A sign with a notice of closure is seen pinned on the fence to the National Zoo in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 12, 2025. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) 

WASHINGTON —  The Trump administration cannot carry out layoffs that it announced after the government shutdown began Oct. 1 and is barred from issuing any new layoff notices under a court order issued Tuesday. 

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said at the end of an hour-long hearing in the Northern District of California she granted the preliminary injunction because the reductions in force are unlawful and “intended for the purpose of political retribution.”

Illston referenced a social media post by President Donald Trump that said, “I can’t believe the radical left Democrats gave me this unprecedented opportunity.”

Michael Velchik, a Justice Department attorney representing the government, argued against the judge issuing a preliminary injunction. 

Velchik said statements from Trump and other administration officials were an expression of policy differences with Democrats and were not evidence of attempted political retribution. 

The hearing was the latest step in a lawsuit filed in late September. In the month since, attorneys for labor unions have contended the Trump administration’s actions violate federal law, while lawyers for the government have said it’s well within the scope of their authority. 

Illston, who was nominated to the bench by President Bill Clinton, granted a temporary restraining order in mid-October that she clarified and expanded days later amid a misunderstanding within the administration about its impact.

Some layoffs planned pre-shutdown, government says

Illston said during Tuesday’s hearing that she’s likely to schedule an evidentiary hearing over claims that some layoff notices that have gone out during the shutdown were planned before it began, and shouldn’t be subject to any court orders in this lawsuit. 

Danielle Leonard, an attorney representing the labor unions that brought the case, said she believed that type of hearing could help all involved “get to the heart of” the disagreement. 

Leonard requested the preliminary injunction cover employees at the Interior Department, Commerce Department’s patent office and the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights from layoffs until after the judge scheduled that evidentiary hearing. 

Illston didn’t respond directly to that proposal, but said she planned to release a written version of the preliminary injunction she issued from the bench as soon as Tuesday. 

Illston said the injunction didn’t apply to employees at the Small Business Administration who received layoff notices in late September, before the shutdown began. 

Velchik contended that layoff notices issued since the shutdown began were well within the administration’s authority, saying the country does not “have a fossilized executive branch where we cannot reduce the size.”

Velchik also told the judge that efforts to lay off federal employees during the shutdown were “the right thing to do, morally. And it’s the democratic thing to do.” 

The U.S. Capitol building and Washington Monument in Washington, D.C., at sunset on Oct. 14, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — Some members of Congress are asking for their salaries to be withheld during the government shutdown, while federal workers on Friday missed their first full paycheck since many operations closed on Oct. 1.

With no movement toward a deal to end the shutdown, the House remained on a prolonged break from Capitol Hill, the Senate left for its usual long weekend and President Donald Trump prepared to depart for a trip to China, where he will likely focus much more on foreign policy and tariffs than the funding lapse. 

The president, lawmakers and federal judges all receive their regular paychecks during government shutdowns, unlike the 2 million civilian federal employees and thousands of staffers who work in the legislative branch. Members of Congress are paid $174,000 a year and leaders are paid more.

Active duty military members would also normally miss their paychecks, but the Defense Department reprogrammed $8 billion earlier this month to avoid a missed payday for U.S. troops. It’s unclear if the Pentagon can do that again ahead of the Oct. 31 pay date or if there was enough money left to cover those salaries. 

Pay for Congress

Unlike most federal workers, members of Congress have the option to receive their pay as normal, donate their salaries to charity, give the money back to the Treasury, or have their checks withheld during this shutdown.  

Rhode Island Democratic Rep. Gabe Amo posted a letter Thursday evening from House Chief Administrative Officer Catherine L. Szpindor confirming that House members’ salaries can be held back until after the funding lapse ends. 

Szpindor wrote that legal requirements, including the 27th Amendment, entitle members of Congress to their pay and that any lawmaker who has their check withheld during a shutdown can request it be distributed at any time. Szpindor did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokesperson for Ohio Republican Sen. Jon Husted said the Senate Financial Clerk told their office that while senators are required to be paid, officials can withhold his check until after the shutdown ends, at his request. 

The Senate disbursing office will continue to cut the check, but Husted will not pick it up until after Congress funds the government, the spokesperson said. 

Husted doesn’t believe members of Congress should receive their salaries on time when other federal workers cannot, the spokesperson said. 

A different Senate staffer, speaking on background about the issue, told States Newsroom the salary for another senator was transitioned from direct deposit to a physical paycheck so it could be held by the disbursing office for the duration of the shutdown, at that senator’s request. 

Members of Congress who have asked for their salaries to be withheld include Colorado Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, Florida Republican Rep. Kat Cammack, New Jersey Democratic Sen. Andy Kim, Oklahoma Republican Rep. Stephanie Bice and Oregon Democratic Rep. Janelle Bynum, among others.  

Spokespeople for Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., did not respond to a request for comment about whether they are having their salaries withheld during the shutdown. A spokesperson for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he is having his paycheck held back.

Can lawmakers’ salaries legally be withheld?

Congress has voted several times over the years to officially withhold members’ salaries during a shutdown, but none of the bills have ever become law. There have been questions during past funding lapses about whether members’ paychecks could legally be withheld.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office wrote in a letter to Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst just before the shutdown began that member pay “is required by the Constitution and is considered mandatory spending.” 

“Thus, Members of Congress would continue to be paid during a lapse in discretionary appropriations,” CBO Director Phillip L. Swagel wrote. 

That assessment lines up with a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, updated in August, that says “Members of Congress continue to receive their pay during a lapse in appropriations for a number of reasons.”

Lawmaker salaries “have been provided by a permanent, mandatory, appropriation since” 1981, the report says.

The U.S. Constitution, in Article I, Section 6, Clause 1, says: “Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.”

And the 27th Amendment to the Constitution says: “No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.”

The CRS report quotes the Government Accountability Office’s principles of federal appropriations law as saying, “The salary of a Member of Congress is fixed by statute and therefore cannot be waived without specific statutory authority.”

But the report also points out nothing prevents a member of Congress from accepting the salary and then donating all or part of it back to the Treasury.

No options and no paychecks for feds

That same choice isn’t available for the people who work for members of Congress or those at departments and agencies throughout the executive branch. 

They must go without their paychecks until after Congress and the president broker a deal to fund the government and end the shutdown. 

Any worker who manages national security issues, or the protection of life or property, is considered exempt and continues working until the shutdown ends. Any federal employee not in that category is placed on furlough. 

The Senate was unable to advance multiple bills Thursday that would have provided salaries to some federal employees and contractors during the shutdown. 

Absent new congressional action, both exempt and non-exempt federal workers are supposed to receive back pay under a 2019 law once government reopens, though Trump and administration officials have cast doubt on whether they will do that for employees in the executive branch. 

Guidance from the House Committee on Administration says that all employees who work within the legislative branch will receive back pay once a funding bill becomes law. 

“Neither essential nor furloughed employees are authorized to receive compensation during a lapse in government funding,” the report says. “Federal law statutorily requires retroactive pay for furloughed and essential employees following the end of a lapse in government funding.”

 

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., talks to a reporter in the basement of the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, Oct. 23, 2025. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The Senate Thursday failed to advance a Republican measure and rejected unanimous agreements on two related bills from Democrats that would have paid federal employees and contractors who have continued to work amid the government shutdown, which entered day 23. 

The stalemate constituted the latest example of how dug in to their arguments both parties are as the shutdown that began Oct. 1 drags out, as well as the heightened political tensions in the upper chamber when it comes to striking a deal to resume government funding.  

Most federal employees will miss their first full paycheck on Friday or early next week. More than 42 million Americans, some 40% under the age of 17, are also at risk of delayed food assistance if Congress doesn’t address a funding shortfall expected by Nov. 1 in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. 

Senate Democrats Wednesday sent a letter to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins over concerns that the agency has warned states to hold off on processing SNAP benefits. They contended the agency has the resources to keep payments flowing.

“We were deeply disturbed to hear that the USDA has instructed states to stop processing SNAP benefits for November and were surprised by your recent comments that the program will ‘run out of money in two weeks,’” according to the letter. “In fact, the USDA has several tools available which would enable SNAP benefits to be paid through or close to the end of November.”

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., introduced a bill Wednesday to continue SNAP funding through the shutdown. During Thursday’s briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the administration would “absolutely support” the legislation.

Deadlock on federal worker pay

In the Senate, a measure from Wisconsin GOP Sen. Ron Johnson on a 54-45 vote did not reach the 60-vote threshold needed to advance in the chamber. Its failure means that federal employees who have continued to work will not be paid until the shutdown ends.

Democratic senators who agreed to the measure included Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman and Georgia’s Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota changed his vote in order to reconsider the measure. 

“I don’t think it makes sense to hold these federal workers hostage,” Warnock told States Newsroom in an interview on his vote Thursday. “If I could have a path to give some of these folks relief while fighting for health care, that’s what I decided to do.”

A separate measure from Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen also failed to move forward after Johnson objected. Van Hollen requested unanimous consent to approve his bill that would have also protected federal workers from mass Reductions in Force, or RIFs, that President Donald Trump has attempted during the shutdown. 

A second Democratic bill, from Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., was narrower, only including pay for federal workers. But when he requested unanimous approval for his measure, it was also blocked by Johnson.

Senators then left Capitol Hill for the weekend. On Wednesday, the Senate took a failed 12th vote to provide the federal government and its services with flat funding through Nov. 21.

Senate Republicans have pressed Senate Democrats to approve the GOP-written stopgap measure. But Democrats have maintained that they will not support the House measure because it does not extend tax credits that will expire at the end of the year for people who buy their health insurance through the Affordable Care Act Marketplace.

Layoffs cited by Van Hollen

Van Hollen argued his bill would protect workers from the president’s targeting of certain federal agencies and programs.

“We certainly shouldn’t set up a system where the president of the United States gets to decide what agencies to shut down, what they can open, who to pay and who not to pay, who to punish and who not to punish,” Van Hollen said on the Senate floor before asking for unanimous consent to move the bill forward.

Johnson objected to including Van Hollen’s provision to ban federal worker layoffs during a shutdown. President Donald Trump’s efforts to lay off thousands of federal workers during the shutdown have been on hold since last week, after a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order that was later expanded.  

However, Johnson said he was willing to add into his own bill the provision from Van Hollen to pay furloughed workers.

“I’m more than happy to sit down with you. Maybe we should do that later today,” Van Hollen told Johnson during their debate on the floor.

Shortly after, Peters introduced a near-mirror version of Van Hollen’s bill, except that his measure would not prohibit layoffs — essentially what Johnson told Van Hollen he would agree to.

“We all say we agree on this, so let’s just pass this bill now,” the Michigan Democrat said before asking for unanimous consent to advance the legislation.

Johnson also objected to that proposal.

“It only solves a problem temporarily. We’re going to be right back in the same position,” Johnson said in an interview with States Newsroom about why he rejected Peters’ proposal.  

Johnson said he talked with Peters and Van Hollen after the vote and “we’ll be talking beyond this.”

‘Waste of time’ for House to meet

Even if the Senate passed the bill sponsored by Johnson or Van Hollen, it’s unlikely the House, which has been in recess since last month, would return to vote on either measure.

At a Thursday morning press conference, House Speaker Mike Johnson argued that Republicans already passed a stopgap measure to pay federal workers and that Senate Democrats should support that legislation. 

Johnson said bringing back the House would be a “waste of time,” noting that Democrats would not vote on the Republican proposal. 

“If I brought everybody back right now and we voted on a measure to do this, to pay essential workers, it would be spiked in the Senate,” said the Louisiana Republican. “So it would be a waste of our time.”

Duffy warns of flight delays due to shutdown

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy joined Johnson and House Republicans during their press conference. 

He said that flight delays have increased due to staffing shortages.

More than 50,000 TSA agents and more than 13,000 air traffic controllers have continued to work without pay during the government shutdown. 

“They’re angry,” Duffy said of air traffic controllers. “I’ve gone to a number of different towers over the course of the last week to 10 days. They’re frustrated.”

Next Tuesday, air traffic controllers will not receive their full paycheck for their work in October, Duffy said.

He added that the agency is already short-staffed — by up to 3,000 air traffic controllers.

“When we have lower staffing, what happens is, you’ll see delays or cancellations,” Duffy said. 

The FlightAware tracker said there were 2,132 delays within, into or out of the United States of unspecified length reported by Thursday afternoon, compared to 4,175 on Wednesday, 3,846 on Tuesday and 6,792 on Monday.

A shortage of air traffic controllers helped play a role in ending the 2019 government shutdown, which lasted 35 days, after thousands of commercial flights were ground to a halt. 

U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan speaks with furloughed federal workers on Wednesday, Oct. 22, 2025. Pocan, a Democrat, brought pizza for the group and discussed the current federal shutdown. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

Ellie Lazarcik worked in a few different industry jobs after moving to Madison in 2017. None of them really fit, she says. Then she learned that the U.S. Forest Service Forest Products Lab in Madison was hiring.

Coincidentally, she knew of the lab from a visit she made “way back when I was in college, for a wood sculpture class of all things,” Lazarcik said Wednesday.

“Over a decade had passed since then, and I saw a job opening come up in the lab and thought, ‘Why not? That place was really amazing when I visited. They had really cool stuff going on then, and they probably still have really cool stuff going on,’” she recalled.

She applied and got the job.

That was five years ago. Her job title is physical science technician in the lab’s building and fire science program. Her work supports other members of the research team — setting up lab tests, preparing samples and then running them through the testing or analysis process and sorting through the data afterward.

“And I love what I do,” Lazarcik said.

Since President Donald Trump took office in January, “there have been a lot of really sort of rapid-fire changes,” she said. “We’re on our toes a lot trying to figure out what we can or can’t pursue in terms of research.”

Still, she has continued to find the job engaging. “We’ve been able to keep doing cool projects,” Lazarcik said. “I’ve been involved in some interesting stuff in the lab — but it has been challenging.”

Since Oct. 1, however, Lazarcik has been furloughed along with hundreds of thousands of federal workers on account of the federal government shutdown.

“This is my first furlough and I’m not particularly enjoying it,” she said. Missing a paycheck is one reason, but it’s not the only one.

“It is pretty uncomfortable not knowing when I will get paid next, when I can go back into the lab and continue working on projects that got stopped abruptly,” Lazarcik said, “It’s stressful.”

Lazarcik is married and  her husband “has a job and a paycheck, which definitely helps,” she said. “But going from a two-paycheck household to one has been a pretty stark difference.”

On Wednesday, Lazarcik brought her toddler in his stroller over to the Social Security Administration office on Madison’s far West Side. U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Black Earth) and members of his staff stopped by a little after noon with boxes of pizza as a token of appreciation for some of the furloughed federal workers.

About 18,000 federal employees live in Wisconsin, and about 8,000 are expected to be out of work currently due to the shutdown, the state labor secretary, Amy Pechacek, said at a virtual news conference on Thursday, Oct. 18.

“We’re seeing you and we very much appreciate what you’re doing,” Pocan told the group of just over a dozen federal employees who turned out. “We understand the sacrifice you and your families are making.”

Even before the shutdown, the Trump administration fired about 200,000 federal workers, Pocan said.

“These actions are illegal,” he said, but added that they are likely to drive some people out of the federal workforce. “We’re going to lose a lot of good, qualified people with experience.”

Pocan said communication in Washington, D.C., between the Republican majority in both the House and the Senate and Democrats has been at a standstill.

“I’d prefer we were there now, negotiating to get things done. But we’re not,” Pocan told the group. “We’re seeing a lot of things happen this session that aren’t normal.”

In September the Republicans sought to pass a continuing resolution on spending that if enacted would have averted the shutdown. A majority voted for the measure in the House, but in the U.S. Senate there were not enough votes to clear the 60 needed to advance most bills in the upper chamber.

Democratic support is necessary to meet that threshold, but Democratic lawmakers argued that in return for their votes they should have an opportunity to have some input into the continuing resolution.

Their demands have included extending enhanced subsidies for health insurance premiums sold through the federal HealthCare.gov marketplace and reversing cuts to Medicaid that Republicans included in their big tax cut and spending cut bill enacted in July.

In previous spending standoffs, Pocan said, leaders of both parties in both houses of Congress have been able to hash out agreements, usually avoiding a shutdown altogether or else managing to resolve one before it drags on.

“This time, though, so much has changed,” Pocan said.

A bipartisan deal failed in December after Trump and Elon Musk opposed it. Congress managed to approve another stopgap spending bill two days later that carried the federal government to March 2025.

“Then we had to start over in March,” Pocan said. That measure was unpopular with Democrats, he said, but enough Senate Democrats voted for it to pass,  funding the federal government through Sept. 30.

“And immediately we saw recissions — illegal again — and more illegal actions by the Trump administration taking funds away,” Pocan said. That history over the last 10 months has made Democrats wary of a deal that doesn’t address their priorities, he added.

Lazarcik hopes Congress acts soon to pass legislation that ends the shutdown. In the meantime, she gets by, tapping into savings, “looking at where you can squeeze a little bit tighter,” and skimping on putting aside funds for retirement — “which is really hard.”

Not everyone understands, however.

“I hear a lot  of people talk about, ‘Oh, man, that must be cool.’ It’s really not,” she said. “It’s pretty stressful having to try to plan when you can’t know when your next paycheck is coming.”

She is grateful for a support network of close friends and family members. “[They] do understand furlough is not just some crazy vacation you get to go on,” Lazarcik said.

The forest products lab has had a strong feeling of community that Lazarcik has always enjoyed. That has persisted during furlough, “even in this time when we’re not all going to the same building every day.”

Coworkers have stayed connected, reaching out to each other to meet up, talk and “de-stress,” Lazarcik said. “Even though we’re not all working on a regular schedule and we’re not getting paychecks, we still are supporting each other, and that’s been really great.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Reading Time: 11 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• The number of seasonal workers hired by Wisconsin farmers through the H-2A program has increased six-fold over the past decade.

• Although the surge began before President Donald Trump returned to office, farmers now consider the program even more critical during Trump’s crackdown on immigrants without legal status.

• The Trump administration has introduced adjustments to program rules, including cuts to minimum wages and a pending $250 per-visa fee.

• Mexican nationals made up over 90% of the H-2A workforce last year, but South Africans make up a growing share of workers as well.

• The program does not offer visa holders a pathway to legal permanent residency in the United States.

By the time Monty Lilford received a call from the American consulate in Cape Town in February, he had only days to get from his home in South Africa’s Western Cape to Wisconsin’s Driftless Area. If all went according to plan, the 35-year-old mechanic would spend the next nine months as a do-it-all farmhand, joining the thousands of seasonal agricultural workers seeking better wages in Wisconsin through the H-2A visa program.

Lilford could not afford a last-minute flight halfway across the world. There’s a market for lending to H-2A workers crunched for time, he said — one dominated by “people doing scams to get your banking details.” 

Lilford turned to his father-in-law for help. “I begged him,” he said. “I needed to go.”

The temporary visa program offers Lilford a chance to build a middle-class life back home, albeit one that requires spending much of the year sharing a modest ranch house with seven fellow farmworkers near Fountain City. His visa does not offer him a pathway to legal permanent residency in the United States, and he will be barred from the program if he overstays.

Mike Bushman, Lilford’s employer and the owner of B&B Agri Sales in Buffalo County, considers the program the only legal and reliable source of labor for his farm. While he could hire workers who lack legal status, Bushman is wary of the legal risks. 

“You work your whole life to put something together and then take the risk of losing it all,” he said. 

The H-2A program comes with higher up-front costs, he explained, but he considers it essential  to keep his farm afloat amid a labor shortage.

Bushman is not alone. The number of seasonal workers hired by Wisconsin farmers through the H-2A program has increased six-fold over the past decade, according to 2024 state Department of Workforce Development data. The surge began long before President Donald Trump returned to office in January. Amid the White House’s ongoing immigration crackdown, however, some farmers now consider the program an even more critical alternative to workers without legal status.

The program is far from a flawless solution to the agricultural sector’s labor crisis. 

For farmers, the H-2A application process is often an expensive, slow-moving headache – one they must relive year after year.

Workers, meanwhile, frequently report wage theft and other mistreatment, and the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division routinely uncovers violations of H-2A rules on Wisconsin farms. With inspectors stretched thin, patterns of abuse and fraud can go unpunished for years. Workers who walk away from a dishonest employer or dangerous workplace risk losing their visa.

The Trump administration has introduced a litany of adjustments to the program’s rules in recent months, including cuts to minimum wages and a yet-to-be-implemented $250 fee per visa. With some details still hazy, farmers and workers are awaiting clarity on what lies ahead. 

Application process is ‘constant battle’

Farmers argue the program is rife with inefficiencies. Program staff are often difficult, if not impossible, to reach, the application process relies almost entirely on physical mail, and farmers regularly spend thousands of dollars on attorneys to help navigate the labyrinth of paperwork. Keeping an application moving on schedule is a “constant battle,” Bushman said. 

The application requires approval from multiple federal and state agencies, often resulting in delays during handoffs from one agency to another. Those hurdles and screening interview backlogs at American consulates and embassies can leave workers stuck in their home countries past the planned start of their contract.

“Last year, the workers came almost three days late,” said Adam Lauer, co-owner of a pickling cucumber farm in Waushara County. “At three days late, you’re throwing a lot of pickles away.”

Bushman said such delays were responsible for Lilford’s last-minute rush to secure a plane ticket – a systemic flaw loan sharks exploit by charging desperate workers extortionate interest rates, he added. 

Earlier this month, the Trump administration took steps to address some delays, allowing U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to begin reviewing workers’ applications while the Department of Labor considers applications from employers. That could buy more time for workers to schedule screening interviews at consulates and embassies, said Tom Bortnyk, senior vice president and general counsel for Virginia-based másLabor, which provides H-2A recruitment and application services for farmers nationwide, including in Wisconsin.

Other hurdles are tougher to fix. Federal regulators can be slow to send crucial paperwork, said Ethan Olson, a labor contractor who works with Lauer. That can leave farmers without documentation required – at least in theory – to prove they comply with H-2A rules. “You’re at the government’s mercy,” he said.

The Department of Labor did not respond to a request for comment during an ongoing government shutdown. 

Remaking the workforce

Wisconsin’s H-2A workforce is smaller than those of its neighbors, in part because the seasonal visa program is largely off-limits to the year-round dairy industry, which plays an outsized role in state agriculture. Michigan farmers hired roughly 15,000 H-2A workers in 2024, compared to fewer than 3,000 in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s H-2A workers spent the summer picking celery near Janesville, driving farm equipment in Fond du Lac County and tending pheasants outside of Marshfield. Lilford spent an October afternoon bundling equipment in Bushman’s fabrication shop while another farmhand moved feed corn into storage.

In years past, at least some of those jobs went to workers without legal status. “We went down to Florida to recruit,” said Lauer. Between 2021 and 2022 – the most recent years for which Department of Labor survey data are available — roughly 42% of crop workers surveyed lacked work authorization.

Lauer noted practical reasons to switch to an H-2A workforce. “We were so short on people,” he said. “Multiple years, 20 to 30 people short.” By the time his farm needed workers in mid-summer, many undocumented farmworkers had already found jobs elsewhere. 

Hiring undocumented workers also comes with legal risks. If caught, employers face fines of up to $3,000 per worker. Amid a nationwide immigration enforcement crackdown, Lauer said, “I wouldn’t take that chance.”

Elsewhere in Wisconsin, some farmers turned to the program as local alternatives slipped away. 

Before 2019, Dan Hanauer largely hired in and around Shawano for seasonal jobs on his Christmas tree farm. Some local workers were out of high school; others arrived through a county jail employment program.

By law, employers must offer seasonal jobs to “qualified, eligible U.S. workers,” including past employees, before hiring H-2A workers. In the past six months, prosecutors in Mississippi and Washington state have scrutinized employers who allegedly prioritized H-2A workers over U.S. workers.

Hanauer argues he was forced to switch. His local workforce, he said, was dwindling and prone to missing shifts. 

“The job description says you miss three days and you’re gone,” he added. 

On a recent weekday morning, several H-2A workers cut boughs from the bases of fir trees to be sold as Christmas wreaths — a new product for his business made possible by a more reliable team of seasonal workers from Mexico, Hanauer said.

Most of the roughly 20 H-2A workers who spoke to Wisconsin Watch — all employed by either Bushman, Lauer or Hanauer — were from Mexico. 

Upon returning to Mexico, “I take a week off to rest, and then it’s back to work,” said Israel Cruz, a construction worker who spent much of the summer picking cucumbers on Lauer’s farm in Waushara County.

Mexican nationals made up over 90% of the H-2A workforce last year, often traveling by van to and from farms in rural communities like Shawano. This year, a handful of Hanauer’s workers flew to Appleton instead. 

South Africans make up the second-largest nationality in the H-2A workforce, as they have for much of the past two decades. They outnumbered Jamaican workers, the next-largest cohort, more than 3-to-1 last year. 

Lilford, like the other members of Bushman’s crew, is an Afrikaner – a descendant of early Dutch, French and German settlers. Data on the nationalities of visa recipients does not specify ethnicity, but labor contractors who recruit in South Africa say most H-2A workers from the country are white. 

Labor costs and pay cuts

To theoretically avoid undercutting U.S. farmworker wages, the Department of Labor sets a minimum wage for H-2A workers. This year, Wisconsin H-2A employers must pay at least $18.15 an hour, up from $14.40 in 2020. The program also requires employers to pay for housing and transportation and to reimburse travel to and from workers’ home countries, none of which is required when hiring local farmworkers.

The Department of Labor announced cuts to the program’s minimum wage in early October, responding to farmers’ complaints about rising labor costs.

In a preamble to the new rule, the agency argued that the cost of participating in the H-2A program has become “increasingly burdensome” — surpassing the cost of hiring U.S. workers if they were available. The agency also noted that a decline in the number of undocumented agricultural workers will “deprive growers of a relatively cheaper labor supply,” pushing more farmers to the H-2A program.

The new rules reverse a 2023 Biden administration decision requiring farmers to pay H-2A workers based on the specific duties they perform. Some roles, like veterinary medicine and truck driving, required higher wages than standard field work, and farmers were obligated to pay according to the highest-earning role employees performed, even if it was not their primary role.  

That standard prompted legal challenges from H-2A employers, including Bushman, who joined a federal class action lawsuit challenging the rule earlier this year. A federal judge in Louisiana vacated the rule in August after a sugar cane growers’ association brought a separate lawsuit.

Instead, the Department of Labor’s new rule divides H-2A workers into two “skill levels” based on the experience and training required for their job. It does not guarantee that workers who have spent previous seasons in roles deemed “entry-level” will be paid at the higher end of the scale.

The department will also now allow employers to deduct a portion of workers’ hourly wages to reflect housing costs, which the agency argues will even the playing field for domestic farmworkers.

Wisconsin workers classified as less-skilled could receive as little as $12 per hour next year under the new standards — a reduction of 34% from the current H-2A minimum wage.

“In the countries where they’re recruiting, people are desperate enough to take a job for less than the prevailing wage,” said Jose Oliva, campaign director with HEAL Food Alliance, a national group that organizes and advocates for food supply chain workers.

New H-2A minimum wages are higher in every state neighboring Wisconsin. In Michigan and Illinois, H-2A workers will be paid at least the state minimum wages, exceeding the federal program minimum.

Program wages have always varied from state to state, said Bortnyk of másLabor. The latest changes, however, create a “meaningful enough difference” to fuel steeper recruiting competition for Wisconsin farmers. 

For Bushman, that competition is reason enough not to cut wages. The lower minimum “won’t save us anything,” he said, because retaining experienced crew members makes more business sense than training new hires.

Room for abuse

The minimum wage changes follow the Trump administration’s decision in June to suspend enforcement of Biden-era rules intended to crack down on H-2A abuses. 

Among other protections, those rules previously guaranteed that workers could invite guests like legal aid providers and clergy into employer-provided housing. In Wisconsin, H-2A workers retain that right through the state’s migrant labor law.

Wisconsin farmers are well aware of the opportunities for exploitation. 

Lauer recalled discovering that a recruiter in Mexico had charged job seekers hundreds of dollars to apply for openings on his farm — a violation of program rules.

“It all happened in Mexico, so we never saw the money,” he added. Lauer says his business cut ties with the recruiter after consular officials in Mexico alerted him of the recruiter’s practices.

None of the workers who spoke with Wisconsin Watch shared firsthand accounts of violations or mistreatment at their current workplaces. However, the Department of Labor has fined 23 Wisconsin H-2A employers for program violations in the past decade.

Auditors cited one labor contractor, Adams County-based J&P Harvest, for more than 650 violations of H-2A program rules between 2019 and 2023. The department approved J&P Harvest’s most recent application in March of this year. The company, which lists a Florida phone number in its contact information, did not respond to a request for comment.

In some cases, the Department of Labor can temporarily ban, or “debar,” farmers and contractors from participating in the program. J&P Harvest does not appear on the agency’s current list of debarred businesses, but Jan Enterprises, a flower-growing business near Green Bay, is currently banned from participating in the program for allegedly hiring H-2A workers in place of an American applicant. A related greenhouse is also on the department’s debarment list. 

According to a 2015 review by the federal Government Accountability Office and 2023 reporting by Investigate Midwest, loose enforcement of debarments has enabled some businesses to continue hiring through the H-2A program by operating under a new name. 

Federal inspectors do not catch every violation. The Wage and Hour Division employed just over 720 investigators to enforce labor laws nationwide last year, according to the Department of Labor’s fiscal year 2025 budget. The agency audited 659 agricultural workplaces last year — less than half the number of audits conducted a decade ago. 

Inspectors have recorded H-2A violations by more than half of the 42 Wisconsin agricultural employers audited since 2015, not all of which employ H-2A workers.

“There are other places where you’ll work 10 hours and they’ll pay you for nine,” said Salvador Gonzalez Mosqueda, a veteran member of Hanauer’s crew, recalling warnings about dishonest employers from fellow seasonal workers during an earlier stint in Kentucky. 

Some citations were for technical reasons. Lauer Farms, for instance, says it was fined in 2019 for missing date information on pay stubs.

Trump’s law brings new fees 

The Trump administration’s signature “big beautiful” bill-turned law adds another potential hurdle for workers and employers: a new $250 fee for all nonimmigrant visas, including H-2A. 

If federal rulemakers decide workers must pay the fee before entering the country, employers would likely be required to reimburse them. But Oliva warned that enforcement could be weak. “$250 is not chump change” for already vulnerable workers, he added.

It remains unclear whether employers will be eligible for reimbursement from the federal government once their workers return home.

“We’ll just eat another $30,000,” said Lauer, who often hires 120 or more H-2A workers over the course of the year – Wisconsin’s largest crew. While that expense alone won’t bankrupt him, Lauer considers the rising overall costs of participation unsustainable. 

“They’ll eventually push us out of business,” he said.

Workers keep returning  

Most H-2A workers who spoke with Wisconsin Watch worked on the same farms last season. 

Gonzalez, the veteran member of Hanauer’s team, said that he has returned to Shawano for the past six years, turning down offers from other farms. At Lauer Farms, roughly 90% of last year’s crew returned for the most recent harvest season. 

Some workers say they would prefer to settle in the U.S. rather than traveling back and forth from their home countries. 

“Things in Mexico are very hard,” said Jesus Hernandez Robles, another member of Hanauer’s crew. Hanauer says he has researched sponsoring seasonal employees for green cards, but without a full-time job to offer, that option is out of reach.

But Robles considers the H-2A program preferable to entering the country without a visa. 

“You can enter and leave, spend time with your family,” he said. “If you come here illegally, you have to work for a few years to pay off a coyote.” 

South African workers may have a clearer path to legal residency through the Trump administration’s new refugee program for Afrikaners. 

None of the members of Bushman’s crew who spoke to Wisconsin Watch had applied for refugee status as of early October. Anyone who did secure refugee status, Bushman said, “won’t be working in agriculture. There are just better opportunities.”

International workers continue to show interest in H-2A jobs, Bushman added. But when the federal government entered a shutdown earlier this month, the Department of Labor furloughed staff responsible for reviewing H-2A applications. If the shutdown continues into December and January — the busiest season for applications — Wisconsin farmers could be left high and dry next spring.

Farmers turn to flawed visa program in search for legal labor. Now the rules — and costs — are changing. is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

South Central Federation of Labor President Kevin Gundlach addresses a rally in support of Group Health workers seeking union representation on Monday, Oct. 13. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

On Oct. 13, Group Health Cooperative held what appeared to be its largest membership meeting in at least a decade. Scores of GHC patients filed into the Alliant Energy Center’s Exhibition Hall, packing the meeting room until there were no seats left. They voted unanimously to direct their cooperative to change course and voluntarily recognize GHC workers’ chosen union. 

This win was a long time coming for GHC workers like me. We are unionizing for many reasons. Personally, I started working as a family medicine physician at GHC 22 years ago, and was excited about working for a primary care-based, member-owned cooperative that valued clinical staff voices. But GHC has changed. Through my union involvement I’ve come to see that many of my coworkers also face struggles with high turnover and understaffing, unfair pay and discipline and racial inequities. These struggles collectively hurt our ability to provide excellent patient care.

By supporting each other and working together through a union, we can better advocate for ourselves and improve our ability to provide the best patient care. Our input as employees is not only useful, but critical, to making GHC the best it can be.

But since we announced our intention to unionize in December, GHC has waged a relentless union-busting campaign. Following the legal counsel of antiunion law firm Husch Blackwell, administrators have engaged in surveillance and other intimidation tactics, and even used union activity as a factor in discipline. Their actions are under investigation by the National Labor Relations Board. GHC has also consistently parroted legal arguments straight from the Trump administration’s attacks on workers’ rights. 

GHC’s most fundamental attack, however, has been on our ability to choose for ourselves what our union looks like. We are creating a union of providers and nursing staff in primary and urgent care and closely related units – basically, the generalists you first see when you get care – since we all share issues in common and would benefit from bargaining together.

But GHC administrators are seeking to forcibly add on workers in specialty care units like optometry and radiology who haven’t even sought collective bargaining. Why? They hope to dilute our Yes votes and make it impossible for us to win a union election. They like to claim that the National Labor Relations Board sides with them, and that these specialty care workers must join with us – but don’t believe it. While the NLRB has said that the employer’s version of our union was feasible, they also said they weren’t offering an opinion on the appropriateness of a primary and urgent care union. GHC is still free to recognize the union we chose. 

GHC has also been confused, or is misleading, about what it is we’re asking for. Speaking with Wisconsin Examiner’s Erik Gunn, GHC representative Marty Anderson said “voluntary recognition” wasn’t likely, because they’d want “an NLRB sanctioned and overseen vote.” But voluntary recognition is an NLRB-sanctioned process: all GHC needs to do is tell the NLRB that they recognize our chosen union, either with or without an NLRB-sanctioned card check or secret-ballot demonstration of majority support. That’s voluntary recognition. It would save everyone further time and expense, not to mention cultivate a positive relationship between both parties going forward. We look forward to a collaborative relationship with GHC as we move forward as a union. 

Attending the meeting on Oct. 13 and seeing the support from our patients and community was truly heartwarming. It reinforced my decision to become active in our union movement – both for ourselves and for the care that we provide to our dedicated patients. Excellent patient care is at the heart of our union movement.

And GHC patients have made it clear, with a unanimous vote, that they stand shoulder to shoulder with their caregivers. As a cooperative where members stand “at the top of the leadership chart,” GHC’s Board should respect membership’s vote by voluntarily recognizing our union, effective immediately. To do anything else is unthinkable in any cooperative that claims to be democratically run.

To show your support, please send an email to the GHC Board telling them to respect the will of the membership and recognize our union: https://act.seiu.org/a/ghc-board-1.

Nisha Rajagopalan, MD is a family medicine physician at GHC’s Hatchery Hill Clinic.

South Central Federation of Labor President Kevin Gundlach addresses a rally in support of Group Health workers seeking union representation on Monday, Oct. 13. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

A stalemate between Group Health Cooperative of South Central Wisconsin and employees who have been seeking union representation for the last 10 months shows little sign of breaking soon.

At a mass meeting Monday at the Alliant Center in Madison, members of Group Health, sometimes called GHC for short, passed a motion directing the co-op to voluntarily recognize the union as the employees originally petitioned in December — covering three departments and a series of health care professionals.

The motion set a deadline of Friday, Oct. 17. Marty Anderson, Group Health’s chief strategy and business development officer, said Thursday that action on all the motions would likely be deferred, probably until November.

“We communicated clearly ahead of the meeting that all motions are advisory in nature,” Anderson said. “Any deadlines that would be in any of the motions would also be advisory in nature.”

Monday’s mass meeting was the first of its kind for Group Health members to ask questions of the co-op administration and express their opinions about the union drive. About 172 people attended, according to a Group Health spokesperson. Group Health has more than 50,000 Class A and Founding members — the two groups that were considered eligible to attend, according to the co-op.

In the spring, a volunteer committee met with the board to argue in favor of recognizing the union. 

People attending the Monday meeting described the crowd as strongly supportive of the union, and the voice votes in favor of recognizing the union and other motions favored by union supporters were unanimous, according to Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Wisconsin. 

Growing dissatisfaction 

At a rally outside the Alliant Center before the meeting, South Central Labor Federation President Kevin Gundlach, a Group Health member, charged that the co-op “has lost its way” in its response to the union organizing drive.

“We want GHC to listen to the workers,” Gundlach said. “And these workers know, and it says on my shirt here” — he pointed to his chest — “it’s better in a union.”

Group Health has rejected charges that it’s trying to thwart the union drive, contending that it simply wants health care employees in all departments to take part in the union representation vote — not just those from departments and job classifications that were included in the original union petition.

Union supporters say that claim is disingenuous and a ploy to “dilute the vote,” in the words of several workers interviewed — racking up votes against the union from employees in departments that don’t have the same concerns.

Anderson denied the charge. “We don’t know” what the votes will be, he said.

According to workers involved in the union drive, the Group Health union campaign grew out of increasing dissatisfaction in specific co-op departments with working conditions and what they contend was a lack of input into the co-op’s practices.

“I feel like we can improve the patient care that we provide through unionization and through increased involvement in decision-making,” Dr. Nisha Rajagopalan, a family physician who has worked at Group Health for 22 years, said Thursday.

Pay practices, employee turnover and a voice at the table are all reasons employees have cited for supporting the union.

“GHC leadership stopped collaborating with us and despite our many patient care concerns and our many meeting requests,” said Julie Vander Werff, a physician assistant, the lead speaker at the Monday rally.

Who should be in the union?

Complicating the organizing campaign is the conflict over exactly who among Group Health’s workers should be included in the union.

Union supporters involved in the organizing drive originally proposed that the union represent a bargaining unit of about 220 people. They were doctors, physician assistants, nurse practitioners and nursing staff in three departments: primary care, urgent care and dermatology. Their petition also included physical therapists, occupational therapists and health educators.

The petition was filed Dec. 12, 2024. Group Health filed a brief asserting that the unit the employees sought “was an inappropriate unit,” said Anderson, the Group Health executive.

To resolve the differences, a National Labor Relations Board staffer held a meeting on Dec. 30 in Madison, where he moved between separate rooms, one housing Group Health executives and the co-op’s lawyer, the other housing SEIU Wisconsin staff and Group Health employees leading the union drive.

The NLRB staffer suggested to the union group that they narrow their petition to a single clinic, Group Health employees wrote in a letter to the Group Health board of directors Feb. 10, 2025. Hoping to get an agreement, they took the suggestion.

Group Health opposed the single-clinic unit, however. In subsequent hearings the co-op management’s lawyer argued the vote should include all direct care employees, including in departments that weren’t part of the union’s original petition.

After reviewing briefs from both sides, the NLRB regional director in Minneapolis who heard the case ruled that the single clinic unit that the union had proposed would not be an appropriate bargaining unit. The decision issued by Regional Director Jennifer Hadsall stated that the unit proposed by the employer, Group Health, was appropriate and set an election among all the co-op’s health care employees.

SEIU Wisconsin, however, moved to block the election. A raft of pending unfair labor practice charges against the employer could scare employees from voting for the union, SEIU charged. Hadsall agreed to block the vote until the charges are resolved.  

As a result, the vote is on hold. The NLRB investigation of the charges is on hold as well, because of the federal government shutdown.

Shared concerns, conflicting concerns

In her order, Hadsall also included a footnote that states she did not address the unit that the employees had originally asked for because it had not been formally litigated.

“We had always argued that we are a clinically integrated organization,” Anderson said. “Our staff floats between various parts of the organization and different clinics. And the bargaining unit was established [consisting of] all of our clinical sites and all of our direct care employees.”

But pro-union employees say there are concrete differences between employees who are in the groups that they had originally included in the union petition and the rest of the Group Health staff — including direct care providers.

“Initially our bargaining unit included employees who were in primary care and urgent care,” said Rajagopalan, the family doctor. “We practice similarly and we share the same concerns. There are other departments within GHC that don’t share the same concerns [and] practice very differently than we do. That’s why our initial bargaining unit is an appropriate unit.”

Pat Raes, president of SEIU Wisconsin and a nurse at UnityPoint-Meriter hospital in Madison, said that throughout her health care career she’s seen many workplaces where only some groups of workers are unionized.

“At the bedside or at the side of the patient, it doesn’t make a difference because the priority is patient care,” Raes said. “It’s not whether you’re unionized or not.”

Addressing the rally before Monday night’s meeting, Steve Rankin said it was “entirely normal” for workers in a single workplace to be represented by different unions or no union depending on their department or position.

“There is no reason that everyone at Group Health has to be in the same union,” said Rankin, who joined Group Health when it was founded in 1976 and has been active in marshalling Group Health patients to support the union effort. “We call on GHC to recognize the bargaining unit chosen by the workers themselves and to commit to bargaining in good faith toward the contract.”

While the board has yet to consider the motion that was passed at Monday night’s meeting, Anderson said Thursday that voluntary recognition was unlikely. 

“We want an NLRB sanctioned and overseen vote,” he said. “That’s always going to be our criteria.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A U.S. National Park Service lock keeps John Brown's Fort shut and secured in the Harpers Ferry National Historical Park Lower Town on Oct. 2, 2025 in Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, during the government shutdown. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Bare-bones staffing during the government shutdown across the Interior Department and the U.S. Forest Service is leaving America’s treasured natural assets vulnerable to lasting damage, according to advocates for public lands, including current and former agency employees.

National parks and most public lands remain accessible to visitors, including those run by the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service. 

But the lack of staff already has led to reports of bad behavior, like illegal camping and BASE jumping at California’s Yosemite National Park, and parks advocates and workers told States Newsroom they fear more to come as the shutdown that began Oct. 1 continues with no end in sight.

Adjustments to park staff meant to “front-load visitor services” hide some of the long-term harms, said John Garder, the senior director of budget and appropriations at the advocacy group National Parks Conservation Association. 

The NPS furloughed more than 9,000 of its roughly 14,500 workers, according to a planning document published just before the shutdown began on Oct. 1. 

That has left the people responsible for protecting “irreplaceable resources” and trail management workers needing to instead clean visitor centers and oversee parking, Garder said.

“What that’s done is created this facade for the visitors, so that in many cases they don’t see the damage that’s happening behind the scenes,” he said in a phone interview Wednesday.

Should parks be closed?

The NPCA, a nonprofit that advocates for national parks, has called for parks to close during the shutdown to avoid lasting damage. Others in the conservation community have joined in.

Aaron Weiss, the deputy director of the conservation advocacy group Center for Western Priorities, likened the situation to allowing visitors to ramble through an unstaffed Smithsonian museum.

“The national parks are effectively museums,” he said. “This would be like the Smithsonian saying, ‘Well, you know, we don’t have the staff to keep the Smithsonian museum staffed, but we’ll go ahead and leave the gates, the doors open, and come in and take a look, do what you want.’ 

“That would be horrifically irresponsible of the Smithsonian, but that is exactly what the National Park Service is saying.”

The nature of many park sites makes closing difficult. 

The largest parks, comprising sprawling lands, often lack comprehensive fencing or other ways to keep people out. Public lands outside the Park Service, including those managed by BLM and the Forest Service, are even less likely to have barriers to entry.

Still, the Interior Department under President Donald Trump has prioritized keeping parks open to an extent other administrations have not planned for during shutdowns, by transferring funds meant for park maintenance to be used for operations.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has downplayed reports of improper behavior in the parks while blaming the closures on congressional Democrats who have mostly opposed a stopgap spending bill that would reopen the government. Democrats want Republicans to negotiate on expiring health care tax credits.

“Of course, all of our many sites…. would be better operated and better staffed if the Senate would just get us back in the government,” Burgum said in a Fox News interview Tuesday. “Way to go, Senate Democrats.”

Spokespeople for the NPS did not return messages seeking comment this week. Many communications staff across the federal government have been furloughed during the shutdown and are not legally allowed to respond to messages.

BLM spokeswoman Alyse Sharpe said in an email that the agency would “keep public lands as accessible as possible” during the shutdown. 

“Critical functions that protect life, property, and public health will remain in place, including visitor access in many locations, law enforcement, and emergency response,” she wrote.

Sharpe did not respond to questions about the concerns over lands’ long-term health.

‘Demoralizing’ atmosphere

Meanwhile, the shutdown has accelerated a drop in morale for the federal workforce responsible for public lands, at least some of whom are exasperated by what they see as the Trump administration’s failure to value their work. 

More than half of Interior’s nearly 60,000 employees have been furloughed during the shutdown. That reality, on top of staff reductions earlier this year and threatened additional layoffs by Trump and White House budget director Russ Vought, have added to a sense for many resource managers that the administration doesn’t place a priority on their jobs.

Chris Tollefson, a former communications official at the BLM and the Fish and Wildlife Service who took a buyout this year after a nearly 27-year run at the Interior agencies, said the administration’s posture was “demoralizing” for the agencies’ career employees who consider their work on behalf of public lands a calling.

“The people I know get into this because they care passionately about the land and about the resources they protect,” he said. “Most of them have deep roots in the communities they come from, and it’s really demoralizing to feel like your life’s work has been devalued and that what you’re doing doesn’t matter, that the people in charge feel like it doesn’t matter. So it’s been really hard.”

One furloughed Interior Department worker, who requested her identity be withheld because she is not authorized to speak to reporters, said the department may have trouble attracting qualified employees in the future.

“I came to the government to get a little bit more stability, thinking that it was going to be a safer bet,” the furloughed worker said. “And that has definitely not been the case. It’s not felt as stable as other positions. … I think a lot of folks that are with the federal government are there because of the perception of stability. When you take away that perception of stability, those positions aren’t going to be quite as attractive to talent that you would have attracted.”

Oil and gas permitting continues

Further irritating advocates of conservation, the shutdown has not slowed oil and gas development despite furloughs of staff responsible for science and recreation.

As of Oct. 15, the BLM had issued an average of 19.8 oil and gas permits per day since the shutdown began at the start of the month. That’s roughly on par with a typical month during Trump’s second administration, and represents the highest per-day average since May, according to an analysis of publicly available data by Weiss.

“It’s a statement of values,” Weiss said. “The Interior Department is telling the agency and telling America, ‘The folks who manage drilling on public lands are more important than the folks who actually do the day-to-day caring for our public lands.’ You don’t have the biologists, you don’t have the land managers, you don’t have the folks doing the trail maintenance. Those folks have all been furloughed, but the folks doing the oil and gas permitting are somehow essential.”

Agencies and departments can list some workers as exempt from furloughs. Those employees are kept on the job, though they generally do not receive paychecks until the government is reopened. 

In a post to Instagram on the first day of the shutdown, the Interior Department said it would continue issuing permits “and other efforts related to American Energy Dominance” despite a lapse in appropriations.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

About 13,000 disabled workers previously declared ineligible for unemployment insurance are being sent mailed notices from the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development notifying them they might be eligible for past benefits, worth potentially hundreds to thousands of dollars per person. 

The DWD began processing nearly 10 years worth of unemployment claims from individuals who, under a 2013 state law, were previously declared ineligible for those benefits due to simultaneously receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). But last year a court struck down that law.

That means thousands of people could receive financial compensation if they were either denied unemployment benefits or ordered to repay benefits they received between Sept. 8, 2015, and July 29, 2025, because the person collected SSDI. 

A spokesperson for DWD said the total cost of the claims the agency may have to pay out is unclear right now. Individuals who receive unemployment insurance can receive a maximum of $370 per week for at most 26 weeks, which would be $9,620. But not every person files for the entire 26-week period. The current average is 13 weeks, the spokesperson said. 

What led to this?

A federal judge in 2024 struck down the law that previously blocked individuals from receiving both SSDI benefits and unemployment insurance. 

While the judge ruled the law was discriminatory, the DWD continued to deny unemployment claims until July when the process was ordered to stop. The same federal judge then in August ordered DWD to compensate people who were previously denied or forced to repay unemployment benefits while receiving SSDI between 2015 and 2025. 

A spokesperson for DWD said it is mailing notices to individuals who may be eligible for past benefits, but warned that it will take time to process the claims from the designated time period. 

While DWD is mailing about 13,000 notices, the agency doesn’t know how many people will actually reach out about filing a claim to receive the past benefits. Individuals must call DWD about their claim within 90 days of receiving a notice from the agency. 

Where can I go for more information?

The DWD has a web page with guidance and answers to questions about the court order and individuals who may be eligible for past unemployment benefits. 

People with questions can also contact a DWD Help Center phone number at 414-435-7069 or toll free at 844-910-3661 during business hours.

After court ruling, some 13,000 disabled Wisconsin workers notified they may be eligible for backpay is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., is pictured on Oct. 8, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate returned to Capitol Hill on Tuesday following a four-day weekend, but neither Republicans nor Democrats appeared ready to work toward ending the government shutdown following another failed vote to advance a short-term funding bill. 

President Donald Trump and administration officials also didn’t seem inclined toward compromise anytime soon, if ever, previewing more spending cuts and layoffs as soon as this week. 

“We are closing up programs that are Democratic programs that we wanted to close up or that we never wanted to happen and now we’re closing them up and we’re not going to let them come back,” Trump said. “We’re not closing up Republican programs because we think they work.”

Trump said his administration will release a list of projects it’s cancelled or plans to eliminate funding for on Friday — another step that’s unlikely to bring about the type of bipartisanship and goodwill needed to end the shutdown. 

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget posted on social media it will try to alleviate some of the repercussions of the funding lapse and reduce the size of government while waiting for at least five more Senate Democrats to break ranks to advance a stopgap spending bill. 

“OMB is making every preparation to batten down the hatches and ride out the Democrats’ intransigence,” agency staff wrote. “Pay the troops, pay law enforcement, continue the RIFs, and wait.” 

RIFs refers to Reductions in Force, the technical term for layoffs. The administration announced Friday it sent notices to employees at several departments, including Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Treasury telling them they would soon not have jobs.

Labor unions representing hundreds of thousands of federal workers filed a lawsuit to block the layoffs from taking effect. The judge overseeing that case scheduled a Wednesday hearing to listen to arguments before deciding whether to grant a temporary restraining order. 

Back pay in question

The Trump administration has made several moves during the shutdown that are not typically taken during prolonged funding lapses.

Trump and Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought have indicated they may not provide back pay to furloughed federal workers after the shutdown ends, which is required by a 2019 law. And they have sought to cancel funding approved by Congress for projects in sections of the country that vote for Democrats. 

The Pentagon is also reprogramming money to provide pay for active duty military members this week, despite Congress not taking action on that issue.

The Trump administration’s efforts to reduce the size of government during the shutdown are widely seen as an effort to pressure Democrats to vote for the stopgap spending bill, but they haven’t had any measurable effect so far. 

Another failed Senate vote

The Senate deadlocked for an eighth time Tuesday evening on the House-passed funding bill that would last through Nov. 21. The vote was 49-45. The bill needs at least 60 senators to advance under the chamber’s rules. 

Nevada Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and Maine independent Sen. Angus King voted with Republicans to advance their bill. Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman, who has been voting to advance the bill, didn’t vote. Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul voted no.

Trump said during his afternoon event he wanted Democrats to sign something to reopen government, though it wasn’t clear what he meant since lawmakers in the Senate vote by giving a thumbs up or down. 

“This was a position that’s being forced upon us by Democrats and all they have to do is just sign a piece of paper saying we’re going to keep it going the way it is,” Trump said. “You know, it’s nothing. It shouldn’t even be an argument. They’ve signed it many times before.”

No strategy

During a morning press conference, House Speaker Mike Johnson said he would not change his approach or negotiate with Democrats on a stopgap measure. 

“I don’t have any strategy,” the Louisiana Republican said. “The strategy is to do the right and obvious thing and keep the government moving for the people.”

Johnson has kept the House out of session since late September but has been holding daily press conferences with members of his leadership team to criticize Democrats and press them to advance the short-term funding bill. 

GOP Rep. Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, the chairwoman of the House Rules Committee, said starting Tuesday an additional 400,000 civilian federal workers would receive partial paychecks due to the government shutdown. Those federal employees work at the departments of Education and Interior, as well as the National Science Foundation. 

“This will be the last paycheck that these federal workers receive until Democrats grow a spine and reopen the federal government,” she said. 

Last week, 700,000 civilian federal workers received about 70% of their usual paycheck, due to the shutdown. Those employees work for the Executive Office of the President, Health and Human Services, Department of Veterans Affairs, civilians at the Defense Department, NASA, General Services Administration and the Office of Personnel Management, among others.

Active duty military members were set to miss their first paycheck Wednesday until the Pentagon shifted $8 billion in research funds to pay the troops on time. 

U.S. Capitol Police Labor Committee Chairman Gus Papathanasiou released a statement Tuesday that the thousands of officers who protect members of Congress missed a full paycheck Friday. 

“The longer the shutdown drags on, the harder it becomes for my officers,” Papathanasiou wrote. “Banks and landlords do not give my officers a pass because we are in a shutdown — they still expect to be paid. 

“Unfortunately, Congress and the Administration are not in active negotiations, and everyone is waiting for the other side to blink. That is not how we are going to end this shutdown, and the sooner they start talking, the quicker we can end this thing.”

Maryland, Virginia Dems rally

Seeking to pressure the Trump administration to negotiate, Democratic lawmakers who represent Maryland and Virginia, where many federal workers live, held a rally outside the Office of Management and Budget in the morning.

Virginia Sen. Mark Warner rebuked GOP leaders, including OMB Director Vought, for using federal workers as “political pawns” and “trading chips in some political debate.”

He said that when an agreement is brokered to reopen government, the Trump administration must adhere to it and not illegally withhold or cancel funds approved by Congress, which holds the power of the purse. 

“We’ll get the government reopened, but we have to make sure that when a deal is struck, it is kept,” Warner said. “Russ Vought at the OMB cannot pick and choose which federal programs to fund after Congress and the president have come together.”

Maryland Sen. Angela Alsobrooks sought to encourage Republicans to negotiate with Democrats to extend the enhanced tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the year for people who purchase health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace. 

“The Republicans would prefer to shut down the government than to ensure your family has affordable health care,” Alsobrooks said. “It is more than shameful, it is immoral and it is the kind of immorality that will hurt our country for generations to come.”

Democrats in Congress insisted before the shutdown began and for the 14 days it’s been ongoing that they will not vote to advance the short-term government funding bill without a bipartisan agreement on the expiring subsidies. 

GOP leaders have said they will negotiate on that issue, but only after Democrats advance the stopgap spending bill through the Senate.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries argued during an afternoon press conference that Republicans need Democratic votes in the Senate to advance the stopgap funding bill and should try to negotiate a deal.

“We need them to abandon their failed ‘my way or the highway’ approach,” the New York Democrat said. “If Democratic votes are needed to reopen the government, which is the case, then this has to be a bipartisan discussion to find a bipartisan resolution to reopen the government.”

This report has been clarified to say President Donald Trump referred to “Democrat programs.”

A September 2025 view of Drumgoon Dairy, which Dorothy and Rodney Elliott opened in 2006 near Lake Norden, South Dakota. (Photo by Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)

LAKE NORDEN — The names on the list included some of Dorothy Elliott’s best employees: hardworking, reliable, honest.

Most had been working at Drumgoon Dairy for years. Some worked there for nearly two decades, playing a role in the operation’s expansion and success.

But after an audit of the dairy at the end of May by the federal Department of Homeland Security, 38 of those employees are gone.

The department said they each had inaccurate, outdated or incomplete proof of U.S. citizenship or permission to work in the country.

Elliott co-owns the farm near Lake Norden, 5 miles from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s eastern South Dakota home. Elliott asked the affected employees for updated documentation but ultimately had to fire those who weren’t able to adequately resolve the problems with their documents. One person returned home because his visa was expiring, and another quit.

The audit decimated Elliott’s workforce, once more than 50 employees, dropping it to just 16.

Audits at dairy farms under the Trump administration’s escalated immigration enforcement efforts have “created unrest” among workers and owners, Elliott said. It’s made for a tough summer in an industry that was flourishing after decades of support from state government.

Elliott’s remaining employees have been working without breaks, she said. Without a pathway or plan to create a sustainable workforce in agriculture and by “removing everyone working in it,” she worries some agricultural operations will go out of business. She hopes Drumgoon isn’t one of them.

“Basically, we’ve turned off the tap, but we’ve done nothing to create a solution as to how we find employees for the dairy industry,” she said.

Never previously audited

Elliott is required to file I-9 forms with documentation proving her workers’ identity and eligibility to work in the U.S. It puts employers in a difficult position, said Scott VanderWal, president of the South Dakota Farm Bureau, because applicants may present fraudulent documents an employer doesn’t catch. Yet employers could also be sued for mistakenly rejecting valid documents.

“If employers are presented with documentation that looks real and legitimate, they’re obligated to accept it,” VanderWal said. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services offers similar guidance, saying employers must accept documentation if it “reasonably appears to be genuine.”

Elliott could use the federal government’s web-based system, E-Verify, that allows employers to confirm their employees’ eligibility to work in the country. But E-Verify is not mandated for new hires in South Dakota, and Elliott said she doesn’t use it because of “unreliable results.” Organizations ranging from the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute to the American Civil Liberties Union have opposed the use of E-Verify, citing reasons including errors that cost people jobs because the system wrongly flagged them. 

So Elliott evaluates applicants’ documents herself. If their IDs are out of date or if they have a visa and are applying from another farm without returning home, she passes on hiring them. She’s turned people away a dozen times over the years, she said.

Drumgoon was never audited before. In her past dealings with the Department of Homeland Security during nearly two decades of running the dairy, Elliott said, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents would merely tell her they were searching for a person and ask for a notification if the person applied for a job. 

This time was different. After an audit, employers are required to terminate unauthorized workers who can’t prove their employability, according to a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson. Audits — which are distinct from raids or other immigration enforcement operations — are meant to ensure businesses comply with federal employment laws. 

Elliott does not know where her 38 former employees went. They could be working at other dairies in the U.S. They could have left the country. They could be anywhere.

Because the dairy is near a farm owned by Noem, the former governor of South Dakota, and because Noem was in the state during the month of the audit to receive an honorary degree, South Dakota Searchlight asked the Department of Homeland Security if Noem had a direct role in the audit. The department didn’t respond to the question.

Elliott declined to talk about Noem, saying she recognizes that federal immigration authorities “have a job to do.” 

South Dakota Farmers Union President Doug Sombke called federal dairy audits “stupid,” because they needlessly displace workers. 

“Why the heck can’t we continue to use them there as an intern or apprentice or whatever you want to call it and make it legal? Why is it so important we grab them and call them a criminal? No one wants those jobs,” Sombke said. “I don’t understand why you’d cripple or cause problems for a labor shortage when all you have to do is get them legalized.”

Immigrants hiring immigrants

Elliott’s connection to immigrants isn’t limited to her employees. She was born in the United States but married her husband, Rodney, in Northern Ireland, where they had their children. 

Eliott worked in health care and her husband operated their 140-cow dairy farm in Northern Ireland when a newspaper ad, “Wanted: Dairy farmers in South Dakota,” caught their attention. Moving to America meant fewer regulations, cheaper land, cheaper feed and the ability to grow their business, she said.

The couple used the EB-5 investment-for-visa program to secure backers for their operation, opened the dairy in 2006, paid off the investors within a few years and have been expanding ever since. They started with about 1,500 cows in 2006 and have grown to 6,500.

Elliott’s children got their citizenship shortly after moving to the U.S., and her husband became a citizen about eight years after they moved. That experience helps her empathize with her workers, many of whom are Hispanic. She said everything they’re doing is to support their families back home, even though many aren’t able to see their families for years at a time.

“All they’re guilty of is working and doing a job that isn’t currently being filled by an American,” Elliott said.

Taneeza Islam advocates for immigrants as executive director of South Dakota Voices for Peace. She’s spoken to immigrant workers in other industries who were scared and confused after being terminated due to stricter immigration enforcement. 

“We have two very separate worlds right now: the community that’s impacted and worried about getting detained and deported, and the community that doesn’t know this is happening here,” Islam said.

State recruited dairies

The Elliotts are among many new South Dakotans who’ve helped the dairy industry boom in the last two decades. Then-governor and now-U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican, focused on supporting the industry in the early 2000s, which included efforts to recruit farmers from overseas.

In 2010, South Dakota’s dairy industry had an economic impact of $1.27 billion. By 2023, that had grown to $5.67 billion.

“We’ve achieved our goals we set out for ourselves: build a dairy, milk cows and grow the dairy industry in South Dakota,” Elliott said. “Is it a sustainable goal if there’s nobody to work on these dairies? No. So all the time, money, effort, investment and hard work that has gone into it will be null and void if there isn’t a workforce.”

Sombke, the state Farmers Union president, said the state’s investment in dairy “has been a good thing,” but he isn’t surprised by the recent disruption in the industry.

South Dakota Searchlight requested the number of audits conducted in South Dakota so far in 2025, but a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said the department “does not disclose specific data on audits or enforcement actions by state or industry.”

Sombke said dairy audits are “way up” in the state compared to last year. He said nobody should be surprised to find workers at dairies without permission to be in the country. 

“What do you expect? The unemployment rate is less than 2% in the state,” Sombke said. “You’re going to be looking for labor anywhere you can find it.”

Aftermath of an audit

Drumgoon Dairy’s remaining employees have made mistakes because of the long hours they’ve had to cover — like reversing a payloader into a manure pond — or because they’re new to working on the farm.

“Some of them only get one or two days off in a 15-day period,” Elliott said. “But what else do you do? Do you just let cows starve or calves die because there’s no one there to take care of them?”

Some nearby farms sent workers to help at Drumgoon for a couple of days at a time this summer after the audit. Elliott and her husband have spent over $110,000 on recruiters and transportation so far to hire 22 visa workers from Mexico. But the visas come with restrictions on the types of jobs workers can do, so Elliott hired a dozen or so new employees locally, and still wants to hire another 10 to 15 people to replace terminated staff.

Elliott is struggling to find local applicants, which she is required by law to attempt before hiring visa workers. 

“If raising wages even more will bring Americans to work on the farm, we can try it,” Elliott said, “but there is a limit to how high you can raise wages when you don’t get to set the price of milk. Can I afford to pay a milker $25 an hour? At some point, you’d produce milk for more than you’re receiving for it.”

Trump could lead immigration reforms, Thune says

After a panel discussion at the annual Dakotafest agricultural trade show in Mitchell in August, U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, told South Dakota Searchlight that he believes President Donald Trump is interested in legal immigration and work visa reforms.

“If we can find some willing partners in the Democrats, some sort of an immigration policy or a piece of legislation that we could pass is not outside the realm of possibility,” Thune said. “Ultimately, that’s the best long-term solution, and I’ve heard him talk about it.”

Sen. Rounds told Searchlight that as more people are deported and industries are disrupted, “we will get enough support from the administration to begin looking at a legal system again.”

Republican U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson, who is running for South Dakota governor next year, said some visa programs should be modified to meet the needs of the dairy industry. Some visas are seasonal programs that require participants to return home after a few months. The programs don’t fit the needs of dairy operations that require workers year-round.

Elliott has broached the issue for years to Thune, Johnson, Rounds and other federal officials.

“All I hear is, ‘I’ll mention that. We’ll talk about that.’ But nothing,” Elliott said. “What we hear is there is absolutely no passion for any kind of change to the status quo.”

Farmers suggest solutions

Lynn Boadwine of Boadwine Farms in Baltic has “run out of gas” trying to advocate for visa and immigration policy changes to support the dairy industry. But he was heartened to hear the congressional delegates’ comments.

“There’s rhetoric, but are you really working on it?” Boadwine said. “I hope they are, because the clock is really ticking on all of these issues and we’re going to start to run out of people.”

Boadwine shared immigration reform ideas with congressional offices but hasn’t heard back on the topic. His hope is to modernize and simplify the H-2A visa program for dairies. His proposal would remove the seasonality requirement and allow workers in the country without legal permission to transition to guest-worker status. Long-term guest workers would have a path toward permanent residency by proving they are law-abiding, hardworking employees.

VanderWal, with the South Dakota Farm Bureau, said he met this spring with Noem in Washington, D.C., in his capacity as vice president of the American Farm Bureau Federation. He urged Noem and the Trump administration to back off on audits in the agricultural industry in hopes that Congress would “fix the system.”

“We wanted to impress upon the administration that if they started removing illegal workers up and down the food chain, from production to processing to transportation to grocery stores to restaurants, we’d see a disaster worse than the pandemic,” VanderWal said.

The administration has since “backed off ag,” VanderWal said, but the consequences linger for producers like the Elliotts and their employees. He said that unless President Trump “gets real forceful and goes after it,” he doesn’t expect Congress to undertake legal immigration reforms.

Economic consequence predicted

At Drumgoon Dairy, Elliott has tried automating aspects of her operation. She and her husband put in 20 robots a few years ago with the expectation they could hire students from nearby Lake Area Technical College’s robotics program to maintain them.

They posted robotics maintenance positions to attract graduates, but the response was deflating.

“To date, no one,” Elliott said.

She plans to remove the robots because the cost of running and servicing them is too expensive. So far, they’ve sold three. If the cost of technology continues to be prohibitive or there aren’t reforms to workforce visa or immigration programs, she said, “I wonder how we will become a sustainable industry.”

Elliott fears there will be consequences and higher prices for milk and other consumer dairy products without action at the federal level. Boadwine agreed.

“If we keep down this road we’ll have no choice but to import more food,” Boadwine said, “and the reason we’d import more is because it’s gotten so much more expensive here because we crippled ourselves.”

Wisconsin landscape | Photo by Greg Conniff for Wisconsin Examiner

President Donald Trump’s tariffs are becoming a major drain on Wisconsin’s agricultural economy. China stopped purchasing U.S. soybeans amid a new trade war this spring, triggering a price collapse and leaving farmers wondering what to do with the bumper crop they are now harvesting. Cranberry growers say they’re facing low prices and market uncertainty, too, as other countries turn away their products because of tariffs. 

Small wonder the latest ag economy barometer published by Purdue University on Oct. 7 found that nationwide farmers say their economic condition is weakening. Despite expected record-high corn and soybean yields, farmers report they expect weaker financial performance in 2025 than in 2024 and have a weaker capital investment outlook.

Yet even as optimism about the farm economy is fading, support for Trump among farmers remains strong.

Back in March, 70% of farmers who answered the Purdue survey said they believed tariffs would strengthen the agricultural economy in the long run. That number dropped steeply to 51% by September. Still a large majority — 71% – continue to believe the country as a whole is moving in the right direction, and 80% believe the Trump administration is likely or very likely to give them an aid package to compensate for the damage done by tariffs and trade wars.  

U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wisconsin) reinforced this hope on the WRDN radio podcast from the World Dairy Expo in Madison last week. Tiffany, who is running for governor, was asked what he says to farmers who are “fed up” with Trump’s tariffs. He replied that Trump tariffs are not going away, but, he said of the administration, “they’re gonna use some of that tariff revenue, which is significant, to help farmers out. Because they know, I mean, President Trump has no better friends than the farmers of America.” 

Trump has suggested he will unveil another farm bailout as he did during his first administration, when China responded to steep tariffs by scaling back purchases of U.S. agricultural products. 

The problem with the bailout solution, says Gbenga Ajilore, chief economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and former senior adviser for rural development at USDA, is that the revenue generated by tariffs that Trump proposes to convert into handouts to farmers comes directly from the farmers themselves.  

“It’s not even like robbing Peter to pay Paul. It’s like robbing Peter to pay Peter,” Ajilore said in a phone interview Wednesday. “What’s happening is that there are tariffs on a lot of goods — looking at steel, aluminum, looking at fertilizers. So farmers are paying more for their inputs. We’re seeing this impacting these companies like Caterpillar, John Deere. And so you can say there’s a lot of revenue, but it’s coming out of the pockets of consumers, businesses and farmers.” 

If farmers are not already feeling seasick as the Trump administration spins the ag economy around on a cycle of tariffs and bailouts, the administration’s immigration crackdown is also making them queasy. 

A panel discussion at last week’s World Dairy Expo focused on a labor shortage made worse by a Trump administration that seems hell-bent on deporting the agricultural workforce.

The recent ICE action that scooped up 24 dairy workers in Manitowoc, most of whom had no criminal records, and deportations of entire crews of legally present H2A workers in Texas had farmers who attended the discussion worried.

“Taking hard-working employees off farms does not make communities safer,” said Brain Rexing, a dairy farmer from Indiana. He described the Hispanic workers on his farm as “way more than employees. — they work together with me and my family side to side.”

Like other farmers, he said, he goes to bed at night worrying about his workers and wakes up in the morning worrying about them. Instead of threatening farmworkers with deportation, Rexing and other farmers at the Expo said, Congress should finally get around to creating a year-round visa that recognizes their essential contributions to the U.S. economy. 

U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wisconsin) spoke to the group and assured them that the Trump administration has their back. He had personally spoken with Elon Musk he said. “I was like, hey, Elon, there’s two groups of people in the United States that we need to really watch out for. One of them are service members and veterans, because they gave us our freedom and keep us free. And the second one are our farmers, because they feed us. .. So he really zoned in on that and grasped it,” Van Orden said. 

Another “incredibly, incredibly strong proponent of the dairy industry,” he added, “is Tom Homan.”  Homan is Trump’s border czar and the architect of the family separation policy during the first Trump administration. “He was raised on a dairy farm,” Van Orden said. “So keep that in mind. There are some people in D.C. that understand what’s going on. We’re trying our best to help you. So I would just ask that you stay in the business and that God will bless you.”

It was not the most reassuring speech. But Van Orden also asked the dairy farmers in the room to support his proposal for a new system to make their workforce legal, which would impose a fine on employers and dairy workers and then require the workers to self-deport before returning to the country under a new federal program that would allow them to do their jobs legally. He introduced the bill in July and it was referred to the House Agriculture Committee, of which he is a member. 

The farmers, understandably, had a lot of questions.

What was their workers’ incentive to participate? How long would it take the government to process their paperwork, remove them from the country and let them back in again? How do they know they won’t be deported as soon as they come back? 

These are reasonable fears, given the terrifying scenes of ICE grabbing people off the street, busting down doors and zip-tying parents and children, sweeping up people with and without legal authorization to be in the country, whether or not they have committed any crime.

Recently, even the Trump administration’s Labor Department declared that the nation’s food system faces an emergency due to the administration’s aggressive mass deportation program, warning in a federal filing uncovered by the American Prospect that the immigration crackdown on agricultural workers has created a significant “risk of supply shock-induced food shortages.” 

“The Department does not believe American workers currently unemployed or marginally employed will make themselves readily available in sufficient numbers to replace large numbers of aliens,” the filing states, contradicting Trump administration rhetoric about immigrants stealing American jobs.

The solution proposed by Trump’s labor department is to pay H2A seasonal agricultural workers even less — offsetting the cost to employers of a terrified workforce that is disinclined to show up to work after ICE raids.

It seems like a weird solution, as David Dayen of the American Prospect observed, “since cutting wages across the sector will likely drive existing workers to look elsewhere for jobs.”

But there is a dark logic behind the move to slash wages for agricultural workers in the midst of the moral panic over immigration. Dayen quotes Antonio De Loera-Brust of the United Farm Workers, who sees a government threatening mass deportations working hand in glove with employers who benefit from a powerless immigrant workforce. 

“We call it the ‘Deport and Replace’ strategy,” De Loera-Brust said, “which is defined above all to make it easier for corporate agribusiness to exploit its workers, whether terrified undocumented residents or an unlimited pool of cheap foreign guest workers … The Trump administration would rather expand the abusive H-2A program than do right by the workers who are already here, feeding America for decades.”

This situation does not directly apply to Wisconsin dairy farms, since dairy workers are not eligible for H2A visas. But it was not at all clear from Van Orden’s remarks at the World Dairy Expo that he understands that fact. 

“The H2A program is broken and it sucks. There you go. That’s the whole press conference,” he said after he was introduced. Later, he referred to “all this garbage you’ve been dealing with, these H2As and H2Bs” insisting his own proposal for a new visa system would work better. In fact, dairy farmers are not dealing with the H2A (seasonal) or H2B (non-agricultural) visa systems at all.

Van Orden did acknowledge the difficult situation for the dairy industry, which depends on a labor force 60% to 90% of which is made up of immigrants who lack any sort of legal authorization to be in the country, since there is no such thing as a year-round visa for low-skilled work.

“Rocks are heavy. Trees are made of wood. Gravity is real. If we deport every single person that is working in the agriculture industry, the hospitality industry and the construction industry, all of those industries will shutter in a moment’s notice,” Van Orden declared.

But it’s unclear if his plan, the Agricultural Workforce Reform Act of 2025, will help.

One farmer asked if his workers would be barred from returning to the U.S. if they committed a traffic violation (a common concern in Wisconsin, where immigrants without legal papers cannot get a driver’s license). Van Orden fobbed him off, saying that would be a question for the executive branch to resolve through its rule-making process.

Several farmers listening to Van Orden affirmed that they supported Trump’s goal of securing the border, but added that they thought that mission had been accomplished. Now they hoped the administration would turn its attention to a new public safety issue — the threat mass deportations pose to the U.S. food supply.  

Farmers across the country seem inclined to give the Trump administration the benefit of the doubt. But the doubt is growing. 

“Farmers are getting it in so many ways; their exports are down, their costs are up, and they’re losing their workforce,” said Ajilore, the former USDA economist. Given all that, farmer sentiment “actually hasn’t really moved as much as you would expect, given what’s happening,” he said. He attributes it to a wait-and-see attitude among farmers who have faithfully supported Trump for years. But now, he added, “the impact is starting to really hit home.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks with reporters in the U.S Senate press gallery on Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

This report has been updated.

WASHINGTON — Congress has just one week to break the stalemate and fund the government before active duty military members miss their first paycheck of the shutdown. 

That would be followed later in the month by absent wages for federal civilian employees and the staffers who work for lawmakers — benchmarks that would traditionally increase pressure on Democrats and Republicans to negotiate a deal.

But both sides remained dug in Wednesday, as the Senate failed to pass Republicans’ short-term government funding bill for the sixth time and Democrats were unable to get the support needed to advance their counterproposal. 

The 54-45 vote on the GOP bill and the 47-52 vote on Democrats’ legislation didn’t reach the 60 votes needed to advance under Senate rules.

Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, both Democrats, as well as Maine independent Sen. Angus King voted with Republicans to advance their multi-week funding bill. Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul voted no.

The shutdown began on Oct. 1, the start of the federal government’s 2026 fiscal year.

Trump warms up to idea of separate bill on military pay

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., rejected the idea of voting on a stand-alone bill to provide paychecks to active duty military members during the shutdown, saying that if Democrats wanted to ensure salaries for federal workers, they should vote to advance the stopgap spending bill. 

“They live with that vote. They made that decision. The House is done,” Johnson said at a morning press conference. “The ball is now in the Senate’s court. It does us no good to be here dithering on show votes. We did it. We sent the product over.”

Trump, speaking from the White House later in the afternoon, broke with GOP leaders in Congress on passing a stand-alone bill to provide pay for military members during the shutdown. 

“Yeah, that probably will happen. We don’t have to worry about it yet. That’s a long time,” Trump said. “You know what one week is for me? An eternity. One week for me is a long time. We’ll take care of it. Our military is always going to be taken care of.”

Johnson also appeared to fully reject an idea floated by the Trump administration not to provide back pay for furloughed federal employees, which is required by a 2019 law. 

“It’s my understanding that the law is that they would be paid. There is some other legal analysis that’s floating around. I haven’t yet had time to dig into and read that,” Johnson said. “But it has always been the case, it is tradition and I think it is statutory law that federal employees be paid. And that’s my position. I think they should be.”

Trump muddied the waters on that issue during his afternoon appearance, blaming Democrats for how his administration plans to handle back pay for furloughed federal workers. 

“We’re going to see. Most of them are going to get back pay and we’re going to try to make sure of that,” Trump said. “But some of them are being hurt very badly by the Democrats and they therefore won’t qualify.”

The shutdown will likely only end after congressional leaders begin talking with each other about core policy issues, including how to address enhanced tax credits for people who buy their own health insurance from the Affordable Care Act Marketplace. The credits are set to expire at the end of the year, spurring huge increases in health insurance costs.

Democrats say a deal must be reached before they’ll vote to advance the GOP stopgap spending bill that would fund the government through Nov. 21. Republican leaders maintain they won’t negotiate until after Democrats vote to open the government.

‘You can’t take the federal government hostage’

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he and other GOP lawmakers are willing to talk with Democrats about the tax credits, but only after the government reopens. 

“They have other issues that they want to bring up, which I said before we’re happy to discuss, and yes, there are some things that I think there’s interest on both sides in trying to address when it comes to health care in this country,” Thune said. “But you can’t take the federal government hostage and expect to have a reasonable conversation on those issues.”

Thune said the stopgap funding bill is needed to give both chambers more time to work out a final agreement on the dozen full-year government funding bills, which were supposed to become law by the start of the fiscal year.

“What this does is provide a short-term extension in order for all that to happen,” he said. “That’s all that we’re talking about.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Republicans are divided on health care issues and want to avoid a public debate over the Affordable Care Act tax credits. 

Schumer then read part of a social media post by Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene in which she said she was “absolutely disgusted” that health premiums will double by the end of the year without action.

“More Republicans should listen to her because, on this issue, she’s right on the money,” Schumer said. “Meanwhile, Democrats’ position hasn’t changed. We urge our Republican colleagues to join us in a serious negotiation to reopen the government and extend ACA premiums.”

Trump threats

The shutdown’s ramifications will continue to get worse the longer lawmakers remain intransigent, especially given President Donald Trump’s efforts to differentiate this funding lapse from those in the past.

Trump has said he’ll lay off federal workers by the thousands, cancel funding approved by Congress for projects in Democratic regions of the country and may not provide back pay for the hundreds of thousands of furloughed federal employees.

Trump and administration officials have been vague about when and how they’d implement layoffs, but a federal judge hearing arguments in a suit brought by a federal employee labor union has ordered government attorneys to file a brief later this week detailing its plans and its timeline.  

Northern District of California Judge Susan Illston has given the Trump administration until the end of Friday to share details of any planned or in-progress Reduction in Force plans, “including the earliest date that those RIF notices will go out.”

Illston, who was nominated by former President Bill Clinton, also told the Trump administration to detail what agencies anticipate implementing layoffs and how many employees that would impact. 

Illston set Oct. 16 for oral arguments between the American Federation of Government Employees and federal government attorneys over AFGE’s request for a temporary restraining order to block the Trump administration from implementing layoffs during the shutdown.

Murkowski reports informal talks

Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, part of a bipartisan group that has begun informal talks, said during a brief interview Wednesday that the government must reopen before real steps can be taken on the ACA tax credits. 

“I think the leadership has made very, very clear that the way to open up the government is, let’s pass a bill that will allow us to open up the government, and then there’s a lot of good conversations that can go on,” Murkowski said. “It doesn’t mean that we wait until then to start conversations, and that’s what we’re doing. We’re talking but we’re talking outside of the range of your microphones.”

She said, “There are not a lot of guarantees around this place, are there?” when asked by a reporter whether Republicans could provide Democrats with assurances on floor votes on ACA tax credit extensions if they vote for the stopgap spending bill. 

North Carolina GOP Sen. Thom Tillis said he expects the shutdown to last for at least a couple more weeks and urged Democratic senators to vote to reopen the government. 

“Go take a look at the list of Democrats who are either not running for reelection or not up until ‘28 or ‘30,” Tillis said. “There are plenty of them to walk the plank like I have multiple times to get the government funded and then the discussions start.”

Oklahoma Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin said that talks between Democrats and Republicans are “stalled” but “we’re having conversations with everybody.” 

South Dakota GOP Sen. Mike Rounds said that lawmakers have had bipartisan “visits” though no real conversations. 

“There’s no framework,” Rounds said. “There’s just a matter of a clarification about how important it is to get the shutdown over with. And once we get that shutdown over with, we’ll go back to bipartisan work in the Senate.”

Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report.

A sign advising that the Capitol Visitors Center in the U.S. Capitol is closed, in Washington, D.C., is pictured on Oct. 1, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)

This report has been updated.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration may try to interpret a law enacted during his first term in office differently than it did following the last government shutdown, potentially denying back pay to hundreds of thousands of furloughed federal workers. 

The change in stance, outlined in a memo from the Office of Management and Budget that was first reported by Axios on Tuesday and confirmed to States Newsroom by a White House official, would drastically change the stakes of the ongoing funding lapse, which began Oct. 1. 

President Donald Trump didn’t clearly say how he personally views the law during an afternoon press conference in the Oval Office, though he indicated he doesn’t intend to provide back pay to all federal workers. 

“I would say it depends on who we’re talking about,” Trump said. “I can tell you this: the Democrats have put a lot of people in great risk and jeopardy. But it really depends on who you’re talking about. But for the most part we’re going to take care of our people. There are some people that really don’t deserve to be taken care of and we’ll take care of them in a different way.”

Trump said he will likely announce mass layoffs of federal employees in the next week and opened the door to canceling funding approved by Congress if the shutdown persists. 

“I’ll be able to tell you that in four or five days if this keeps going on,” Trump said. “If this keeps going on it’ll be substantial and a lot of those jobs will never come back.”

OPM earlier said workers would receive back pay

Reinterpreting the law would go against guidance the Office of Personnel Management released in late September, which stated that after “the lapse in appropriations has ended, employees who were furloughed as the result of the lapse will receive retroactive pay for those furlough periods.”

During the 35-day shutdown during Trump’s first term, Congress approved a bill titled the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019 that guaranteed back pay for both exempt and furloughed federal workers. Trump signed the legislation into law himself. 

Before the law, Congress typically voted following each funding lapse to ensure back pay for all federal employees. 

The Congressional Budget Office projected 750,000 federal workers would be furloughed in the current shutdown. 

Democrats on Capitol Hill rebuffed the memo on Tuesday, arguing it is another example of Trump attempting to circumvent the law. 

“The letter of the law is as plain as can be—federal workers, including furloughed workers, are entitled to their backpay following a shutdown,” Senate Appropriations ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., wrote on social media. “Another baseless attempt to try and scare & intimidate workers by an administration run by crooks and cowards.”

Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who represents a considerable number of federal workers, said during a brief interview he doesn’t believe lawmakers need to clarify the law in any way, calling it “crystal clear.” 

“This is a bill that (former) Senator (Ben) Cardin and I introduced back during that shutdown,” Van Hollen said. “And I looked at it again today after the White House comments, and they’re blowing smoke. This is part of their effort to scare. So this is all part of their fearmongering. That’s what it’s about.” 

‘That should turn up the urgency’

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., asked about the memo during a morning press conference, said he hadn’t seen it or spoken with anyone in the White House, but he didn’t seem to take issue with its change of course. 

“I’m sure there will be a lot of discussion about that. But there are legal analysts who think that is not something that government should do,” Johnson said. “If that is true, that should turn up the urgency and the necessity of the Democrats doing the right thing here.” 

Pressed by another reporter about the principle involved with possibly not adhering to the law, Johnson said he hopes that furloughed federal workers do receive their back pay.

“I can tell you the president believes that as well. He and I have talked about this personally. He doesn’t want people to go without back pay,” Johnson said. “And that’s why he pleaded with Chuck Schumer to do the right thing and vote to keep the government open. We don’t want this to happen.” 

Johnson didn’t clarify why — if Trump believes furloughed workers should receive back pay consistent with the 2019 law — the White House budget office prepared a memo stating the opposite.

Johnson’s official House website explains that during a shutdown “federal employees will either be furloughed, or in some cases required to work without pay. Under federal law, employees are entitled to back pay upon the government reopening.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said during an afternoon press conference he expects furloughed workers will receive their back pay once the shutdown ends. 

“I haven’t looked at the memo specifically yet. My assumption is that furloughed workers will get back pay,” Thune said. “But that being said, this is very simple — open up the government and this is a nonissue.”

The Senate has deadlocked five times on a stopgap government funding bill that passed the House in mid-September. The upper chamber is expected to vote at least one more time this week.

Democrats call for negotiations on shutdown

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said during a morning floor speech that Johnson “has become a massive roadblock to progress,” though he didn’t address the possibility of no back pay for furloughed workers. 

“Ending this shutdown will require Donald Trump to step in and push Speaker Johnson to negotiate because without the president’s involvement, Speaker Johnson and MAGA Republicans in the House are increasingly dug in,” Schumer said. 

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries,  a New York Democrat, said during a morning press conference the White House was incorrect in its new interpretation. 

“The law is clear — every single furloughed employee is entitled to pay back. Period. Full stop,” Jeffries said. “The law is clear and we will make sure that that law is followed.”

American Federation of Government Employees National President Everett Kelley wrote in a statement the “frivolous argument that federal employees are not guaranteed backpay under the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act is an obvious misinterpretation of the law. 

“It is also inconsistent with the Trump administration’s own guidance from mere days ago, which clearly and correctly states that furloughed employees will receive retroactive pay for the time they were out of work as quickly as possible once the shutdown is over.”

 Shauneen Miranda and Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report.

Dairy cows huddle at sunset on a farm in Manitowoc County. Advocates and farmers say an ICE raid that took 24 migrants into custody Sept. 25 poses a threat to the state’s dairy farms and the immigrant workers that keep the industry afloat. (Photo by Andrew Kennard/Wisconsin Examiner)

The morning of Sept. 25, federal agents and immigration authorities swept into Manitowoc to arrest people alleged to be in the country without proper documentation. Agents first went to a Walmart parking lot where dairy workers are known to meet up before driving to the farms where they work. The action then moved on to private residences, where migrants were arrested as they left the house. 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security claims the ICE raid in Manitowoc was aimed at dismantling an international sex and drug trafficking ring, but has so far provided little evidence to support that claim. Federal authorities initially said 21 migrants had been arrested in the raid, before later saying 24 had been picked up. 

On Tuesday, DHS released the names of six of the 24. Only one individual named in the release has been charged with a sex crime — Jose Hilario Moreno Portillo, who was charged in Manitowoc County court in May with the 2nd degree sexual assault of a child. However, Moreno Portillo has not yet been convicted and court records show he’s been in ICE custody since July. 

ICE did not respond to a request for comment on why Moreno Portillo was named as being arrested in the Manitowoc action when he was already in ICE custody. 

The five other named individuals have been convicted of identity theft, hit-and-run, disorderly conduct, driving under the influence, possession of narcotic equipment, traffic offenses and a failure to appear charge. 

In Wisconsin, immigrants without documentation aren’t able to obtain driver’s licenses, which often causes them to wrack up several criminal traffic offenses when they’re pulled over and ticketed for driving without a license. 

With little proof that ICE actually broke up a ring of sex traffickers, immigration advocates and farm groups see the raid as a direct threat to the state’s dairy farms and the immigrant workers that keep the industry afloat. 

Farmers and immigrant advocates in Wisconsin have been watching ICE’s actions on dairy farms across the country closely. In March, ICE raided a dairy farm and petting zoo in New York. In April, a raid on a dairy farm in Vermont resulted in eight arrests. And in early June, ICE arrested 11 immigrants in a raid on a dairy farm in New Mexico. 

But so far, enforcement against undocumented people on dairy farms had been sporadic and far from the Midwest. In June, President Donald Trump announced and then retreated from guidance that ICE would not aggressively target farms and the hospitality industry. 

While last Thursday’s raid in Manitowoc didn’t take place on a dairy farm, most of the individuals arrested were dairy workers. Beyond that, they were dairy workers in the county with the highest concentration of dairy factory farms in the state. Manitowoc County and its northeast Wisconsin neighbors are the epicenter of the modern farming powerhouse that maintains Wisconsin’s status as “America’s Dairyland.” 

“It’s just sending an economic ripple effect across the dairy industry, which is Wisconsin’s rural economy,” says Luis Velasquez, statewide organizing director for immigrant advocacy group Voces de la Frontera. “And then also there’s the symbolic and political dimension to it as well. We are America’s Dairyland, and so this enforcement is not just an administrative matter, but it threatens the industry’s well being. Who are we going to be after all of this? Are we still going to be America’s Dairyland?”

Velasquez says the raid sent a “big anxiety wave” through immigrant communities across the state. 

“These views have just spiraled out of control in terms of the rumors that have been sent out across the community, rumors of ICE coming into their neighborhoods, to their homes, to their schools,” Velasquez says.  

“I have had serious conversations since the raid in Manitowoc of folks who are planning to leave after many years of being here,” he adds. “They just don’t feel like this is a humane lifestyle anymore. They’ve given many years of their lives, and many of them have children here.” 

Michael Slattery, a Manitowoc County farmer who grows grain and raises Holstein steers, points to data that shows 70% of the labor on Wisconsin’s dairy farms comes from immigrants and estimates that the dairy industry is the driver of 20% of Manitowoc County’s economy. 

Slattery says farmers can’t survive without that migrant labor because no one else is willing to do the work.

“Do you want to get up at 3 a.m. seven days a week to go out in the cold, the heat, to get kicked by cows when you’re putting the suction cups on, to be shat upon, pissed on, pushed around by 1,400 pound cows? People don’t want that,” he says. “I’ve tried to hire part time labor here, I cannot get people, they don’t want to do this sort of stuff.”

Simply expecting farm families to pick up the slack isn’t the answer, he adds.  “These dairy farms, they don’t have enough family members that can come out and replace immigrant labor, both documented and undocumented, that are leaving,” Slattery says. “They’re in a money-losing situation now.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Losing the dairy labor force would have ripple effects across the economy in Wisconsin and the country. 

“What do they do in that situation? If your cows cannot be milked, in two, two and a half weeks they’ll go dry,” he says. “The cows get milk fever, get ill, that’s your cheap hamburger in the stores. They’re selling the cows at a loss, that’s what they’ll do. There’s less milk in the market, that will drive up prices for cheese, milk and butter.”

Danielle Endvick, executive director of the Wisconsin Farmers Union, says if Wisconsin’s immigrant workers leave the state — either from being arrested by ICE or leaving on their own to avoid arrest — farms could close and prices could increase. 

“Immigration raids and mass deportations can shrink rural economies, are terribly destabilizing for communities and can harm schools, churches, just the fabric of our rural communities too,” Endvick says. “Our rural spaces, our farmers can’t thrive if we’re treating a key workforce like they’re disposable. I think that immigrant workers are essential to Wisconsin dairy, and that when they are threatened, farmers in our rural communities are threatened too.”

The U.S. Capitol on the evening of Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025, just hours before a federal government shutdown. (Photo by Ashley Murray/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats and Republicans remained at a stalemate Wednesday as government offices closed and hundreds of thousands of federal workers faced furloughs on the first day of a government shutdown that showed no sign of ending.

Proposals from each side of the aisle to fund and reopen the government failed again during morning Senate votes, mirroring the same vote breakdowns as Tuesday evening, when lawmakers could not reach a deal hours before the government ran out of money.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected up to 750,000 federal workers could be furloughed, leading to a $400 million per day impact on the economy.

Locked in their positions, Republicans failed to pick up enough Democrats to reach the 60 votes needed to advance their plan to fund the government until Nov. 21. 

Senators will break Thursday to observe Yom Kippur but will return Friday to again vote on the funding proposals.

Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, along with independent Angus King of Maine, again joined Republicans in the 55-45 vote for the House-passed stopgap spending bill. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voted no.

Democrats also failed to find support to move forward their bill to fund the government through Oct. 31, roll back GOP cuts on Medicaid and permanently extend subsidies that tie the cost of Affordable  Care Act health insurance premiums to an enrollee’s income level. 

The Democrats failed to advance their plan in a party-line 47-53 vote. King, who caucuses with Democrats, voted in favor.

Shutdown tied to health care tax credits

Senate and House Democrats say they will not support a GOP path to reopen the government unless Republicans agree to negotiate on rising health care costs. 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said at a press conference that Democrats are “ready to sit down with anyone at any time and at any place in order now to reopen the government, to enact a spending agreement that meets the needs of the American people and to address the devastating Republican health care crisis that has caused extraordinary harm on people all across the country.”

The New York Democrat pointed to harms in “rural America, working class America, urban America, small-town America, the heartland of America and Black and brown communities throughout America.” 

Democratic leaders blitzed Capitol Hill with their message on health care, holding press conferences and attending an evening rally Tuesday on the lawn outside the U.S. House. 

They pointed to new data published this week showing annual insurance premiums could double on average in 2026 if the subsidies expire at year’s end, according to an analysis from the nonprofit health policy research organization KFF. 

Open enrollment for next year’s ACA health insurance plans opens Nov. 1 in most states, and Oct. 15 in Idaho.

Uptake of ACA health insurance plans has more than doubled to over 24 million, up from 11 million, since the introduction of the subsidies in 2021, according to KFF. 

During their own budget reconciliation deal in 2022, Democrats extended the insurance premium tax credits until the end of 2025. The majority of ACA enrollees currently rely on the credits.

Democrats also want assurances that the White House and Senate Republicans will not cancel any more funds that have already been approved by Congress, as was the case this year when the administration and GOP lawmakers stripped funding for medical research, foreign aid and public broadcasting, among other areas.

‘This can all end today’

GOP leaders in the House and Senate continued to blame Senate Democrats for the government shutdown at the expense of furloughed federal workers and Americans who rely on their services. 

At a Wednesday morning press conference, House Speaker Mike Johnson said “troops and border patrol agents will have to go to work, but they’ll be working without pay.”

Johnson also claimed at the press conference that veterans benefits would stop. The claim is false, as Veterans Administration medical care will continue uninterrupted and vets will also continue to receive benefits, including compensation, pension, education and housing.

“As we speak here this morning, there are hundreds of thousands of federal workers who are getting their furlough notices. Nearly half of our civilian workforce is being sent home — these are hard-working Americans who work for our federal government,” the Louisiana Republican said, flanked by fellow GOP leaders on the Upper West Terrace of the U.S. Capitol overlooking the National Mall. 

Johnson decided in late September the House will be out until Oct. 6, canceling this week’s votes. 

The speaker said he will bring House members back next week, even if the government is still shut down.

“They would be here this week, except that we did our work — we passed the bill almost two weeks ago out of the House, sent it to the Senate,” Johnson said. “The ball is literally in (Senate Minority Leader) Chuck Schumer’s court, so he determines that.” 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said “this can all end today” and “needs to end today.”

The South Dakota Republican said the funding lapse can cease when Senate Democrats vote for the GOP’s “clean” short-term funding bill. 

“We will continue to work together with our House counterparts, with the president of the United States, to get this government open again on behalf of the American people,” Thune said. 

Bipartisan deal and Trump

Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine said later in the day that a bipartisan group huddled on the floor during votes to talk about a possible path forward on “health care fixes” and ensuring that if a bipartisan deal is brokered, the Trump administration will stick to it. 

Republican senators, he said, could give Democrats assurances they won’t vote for any more rescissions requests from the White House, which ask Congress to cancel already approved government spending. But other issues, like laying off federal workers by the hundreds or thousands, have to be a promise from the president. 

“If I find a deal, should Congress have to follow it? Yes. Should the president have to follow it? Yes. Well, what if the president won’t follow it? Oh, yeah, you got a problem,” Kaine said. “So you know, rescission, impoundment, those are Senate words. But a deal is a deal — people get that.”

Kaine also emphasized that it’s not a “clean” stopgap funding bill if the Trump administration unilaterally cancels some of the spending. 

“In the past, we voted for clean (continuing resolutions), but the president has shown that he’ll take the money back,” Kaine said, referring to the technical name for a short-term funding bill. “I mean, just in Virginia, canceling $400 million to our public health, $40 million economic projects just pulled off the table, firing more Virginians than any president. 

“So we just want you to agree, if we do a deal, then you’ll honor the deal,” Kaine said. “It’s not that much to ask.”

‘People are suffering’

North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said he doesn’t expect the shutdown will have long-term ramifications for senators’ ability to negotiate bipartisan deals — a necessity in the upper chamber, which has a 60-vote threshold to advance legislation. 

“It’s all transactional,” Tillis said. “I think there’s going to be opportunities for some bipartisan work, but none of that happens, you can’t even really consider it when you’re in a shutdown posture.”

Cortez Masto, who voted to advance Republicans’ seven-week stopgap bill, said the GOP “created this crisis” on health care and “need to address it.”

“They have no moral standing — no moral standing —- to say that this is all on the Democrats. They are in control. They’ve created this crisis,” Cortez Masto said. “People are suffering and they need to come to the table.” 

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who was sworn in for the first time during the last shutdown, said he worries about longer-term effects. 

“My concern is it’s going to poison the well on negotiations going forward on a lot of things,” Hawley said. “I can’t speak for anybody but myself, but I would just say that these tactics are very destructive. And it’s destructive, not just for relationships, but for real people.”

Ariana Figueroa contributed to this report.

U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks to the media at the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 30, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Thune was joined by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., and Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

This report has been updated.

WASHINGTON — The federal government started shutting down early Wednesday after Congress failed to approve a funding bill before the beginning of the new fiscal year — resulting in widespread ramifications for hundreds of programs and giving the Trump administration an avenue to fire federal workers en masse.

The U.S. Senate was unable to advance two short-term government funding bills Tuesday when Democrats and Republicans deadlocked for the second time this month, with just hours to go before the midnight Tuesday shutdown deadline.

Senators voted 55-45 on Republicans’ bill that would fund the government for seven weeks and 47-53 on a Democratic stopgap proposal that would keep the lights on for a month and included several health care provisions that they said were needed for their support. Neither had the 60 votes needed to advance. 

Nevada Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman and Maine independent Sen. Angus King voted with GOP senators on their stopgap bill. Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul voted against it.

White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought said in a memo to departments and agencies Tuesday night after the Senate vote that “affected agencies should now execute their plans for an orderly shutdown.” Vought said federal employees should report for their next regularly scheduled tour of duty to undertake shutdown activities.

The consequences of a shutdown will be sweeping in the nation’s capital and across the country, where states are bracing for the impact. About 750,000 federal workers could be furloughed, leading to a $400 million impact a day, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported. All federal employees would go unpaid until the shutdown is over.

Additionally, the Trump administration plans to lay off thousands of federal employees, which would reshape the federal workforce. President Donald Trump again vowed Tuesday to undertake layoffs and a major government employee union filed suit in federal court in advance of such a move.

More votes on GOP bill planned

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said hours before the votes there wouldn’t be any talks with Democrats during a shutdown. 

“The negotiation happens when the government is open. So let’s keep the government open and then we will have the negotiations,” Thune said. 

“We’re happy to sit down and talk about these issues that they’re interested in,” he said. “But it should not have anything to do with whether or not for a seven-week period we keep the government open, so that this government can continue to do its work and that we can do our work through the regular appropriations process to fund the government.” 

After the votes failed, Thune expressed his frustration with Democrats during a press conference. 

“This is so unnecessary and uncalled for,” he said. 

Thune said he plans to bring up a vote on the continuing resolution again. He said as soon as Wednesday the federal government can be funded if five Democrats voted with Republicans. 

“Democrats may have chosen to shut down the government, but we can reopen it tomorrow,” Thune said. 

Republican Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming said the “cracks in the Democrats are already showing,” noting that three Democrats voted with Republicans Tuesday night. 

“There is bipartisan support for keeping the government open,” Barrasso said. “We’re happy to see that the Democrats are already starting to break from (Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer) and we’re going to continue to offer a clean (continuing resolution) on the floor of the Senate to open the government for the next seven weeks.”

Health care tax credits at center of standoff

The disagreement isn’t entirely about GOP lawmakers writing their short-term funding bill behind closed doors and then expecting Democrats to help advance it in the Senate, where bipartisanship is required for major legislation.

Democratic leaders have raised concerns for weeks about the end-of-year sunset of enhanced tax credits for people who buy their health insurance on the Affordable Care Act Marketplace, arguing a solution is needed now ahead of the open enrollment period starting on Nov. 1. 

Democrats have also grown increasingly frustrated with the White House budget office’s unilateral actions on spending, arguing Vought is significantly eroding Congress’ constitutional power of the purse. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the Republican chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, said Tuesday the Government Accountability Office should sue the Trump administration over its efforts to freeze or unilaterally cancel spending approved by Congress. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats need an agreement with Republicans to extend the enhanced tax credits. 

Schumer said people will begin getting notices in October telling them how much the cost of their ACA plans will increase during the next year, which he expects will ratchet up pressure on Republican leaders to broker a bipartisan agreement. 

“We’re going to be right there explaining to them it’s because the Republicans wouldn’t negotiate with us,” Schumer said, referring to consumers. “We’re ready to do it anytime. And there will be huge heat on (Republicans) on this issue.”

People who buy health insurance on the ACA marketplace and receive subsidies through enhanced ACA tax credits could expect to pay on average more than double for annual premiums in 2026 if the credits expire as scheduled at the end of this year, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the nonprofit health policy research organization KFF. 

The analysis found premiums could increase from an average of $888 this year to $1,904 in 2026.

Claims about immigrants 

Schumer also rebuffed GOP leaders saying that Democrats want to include people without legal immigration status in federal health care programs. 

“They say that undocumented people are going to get these credits. That is absolutely false. That is one of the big lies they tell, so they don’t have to discuss the issues,” Schumer said. “The federal government by law that we passed does not fund health insurance for undocumented immigrants in Medicaid, nor the ACA nor Medicare. Undocumented immigrants do not get federal health insurance premiums.” 

Immigrants in the country without legal authorization are not eligible for Medicaid, and neither are most immigrants with legal status, such as those with student visas or enrollment in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA. 

Only immigrants with a “qualified status,” such as legal permanent residents, asylees and refugees, are able to get Medicaid benefits, and they usually have to wait five years before their coverage can even begin. 

Democrats explain why they voted with GOP 

Cortez Masto of Nevada wrote in a statement explaining her vote to advance the GOP stopgap bill that she could not support “a costly shutdown that would hurt Nevada families and hand even more power to this reckless administration.”

“We need a bipartisan solution to address this impending health care crisis, but we should not be swapping the pain of one group of Americans for another,” she added. “I remain focused on protecting health care for working families, and I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work together to tackle this problem.”

Pennsylvania’s Fetterman wrote in a statement of his own that his vote on the Republican bill “was for our country over my party.

“Together, we must find a better way forward.”

Collins said during a brief interview before the vote she is worried about the broad authority the White House holds during a shutdown and how the Office of Management and Budget has indicated it will use that power. 

“I’m much more concerned about OMB sending signals that there should be mass firings of federal employees who have the misfortune to be designated as non-essential, when in fact they’re performing very essential work, they’re just not being paid,” Collins said.  

North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven, chairman of the Agriculture spending subcommittee, said lawmakers will have to sort through how various departments implement their contingency plans as well as the possibility of mass layoffs during a shutdown. 

“We’ll have to work through those things and figure out how we do keep things going as best we can during this Democrat shutdown,” Hoeven said.

West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said Republicans are “unified in the belief that this is an easy choice” to fund the government with a stopgap bill that doesn’t include any contentious or political provisions. 

Capito — who chairs the Appropriations subcommittee that funds the departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor — said there are several programs that will be “missed” during a shutdown. 

“And that’s concerning. So I think the option is to keep the government open so we can avoid this pain,” Capito said. 

‘I’m not optimistic that we’re going to get a path forward’

Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said he is worried about the possible impacts of a shutdown on his home state and that keeping the government open is the only way to avoid that.  

“I’m sure the administration will do everything they can,” Hawley said. “But the solution is to not shut the government down. I mean, why would you punish working people because you’re not getting what you want on any issue, whatever it is.”

South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds said he doesn’t expect a shutdown will end until after Democrats have sent a message to their voters. 

“I’m not optimistic that we’re going to get a path forward until they’ve had a shutdown,” he said. 

Rounds, who negotiated a handshake agreement with the White House budget director this summer to preserve some funding for rural tribal radio stations after Congress eliminated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, said that deal could be affected by a shutdown. 

“They’re putting the administration in a position where they can pick and choose what they’re going to do, and a shutdown is not going to be beneficial to these Native American radio stations,” Rounds said. 

Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan said she wants Democrats and Republicans to negotiate on health care provisions.

“I’ve been making the case constantly, that (it) is literally my obligation to try and fight for health care, and I’m willing to talk to anyone,” she said. “I’m willing to accept that I certainly will not get everything I want.”

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois said that while Democrats agreed to help advance what’s known as a continuing resolution in March, they can’t now because of “what President Trump is doing to this country, particularly when it comes to health care costs for families.”  

The shutdown will significantly affect the operations of the federal government as lawmakers have not passed any of the dozen full-year appropriations bills that finance agency operations. Oct. 1 is the beginning of the new fiscal year for the federal government.

Shutdown plan for national parks

Departments began releasing updated contingency plans this weekend, detailing how many of their employees would work during a government shutdown and how many would be furloughed.

The Interior Department, which includes the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, posted its updated plans late Tuesday. 

The National Park Service plans to furlough 9,300 of its 14,500 workers. 

The Trump administration will allow several activities necessary for the protection of life or property to continue, including fire suppression for active fires, permitting and monitoring First Amendment activities, border and coastal protection and surveillance, and law enforcement and emergency response.

The contingency plan says that roads, lookouts, trails, and open-air memorials will generally remain accessible to visitors,” but it adds that if “access becomes a safety, health or resource protection issue … the area must be closed.”

Union files suit

In anticipation of layoffs by the Trump administration, labor unions representing more than 1 million federal workers filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of California on Tuesday to block the Trump administration from carrying out mass firings. The suit argues that there is no statutory authority to fire federal employees during a government shutdown.

“These actions are contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious, and the cynical use of federal employees as a pawn in Congressional deliberations should be declared unlawful and enjoined by this Court,” according to the suit filed by the American Federation of Government Employees and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Ashley Murray and Shauneen Miranda contributed to this report. 

The U.S. Capitol is seen behind a barricade on Sept. 30, 2025 in Washington, DC. If lawmakers fail to reach a bipartisan compromise on the funding bill, the federal government shutdown will begin at midnight. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — A government shutdown could have significant economic consequences, though an analysis released Tuesday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said it’s difficult to pinpoint ramifications without knowing the length of a funding lapse or how exactly the Trump administration will try to reshape the federal workforce. 

Director Phillip L. Swagel wrote in a four-page letter the agency projects about 750,000 federal workers would be furloughed, leading to a $400 million impact per day. 

“The number of furloughed employees could vary by the day because some agencies might furlough more employees the longer a shutdown persists and others might recall some initially furloughed employees,” Swagel wrote. 

New plans from the Trump administration to lay off federal employees en masse, he wrote, could significantly change those calculations. 

The economic impacts and ramifications for business activity are hard to predict, he wrote, because it’s not yet clear how exactly the Trump administration will handle a shutdown or how long it will take congressional leaders to broker a stopgap funding agreement. 

The partial government shutdown that began in December 2018 and lasted through January 2019 led to a loss of about $3 billion in gross domestic product that couldn’t be recovered, according to a prior CBO analysis that was referenced in the letter. 

That represented about 0.02% of annual GDP in 2019. 

Swagel wrote the “effects of a government shutdown on business activity are uncertain, and their magnitude would depend on the duration of a shutdown and on decisions made by the Administration. 

“CBO expects that if a government shutdown persisted for several weeks, some private-sector entities would never recover all of the income they lost as a result of the suspension of federal activity.”

CBO conducted the analysis after receiving a request from Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst. 

Thune, Schumer debate shutdown on Senate floor

A government shutdown will begin Wednesday unless congressional leaders broker a stopgap funding agreement before the new fiscal year starts. 

That seemed like a long shot early Tuesday afternoon as Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., engaged in a brief debate on the floor, a rarity. 

Thune said Democrats would have the same leverage on health care issues they have now in mid-November, when the stopgap spending bill that passed the House but stalled in the Senate would expire. 

“They will have another funding cliff they can take advantage of come November the 21st,” Thune said. “This funds the government and protects federal workers and the American people from the hostage-taking that has become, evidently, now the Democratic norm. Even though it’s something they decried not that many years ago.”

Thune told reporters afterward the chamber would likely be out of session for Yom Kippur, which begins shortly before sunset on Wednesday and continues until Thursday night, but would otherwise hold votes during a shutdown.

“We will observe the Jewish holiday, but I would expect additional votes throughout the week,” Thune said. “I mean, we filed last night on a whole new bunch of (nominees) and I would expect additional votes on funding the government.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., canceled the House’s schedule for this week and doesn’t plan for that chamber to go back into session until Oct. 6 at the earliest.

Meeting breaks up with no deal

Congressional leaders, including Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, met with President Donald Trump at the White House on Monday, but were unable to make progress toward a stopgap funding agreement.

Schumer said on the Senate floor Tuesday that Democrats need a deal with GOP leaders to extend the enhanced tax credits for people who buy their health insurance on the Affordable Care Act Marketplace, which are set to expire at the end of the year. 

“In a day or two, millions of Americans — millions — are going to get notices that their insurance premiums will rise an average of $400 a month, $5,000 a year,” Schumer said. “A middle-class family can’t afford that. We want to renew those credits, among other things in health care. But renew those credits so that people won’t pay that horrible increase.”

Schumer called Republican assertions that Democrats want immigrants without legal status to have access to federal health care programs, like Medicare and Medicaid, “utter bull.”

“There is no money, not a penny of federal dollars that are going there. So why do they bring this up? Because they’re afraid to talk about the real issue, which is health care for American citizens, health care for people who need the health care and can’t afford these premiums,” Schumer said.

Without a new funding law before the start of the fiscal year at 12:01 a.m. on Wednesday, the government will begin shutting down.

The ramifications will be significantly broader than the 35-day shutdown that took place during Trump’s first term, when five of the dozen full-year government spending bills had become law.

That isn’t the case this time around and a shutdown is expected to affect every department and agency to varying degrees.

‘They’re taking a risk’

White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought has also called on Trump administration officials to implement mass layoffs during a prolonged funding lapse.

Trump said during a press conference in the Oval Office on Tuesday that he didn’t want a shutdown but that his administration might take sweeping action to restructure the federal government if one does begin. 

“We can do things during the shutdown that are irreversible, that are bad for them and irreversible by them, like cutting vast numbers of people out, cutting things that they like, cutting programs that they like,” Trump said, referring to Democrats. “So they’re taking a risk by having a shutdown, because because of the shutdown, we can do things medically and other ways, including benefits.”

A U.S. Department of Education employee leaves the building with their belongings on March 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C., amid mass layoffs.  (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration began posting plans over the weekend that detail how hundreds of thousands of federal workers will be furloughed during a government shutdown, while others will keep working without being paid. 

The updated guidance gives the clearest picture yet into how President Donald Trump and White House budget director Russ Vought hope to reduce the size and scope of government when given increased authority over the federal workforce during a funding lapse. 

A shutdown will begin Wednesday unless Republicans and Democrats in Congress reach agreement on a stopgap spending bill. Congressional leaders were set to meet Monday afternoon with Trump, but it was unclear if any agreement would result that would avert a shutdown.

The Defense Department’s plan shows it would keep about 406,500 of its 741,500 civilian employees working without pay during the shutdown, with the remaining going on furlough. 

The nearly 2.1 million military personnel housed within the department would continue to work throughout a shutdown but would not be paid until after it ends. 

The plan says the Defense Department believes operations to secure the U.S. southern border, Middle East operations, Golden Dome for America defense system, depot maintenance, shipbuilding and critical munitions are the “highest priorities” in the event of a shutdown. 

Medical and dental services, including private sector care under the TRICARE health care program, would largely continue at the Defense Department, though “(e)lective surgery and other routine/elective procedures in DoW medical and dental facilities are generally not excepted activities, unless the deferral or delay of such procedures would impact personnel readiness or deployability.”

Thousands of workers to be sent home from HHS

The Health and Human Services Department plans to furlough about 32,500 of its nearly 80,000 employees during a shutdown. 

The various components of HHS — including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Food and Drug Administration, and National Institutes of Health — have individual plans for a shutdown. 

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services plans to retain 3,311, or 53%, of its employees during a shutdown and “will maintain the staff necessary to make payments to eligible states for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).”

The CDC plans to have 4,891, or 35.88%, of its employees as well as those at the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry keep working. 

The contingency plans says that “(r)esponses to urgent disease outbreaks and continuing efforts to support the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program, the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA), and the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program” would continue during a shutdown. 

The CDC would not be able to undertake several other activities, including providing “guidance to state and local health departments implementing programs to protect the public’s health (e.g., opioid overdose prevention, HIV prevention, diabetes prevention).”

Departments with plans

Here is a list of the departments that have posted updated contingency plans in September:

• Defense Department contingency plan
• Education Department contingency plan
• Health and Human Services contingency plan
• Homeland Security Department contingency plan
• Labor Department contingency plan
• Justice Department contingency plan
• Social Security Administration contingency plan
• Treasury Department contingency plan

Here is a list of the departments that hadn’t posted updated contingency plans as of Monday afternoon:

• Agriculture Department contingency plan
• Commerce Department contingency plan
• Energy Department contingency plan
• Housing and Urban Development contingency plan
• Interior Department contingency plan
• State Department contingency plan
• Transportation Department contingency plan
• Veterans Affairs Department contingency plan

States Newsroom’s Washington, D.C. Bureau reached out to the  departments that didn’t have contingency plans posted to ask when those might become public.

A spokesperson for the USDA wrote in an email the department “is prepared for all contingencies regarding Department operations, including critical services and supports.” 

A State Department spokesperson said leadership “is undergoing all necessary planning efforts to sustain critical missions.”

Federal employees who work  without pay will be paid after the shutdown concludes. 

According to the Office of Personnel Management — the executive branch’s chief human resources agency — “after the lapse in appropriations has ended, employees who were furloughed as the result of the lapse will receive retroactive pay for those furlough periods.” 

The Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019 requires furloughed government employees to receive back pay as a result of a government shutdown. 

That law does not apply to federal contractors, who face uncertainty in getting paid during a shutdown. 

Ashley Murray, Ariana Figueroa, Shauneen Miranda and Jacob Fischler contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump signs an executive order on Sept. 19, 2025, introducing a $100,000 fee for H-1B visas that allows foreign nationals permanent residency and a pathway to U.S. citizenship. (Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

A proclamation signed by President Donald Trump last week seeking to restrict entry of non-immigrant workers to the U.S. and apply a $100,000 fee to H-1B visa applications created confusion and concern within the tech industry over the weekend. 

Immediately after Friday’s announcement, companies of all sizes, including tech giants Microsoft and Amazon and smaller startups, began calling any workers with H-1B visas who were traveling outside the U.S. to return to the country by the proclamation’s deadline of midnight Sunday. 

“It’s been seismic, to say the least,” said Nicole Gunara, a principal immigration lawyer with Manifest Law. “People are trying to fight to get out of planes, cancel flights, fly back as quickly as possible, privately chartering boats and planes in the night.”

The Trump administration has since clarified that only new H-1B visa applications would be subject to the fee. Officials also said the proclamation would not impact the ability of visa holders to travel to and from the U.S., but the announcement sent many companies and their foreign workers into a “panic,” Gunara said.

H-1B visas are given to non-immigrant foreign candidates with college degrees who fill highly skilled positions that U.S. companies struggle to hire for. Each year, the U.S. caps the number of new visas to about 85,000, and there were about 730,000 H-1B workers in the U.S. at the start of 2025. 

The visas have traditionally cost between just under $1,000 to a few thousand dollars a year, and are paid by the companies. Companies must pay their H-1B workers at least an average wage for their geographical area, to not undercut the cost of wages for other workers. In 2023, the median wage for H-1B workers was $118,000, on par with the 90th percentile ($121,000) of all U.S. wages.

Many of these roles are in information technology, with Amazon, Microsoft and Meta leading the top Fortune 500 companies with the most H-1B visa workers, with 12,391 workers, 5,189 workers and 5,123 workers respectively. About 70% of H-1B visas went to Indian workers and nearly 12% went to Chinese workers last year. 

Trump’s proclamation calls for American companies to rely on American workers for these roles, saying there is “abuse” of the H-1B program. But domestic educational institutions just aren’t preparing Americans for the type of skilled labor that many of the tech companies are seeking, said Elizabeth Ricci, immigration attorney and partner at Rambana & Ricci.

Trump has cut science funding to its lowest level in at least 35 years, and his cuts to the National Science Foundation and other research organizations are having direct effects on K-12 and college tech education. 

“It’ll have a huge effect,” Ricci said of the cost of fees on the industry. “We can’t have it both ways, where we’re not educating the people we need and also having such an incredibly high fee to be able to get a visa to bring someone in to do work for places like Apple and Google.”

U.S. companies have faced a shortage of skilled tech workers for years. Recruiting and talent firm Robert Half reported 87% of tech leaders said they faced challenges finding skilled talent earlier this year. And Silicon Valley tech giants have long sought global talent to help build American companies.  

“There is a dire shortage of extremely talented and motivated engineers in America,” X CEO Elon Musk posted on the platform, earlier this year. He compared tech companies to a pro sports team scouting players. 

“If you force the world’s best talent to play for the other side, America will LOSE,” he wrote.

But large tech companies will not be the only ones to feel the effects of the change if it is upheld. Startup companies, many of whom are responsible for new technology advances, also rely on H-1B visa workers. 

Pedro David Espinoza, a Peruvian-American entrepreneur and investor, said that many of the startups he works with in the Bay Area have hired H-1B workers to their small teams of 20 or 30 people. 

“We probably are going to skip on many foreign hires altogether, because it’s really expensive, and this will definitely, to a certain degree, stifle innovation,” he said.

Ricci said she thinks the $100,000 fee will result in fewer jobs, and may make America’s global competitors more attractive to these highly-skilled workers. 

“People aren’t going to want to come here if the rules are changing day by day, and they’re going to be put in jeopardy just by going home for a vacation or to see a loved one and not know if they’re going to be able to come back. It’s too tenuous,” she said. “And if they can have promises of continuity in places like the UK, they’re going to go there, and they’re going to make those countries better.”

Gunara said she’s unsure that Trump’s proclamation will have the desired effect of hiring more American workers. In the last few days, she’s heard from clients that they’re considering offshoring tech teams, or setting up entities outside of the U.S., maybe in Canada or somewhere with similar time zones. Companies may also pursue alternative plans for these foreign workers, like a J1 visa, which allows people to research in the U.S. for a temporary period of time. 

Gunara said she believes many people are aligned on the idea that America needs the “best and brightest” talent, but that we could be more mindful of cultivating domestic talent where possible. She suspects there will be legal challenges to the action, but that it speaks to the larger Trump administration attitude toward immigration. 

“Innovation moves immediately, right? Innovation doesn’t wait for that talent to already be trained,” Gunara said. “And I think that that’s going to be the inflection point between the initiatives of the government versus what companies are going to be able to do.”