Bobby Kogan
@bbkogan.bsky.social
Senior Director of Federal Budget Policy for the Center for American Progress doing budget, tax, and econ.
Formerly: Biden OMB, Biden Transition Team, Senate Budget Committee (Murray and Sanders).
CBO and OMB’s biggest fan! Personal account.
Formerly: Biden OMB, Biden Transition Team, Senate Budget Committee (Murray and Sanders).
CBO and OMB’s biggest fan! Personal account.
During Trump’s first term, we actually had a shutdown that lasted a few hours *entirely* because Rand Paul refused to give UC.
Again, if we don’t get UC, then the Senate won’t actually be able to pass this thing until Saturday at the earliest (and then the House could pass it shortly thereafter).
Again, if we don’t get UC, then the Senate won’t actually be able to pass this thing until Saturday at the earliest (and then the House could pass it shortly thereafter).
November 10, 2025 at 1:50 AM
During Trump’s first term, we actually had a shutdown that lasted a few hours *entirely* because Rand Paul refused to give UC.
Again, if we don’t get UC, then the Senate won’t actually be able to pass this thing until Saturday at the earliest (and then the House could pass it shortly thereafter).
Again, if we don’t get UC, then the Senate won’t actually be able to pass this thing until Saturday at the earliest (and then the House could pass it shortly thereafter).
The RIFs language is actually great. Not only does it rehire the people RIFed during the shutdown, it makes it an unequivocal Antideficiency Act violation to do ANY MORE RIFs through the duration of the CR (Jan 30)
Completely stops Trump/Vought Phase 2 for now
Would love to see this standardized
Completely stops Trump/Vought Phase 2 for now
Would love to see this standardized
November 10, 2025 at 12:27 AM
The RIFs language is actually great. Not only does it rehire the people RIFed during the shutdown, it makes it an unequivocal Antideficiency Act violation to do ANY MORE RIFs through the duration of the CR (Jan 30)
Completely stops Trump/Vought Phase 2 for now
Would love to see this standardized
Completely stops Trump/Vought Phase 2 for now
Would love to see this standardized
After issuing guidance saying they were working on administering full benefits, USDA has now released guidance saying releasing full benefits was unauthorized, and states that did so must claw back funds.
More chaos and incompetence from this administration, harming the hungry.
More chaos and incompetence from this administration, harming the hungry.
November 9, 2025 at 3:26 PM
After issuing guidance saying they were working on administering full benefits, USDA has now released guidance saying releasing full benefits was unauthorized, and states that did so must claw back funds.
More chaos and incompetence from this administration, harming the hungry.
More chaos and incompetence from this administration, harming the hungry.
Taken literally, the Attorney General is saying that President Trump’s agenda is to deliver only partial SNAP benefits instead of full benefits.
This of course makes sense given that President Trump recently enacted the largest SNAP cuts in history.
This of course makes sense given that President Trump recently enacted the largest SNAP cuts in history.
November 8, 2025 at 4:04 AM
Taken literally, the Attorney General is saying that President Trump’s agenda is to deliver only partial SNAP benefits instead of full benefits.
This of course makes sense given that President Trump recently enacted the largest SNAP cuts in history.
This of course makes sense given that President Trump recently enacted the largest SNAP cuts in history.
New guidance from USDA says they will administer full SNAP benefits.
However, less than 45 minutes ago, the Attorney General tweeted about asking for a stay on the order forcing full benefits.
Seems weird to send this guidance if they’re hoping for a stay by 4pm.
However, less than 45 minutes ago, the Attorney General tweeted about asking for a stay on the order forcing full benefits.
Seems weird to send this guidance if they’re hoping for a stay by 4pm.
November 7, 2025 at 6:14 PM
New guidance from USDA says they will administer full SNAP benefits.
However, less than 45 minutes ago, the Attorney General tweeted about asking for a stay on the order forcing full benefits.
Seems weird to send this guidance if they’re hoping for a stay by 4pm.
However, less than 45 minutes ago, the Attorney General tweeted about asking for a stay on the order forcing full benefits.
Seems weird to send this guidance if they’re hoping for a stay by 4pm.
Illegal impoundments are so important to Republicans that they’re insisting on language that would prevent GAO from suing.
How can you make a budget deal when one side insists on the ability to ignore that deal?
How can you make a budget deal when one side insists on the ability to ignore that deal?
November 6, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Illegal impoundments are so important to Republicans that they’re insisting on language that would prevent GAO from suing.
How can you make a budget deal when one side insists on the ability to ignore that deal?
How can you make a budget deal when one side insists on the ability to ignore that deal?
Wow, huge credit to Katie and the rest of the nutrition team at @centeronbudget.bsky.social. USDA has now issued revised numbers because CBPP caught them either accidentally or intentionally making huge errors that would severely underfund SNAP, in direct violation of court orders.
November 6, 2025 at 3:47 AM
Wow, huge credit to Katie and the rest of the nutrition team at @centeronbudget.bsky.social. USDA has now issued revised numbers because CBPP caught them either accidentally or intentionally making huge errors that would severely underfund SNAP, in direct violation of court orders.
lol, senate republicans set the precedent in june that they can do literally anything through reconciliation.
literally refused to meet w/ the parliamentarian, did the thing anyway, presiding officer asserted “no point of order,” and used 51 votes to uphold that. can do literally ANYTHING that way.
literally refused to meet w/ the parliamentarian, did the thing anyway, presiding officer asserted “no point of order,” and used 51 votes to uphold that. can do literally ANYTHING that way.
November 5, 2025 at 4:03 PM
lol, senate republicans set the precedent in june that they can do literally anything through reconciliation.
literally refused to meet w/ the parliamentarian, did the thing anyway, presiding officer asserted “no point of order,” and used 51 votes to uphold that. can do literally ANYTHING that way.
literally refused to meet w/ the parliamentarian, did the thing anyway, presiding officer asserted “no point of order,” and used 51 votes to uphold that. can do literally ANYTHING that way.
The president says he will defy court orders and illegally withhold SNAP benefits despite there being money in the SNAP contingency fund that the Trump is required to use.
November 4, 2025 at 4:25 PM
The president says he will defy court orders and illegally withhold SNAP benefits despite there being money in the SNAP contingency fund that the Trump is required to use.
Longtime Trump supporter: “I think deep down he wants to help the country with things like food insecurity.”
(Trump enacted the largest cuts to SNAP in history a few months ago)
Now says she regrets voting for Trump and wishes a Democrat were president to “protect benefits [Trump] wants to cut.”
(Trump enacted the largest cuts to SNAP in history a few months ago)
Now says she regrets voting for Trump and wishes a Democrat were president to “protect benefits [Trump] wants to cut.”
![Hannah's mom, Betty, a 63-year-old recent retiree who is a caretaker for her daughter and a longtime Trump supporter, said she is losing confidence in the president she once supported amid the shutdown fight.
"I think deep down he wants to help the country with things like food insecurity," she said. "But now he is busy out of the country and demolishing the White House. I know that is being paid for with private funds, but those could be used to help people."
"It all seems very selfish," she added.
Betty Szretter said she now regrets voting for Trump in 2024 and would prefer a Democrat in the White House to "protect benefits he [Trump] wants to cut."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:drfb2pdjlnsqkfgsoellcahm/bafkreihyvn3jjcjcdv2c2a7hvwbvmjmtapemihu3dbvlijsep5eeeqjh7a@jpeg)
November 3, 2025 at 4:50 PM
Longtime Trump supporter: “I think deep down he wants to help the country with things like food insecurity.”
(Trump enacted the largest cuts to SNAP in history a few months ago)
Now says she regrets voting for Trump and wishes a Democrat were president to “protect benefits [Trump] wants to cut.”
(Trump enacted the largest cuts to SNAP in history a few months ago)
Now says she regrets voting for Trump and wishes a Democrat were president to “protect benefits [Trump] wants to cut.”
Unsurprisingly, a judge just sided with the states suing to get SNAP benefits released. It’s an open-and-shut case.
![MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
October 31, 2025
TALWANI, D.J.
Pending before the court is Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order [Doc.
No. 3] seeking to enjoin, on an emergency basis, Defendants' November 1, 2025 suspension of benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program ("SNAP"). For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs have standing to bring this action and are likely to succeed on their claim that Defendants' suspension of SNAP benefits is unlawful. Where that suspension of benefits rested
on an erroneous construction of the relevant statutory provisions, the court will allow Defendants to consider whether they will authorize at least reduced SNAP benefits for November, and report back to the court no later than Monday, November 3, 2025.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:drfb2pdjlnsqkfgsoellcahm/bafkreia2chkzdot4e4p4bnogsq4gbc643upos5jfxyk3chu7yp4z2kprle@jpeg)
October 31, 2025 at 6:00 PM
Unsurprisingly, a judge just sided with the states suing to get SNAP benefits released. It’s an open-and-shut case.
During the 2018-2019 shutdown, during his his first term, the Trump administration issued similar guidance.
October 31, 2025 at 4:48 PM
During the 2018-2019 shutdown, during his his first term, the Trump administration issued similar guidance.
And the Trump administration's own guidance agreed it could be use. Here's what they posted on September 30. The Trump administration then deleted this guidance on October 23 and began pretending it couldn't use the money.
October 31, 2025 at 4:47 PM
And the Trump administration's own guidance agreed it could be use. Here's what they posted on September 30. The Trump administration then deleted this guidance on October 23 and began pretending it couldn't use the money.
Again, here's the *entire* text for the SNAP contingency fund. It says it's for when you need it for carry out program operations. It doesn't say "it's for when there's some money but not enough." Give me a fucking break. It can obviously be used on benefits during a shutdown.
October 31, 2025 at 4:46 PM
Again, here's the *entire* text for the SNAP contingency fund. It says it's for when you need it for carry out program operations. It doesn't say "it's for when there's some money but not enough." Give me a fucking break. It can obviously be used on benefits during a shutdown.
So, when can the SNAP contingency fund be used? It can only be used if there's not enough money to carry out program operations. We're shut down and the rest of the SNAP funding lapsed, so there's not enough money to carry out program operations. The contingency fund can be used.
October 31, 2025 at 4:45 PM
So, when can the SNAP contingency fund be used? It can only be used if there's not enough money to carry out program operations. We're shut down and the rest of the SNAP funding lapsed, so there's not enough money to carry out program operations. The contingency fund can be used.
Then, in the full-year CR for FY2025, two provisions duplicate that, with one change: instead another $3 billion that expires on September 30, 2026, this new $3 billion appropriation actually expires on September 30, 2027. But the authorization language is otherwise identical.
October 31, 2025 at 4:44 PM
Then, in the full-year CR for FY2025, two provisions duplicate that, with one change: instead another $3 billion that expires on September 30, 2026, this new $3 billion appropriation actually expires on September 30, 2027. But the authorization language is otherwise identical.
Let's start with the first claim, that it can be used. Below is the *entire* statutory language around the contingency fund, both creating it and governing how it can be used. Anything else you see is not correct.
October 31, 2025 at 4:41 PM
Let's start with the first claim, that it can be used. Below is the *entire* statutory language around the contingency fund, both creating it and governing how it can be used. Anything else you see is not correct.
The White House says it’s going to use procurement dollars to illegally pay the troops for rather than do it the legal way of enacting a military pay bill.
You cannot w/ a straight face tell me using procurement dollars to pay the military adheres to the purpose statute and the Antideficiency Act.
You cannot w/ a straight face tell me using procurement dollars to pay the military adheres to the purpose statute and the Antideficiency Act.
October 29, 2025 at 10:22 PM
The White House says it’s going to use procurement dollars to illegally pay the troops for rather than do it the legal way of enacting a military pay bill.
You cannot w/ a straight face tell me using procurement dollars to pay the military adheres to the purpose statute and the Antideficiency Act.
You cannot w/ a straight face tell me using procurement dollars to pay the military adheres to the purpose statute and the Antideficiency Act.
Huge contrast with them illegally refusing to make SNAP payments.
What we’re seeing from the White House is them moving heaven and earth to pay what they want to pay, even if it’s illegal — and moving heaven and earth to NOT pay what they don’t want to pay, even if it’s illegal.
What we’re seeing from the White House is them moving heaven and earth to pay what they want to pay, even if it’s illegal — and moving heaven and earth to NOT pay what they don’t want to pay, even if it’s illegal.
October 28, 2025 at 6:34 PM
Huge contrast with them illegally refusing to make SNAP payments.
What we’re seeing from the White House is them moving heaven and earth to pay what they want to pay, even if it’s illegal — and moving heaven and earth to NOT pay what they don’t want to pay, even if it’s illegal.
What we’re seeing from the White House is them moving heaven and earth to pay what they want to pay, even if it’s illegal — and moving heaven and earth to NOT pay what they don’t want to pay, even if it’s illegal.
From @ernietedeschi.bsky.social on the bad site: tariffs continue to show up very clearly in the data
October 24, 2025 at 2:06 PM
From @ernietedeschi.bsky.social on the bad site: tariffs continue to show up very clearly in the data
Great post from @ernietedeschi.bsky.social on the bad site. The left shows the Atlanta Fed wage tracker. The right is Ernie’s cut at it.
Atlanta Fed puts people into wage buckets based on the average of their starting *& ending* wage.
Ernie’s cut instead does it based on started wage (imo better).
Atlanta Fed puts people into wage buckets based on the average of their starting *& ending* wage.
Ernie’s cut instead does it based on started wage (imo better).
October 20, 2025 at 12:04 AM
Great post from @ernietedeschi.bsky.social on the bad site. The left shows the Atlanta Fed wage tracker. The right is Ernie’s cut at it.
Atlanta Fed puts people into wage buckets based on the average of their starting *& ending* wage.
Ernie’s cut instead does it based on started wage (imo better).
Atlanta Fed puts people into wage buckets based on the average of their starting *& ending* wage.
Ernie’s cut instead does it based on started wage (imo better).
