Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The baking isn’t done only by elected officials. It’s done by citizens​

Opinion

The baking isn’t done only by elected officials. It’s done by citizens​

a view of the capitol building

In November, eight Senate Democrats voted with Republicans to end the longest government shutdown in history, with little to show for the 43-day closure.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), who was not one of the eight, told discouraged Democrats, “We need to remember the battle we’re in….[We need to continue the fight] to defend our country from Trump and MAGA. Two things coming up that are really important,” Whitehouse said, “1) In December, there will be a vote on extending the Affordable Care credits we fought for. That gives us…weeks to hammer the Republicans so hard that we actually get a good Affordable Care credits bill.


“The second,” Whitehouse continued, “this gets a little bit boring, so I won’t go into it in detail, but as the appropriations bill moves forward, we can bake in increases above Trump’s budget, to the agencies we care about, guardrails against Trump’s mischief, and assurances and even hooks to make sure that the funding that we’ve appropriated actually gets spent and not blockaded by [Office of Management and Budget Director] Russ Vought. That we have until January 31st to do, when the current continuing resolution would expire. And then if they haven’t done those things we can go right back to insisting that they have to do them or face another government shutdown.”

The process that Whitehouse called “a little boring” provided an unexpected victory a few days later. Jeremy Lewin, the undersecretary of state for foreign assistance, humanitarian affairs, and religious freedom at the State Department, announced that the United States would provide $4.6 billion to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria over three years. The Global Fund and its partners have saved 70 million lives since 2002. Lewin, a former Elon Musk lieutenant at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), helped oversee the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID,) which was our nation’s primary international aid agency.

The $4.6 billion was smaller than the previous Biden-era pledge. But it represented something important: a reversal by the Trump Administration.

In Trump’s budget for fiscal year 2026 (FY26), the President proposed slashing the Global Fund from the $1.65 billion enacted in FY25 to $800 million for FY26, a cut of more than 50%. Over three years, that would total just $2.4 billion. Instead, the administration nearly doubled that to $4.6 billion. Why?

Because Congress had already begun “baking in” increases above Trump’s proposed cuts, as Sen. Whitehouse called for.

On April 28, 160 House members—led by two Republicans and three Democrats—signed a bipartisan letter urging appropriators to maintain robust FY26 funding for the Global Fund and PEPFAR. They were rejecting the President’s proposed $850 million cut and signaling a clear expectation: hold the line.

The House Appropriations Committee followed through, allocating $1.5 billion for FY26 instead of Trump’s $800 million. Over three years, that totals $4.5 billion—almost exactly the size of the administration’s eventual pledge.

The matter moves next to the Senate, where appropriators often increase the House’s number in global health.

A few days before Lewin’s public announcement, a journalist asked him whether the United States would make a pledge to the Global Fund. Lewin’s answer was revealing: “We are in the midst of active consultations with Congress… we will be making a pledge… in the coming days, after our consultations with Congress.”

There it is—the quiet power Whitehouse was pointing to. The appropriations process may look boring, but it forces administrations to respond to Congress's will. And Congress often responds to its constituents' will.

Because here’s a truth that rarely makes headlines: the baking isn’t done only by elected officials. Citizens do it.

I know volunteers who have spent years and even decades bringing their members of Congress into the kitchen and over to the oven on issues like the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. Most of the 160 House signers entered Congress, never having heard of the Global Fund. It was engaged constituents, doing their homework and getting training, who taught them.

That is transformational advocacy, citizens awakening to their power. And you can join them.

Sam Daley-Harris is the author of “Reclaiming Our Democracy: Every Citizen’s Guide to Transformational Advocacy” and the founder of RESULTS and Civic Courage. This is part of a series focused on better understanding transformational advocacy: citizens awakening to their power.

Read More

Pro-Trump protestors
Trump supporters who attempted to overturn the 2020 election results are now seeking influential election oversight roles in battleground states.
Andrew Lichtenstein/Getty Images

Loving Someone Who Thinks the Election Was Stolen

He’s the kind of man you’d want as a neighbor in a storm.

Big guy. Strong hands. The person you’d call if your car slid into a ditch. He lives rural, works hard, supports a wife and young son, and helps care for his aging mom. Life has not been easy, but he shows up anyway.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025 Drives Trump’s State Dept Overhaul

U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House on December 15, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Project 2025 Drives Trump’s State Dept Overhaul

In May 2025, I wrote about the Trump administration’s early State Department reforms aligned with Project 2025, including calls for budget cuts, mission closures, and policy realignments. At the time, the most controversial move was an executive order targeting the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), shutting it down and freezing all federal foreign aid. This decision reflected Project 2025’s recommendation to scale back and "deradicalize" USAID by eliminating programs deemed overly politicized or inconsistent with conservative values. The report specifically criticized USAID for funding progressive initiatives, such as policies addressing systemic racism and central economic planning, arguing that U.S. foreign aid had become a "massive and open-ended global entitlement program" benefiting left-leaning organizations. The process connecting the report’s ideological critiques to this executive action involved a strategic alignment between key administration officials and Project 2025 architects, who lobbied for immediate policy adjustments. This coalition effectively linked the critique to policy by framing it as a necessary step toward realigning foreign aid with national interests and conservative principles.

Back then, I predicted even more sweeping changes to the State Department. Since May, several major developments have indeed reshaped the department:

Keep ReadingShow less
SNAP Isn’t a Negotiating Tool. It’s a Lifeline.
apples and bananas in brown cardboard box
Photo by Maria Lin Kim on Unsplash

SNAP Isn’t a Negotiating Tool. It’s a Lifeline.

Millions of families just survived the longest shutdown in U.S. history. Now they’re bracing again as politicians turn food assistance into a bargaining chip.

Food assistance should not be subject to politics, yet the Trump administration is now requiring over 20 Democratic-led states to share sensitive SNAP recipient data—including Social Security and immigration details—or risk losing funding. Officials call it "program integrity," but the effect is clear: millions of low-income families may once again have their access to food threatened by political disputes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats’ Redistricting Gains Face New Court Battles Ahead of 2026 Elections
us a flag on white concrete building

Democrats’ Redistricting Gains Face New Court Battles Ahead of 2026 Elections

Earlier this year, I reported on Democrats’ redistricting wins in 2025, highlighting gains in states like California and North Carolina. As of December 18, the landscape has shifted again, with new maps finalized, ongoing court battles, and looming implications for the 2026 midterms.

Here are some key developments since mid‑2025:

  • California: Voters approved Proposition 50 in November, allowing legislature‑drawn maps that eliminated three safe Republican seats and made two more competitive. Democrats in vulnerable districts were redrawn into friendlier territory.
  • Virginia: On December 15, Democrats in the House of Delegates pushed a constitutional amendment on redistricting during a special session. Republicans denounced the move as unconstitutional, setting up a legal and political fight ahead of the 2026 elections.
  • Other states in play:
    • Ohio, Texas, Utah, Missouri, North Carolina: New maps are already in effect, reshaping battlegrounds.
    • Florida and Maryland: Legislatures have begun steps toward redistricting, though maps are not yet finalized.
    • New York: Court challenges may force changes to existing maps before 2026.
    • National picture: According to VoteHub’s tracker, the current district breakdown stands at 189 Democratic‑leaning, 205 Republican‑leaning, and 41 highly competitive seats.

Implications for 2026

  • Democrats’ wins in California and North Carolina strengthen their position, but legal challenges in Virginia and New York could blunt momentum.
  • Republicans remain favored in Texas and Ohio, where maps were redrawn to secure GOP advantages.
  • The unusually high number of mid‑decade redistricting efforts — not seen at this scale since the 1800s — underscores how both parties are aggressively shaping the battlefield for 2026.
So, here's the BIG PICTURE: The December snapshot shows Democrats still benefiting from redistricting in key states, but the fight is far from settled. With courts weighing in and legislatures maneuvering, the balance of power heading into the 2026 House elections remains fluid. What began as clear Democratic wins earlier in 2025 has evolved into a multi‑front contest over maps, legality, and political control.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network