Trump says funds will be paid to active military members during shutdown

Photo by Sonder Bridge Photography, Unsplash

President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that active military members will be paid during the government shutdown, Deepa Shivaram and Luke Garrett reported for NPR.

The funds are expected to come from around $8 billion of “unused research and development funding from last year,” Shivaram and Garrett wrote.

A bill called the “Pay Our Troops Act” also has been introduced in Congress to address growing concerns of military members who are unable to feed their families. No action has been taken on the bill.

“Military families deserve better than to have our livelihoods tied to political stalemates,” Besa Pinchotti, CEO of the National Military Family Association said in a statement.

The current stalemate is largely caused by disagreements on funding for health care policies such as Medicaid. Congress must pass an appropriations bill, which is a bill that would fund the government, to end the shutdown.

Many other federal workers are also facing financial burdens and layoffs due to the shutdown. Members of Congress, however, still receive paychecks, though some have refused to take their pay because they believe it is wrong to do so while the military and other federal workers are not getting paid.

Department of Veterans Affairs reverses course on mass layoffs after pushback

Veterans make up about 30% of the federal civilian 
workforce. (Gallup photo)

Faced with bipartisan pushback and anger from military veterans, the Department of Veterans Affairs is backtracking on its plan to shed more than 80,000 employees. Eric Katz of Government Executive reports, "VA previously told top-level staff it would utilize widespread reductions in force to cut its workforce back to the level it employed in fiscal 2019, leading to a reduction of more than 80,000 employees."

Early 2025 cuts by the Department of Government Efficiency and the VA have already taken a disproportionate toll on veterans' post-service employment, because they make up roughly 30% of the U.S. federal civilian workforce. "The VA has already shed 17,000 employees since January, and plans to cut another 12,000 through additional attrition and separation incentives," Katz explains. "While VA said it would not implement a 'large-scale' or 'department-wide' Reduction in Force, it did not rule out using more targeted layoffs."

Reducing VA staff is framed as a reorganization effort to improve the VA, rather than a way to cut jobs. VA Secretary Doug Collins told Katz, "Since March, we’ve been conducting a holistic review of the department centered on reducing bureaucracy and improving services to veterans. . . . A department-wide RIF is off the table, but that doesn’t mean we’re done improving VA."

The VA has until Monday to "keep its plans under wraps, requiring all of those working on it to take the unusual step of signing a non-disclosure agreement," Katz reports. 

While Collins and some lawmakers said the reversal of mass layoffs was always a possibility, the American Federation of Government Employees council, which represents employees in VA’s central office, "suggested that the change was a direct result of outcry and pushback," Katz adds. "The group said the change in plans was not 'a coincidence, it was a response.' The union added significant damage has been done to the VA workforce."

Rash of federal firings will hurt rural communities' economic health and development possibilities

Map by Sarah Melotte, The Daily Yonder, from Bureau of Labor Statistics data

The Trump administration's federal employee purge has plunged several sectors into chaos and disarray. Some firings include rural workers employed by public land agencies. "In a radical move to stave off perceived bureaucratic bloat, the administration has laid off thousands of federal employees," reports Sarah Melotte of The Daily Yonder. "Over a quarter million federal employees are stationed in rural counties across the country."

By cutting federal payrolls, the Trump administration hopes to fund part of its "proposed $4.5 trillion in tax cuts," Melotte explains. "The firings will hurt many rural communities that rely on the federal government for a large share of their economic base."

The loss of government jobs is particularly harmful to rural communities because federal positions generally pay better and will be more difficult for individuals to replace. Melotte reports, "In 2023, wages in rural private sector jobs were $50,600 per job, on average, compared to $79,300 per job in the federal government. . . . Federal jobs only make up 1.6% of the total rural workforce, but in many rural communities, they are one of the largest employers.

Explaining the domino effect federal firings could have on rural communities, Megan Lawson, from Headwaters Economics, told Melotte, "Especially in the West, where many federal layoffs are affecting public land agencies, these employees will not be able to manage our natural resources and serve the public. Our gateway communities whose economies depend on natural resources or recreation on federal land will feel the ripple effects when the resources and their visitors aren't being managed well. It's unclear how quickly these effects will be felt."

Nationwide, the tally of federal wages paid to rural employees is substantial. "Federal wages accounted for $21 billion in non-metropolitan, or rural, counties in 2023," Melotte adds. So far, the Trump administration fired more than 1,000 Department of Veteran Affairs employees and cut 3,400 Forest Service jobs.

Depite U.S. fireseason extremes, wildland firefighters eye deep paycuts as they wait for Congress to act

Wildland firefighters often deal with tremendous heat,
extreme weather and treacherous terrain. (Adobe Stock photo)

Federal firefighters work in heat, wind, fire, smoke and unpredictable weather. Despite their dedication to public safety, most wildland firefighters face deep pay cuts unless Congress intervenes, writes Robin Verble for The Conversation. "Continued uncertainty regarding federal pay and benefits, coupled with mental health risks and seasonal financial strain, make this a precarious time for wildland firefighters."

Roughly four years ago, Congress approved a "temporary retention bonus of $20,000 a year or 50% of the firefighter’s base pay, whichever amount was smaller," Verble explains. "However, wildland firefighters are still waiting for that raise to be codified." If Congress allows the pay raise to expire, "many firefighters will lose large percentages of their income. . . .These aren’t high-paying jobs. The starting pay is as low as $15 per hour."

The pay policies embedded in the "federal wildland fire system also incentivize overworking," Verble writes. "With starting pay so low, many wildland firefighters end up working an average of over 600 hours of overtime annually to pay their bills. . . . Many federal firefighters are temporary seasonal employees, so they need to reapply for positions every year."

When asked about federal firefighters' low pay, Tania Daffron, assistant fire chief for Bloomington, Ind., told The Rural Blog, "Fighting for decent wages is ridiculous, regardless of jurisdiction. Federal departments should be leading the way. No wonder personnel transfer or leave this 'ultra-hazardous' profession."

The U.S. Forest Service is grappling with constant employee turnover. "Over the past three years, 45% of the USFS wildland firefighting workforce has quit," Verble adds. "Retaining experienced firefighters amid longer and worsening fire seasons will require policymakers to improve health care, pay and the organizational structure itself, including how firefighters are hired and retained. Yet, the federal government continues to delay taking action."