The Brief

Spotting a Mojave Desert tortoise is increasingly difficult in the American Southwest. The tortoises, with their unmistakable domed patterned shells, live in California, parts of Nevada, Arizona and northwestern Mexico . But they have lost habitat over the decades to encroaching development. They're also at risk from disease and climate change, all of which threaten their existence.

In four out of the five primary regions where Mojave Desert tortoises can be found, some estimates show that around 90% of tortoises have disappeared since 1984 .

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife classified the Mojave Desert tortoise as threatened in 1989. A year later, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the tortoise as threatened. But California has taken measures a step further this year by declaring the tortoise as endangered under the state's Endangered Species Act. That designation means the tortoises are likely to go extinct if they are not managed properly.

The state agency's spokesperson, Krysten Kellum, said in an email that the status change could increase the likelihood that state, federal and resource management agencies will prioritize and distribute more funds toward protection and recovery actions.

"The uplisting highlights the urgency of tortoise conservation needs," Kellum wrote.

A six-month-old Mojave Desert Tortoise is examined by wildlife biologist.

(

Donovan Smith

/

NPS

)

Earlier this year, the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, fired 420 USFW probationary staff . Nearly another 300 took the Trump administration's deferred resignation offer. The administration has also proposed cutting the budgets of the USFWS, the Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service. Those agencies are all tasked with managing endangered and threatened species on federal lands, including the desert tortoise.

Garrett Peterson, a spokesperson for the USFWS, said in an emailed statement that the agency remains committed to fulfilling the mission of conserving fish, wildlife, and natural resources for the American people. But the agency could "not comment on personnel matters or on Congressional deliberations regarding appropriations."

Kristina Drake used to lead the Desert Tortoise Recovery Office for the USFWS. She signed the administration's deferred resignation letter in the spring. Drake says she doesn't anticipate any additional federal funding to support the tortoise — a species that's survived in the desert for at least 15 million years .

Nonetheless, nonprofits like the Mojave Desert Land Trust, located in the town of Joshua Tree, and others remain steadfast in wanting to protect and preserve the desert tortoise and its habitat.

And on a warm early morning summer day, Patrick Emblidge and Clay Noss with the Mojave Desert Land Trust, are hopeful they can catch a glimpse of a desert tortoise. To do that, they're searching for holes that tortoises make, often called burrows, in a canyon near Joshua Tree, where the town's namesake tree flourishes near desert flora and grasses.

It's difficult to find a desert tortoise because they spend the majority of their time underground. And they are rare, explains Emblidge. "They're at serious risk of going extinct  and it's terribly unjust."

A desert tortoise crosses a road while cars drive in the opposite lane. There's no single thing that has contributed to the tortoise downturn. Vehicle collisions, habitat encroachment and climate change are among the many factors.

(

Samantha Laarman

/

NPS

)

'Death from a thousand cuts'

Since being listed as a threatened species more than 35 years ago, tortoise numbers have continued to dwindle . Ed LaRue, who's on the board of directors for the Desert Tortoise Council, a group that focuses on the species' survival, says it took five years for California to review data to move the tortoise from threatened to endangered earlier this year.

"The state's determination was in California, the tortoise is worse off now than it was when it was formally listed back in 1989," LaRue says. "So, even though there are a few places where you can go and see them, at a population level, they're still declining across the board."

That's despite the existence of five recovery areas for the Mojave Desert tortoise in the Southwest. They include the Upper Virgin River, Northeastern Mojave, Eastern Mojave, Western Mojave and Eastern Colorado.

There's no single issue that has contributed to the tortoise downturn, says Cameron Barrows, who studies deserts at the University of California, Riverside. He and many scientists describe the tortoises' decline as "death from a thousand cuts." That's because they face multiple threats, including off-road vehicles, predators, drought, and even military bases.

Then there's climate change.

" Climate change is one of those things, and it's not minor at all," Barrows says. "It's a very important aspect of what's going on with tortoises."

Human-caused climate change makes temperatures hotter and droughts last longer. Jeff Lovich, a retired scientist who researched tortoises at the U.S. Geological Survey for over 30 years, says higher temperatures contribute to the sex determination of tortoise hatchlings.

During California's long drought that lasted from 2012 to 2016, Lovich conducted a study that showed a big decline in female tortoises . That's because when female tortoises lay eggs, they lose water and protein. Drought exacerbates this, ultimately affecting the population's survival.

" The eggs are about the size of a ping pong ball," Lovich says. "If females are doing that during a drought, it's gonna put them in life-threatening situations, and we think we documented that with their high mortality during that epic drought."

Tortoises build between seven to 17 burrows underground per year. When they get tired of their burrow, they move to another area and dig a new spot.

(

Stacy Manson

/

NPS

)

A keystone species

Some conservationists call tortoises "ecosystem engineers" because they build between seven to 17 burrows underground per year .

When tortoises tire of their burrow, they abandon them and relocate. Lovich says that's when other critters like snakes, birds and small mammals move in.

"If you took the tortoise away, you would take away that service that they provide for other species," he explains.

In the Mojave Desert, Emblidge and Noss study a burrow that's too big to be a tortoise's home. It's shaped like a half-moon – flat on the bottom and domed on the top – and sandwiched under a large boulder. They come to the same conclusion.

"Yeah, it's a tortoise burrow, it's just so big," Emblidge says. "It looks like it could have been modified by a fox or a coyote."

But losing the tortoise from the Mojave Desert would mean losing more than recycled burrows. The species' extinction could drastically change the landscape, says Emblidge.

"It would remove a keystone animal that is an indicator of ecosystem health," says Emblidge, who spent eight years studying tortoises at the USGS in the Southwest. "If tortoises are going extinct, we're doing something wrong and everything else is suffering as well."

Climate change makes temperatures hotter and droughts last longer. According to Jeff Lovich, a retired scientist, higher temperatures contribute to determining the sex of tortoise hatchlings.

(

Stacy Manson

/

NPS

)

A 'tortoisey area'

In the Mojave Desert, Emblidge and Noss point out desert dandelion, devil's lettuce and other forage tortoises like to munch on. They hope that maybe the elusive desert tortoise will appear on this hot summer morning. After a short hike, Emblidge and Noss drop to their knees to look underneath a boulder. There, burrowed back into the dirt and camouflaged by the rock, is a tortoise with its big domed shell and stubby feet.

Emblidge and Noss climb higher up the rocks and spot another tortoise.

"This is a really tortoisey area," Noss says.

This one has a burrow in between two boulders where she's — yes, the tortoise is a female — buried deep, providing ample shade and protection from predators. Only her back shell and one leg are visible. "She's not very photogenic today," laughs Emblidge.

Emblidge and Noss say seeing two tortoises in one day is special because they're in serious danger of going extinct. "They are amazing animals when you get to know 'em," Noss says, "and they're doing what they can to survive out here. We're just not really giving them a chance."

But with additional federal funding for tortoise conservation unlikely, groups like the Mojave Desert Land Trust and the Desert Tortoise Council become more important, according to Drake, formerly with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. She says those groups will have to continue to "hold the line for a few years," for the sake of all endangered species and ecosystems.
Copyright 2025 NPR

President Donald Trump has signed a bill to fund the government, bringing a close to the longest government shutdown in history, one that saw millions of Americans affected and ended with little political gain.

The bill passed Wednesday night despite Republicans' narrow margin in the House. Six Democrats joined their Republican colleagues to get the bill over the finish line 43 days after the shutdown began: Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Don Davis of North Carolina, Adam Gray of California, Jared Golden of Maine, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, and Tom Suozzi of New York.

Two Republicans — Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Greg Steube of Florida — voted no. The final vote was 222 to 209.

Trump signed the bill shortly after the House vote. He blamed Democrats for the shutdown at the signing event in the Oval Office.

"This was an easy extension but they didn't want to do it the easy way," Trump said. "They wanted to do it the hard way."

In addition to extending last year's spending levels through the end of January for most of the government, the bill provides funding for some agencies through the end of next September, including payments for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The program, which provides food aid to nearly 1 in 8 Americans, has been mired in a court battle because of the shutdown.

The bill includes a measure to reverse layoffs the Trump administration imposed during the shutdown, provides backpay for federal employees, and institutes protections against further layoffs.

But the central issue underlying the entire shutdown — extensions on enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that expire at the end of the year — is not addressed in the bill.

Instead, as part of the deal reached with a bipartisan contingent of senators , Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., agreed to hold a vote in mid-December on Democrat-drafted legislation aimed at extending those subsidies.

That doesn't sit well with many Senate Democrats, who remain wary of the pledge.

"A handshake deal with my Republican colleagues to reopen the government and no guarantee to actually lower costs is simply not good enough," said Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., who voted against the measure.

Even if a December bill addressing the expiring subsidies passes the Senate, it would need to go to the House. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has not made a guarantee to bring such a bill to the floor for a vote.

A lot of pain, not a lot of gain

Government shutdowns historically have not been effective tools for advancing a party's policy goals. The last six weeks proved that to be the rule, not an exception.

The decision by Senate Democrats not to fund the government before Oct. 1 was fueled, at least in part, by demands from the Democrats' political base to be a strong opposition party. The party homed in on a promise that they would not fund the government unless Republicans agreed to extend subsidies for people who buy health care through the Affordable Care Act marketplace.

The decision came after key Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, voted alongside Republicans to avoid a shutdown in March. The result was a furious Democratic base, who demanded the minority party exert what little leverage it has to force a negotiation with Republicans in exchange for their votes to fund the government.

With an eye toward the expiring subsidies and resulting skyrocketing premiums, Senate Democrats stood firm during the October shutdown, hoping their resolve, paired with the devastating impacts of the shutdown on millions of Americans, would bring Republicans to the negotiating table.

But the strategy ultimately didn't work. Republicans didn't budge and continued to hold regular votes to fund the government.

In the meantime, 42 million Americans who participate with SNAP didn't receive the food aid they rely on. Air traffic controllers and most Transportation Security Administration employees had to remain on the job without pay, leading to the Federal Aviation Administration's order to scale back flights . Millions of federal workers went without pay.

The group of seven Democrats and one independent senator who voted to end the shutdown acknowledged that waiting longer wouldn't bring about a different result.

"There was no guarantee that waiting would get us a better result, but there was a guarantee that waiting would impose suffering on more everyday people," Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told NPR.

The result is an end to a shutdown that does not address the core demand from Democrats on the subsidies. Instead they are left to defend the kind of handshake agreement that they once said was insufficient.

Thune's ultimate deal with Democrats aligns with his repeated statements throughout the shutdown that Republicans would be open to negotiating on the expiring subsidies only after the government was funded, not before.

Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, one of the six Democrats who voted for the bill in the House, said there is still an opportunity to address health care.

"Congress still has a window to pass bipartisan legislation to extend the ACA premium tax credits," Golden said in a statement. "In September, I joined a bipartisan coalition in the House to put forth legislation to extend the credits for one year and now, with the shutdown now over, I urge members of both parties who care about affordable health care to come back to the table so we can get the job done."

Another factor that didn't go Democrats' way is the president himself. President Trump has been known at times to upend Congressional Republicans' game plan. But he took a step back during the shutdown and let Thune drive the GOP strategy. He didn't take the bait from Democrats who repeatedly asked where Trump "the great negotiator" was in the discussions.

What happens now? 

Both parties have significant choices ahead that could lay the groundwork for their political successes and headaches through next year.

Senate Democrats have about a month to craft a bill that addresses the expiring ACA subsidies in a way that brings enough Republicans on board for passage.

If they're successful at getting an extension, Democrats will be able to start 2026 with a policy victory in hand that will shape their messaging going into the midterm elections. If Republicans don't support it, Democrats still have what they see as a winning issue — health care — to run on next year.

Some Republicans have shown interest in addressing the subsidies, but want to institute reforms like fraud prevention and income caps.

And both parties have to contend with the fact that the government is only funded for a few months. Congress will still have to pass nine other appropriations bills before the continuing resolution ends.

Copyright 2025 NPR

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s former chief of staff, Dana Williamson, and four co-conspirators were indicted Wednesday on 23 counts of bank and wire fraud, allegedly committed from 2022 to 2024, during her time working for the governor.

The indictment alleges that Williamson, a longtime Democratic strategist, worked with Greg Campbell, a prominent Sacramento lobbyist, and Sean McCluskie, the former chief of staff to former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, as well as two other unnamed co-conspirators to steal $225,000 from an unnamed former official’s dormant campaign account for McCluskie’s personal use.

“Collectively, they funneled the money through various business entities and disguised it as pay for what was, in reality, a no-show job,” FBI Sacramento Special Agent in Charge Sid Patel said in a news release.

Prosecutors allege that Williamson and one of the unnamed co-conspirators, described only as a former California public official who owned a political consulting firm, used their political strategy firms to funnel money out of a campaign account, believed to be Becerra’s, into an account controlled by McCluskie. They allegedly disguised the funds as payments for McCluskie’s spouse, who was described in the indictment as a stay-at-home parent.

Williamson is also accused of falsely claiming more than $1.7 million in business expenses on her taxes. She used the funds to purchase luxury handbags, chartered jets and a nearly $170,000 birthday trip to Mexico, the indictment alleges.

Williamson, who previously held a high-level position in Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration, was well known for her negotiating ability. When she left his office, Newsom said in a statement that he would miss her "insight, tenacity and big heart.”

The indictment indicated that Becerra had no knowledge of the scheme, and he confirmed as much Wednesday afternoon in a written statement via his spokesperson, Owen Kilmer.

“The news today of formal accusations of impropriety by a long-serving trusted advisor are a gut punch,” said Becerra, a prominent candidate to succeed Newsom in next year’s gubernatorial election. He added that he had fully cooperated with the U.S. Justice Department and would continue to do so.

“As California’s former Attorney General, I fully comprehend the importance of allowing this investigation and legal process to run its course through our justice system.”

Williamson was scheduled to appear in federal court Wednesday afternoon.

A spokesperson for Newsom distanced the governor from his former top aide.

“While we are still learning details of the allegations, the governor expects all public servants to uphold the highest standards of integrity,” said Izzy Gardon, Newsom’s spokesperson, in a written statement.

“At a time when the president is openly calling for his Attorney General to investigate his political enemies, it is especially important to honor the American principle of being innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of one’s peers,” the statement said.

Patel, the special agent in charge, said in a news release that the charges were “the result of three years of relentless investigative work.”

“The FBI will remain vigilant in its efforts to uncover fraud and corruption, ensuring our government systems are held to the highest standards.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

After more than two years of discussion and debate, the Los Angeles City Council voted Wednesday to significantly lower annual rent increases in most of the city’s apartments.

L.A.’s current rent control rules guarantee landlords the right to raise rents at least 3% every year. Increases can be as high as 10% in some apartments during periods of high inflation.

But under the reforms passed by 12 of the council’s 15 members, rent increases would be capped at 4% annually, and an additional 2% increase for landlords who cover utilities would be eliminated. The exact rate each year would be equal to 90% of the change in the region’s consumer price index, a government measure of economic inflation.

“We need to make a change to this formula,” said Nithya Raman, chair of the council’s Housing and Homelessness Committee ahead of the vote. “Extraordinary rent increases are driving people out of the city.”

The rules passed by the majority of councilmembers would set a new floor of 1% in years of low inflation. Councilmembers Bob Blumenfield and John Lee voted against the changes, and Councilmember Curren Price recused himself from the vote because he is a landlord.

This is the first overhaul of the city’s rent increase formula since 1985. Tenant groups have long argued that the current rules increase costs faster than incomes for many renters, pushing some toward eviction and potential homelessness.

Landlord groups decried the changes, saying the city is further clamping down on their ability to keep up with skyrocketing insurance premiums and steep maintenance costs.

Before the new rules take effect, they still need to be drafted by the City Attorney’s Office and returned to the council for a final vote.

‘We would end up homeless’

The changes represent a step toward but not a full adoption of the demands for a 3% cap at 60% of inflation from tenant groups. Humberto Altamira, an unemployed cook living with his wife in L.A.’s downtown Fashion District, said his family’s rent went up about $50 per month earlier this year, and they would struggle to afford another increase of 3% or more.

“We would end up homeless and living on the street,” Altamira said, speaking in Spanish.

Humberto Altamira and his wife stand in front of L.A. City Hall ahead of a City Council vote on rent control.

(

David Wagner/LAist

)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the city banned increases for nearly four years . The new cap, while comparable to caps in many other Southern California cities, does not reflect the rising costs property owners face, said California Apartment Association spokesperson Fred Sutton.

“Reject arbitrary magic numbers,” Sutton said. “These changes will not create a single new home, but they’ll make it even harder to build, making the housing crisis worse for everyone.”

Where LA rent control applies

The city’s rent control rules generally cover apartments built before October 1978, as well as new units that replace demolished rent-controlled units or are attached to older buildings.

Nearly two-thirds of L.A.’s residents live in rental housing. And because most of them live in older properties, the city’s rent control rules affect about 42% of all L.A. households.

Some councilmembers, including John Lee, said stricter rules would run counter to other local policies to spur housing development, such as Mayor Karen Bass’ executive directive to speed up the approval of affordable housing projects.

“Just as we are gaining momentum, we are considering a change,” Lee said. “This sends the message, ‘Do not build here. Do not invest in Los Angeles.’”

Other councilmembers said getting rental costs under control is key to addressing homelessness. At last count , about 43,500 people lack housing in the city.

“We have an eviction-to-homelessness pipeline,” Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez said. “We get calls constantly from property owners about people experiencing homelessness around their buildings.

“We are struggling to deal with that crisis,” Hernandez continued. “We can’t house the number of people every year that are falling into homelessness. And a majority of that is because they can’t afford it.”

To build or not to build?

Renters and landlords crowded into City Council chambers to give public comment ahead of Wednesday’s vote.

Megan Briceño, who owns eight rent-controlled apartments, told LAist she has building permits to construct an accessory dwelling unit on her four-unit property in Mid-City L.A. Because the unit will be rent-controlled, she said the city’s changes could halt her building plans.

“I don't know how much longer I can continue to do business in a city that constantly feels like I'm fighting for my basic property rights, for a basic fair return,” Briceño said.

The process of reforming L.A.’s rent control ordinance was kickstarted in October 2023, when councilmembers Hugo Soto-Martinez and Bob Blumenfield asked for an in-depth review of the city’s rules.

LAist obtained the city-commissioned report produced in that process and was the first to publish it in September 2024.

Among other observations and recommendations, the report argued for eliminating an additional 2% annual increase landlords can impose if they pay for a tenant’s electricity and gas service. The report found that over time those increases can eclipse the entire cost of providing those utilities.

The reforms passed Wednesday include the elimination of this utility bump.