The shutdown’s effects on food and ag

This explains the myriad ways in which consumers and farmers continue to be affected.

Now that the shutdown is over, SNAP is returning to its typical operations, said Katie Bergh, senior food assistance policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Most households have received their full November benefits, following delays from the Trump administration during the shutdown.

But for many households, getting full benefits will not erase the impact of the shutdown. Without assistance, SNAP recipients may have opted to buy groceries in lieu of paying an electric bill or car payment, for example, and are now potentially falling behind in their bills.

“All of that chaos and disruption is going to have long-term impacts for the households that were struggling to follow what was happening and waiting on their benefits in the interim,” Bergh said. - Civil Eats

The Israeli government is back to doing just what they want

Which was obviously the plan once they got the hostages returned. Anyone with any sense saw this coming. Trump is so easily played and suckered with flattery and bribes.

Amnesty International concludes that, over a month after a ceasefire was agreed upon in Gaza and all living Israeli hostages were returned, the Israeli authorities continue to pursue the textbook definition of genocide “by continuing to deliberately inflict conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction.” Moreover, Israeli leaders continue openly to affirm that this course of action is intentional on their parts…

The Secretary General of Amnesty International, Agnes Calmard, observed that “Palestinians remain held within less than half of the territory of Gaza, in the areas least capable of supporting life, with humanitarian aid still severely restricted.” Amnesty says that the Israeli military continues to occupy on the order of 55% of the Gaza Strip. There has been no move to rehabilitate the farmland that has been deliberately destroyed by the Israelis over two years or rebuild livestock. The Israelis routinely shoot at Palestinian fishing boats, preventing them from harvesting protein from the sea. The report concludes, “Palestinians are left virtually totally deprived of independent access to forms of sustenance.” - Informed Comment

COP30 didn't get much done

Though it wasn’t all failure, and it was probably a pipe dream to expect major breakthroughs to begin with.

The Brazilian president’s forceful remarks at the outset of negotiations in the Amazonian city of Belém were meant to set the stage for a new chapter in international climate diplomacy. On the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement, the time had come, according to Lula, to stop arguing about what the historic agreement requires and instead focus on implementation — actually taking the steps required to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect countries against the coming economic and public health consequences wrought by climate change…

But the Brazilian delegation, which was responsible for overseeing COP30 negotiations and ultimately brokering a new deal, was confronted by a different truth than the president envisioned. The viability of the planet may come down to a few degrees Celsius of warming, but in Belém’s fluorescently-lit negotiating rooms, everything ultimately came down to dollars and cents…

The most substantial new agreement negotiated at the conference reflected this realism. The delegations agreed that, by 2035, the world would triple international funding provided to help developing nations adapt to the consequences of a warmer world. - Grist

Montana looks to get around Citizens United

Given how corrupt our governance, including the judiciary, now is, the odds may not be great for this becoming and staying law in a lot of places, or for that matter any at all. But it’s very well worth a try.

The idea comes from Tom Moore, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and a former chief of staff to Federal Election Commission Commissioner Ellen Weintraub. In a white paper released on September 15, 2025, Moore explained that “The states’ authority is absolute in terms of how they define their corporations and which powers they decide to give their corporations.” He described this as “basic foundational corporation law,” noting that most states have historically issued very broad charters to corporations but are not required to do so…

In June, the framework became the foundation for “The Montana Plan,” which now sits at the center of a proposed constitutional amendment asking voters whether Montana should redefine corporate charters to prohibit corporate spending in elections.

The initiative has broad support. An October 2025 poll by Issue One found that 74 percent of Montana voters support the measure, including majorities of Republicans and independents. Moore pointed to the significance of this political setting, stating, “It’s a red state, which is useful, I think,” because it shows that “it’s not just lefty liberals who don’t like dark and corporate money in their politics.” - Nation of Change

The real costs of plastics

It’s quite a number, wherever within the range your take falls.

From our coffee cups and cutting boards to toys and synthetic clothing, plastic may feel convenient—even cheap. But a new report from Duke University reveals that the true cost of plastic is staggering.

The report entitled “The Social Cost of Plastic to the United States” estimates that Americans face $436 billion to $1.1 trillion in annual social costs associated with plastics. This is the most comprehensive analysis to date, examining the full lifecycle of plastics—from fossil fuel extraction and production to use, disposal, and mismanagement. To put the scale of this cost into perspective, you would need to spend $33.8 million every single day for 81 years to reach $1 trillion! - Surfrider

Huge costs for privatized Medicare and Medicaid

This is not meant to be critical of seniors who choose Medicare Advantage plans. They have the right to find the best deals for themselves. But the current system is clearly not viable for much longer.

US President Donald Trump and his Republican allies in Congress took a sledgehammer to Medicaid over the summer, justifying the unprecedented cuts by falsely claiming the program that provides health coverage to tens of millions of low-income Americans is overrun with waste and abuse.

But a new paper published Friday in the journal Health Affairs argues that if the administration actually wanted to target waste, fraud, and abuse, it would have been much better off taking aim at Medicare Advantage (MA) and Medicaid privatization.

The paper’s authors estimate that overpayments to MA plans—which are funded by the government and run by for-profit insurers—and private Medicaid managed care will likely cost US taxpayers a total of $1.92 trillion over the next 10 years. - Common Dreams

A big fat under-the-radar nuclear energy scam

The Trumpers' efforts to promote nuclear are every bit as bad as what they're doing to try to keep coal alive.

On (October 28), the White House announced an $80 billion deal with Westinghouse to finance construction of eight large new reactors in the U.S. There is not enough in the way of actual details about the deal, resulting in even more unanswered questions. But the promise of a large, direct investment in a pack of new reactors has predictably revved up talk of yet another “Nuclear Renaissance” and made it look like the DJT 2.0 administration is making good on big nuclear power goals from a group of executive orders issued in May.

$80 billion sure sounds like a lot! And the news that the announced $80 billion is going to come from Japanese taxpayers and not U.S. taxpayers sounds like a sweet deal!

…But $80 billion is only enough to build, at most, four Westinghouse AP1000 reactors. That’s because the cost of building nuclear reactors is four to 10 times more than wind, solar, or geothermal power. Even wind and solar paired with battery storage are still several times cheaper than new nuclear reactors.

But where would the other $80+ billion for eight reactors come from? U.S. taxpayers? Ratepayers? In this case, probably taxpayers. The reactors would probably receive low-interest loans from the Department of Energy’s (DOE) loan guarantee program, and, following construction, they would be eligible to claim the Clean Energy Investment Tax Credit, which provides a 30-50% subsidy for the cost of a new energy project. That would mean $80 billion or more in loans up front, and, later, $48-80 billion in rebates from U.S. taxpayers. - NIRS