kathleen Kauth of Omaha, which would provide for payment of claims against the state. If a person sues the state of Nebraska, he or she files a claim with the State Claims Board. Approved claims exceeding $50,000 must be reviewed by the Legislature.As introduced, LB534 includes:• three indemnification claims totaling $432,500;• two settlements totaling $482,700 reached by the state attorney general to be paid out of the state’s General Fund;• three Workers’ Compensation Court claims totaling $665,000 to be paid out of the Workers’ Compensation Revolving Fund; and• six tort claims totaling $1.396 million out of the State Insurance Fund.The bill also includes approximately $1.767 million in agency write-offs approved by the State Claims Board.Kauth said the measure reflects “good faith” settlements made by the State Claims Board and the attorney general.“These are debts the state owes the victims of accidents, officers who died in the line of duty, the cost of publishing the ballot initiatives and the victims of brutal murders,” she said.A committee amendment, adopted 36-0, would add the following additional claims:• a $49,826 additional tort claim;• a $395,000 indemnification claim;• six additional workers’ compensation claims totaling $595,000; and• two line of duty claims and a miscellaneous claim totaling $712,991.Following adoption of the committee amendment, senators voted 37-0 to advance LB534 to select file May 8.Lawmakers also gave first-round approval May 7 to three additional components of the budget package introduced by Arch:• LB260, which would make adjustments to appropriations in the current fiscal year, on a 41-0 vote;• LB262, which would appropriate funds for salaries of members of the Legislature, on a 40-1 vote; and• LB263, which would appropriate funds for salaries of constitutional officers, on a 38-0 vote.

State budget package clears first round, further adjustments ahead

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/author/ariana-figueroa/">Ariana Figueroa</a>

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration Thursday made an emergency request to the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the deportation of more than half a million immigrants granted humanitarian protections under the Biden administration.

A federal judge in Massachusetts in April blocked Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from ending the humanitarian parole program for 532,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. An appeals court rejected the request from the Trump administration to stay the lower court’s order.

<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A1079/358354/20250508121118618_Kristi_Noem_v_Svitlana_Doe_et_al_%20application_stay.pdf" target="_blank">In the filing</a>&nbsp;to the high court, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argues that the Immigration Nationality Act bars judicial review of discretionary decisions, such as humanitarian parole.

Sauer adds that Noem terminated the program because it does not align with the interests of the Trump administration.

“The district court’s order stymies the government’s ability to terminate parole grants that the Secretary has determined undermine U.S. interests, and thus it inhibits the government’s pursuit of its foreign policy goals,” according to the brief.

Presidents for decades have used their parole authority to allow for migrants to obtain protected status.

President Joe Biden&nbsp;<a href="https://georgiarecorder.com/briefs/biden-administration-to-rapidly-expel-more-migrants-at-the-border-add-legal-pathways/" target="_blank">created the program in 2023</a>&nbsp;that&nbsp;temporarily grants work permits and allows nationals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to remain in the country if they are sponsored by someone in the United States.

Thursday’s emergency request is one of several immigration related challenges the Trump administration is asking the high court to intervene in after district courts and appeals courts have ruled against the administration.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-hear-case-trumps-birthright-citizenship-order" target="_blank">ending birthright citizenship</a>, the use of the 1798&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/supreme-court-permits-trump-use-wartime-law-deportations-now-and-limits" target="_blank">wartime Alien Enemies Act</a>, revoking&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-strip-legal-protections-venezuelans" target="_blank">Temporary Protected Status</a>&nbsp;for Venezuelans and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/supreme-court-says-trump-administration-must-facilitate-return-wrongly-deported-man" target="_blank">requirements to return</a>&nbsp;a wrongly deported Maryland man from El Salvador.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/12/1672235865420.png" alt="Supreme Court Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States" />
 <figcaption>Supreme Court Credit: Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States</figcaption>
 </figure>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/author/ariana-figueroa/">Ariana Figueroa</a>WASHINGTON — The Trump administration Thursday made an emergency request to the U.S. Supreme Court to allow the deportation of more than half a million immigrants granted humanitarian protections under the Biden administration.A federal judge in Massachusetts in April blocked Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from ending the humanitarian parole program for 532,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela. An appeals court rejected the request from the Trump administration to stay the lower court’s order.<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A1079/358354/20250508121118618_Kristi_Noem_v_Svitlana_Doe_et_al_%20application_stay.pdf" target="_blank">In the filing</a>&nbsp;to the high court, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argues that the Immigration Nationality Act bars judicial review of discretionary decisions, such as humanitarian parole.Sauer adds that Noem terminated the program because it does not align with the interests of the Trump administration.“The district court’s order stymies the government’s ability to terminate parole grants that the Secretary has determined undermine U.S. interests, and thus it inhibits the government’s pursuit of its foreign policy goals,” according to the brief.Presidents for decades have used their parole authority to allow for migrants to obtain protected status.President Joe Biden&nbsp;<a href="https://georgiarecorder.com/briefs/biden-administration-to-rapidly-expel-more-migrants-at-the-border-add-legal-pathways/" target="_blank">created the program in 2023</a>&nbsp;that&nbsp;temporarily grants work permits and allows nationals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to remain in the country if they are sponsored by someone in the United States.Thursday’s emergency request is one of several immigration related challenges the Trump administration is asking the high court to intervene in after district courts and appeals courts have ruled against the administration.The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-hear-case-trumps-birthright-citizenship-order" target="_blank">ending birthright citizenship</a>, the use of the 1798&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/supreme-court-permits-trump-use-wartime-law-deportations-now-and-limits" target="_blank">wartime Alien Enemies Act</a>, revoking&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-strip-legal-protections-venezuelans" target="_blank">Temporary Protected Status</a>&nbsp;for Venezuelans and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/supreme-court-says-trump-administration-must-facilitate-return-wrongly-deported-man" target="_blank">requirements to return</a>&nbsp;a wrongly deported Maryland man from El Salvador.

Trump asks U.S. Supreme Court to end humanitarian protections for migrants from 4 nations

The new pope is Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost. He was born in Chicago. His papal name is Pope Leo XIV. He is the first American pope.

The new pope is Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost. He was born in Chicago. His papal name is Pope Leo XIV. He is the first American pope.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">WATCH: Complete remarks from Pope Leo XIV. <a href="https://t.co/aOzEdyb0G0">pic.twitter.com/aOzEdyb0G0</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1920538411326169492?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 8, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div><div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">Pope Leo XIV <a href="https://t.co/UejjnPjzeQ">pic.twitter.com/UejjnPjzeQ</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1920531668311359753?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 8, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

🎥Pope Leo XIV, first American elected Pope

LINCOLN, Neb. – Despite a $2 billion decline from 2022, Nebraska’s agricultural exports totaled $7.9 billion in 2023, marking the third-highest export year on record. That’s according to a Nebraska Farm Bureau’s annual&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nefb.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/NEAgriculture-InternationalTrade_2023_Proof2.pdf">Agriculture and International Trade Report.</a>

The report, prepared by economist Jay Rempe of Rolling Prairie Economics, provides a comprehensive look at how global markets are driving and challenging the economic future of&nbsp;Nebraska’s farm and ranch families. According to the report, trade remains a foundational pillar of&nbsp;Nebraska’s agriculture-driven economy.

“Our state ranks fifth in the nation for agricultural exports, and we lead the country in beef exports. Yet, the story behind the numbers is about the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;farm families whose livelihoods depend on access to global markets,” said Mark McHargue, president of&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau. “When trade thrives,&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;thrives. That’s why it’s critical that we push for new trade agreements and work to eliminate barriers that unfairly limit our access to overseas markets.”

The report, released annually since 2017, examines the most recent data provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), sourced from the year 2023 and includes county-level estimates showing the importance of trade at the grassroots level. Cuming and Platte Counties led the state in total agricultural export value, each exceeding $200 million, while Phelps County topped the list for per-farm export value at an estimated $474,832. Counties like Kearney, Fillmore, and Boone also ranked among the highest per-farm export values, a reflection of the size, productivity, and diversity of their farming operations.

“Trade translates directly to income for farm and ranch families,” said Rempe. “Whether it’s corn from Dawson County, soybeans from York County, or beef from the Sandhills, the ability to sell these products overseas can make the difference between a good year and a tough one for many&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;producers.”

According to the report, soybeans, corn, and beef remained solidly entrenched as&nbsp;Nebraska’s top agricultural exports, accounting for nearly two-thirds of total exports.&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;ranked first in the nation for beef exports at $1.59 billion. The state ranked third in corn exports and seventh in soybeans. Exports of pork and soybean meal were among the few that increased in value, rising 3% and 12%, respectively.

While commodity prices and increased global competition from countries like Brazil contributed to export declines,&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;producers remain competitive and resilient. However, trade uncertainty and tariffs continue to pose significant challenges.

“Now is the time for policymakers to take action,” said McHargue. “We must actively seek new trade agreements, explore untapped markets, and remove regulatory and other trade obstacles that unfairly impact&nbsp;Nebraska’s agricultural sector. Expanding trade is not just smart economics, it’s critical for our state’s future.”

LINCOLN, Neb. – Despite a $2 billion decline from 2022, Nebraska’s agricultural exports totaled $7.9 billion in 2023, marking the third-highest export year on record. That’s according to a Nebraska Farm Bureau’s annual&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nefb.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/NEAgriculture-InternationalTrade_2023_Proof2.pdf">Agriculture and International Trade Report.</a>The report, prepared by economist Jay Rempe of Rolling Prairie Economics, provides a comprehensive look at how global markets are driving and challenging the economic future of&nbsp;Nebraska’s farm and ranch families. According to the report, trade remains a foundational pillar of&nbsp;Nebraska’s agriculture-driven economy.“Our state ranks fifth in the nation for agricultural exports, and we lead the country in beef exports. Yet, the story behind the numbers is about the&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;farm families whose livelihoods depend on access to global markets,” said Mark McHargue, president of&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;Farm Bureau. “When trade thrives,&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;thrives. That’s why it’s critical that we push for new trade agreements and work to eliminate barriers that unfairly limit our access to overseas markets.”The report, released annually since 2017, examines the most recent data provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), sourced from the year 2023 and includes county-level estimates showing the importance of trade at the grassroots level. Cuming and Platte Counties led the state in total agricultural export value, each exceeding $200 million, while Phelps County topped the list for per-farm export value at an estimated $474,832. Counties like Kearney, Fillmore, and Boone also ranked among the highest per-farm export values, a reflection of the size, productivity, and diversity of their farming operations.“Trade translates directly to income for farm and ranch families,” said Rempe. “Whether it’s corn from Dawson County, soybeans from York County, or beef from the Sandhills, the ability to sell these products overseas can make the difference between a good year and a tough one for many&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;producers.”According to the report, soybeans, corn, and beef remained solidly entrenched as&nbsp;Nebraska’s top agricultural exports, accounting for nearly two-thirds of total exports.&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;ranked first in the nation for beef exports at $1.59 billion. The state ranked third in corn exports and seventh in soybeans. Exports of pork and soybean meal were among the few that increased in value, rising 3% and 12%, respectively.While commodity prices and increased global competition from countries like Brazil contributed to export declines,&nbsp;Nebraska&nbsp;producers remain competitive and resilient. However, trade uncertainty and tariffs continue to pose significant challenges.“Now is the time for policymakers to take action,” said McHargue. “We must actively seek new trade agreements, explore untapped markets, and remove regulatory and other trade obstacles that unfairly impact&nbsp;Nebraska’s agricultural sector. Expanding trade is not just smart economics, it’s critical for our state’s future.”

Nebraska Farm Bureau Report Reveals $7.9 Billion Impact of Agricultural Trade on State’s Economy

Columbus, Neb. –&nbsp;Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) wants to remind large equipment and drone operators to look up and look out for powerlines.

When a large piece of equipment with tall or large attachments gets too close or touches a power line, electricity can arc from the line to the equipment. This can leave the equipment damaged and result in the operator experiencing serious or even fatal injuries.

“Spring planting season is a busy time for large equipment use, and we continue to emphasize the importance of being aware of power lines when operating ag equipment,” says NPPD Operations Program Manager Trevor Roth. “We also want to remind non-ag workers to look up and look out for power lines. Operators using large excavation equipment or any equipment with tall hoists or booms should ensure they have the proper clearance from power lines.”

If a vehicle or piece of equipment is in contact with a power line, call 911 or your local power provider and remain inside the vehicle until help can arrive and de-energize the line. When a power line touches a vehicle, it can electrify the vehicle and ground in the surrounding area. If a fire forces you to exit the vehicle, jump away, land on two feet, and shuffle as far away from the area as possible.

“In addition to large equipment, we want to encourage drone operators to be attentive to power lines. Drones are being implemented in many different industries, including for spraying crops. If operators aren’t aware of power lines, they could damage both their equipment and the line,” added Roth.

NPPD encourages farmers to review the following safety precautions before entering the fields to begin harvest operations. For more safety information, visit&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nppd.com/outages-safety/electrical-safety">NPPD.com</a>.

<h2></h2>Columbus, Neb. –&nbsp;Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) wants to remind large equipment and drone operators to look up and look out for powerlines.When a large piece of equipment with tall or large attachments gets too close or touches a power line, electricity can arc from the line to the equipment. This can leave the equipment damaged and result in the operator experiencing serious or even fatal injuries.“Spring planting season is a busy time for large equipment use, and we continue to emphasize the importance of being aware of power lines when operating ag equipment,” says NPPD Operations Program Manager Trevor Roth. “We also want to remind non-ag workers to look up and look out for power lines. Operators using large excavation equipment or any equipment with tall hoists or booms should ensure they have the proper clearance from power lines.”If a vehicle or piece of equipment is in contact with a power line, call 911 or your local power provider and remain inside the vehicle until help can arrive and de-energize the line. When a power line touches a vehicle, it can electrify the vehicle and ground in the surrounding area. If a fire forces you to exit the vehicle, jump away, land on two feet, and shuffle as far away from the area as possible.“In addition to large equipment, we want to encourage drone operators to be attentive to power lines. Drones are being implemented in many different industries, including for spraying crops. If operators aren’t aware of power lines, they could damage both their equipment and the line,” added Roth.NPPD encourages farmers to review the following safety precautions before entering the fields to begin harvest operations. For more safety information, visit&nbsp;<a href="https://www.nppd.com/outages-safety/electrical-safety">NPPD.com</a>.<ul>
 <li>Review all work activities and practices around powerlines daily and remind all workers to take precautions.</li><li>Know the location of power lines, and when setting up the equipment, be at least 20 feet away from them. Contact your local public power provider if this distance cannot be achieved.</li><li>Use caution when raising booms, arms, augers or the bed of a grain truck or wagon. It can be difficult to estimate distance, and sometimes a powerline is closer than it looks. For large equipment, use a spotter to ensure the equipment stays a safe distance from the line.</li><li>Always adjust portable augers or elevators to their lowest possible level – under 14 feet – before transporting them. Variables like wind, uneven ground or shifting weight can cause unexpected results.</li>
 </ul>

Look up, look out for power lines when operating equipment

<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">.<a href="https://twitter.com/Sec_Noem?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Sec_Noem</a>: &quot;Tomorrow is the day that Real ID will finally be enforced. It&#39;s been a law that&#39;s been in place for over 20 years. 81% of the travelers that travel by airline in the United States today are already compliant.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/n4A6ZVorkw">pic.twitter.com/n4A6ZVorkw</a>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1919765080175989075?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 6, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>

🎥DHS explains what will happen Wednesday to travelers without a REAL ID 

Washington, D.C. - Today,&nbsp;during a speech on the Senate floor, U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) called on her colleagues to pass her&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fischer.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2025/1/fischer-introduces-legislation-to-strengthen-u-s-telecommunications-against-foreign-adversaries">Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency (FACT) Act</a>&nbsp;–&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fischer.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news?ID=5AF350A6-09CF-4F79-9239-D4550205AE98">approved</a>&nbsp;by the Senate Commerce Committee last week – which will require the&nbsp;Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to&nbsp;publicly identify&nbsp;entities&nbsp;that hold&nbsp;FCC licenses, authorizations, or other grants of authority that are owned, wholly or partially, by foreign adversarial governments.

In her remarks, Fischer highlights the threats the United States faces from companies with strong ties to foreign adversaries. She specifically calls out Huawei, a major global supplier of cellphone network equipment, citing its troubling and potentially dangerous access to critical communications infrastructure.

Washington, D.C. - Today,&nbsp;during a speech on the Senate floor, U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) called on her colleagues to pass her&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fischer.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2025/1/fischer-introduces-legislation-to-strengthen-u-s-telecommunications-against-foreign-adversaries">Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency (FACT) Act</a>&nbsp;–&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fischer.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news?ID=5AF350A6-09CF-4F79-9239-D4550205AE98">approved</a>&nbsp;by the Senate Commerce Committee last week – which will require the&nbsp;Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to&nbsp;publicly identify&nbsp;entities&nbsp;that hold&nbsp;FCC licenses, authorizations, or other grants of authority that are owned, wholly or partially, by foreign adversarial governments.<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7laA7gD9c_Y?si=C9239dtuKwFn1qh7" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>In her remarks, Fischer highlights the threats the United States faces from companies with strong ties to foreign adversaries. She specifically calls out Huawei, a major global supplier of cellphone network equipment, citing its troubling and potentially dangerous access to critical communications infrastructure.

Fischer on Senate Floor: Congress Must Pass the Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a lawsuit in 2023 along with attorneys general from Kansas and Idaho

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">Jennifer Shutt</a>&nbsp;

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice wrote in a legal filing released Monday that three GOP-led states attempting to overturn federal prescribing guidelines for medication abortion have sought to keep a case going in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The filing is significant since it appears to indicate the Trump administration will defend the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s decision nine years ago to broaden access to mifepristone. The Biden administration also sought to keep the newer prescribing guidelines intact.

Idaho, Kansas and Missouri want a federal judge to let them intervene in a case that’s already been to the U.S. Supreme Court, so they can argue the FDA erred when it updated prescribing guidelines for mifepristone in 2016.

The goal is to get those changes thrown out so use of mifepristone, one of two pharmaceuticals used in medication abortion, reverts to what was in place between 2000 and 2016.

That would cap medication abortion at seven weeks gestation instead of the current 10 weeks and patients seeking medication abortions would need to attend three, in-person doctor appointments. Medication abortion would no longer be available via telehealth and it could no longer be legally mailed to patients.

The Trump administration wrote in a&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.370067/gov.uscourts.txnd.370067.247.0_1.pdf" target="_blank">15-page brief</a>&nbsp;filed with the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Texas that the three states “cannot keep alive a lawsuit in which the original plaintiffs were held to lack standing, those plaintiffs have now voluntarily dismissed their claims, and the States’ own claims have no connection to this District.”

“The States are free to pursue their claims in a District where venue is proper … but the States’ claims before this Court must be dismissed or transferred pursuant to the venue statute’s mandatory command,” the brief adds.

The Department of Justice also wrote that at “a minimum, the States’ challenge to FDA’s 2016 actions is time-barred because the States sought to intervene more than six years after FDA finalized those actions.”

The original case challenging the federal government’s 2000 approval and current prescribing guidelines for medication abortion began in November 2022 when anti-abortion groups filed their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Texas.

That case worked its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-rejects-attempt-limit-access-abortion-pill-6" target="_blank">ruled in June 2024</a>&nbsp;that the anti-abortion organizations lacked standing to bring the case.

But Idaho, Kansas and Missouri state officials sought to intervene in the case before it reached the high court and have tried to keep the challenge to the 2016 prescribing guidelines moving forward.

The Department of Justice wrote in its brief that there were several reasons the case shouldn’t continue in the Northern District of Texas.

Among those is that the three states “fail to identify any actual or imminent controversy over whether any of their laws are preempted” and that they lack Article III standing since “they failed to exhaust their claims; and their challenge to FDA’s 2016 actions is outside the six-year statute of limitations.”

The case is assigned to Judge Matthew Joseph Kacsmaryk, who&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-appeals-judges-ruling-ordering-abortion-pill-us-market" target="_blank">overturned the FDA’s original 2000 approval of mifepristone</a>&nbsp;in April 2023 in the original lawsuit.

That ruling never took effect as the original lawsuit worked its way through the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and up to the Supreme Court.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/11/1732796525522.png" alt="- Andrew Bailey is hoping to win his first full term as Missouri’s attorney general after being appointed to the position in November 2022&nbsp;by Gov. Mike Parson (Photo provided by Andrew Bailey’s campaign)." />
 <figcaption>- Andrew Bailey is hoping to win his first full term as Missouri’s attorney general after being appointed to the position in November 2022&nbsp;by Gov. Mike Parson (Photo provided by Andrew Bailey’s campaign).</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a lawsuit in 2023 along with attorneys general from Kansas and Idaho</h2>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">Jennifer Shutt</a>&nbsp;WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice wrote in a legal filing released Monday that three GOP-led states attempting to overturn federal prescribing guidelines for medication abortion have sought to keep a case going in the wrong place at the wrong time.The filing is significant since it appears to indicate the Trump administration will defend the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s decision nine years ago to broaden access to mifepristone. The Biden administration also sought to keep the newer prescribing guidelines intact.Idaho, Kansas and Missouri want a federal judge to let them intervene in a case that’s already been to the U.S. Supreme Court, so they can argue the FDA erred when it updated prescribing guidelines for mifepristone in 2016.The goal is to get those changes thrown out so use of mifepristone, one of two pharmaceuticals used in medication abortion, reverts to what was in place between 2000 and 2016.That would cap medication abortion at seven weeks gestation instead of the current 10 weeks and patients seeking medication abortions would need to attend three, in-person doctor appointments. Medication abortion would no longer be available via telehealth and it could no longer be legally mailed to patients.The Trump administration wrote in a&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.370067/gov.uscourts.txnd.370067.247.0_1.pdf" target="_blank">15-page brief</a>&nbsp;filed with the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Texas that the three states “cannot keep alive a lawsuit in which the original plaintiffs were held to lack standing, those plaintiffs have now voluntarily dismissed their claims, and the States’ own claims have no connection to this District.”“The States are free to pursue their claims in a District where venue is proper … but the States’ claims before this Court must be dismissed or transferred pursuant to the venue statute’s mandatory command,” the brief adds.The Department of Justice also wrote that at “a minimum, the States’ challenge to FDA’s 2016 actions is time-barred because the States sought to intervene more than six years after FDA finalized those actions.”<h2>Original suit began in 2022</h2>The original case challenging the federal government’s 2000 approval and current prescribing guidelines for medication abortion began in November 2022 when anti-abortion groups filed their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Texas.That case worked its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-supreme-court-rejects-attempt-limit-access-abortion-pill-6" target="_blank">ruled in June 2024</a>&nbsp;that the anti-abortion organizations lacked standing to bring the case.But Idaho, Kansas and Missouri state officials sought to intervene in the case before it reached the high court and have tried to keep the challenge to the 2016 prescribing guidelines moving forward.The Department of Justice wrote in its brief that there were several reasons the case shouldn’t continue in the Northern District of Texas.Among those is that the three states “fail to identify any actual or imminent controversy over whether any of their laws are preempted” and that they lack Article III standing since “they failed to exhaust their claims; and their challenge to FDA’s 2016 actions is outside the six-year statute of limitations.”The case is assigned to Judge Matthew Joseph Kacsmaryk, who&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-appeals-judges-ruling-ordering-abortion-pill-us-market" target="_blank">overturned the FDA’s original 2000 approval of mifepristone</a>&nbsp;in April 2023 in the original lawsuit.That ruling never took effect as the original lawsuit worked its way through the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and up to the Supreme Court.&nbsp;

Trump admin. asks to dismiss Missouri AG’s lawsuit targeting abortion pill

By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ariana-figueroa/">Ariana Figueroa</a>&nbsp;

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced Monday that the agency will provide $1,000 in what it called “travel assistance” to people in the United States without permanent legal status if they self deport.

It’s the latest attempt by DHS to try to meet the Trump administration’s goal of removing 1 million migrants without permanent legal status from the country. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem touted the option as cost-effective.

“If you are here illegally, self-deportation is the best, safest and most cost-effective way to leave the United States to avoid arrest,” Noem said in a statement. “This is the safest option for our law enforcement, aliens and is a 70% savings for US taxpayers.”

It’s unclear from which part of the DHS budget the funding for the travel assistance is coming, as it would roughly cost $1 billion to reimburse up to $1,000 to meet the goal of removing 1 million people.

DHS did not respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.

President Donald Trump gave his support for the move Monday afternoon, according to White House pool reports.&nbsp;

“We’re going to get them a beautiful flight back to where they came from,” the president said.

Self-deportation would be facilitated by the CBP Home app, which was used by the Biden administration to allow asylum seekers to make appointments with U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The payment would apparently not be made in advance. DHS said that once those who use the app to self deport arrive in their home country, they will receive a travel stipend of $1,000.

According to DHS, the Trump administration has deported 152,000 people since taking office in January. The Biden administration last year deported 195,000 people from February to April, according to DHS data.

DHS said already one migrant has used the program to book a flight from Chicago to Honduras.

“Additional tickets have already been booked for this week and the following week,” the agency said in a statement.

The Trump administration has rolled out several programs to facilitate mass self-deportations, such as&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/dhs-will-require-migrants-without-legal-status-register-us-government" target="_blank">a registry to require</a>&nbsp;immigrants in the country without legal authorization to register with the federal government.

Immigrants who don’t register with the federal government could face steep fines and a potential prison sentence.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/3/1741624392845.png" alt="Homeland Security app" />
 <figcaption>Homeland Security app</figcaption>
 </figure>By:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/ariana-figueroa/">Ariana Figueroa</a>&nbsp;WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced Monday that the agency will provide $1,000 in what it called “travel assistance” to people in the United States without permanent legal status if they self deport.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">.<a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> on his place to pay illegals to self-deport: &quot;We&#39;re going to pay each one a certain amount of money and we&#39;re going to get them a beautiful flight back to where they came from... It&#39;s called self-deportation... You&#39;re talking about so many millions of people.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/3bkRYeNWO0">pic.twitter.com/3bkRYeNWO0</a>&mdash; Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1919453781932101990?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 5, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>It’s the latest attempt by DHS to try to meet the Trump administration’s goal of removing 1 million migrants without permanent legal status from the country. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem touted the option as cost-effective.“If you are here illegally, self-deportation is the best, safest and most cost-effective way to leave the United States to avoid arrest,” Noem said in a statement. “This is the safest option for our law enforcement, aliens and is a 70% savings for US taxpayers.”It’s unclear from which part of the DHS budget the funding for the travel assistance is coming, as it would roughly cost $1 billion to reimburse up to $1,000 to meet the goal of removing 1 million people.DHS did not respond to States Newsroom’s request for comment.President Donald Trump gave his support for the move Monday afternoon, according to White House pool reports.&nbsp;“We’re going to get them a beautiful flight back to where they came from,” the president said.Self-deportation would be facilitated by the CBP Home app, which was used by the Biden administration to allow asylum seekers to make appointments with U.S. Customs and Border Protection.The payment would apparently not be made in advance. DHS said that once those who use the app to self deport arrive in their home country, they will receive a travel stipend of $1,000.According to DHS, the Trump administration has deported 152,000 people since taking office in January. The Biden administration last year deported 195,000 people from February to April, according to DHS data.DHS said already one migrant has used the program to book a flight from Chicago to Honduras.“Additional tickets have already been booked for this week and the following week,” the agency said in a statement.The Trump administration has rolled out several programs to facilitate mass self-deportations, such as&nbsp;<a href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/dhs-will-require-migrants-without-legal-status-register-us-government" target="_blank">a registry to require</a>&nbsp;immigrants in the country without legal authorization to register with the federal government.Immigrants who don’t register with the federal government could face steep fines and a potential prison sentence.&nbsp;

DHS offers $1,000 to immigrants without legal status who self-deport

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">JENNIFER SHUTT</a>

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump released a budget request Friday that would dramatically slash some federal spending, the initial step in a monthslong process that will include heated debate on Capitol Hill as both political parties work toward a final government funding agreement.

The proposal, for the first time, details how exactly this administration wants lawmakers to restructure spending across the federal government — steep cuts to domestic appropriations, including the elimination of dozens of programs that carry a long history of bipartisan support, and a significant increase in defense funding.

Trump wants more than 60 programs to be scrapped, some with long histories of assistance to states, including Community Services Block Grants, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, the National Endowment for Democracy, the National Institute on Minority and Health Disparities within the National Institutes of Health, and the Sexual Risk Avoidance and Teen Pregnancy Prevention programs.

Congress will ultimately decide how much funding to provide to federal programs, and while Republicans hold majorities in both chambers, regular funding bills will need Democratic support to move through the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster.

White House budget director Russ Vought wrote in a letter that the request proposes shifting some funding from the federal government to states and local communities.

“Just as the Federal Government has intruded on matters best left to American families, it has intruded on matters best left to the levels of government closest to the people, who understand and respect the needs and desires of their communities far better than the Federal Government ever could,” Vought wrote.

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-resources/budget/the-presidents-fy-2026-discretionary-budget-request/" target="_blank">budget request</a>&nbsp;calls on Congress to cut non-defense accounts by $163 billion to $557 billion, while keeping defense funding flat at $893 billion in the dozen annual appropriations bills.

The proposal assumes the GOP Congress passes the separate reconciliation package that is currently being written in the House, bringing defense funding up to $1.01 trillion, a 13.4% increase, and reducing domestic spending to $601 billion, a 16.6% decrease.

Under Trump’s request many federal departments and agencies would be slated for significant spending reductions, though defense, border security and veterans would be exempt.&nbsp;

The budget request also asks Congress to eliminate AmeriCorps, which operates as the Corporation for National and Community Service; the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides some funding to National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service; the Institute of Museum and Library Sciences; and the 400 Years of African American History Commission.

What if Congress won’t act on the cuts?

Debate over the budget proposal will take place throughout the summer months, but will come to a head in September, when Congress must pass some sort of funding bill to avoid a partial government shutdown.

A senior White House official, speaking on background on a call with reporters to discuss details of the budget request, suggested that Trump would take unilateral action to cut funding if Congress doesn’t go along with the request.

“Obviously, we have never taken impoundment off the table, because the president and myself believe that 200 years of the president and executive branch had that ability,” the official said. “But we’re working with Congress to see what they will pass. And I believe that they have an interest in passing cuts.”

The 1974 Impoundment Control Act bars the president from canceling funding approved by Congress without consulting lawmakers via a rescissions request, which the officials said the administration plans to release “soon.”

The annual appropriations process is separate from the reconciliation process that Republicans are using to pass their massive tax cuts, border security, defense funding and spending cuts package.

The budget proposal aligns with the Trump’s administration’s plans for mass deportations of people without permanent legal status, and would provide the Department of Homeland Security with $42.3 billion, or a 64.9% increase.

The budget proposal suggests eliminating $650 million from a program that reimburses non-governmental organizations and local governments that help with resettling and aiding newly arrived migrants released from DHS custody, known as the Shelters and Services Program.

The Trump administration also seeks to eliminate the agency that handles the care and resettlement of unaccompanied minors within Health and Human Services. The budget proposal recommends getting rid of the Refugee and Unaccompanied Alien Children Programs’ $1.97 billion budget. The budget proposal argues that because of an executive order to suspend refugee resettlement services, there is no need for the programs.

A federal judge from Washington state issued a nationwide injunction, and ruled the Trump administration must continue refugee resettlement services.

The budget proposal also calls for axing programs that help newly arrived migrant children or students for whom English is not a first language.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2025/5/1746356978428.png" alt="President Trump during a meeting of his Cabinet last week -image White House" />
 <figcaption>President Trump during a meeting of his Cabinet last week -image White House</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jennifer-shutt/">JENNIFER SHUTT</a>WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump released a budget request Friday that would dramatically slash some federal spending, the initial step in a monthslong process that will include heated debate on Capitol Hill as both political parties work toward a final government funding agreement.The proposal, for the first time, details how exactly this administration wants lawmakers to restructure spending across the federal government — steep cuts to domestic appropriations, including the elimination of dozens of programs that carry a long history of bipartisan support, and a significant increase in defense funding.Trump wants more than 60 programs to be scrapped, some with long histories of assistance to states, including Community Services Block Grants, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, the National Endowment for Democracy, the National Institute on Minority and Health Disparities within the National Institutes of Health, and the Sexual Risk Avoidance and Teen Pregnancy Prevention programs.Congress will ultimately decide how much funding to provide to federal programs, and while Republicans hold majorities in both chambers, regular funding bills will need Democratic support to move through the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster.White House budget director Russ Vought wrote in a letter that the request proposes shifting some funding from the federal government to states and local communities.“Just as the Federal Government has intruded on matters best left to American families, it has intruded on matters best left to the levels of government closest to the people, who understand and respect the needs and desires of their communities far better than the Federal Government ever could,” Vought wrote.The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-resources/budget/the-presidents-fy-2026-discretionary-budget-request/" target="_blank">budget request</a>&nbsp;calls on Congress to cut non-defense accounts by $163 billion to $557 billion, while keeping defense funding flat at $893 billion in the dozen annual appropriations bills.The proposal assumes the GOP Congress passes the separate reconciliation package that is currently being written in the House, bringing defense funding up to $1.01 trillion, a 13.4% increase, and reducing domestic spending to $601 billion, a 16.6% decrease.<h2>Many domestic cuts</h2>Under Trump’s request many federal departments and agencies would be slated for significant spending reductions, though defense, border security and veterans would be exempt.&nbsp;The cuts include:<ul>
 <li>Agriculture: – $5 billion, or 18.3%</li><li>Commerce: – $1.7 billion, or 16.5%</li><li>Education: – $12 billion, or 15.3%</li><li>Energy: – $4.7 billion, or 9.4%</li><li>Health and Human Services: – $33 billion, or 26.2%</li><li>Housing and Urban Development: – $33.6 billion, or 43.6%</li><li>Interior: – $5.1 billion, or 30.5%</li><li>Justice: – $2.7 billion, or 7.6%</li><li>Labor: – $4.6 billion, or 34.9%</li><li>State: – $49.1 billion, or 83.7%</li><li>Treasury: – $2.7 billion, or 19%</li>
 </ul>Increases include:<ul>
 <li>Defense: + $113 billion, or 13.4% with reconciliation package</li><li>Homeland Security: + $42.3 billion, or 64.9% with reconciliation package</li><li>Transportation: + $1.5 billion, or 5.8%</li><li>Veterans Affairs: + $5.4 billion, or 4.1%</li>
 </ul>The budget request also asks Congress to eliminate AmeriCorps, which operates as the Corporation for National and Community Service; the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides some funding to National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service; the Institute of Museum and Library Sciences; and the 400 Years of African American History Commission.<h2>What if Congress won’t act on the cuts?</h2>Debate over the budget proposal will take place throughout the summer months, but will come to a head in September, when Congress must pass some sort of funding bill to avoid a partial government shutdown.A senior White House official, speaking on background on a call with reporters to discuss details of the budget request, suggested that Trump would take unilateral action to cut funding if Congress doesn’t go along with the request.“Obviously, we have never taken impoundment off the table, because the president and myself believe that 200 years of the president and executive branch had that ability,” the official said. “But we’re working with Congress to see what they will pass. And I believe that they have an interest in passing cuts.”The 1974 Impoundment Control Act bars the president from canceling funding approved by Congress without consulting lawmakers via a rescissions request, which the officials said the administration plans to release “soon.”The annual appropriations process is separate from the reconciliation process that Republicans are using to pass their massive tax cuts, border security, defense funding and spending cuts package.<h2>Huge boost for Homeland Security</h2>The budget proposal aligns with the Trump’s administration’s plans for mass deportations of people without permanent legal status, and would provide the Department of Homeland Security with $42.3 billion, or a 64.9% increase.The budget proposal suggests eliminating $650 million from a program that reimburses non-governmental organizations and local governments that help with resettling and aiding newly arrived migrants released from DHS custody, known as the Shelters and Services Program.The Trump administration also seeks to eliminate the agency that handles the care and resettlement of unaccompanied minors within Health and Human Services. The budget proposal recommends getting rid of the Refugee and Unaccompanied Alien Children Programs’ $1.97 billion budget. The budget proposal argues that because of an executive order to suspend refugee resettlement services, there is no need for the programs.A federal judge from Washington state issued a nationwide injunction, and ruled the Trump administration must continue refugee resettlement services.The budget proposal also calls for axing programs that help newly arrived migrant children or students for whom English is not a first language.For the Education Department, the budget proposal suggests eliminating $890 million in funding for the English Language Acquisition and $428 million for the Migrant Education and Special Programs for Migrant Students.<h2>Key GOP senator rejects defense request</h2>Members of Congress had mixed reactions to the budget request, with some GOP lawmakers praising its spending cuts, while others took issue with the defense budget.Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., outright rejected the defense funding level, writing in a statement that relying on the reconciliation package to get military spending above $1 trillion was unacceptable.&nbsp;“OMB is not requesting a trillion-dollar budget. It is requesting a budget of $892.6 billion, which is a cut in real terms. This budget would decrease President Trump’s military options and his negotiating leverage,” Wicker wrote. “We face an Axis of Aggressors led by the Chinese Communist Party, who have already started a trade war rather than negotiate in good faith. We need a real Peace Through Strength agenda to ensure Xi Jinping does not launch a military war against us in Asia, beyond his existing military support to the Russians, the Iranians, Hamas, and the Houthis.”The senior White House official who spoke on a call with reporters to discuss details of the budget request said that splitting the defense increase between the regular Pentagon spending bill and the reconciliation package was a more “durable” proposal.Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, wrote the panel will have “an aggressive hearing schedule to learn more about the President’s proposal and assess funding needs for the coming year.”“This request has come to Congress late, and key details still remain outstanding,” Collins wrote. “Based on my initial review, however, I have serious objections to the proposed freeze in our defense funding given the security challenges we face and to the proposed funding cuts to – and in some cases elimination of – programs like LIHEAP, TRIO, and those that support biomedical research.&nbsp;“Ultimately, it is Congress that holds the power of the purse.”Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., wrote in a statement she will work with others in Congress to block the domestic funding cuts from taking effect.“Trump wants to rip away funding to safeguard Americans’ health, protect our environment, and to help rural communities and our farmers thrive. This president wants to turn our country’s back on Tribes—and let trash pile up at our national parks,” Murray wrote. “Trump is even proposing to cut investments to prevent violent crime, go after drug traffickers, and tackle the opioids and mental health crises.”A press release from Murray’s office noted the budget request lacked details on certain programs, including Head Start.House Speaker Mike Johnson R-La, praised the budget proposal in a statement and pledged that House GOP lawmakers are “ready to work alongside President Trump to implement a responsible budget that puts America first.”“President Trump’s plan ensures every federal taxpayer dollar spent is used to serve the American people, not a bloated bureaucracy or partisan pet projects,” Johnson wrote.<h2>Spending decisions coming</h2>The House and Senate Appropriations committees are set to begin hearings with Cabinet secretaries and agency heads next week, where Trump administration officials will explain their individual funding requests and answer lawmakers’ questions.The members on those committees will ultimately write the dozen annual appropriations bills in the months ahead, determining funding levels and policy for numerous programs, including those at the departments of Agriculture, Defense, Education, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Interior, Justice, State and Transportation.The House panel’s bills will skew more toward Republican funding levels and priorities, though the Senate committee has a long history of writing broadly bipartisan bills.&nbsp;The leaders of the two committees — House Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., House ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., Senate Chairwoman Collins and Senate ranking member Murray — will ultimately work out a final deal later in the year alongside congressional leaders.Differences over the full-year bills are supposed to be solved before the start of the new fiscal year on Oct. 1, but members of Congress regularly rely on a stopgap spending bill through mid-December to give themselves more time to complete negotiations.Failure to pass some sort of government funding measure, either a stopgap bill or all 12 full-year spending bills, before the funding deadline, would lead to a partial government shutdown.This round of appropriations bills will be the first debated during Trump’s second-term presidency and will likely bring about considerable disagreement over the unilateral actions the administration has already taken to freeze or cancel federal spending, many of which are the subject of lawsuits arguing the president doesn’t have that impoundment authority.&nbsp;