Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • So, what's next?
    An exterior view of the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 9, in Washington, D.C.
    An exterior view of the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 9 in Washington, D.C.

    Topline:

    The government is back open. It was the longest shutdown in U.S. history at 43 days. There remain lots of questions about what this means, how we got here and where we go from here.

    What are some of those questions? What happens with the health care subsidies that largely were at the center of the shutdown? What happens to federal workers and their paychecks? What happens if there's another shutdown? How likely is another shutdown in the short term?

    Read on ... for the answers to these and other questions that arose from the shutdown.

    The government is back open.

    It was the longest shutdown in U.S. history at 43 days.

    There are lots of questions about what this means, how we got here and where we go from here. Let's answer some:

    Why did it start?

    The Democratic base has been urging its leaders to show more fight. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer caught tremendous blowback in March for doing an about-face and going along with Republicans to keep the government open despite what the left saw as an odious spending bill.

    When the latest funding fight came up, Schumer this time showed a united front with House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries. Arm in arm, they refused to go along with continuing to fund the government and made the key issue extending health care subsidies, which if not extended, would mean tens of millions of Americans would see their health care costs increased.

    How did it end?

    It ended without the health care extensions Democrats were fighting for. Eight moderate senators crossed the aisle and indicated Sunday night that they had struck a deal with Senate Republicans to reopen the government.

    The reason they didn't hold out longer, this group said, was because it was obvious President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans weren't going to negotiate, and too many people were suffering. The Trump administration — correctly — gambled that enough Democrats would not be able to stomach the amount of pain the administration was willing to inflict on the 42 million recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, and more than 3 million federal workers.

    So what does the bill do?

    The bill passed by Congress and signed by Trump funds the government until Jan. 30 with carveouts for SNAP, benefits targeted at women, infants and children, or WIC, the Department of Veterans Affairs and Congress. Those will all be funded until the end of September 2026.

    It notably also tries to rectify the firings and loss of pay to federal workers, although it's a leverage point the Trump administration could use again if the government were to shut down again after Jan. 30.

    There is also money for increased security for members of Congress, executive branch officials, judges and Supreme Court justices. Several Republican members were outspoken about this after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

    If the government is only funded until Jan. 30, does that mean there could be another shutdown soon?

    It's possible. It depends on a few things. What lessons do Democrats take out of the shutdown? Does the fire within the base subside some between now and then? And is there an actual vote on health care subsidies?

    OK, so what about those health care subsidies?

    It's not clear yet, but the lack of a negotiation on them likely means they will expire unless enough moderate Republicans, feeling pressure in their districts, cross over to strike a deal with Democrats — and Republican leadership, including and especially Trump, go along with it.

    But that seems highly improbable — and tens of millions of people would see their premiums go up.

    If that's the case, what was the point of the shutdown?

    That's a question a lot of people, especially those left of center, are asking. They see what moderate Democrats did as caving to Republicans.

    The reality is, though, the eight moderate senators, who caucus with Democrats and took this deal, didn't want to see regular people feel more unnecessary pain — and they saw no hope for Republicans to compromise after what became the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

    Democrats did accomplish something in this shutdown, though. They elevated the issue of health care, and if Republicans block the extension of subsidies, then they will likely own increased health care costs in voters' minds.

    What does this mean for federal workers and flight delays?

    Government workers will get back to work, and recent mass layoffs are to be reversed. Furloughed workers were missing paychecks.

    As far as airports, there are already signs of easing, but it will likely be several days or more until everything will get back to normal. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy noted that more air traffic controllers are heading back to work, but in the very short term, flight reductions at some major airports will continue.

    Were there any surprises?

    Yes, there were a few. First, there's drama around a provision slipped in the bill that would allow senators to sue the Justice Department for $500,000 each, if they were subject to subpoenas or had their phone records accessed as a result of DOJ's Jan. 6 investigation.

    House Republicans pledged to pass a resolution repealing that provision, but there's no guarantee of that or that the Senate will go along.

    There was also a clash about hemp regulation between two Republican senators from the same state. The disagreement between Kentucky Sens. Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul got pretty heated.

    The bill also shines a light on how hundreds of local projects are funded — from the purchasing of equipment for a college in the Virgin Islands, the establishing of a veterinary doctorate program in Maryland, urban forest conservation in Texas and asbestos abatement in Alaska to funding for local hospitals, rural community facilities, youth centers, fire stations and so, so much more. It's earmarks — funding not voted on or allocated through the formal appropriations process but tacked on in spending bills — that pay for all of these things.

    One day, there will be a vet that will say he or she got a degree from the University of Maryland, Eastern Shore — and it'll all be because of the funding deal to reopen the government.

    Is there a guarantee on a health care vote?

    No. The moderate Senate Democrats, who crossed over to open the government, thought so, but House Speaker Mike Johnson said shortly after the deal was reached that he wouldn't commit to a vote.

    Whether the vote happens or not, if health care subsidies are not extended, it will be because of Republicans — and that will mean they will own higher health care costs heading into an election year.

    What does this mean for the Epstein files?

    The end of the shutdown meant the swearing in of Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat, who won a special election in Arizona replacing her late father.

    That's key because she signed onto a discharge petition trying to compel the Justice Department to release the files associated with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and her support gave a majority to those who want to see them released. Johnson, who is close to Trump, has argued compelling the release is not necessary — though the president has made clear he does not want them released in full and his Justice Department has not taken public steps to do so.

    Even if it passes, though, it will largely likely be symbolic. The Senate is unlikely to get the required 60 votes. Trump would, of course, like it to fail in the House. Colorado Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert, one of three Republicans who have also signed the discharge petition, met in the White House Situation Room, apparently about Epstein. Boebert did not remove her name even after the meeting.

    The day the shutdown ended, more investigative materials were released from the House Oversight Committee, including a leak from committee Democrats pointing specifically to emails from Epstein's estate, showing Epstein implying that Trump knew about the girls.

    Any day Trump is talking about Epstein is not a good day for the White House.

    Who winds up with the political advantage out of the shutdown?

    Democrats really upset their base — again. Progressives continue to feel like they get rolled by party leaders. At the end of the day, though, Democrats are likely the ones who got the most out of the shutdown and will have the advantage in the midterm elections.

    Consider that Democrats are coming off huge wins across the country earlier this month in the off-year elections. The central issue in those elections was affordability. And through the shutdown, they elevated the issue of health care.

    The party and its candidates will likely be able to campaign on both of those issues next year, and with Republicans in charge, that will help Democrats — if they can mend fences with their base, that is.

  • Only qualified candidates count
    People lean over tables, separated by privacy dividers reading "Vote" and bearing images of the American flag.
    A man casts his ballot during early voting

    Topline:

    Write-in candidates in Southern California are no joke. Election officials require them to qualify. While many are already in, Tuesday is the deadline to be considered. The full list will be released to the public Friday.

    The rules: The city of L.A. requires write-in candidates to file a form and pay $300 or submit 500 valid signatures, while other cities may not require anything except paperwork. Qualified candidate names are sent to county election officials and will post the information Friday for voters.

    Some write-in candidates: As of 3 p.m. Tuesday, the L.A. County Registrar of Voters listed 20 write-in candidates who filed in California for a wide range of races, from state Assembly and state Senate to governor. Of the 20, 11 filed as write-ins for the governor’s race.

    Why it matters: Most write-in campaigns are a long shot but some have won: Lisa Murkowski won an Alaska U.S. Senate seat in 2010; Washington, D.C., Mayor Anthony Williams was reelected in 2002.

    Who gets counted: Only votes for qualified write-in candidates are counted and certified. Sorry, Mickey Mouse and George Washington.

    What's next: Here’s the current list of qualified write-in candidates in L.A. County. Checking the box that says Show only Write In Records will show you write-in candidates. Orange County election officials say they have no write-in candidates.

    Go deeper: Your LAist voter guide for the 2026 June elections.

  • Sponsored message
  • Here's a roundup of the fires in SoCal
    Several buildings are seen next to a cove on a rugged island.
    A fire on Santa Rosa Island has been burning since May 15, 2015. The island is seen here in 1997.

    Topline:

    Several fires are burning across Southern California, with some destroying structures, threatening homes and charring pristine landscapes.

    Where are the fires? A large fire is burning on Santa Rosa Island in Channel Islands National Park. A fire in Simi Valley has destroyed one home and led to multiple evacuation alerts. Two fires are in Riverside County, and a small fire is in the San Gabriel Mountains.

    The forecast: Warm weather and Santa Ana wind conditions have hampered firefighting efforts and are expected to continue through Wednesday this week.

    Read on ... for details about the Sandy Fire, Santa Rosa Island Fire and others.

    Several fires are burning across Southern California, with some destroying structures, threatening homes and charring pristine landscapes.

    Warm weather and Santa Ana wind conditions have hampered firefighting efforts and are expected to continue through Wednesday this week. The National Weather Service forecasts cooler weather and "May gray" through the weekend.

    Here's a roundup of some of the fires burning now.

    (All dates refer to today, Tuesday, May 19, unless otherwise noted)

    Santa Rosa Island Fire (Santa Barbara County)

    The fire is burning in Channel Island National Park territory. Firefighters traveled by boat with their equipment to get to the island, according to news reports. The island is home to rare and endangered plants and animals.

    Sandy Fire (Ventura County)

    CalFire reported about 2:40 p.m. Tuesday that lessening winds allowed "firefighters to take full advantage of improved weather to strengthen containment lines and continue aggressive suppression efforts. Crews remain actively engaged both on the ground and in the air to gain additional containment and keep the fire within its current perimeter."

    The fire started Monday in the southern part of Simi Valley. It eventually spread eastward toward L.A. County communities in the San Fernando Valley, but overnight conditions were favorable to firefighters, CalFire said. Several communities were under evacuation orders and warnings, and schools in the area were closed.

    Bain Fire (Riverside County)

    The fire was first reported around noon Tuesday, according to CalFire, near Jurupa Valley (east of the 15 Freeway and south of the 60). CBS News Los Angeles reported that four people have been injured.

    Verona Fire (Riverside County)

    Burro Fire (Angeles National Forest)

    The fire started Monday in a mountainous area north of the San Gabriel Reservoir.

    Listen to our Big Burn podcast

    Listen 39:42
    Get ready now. Listen to our The Big Burn podcast
    Jacob Margolis, LAist's science reporter, examines the new normal of big fires in California.

    Fire resources and tips

    Check out LAist's wildfire recovery guide.

    Prepare for the next disaster:

    If you have to evacuate:

    Navigating fire conditions:

    How to help yourself and others:

    How to start the recovery process:

    What to do for your kids:

  • Ethics Commission to serve as corruption watchdog
    A woman with reddish hair, glasses and light-tone skin speaks on screen as her name (Lindsey P. Horvath) and agenda item appears in the lower thirds.
    Supervisor Lindsey Horvath sponsored the motion to create an L.A. County Ethics Commission.

    Topline:

    Citing a desire to prevent corruption within county government, the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday established Los Angeles County’s first ethics commission.

    The backstory: In 2024, voters approved Measure G, which called for the creation of an Ethics Commission and Office of Ethics Compliance. The measure came amid a series of corruption cases at L.A. City Hall but calls for reform spilled over into the county government.

    The details: The motion by Supervisor Lindsey Horvath and approved by the board Tuesday directs county departments to begin establishing the operational, staffing and legal infrastructure necessary to launch the commission in this year. It also directs staff to prepare a charter amendment for voter consideration on the November ballot to enshrine the commission in the charter.

    Composition: Supervisors voted for a plan that calls for a seven-member commission. Initially, the chair of the Board of Supervisors, the county assessor and the Governance Reform Task Force would each appoint a commissioner, filling three spots. Those appointees would then select the remaining four members from a pool of applicants.

    Opposition: Supervisor Janice Hahn supported the overall motion but opposed the composition of the commission, saying too many members were to be appointed by elected officials — the same people the panel would be charged with watchdogging.

    History: The county has had its own campaign, lobbying and ethics laws on the books for years, but they were enforced by ethics officers in various departments. The latest proposal calls for a 54-member ethics office to enforce those laws and for the commission to impose fines if they are violated.

  • CA community colleges crack down on fake students
    Students walk down a cement path passing signage that reads "Financial aid office. Cloud hall, room 324."
    Students walk past a sign for a campus financial aid office Dec. 8, 2017.

    Topline:

    After a spike in fraudulent applications to California’s community colleges, school officials say they are getting better at detecting and preventing fraud, though it still happens.

    Why it matters: Between January and March 2025, scammers stole nearly $5.6 million in federal student aid and over $900,000 in state aid. By comparison, this spring colleges have reported losing just under $1.5 million in federal student aid and about $330,000 in state aid to fraudsters. Last spring was “really the peak,” Hadsell said. He said he anticipates the end-of-year total in 2026 to be “significantly lower” than last year.

    The backstory: Last spring, CalMatters reported that colleges were seeing unprecedented reports of fraud, with scammers stealing millions more dollars of student aid than in any previous period, according to reports submitted by colleges to California’s Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

    Read on... for more on how community colleges in the state are cracking down on financial aid fraud.

    This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

    California’s community colleges have been battling fraudulent students for years, trying to prevent scammers from stealing financial aid money.

    Recent data shows the colleges’ efforts finally may be working.

    Last spring, CalMatters reported that colleges were seeing unprecedented reports of fraud, with scammers stealing millions more dollars of student aid than in any previous period, according to reports submitted by colleges to California’s Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.

    Now fewer scammers are bypassing colleges’ vetting systems, according to monthly reports, and school administrators say they’re better, though still not perfect, at detecting and preventing fraud.

    After CalMatters reported on the rise in fraud last year, Republican U.S. Congress members called for a federal investigation, a Democratic state legislator launched a state audit and later, California’s Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office approved a new ID verification policy for students. Colleges now are more vigilant about policing fraud, said Jory Hadsell, an executive in technology initiatives for the chancellor’s office, who pointed to better filtering practices and new software to detect fraud.

    Between January and March 2025, scammers stole nearly $5.6 million in federal student aid and over $900,000 in state aid. By comparison, this spring colleges have reported losing just under $1.5 million in federal student aid and about $330,000 in state aid to fraudsters.

    Last spring was “really the peak,” Hadsell said. He said he anticipates the end-of-year total in 2026 to be “significantly lower” than last year.

    Even in the worst months, such as last spring, the money distributed to scammers is less than 1% of the total financial aid distributed to community college students in California. Students use the money to help pay for tuition, books and the cost of daily living expenses, such as rent, transportation and food.

    But any fraud, however small, is unacceptable, said Chris Ferguson, executive vice chancellor of finance and strategic initiatives. “The ultimate goal for our system is zero.”

    Some anti-fraud policies have been slow to take effect. The California Community Colleges Board of Governors voted nearly a year ago to require ID verification for all students, but only about 50% of college students are doing it as of this month. Hadsell said the delays arose in part because of complications verifying information of students under 18 years old, who represent a growing demographic for the community colleges. He said ID verification, which is currently optional, will become mandatory on July 1.

    The board also voted to “explore” the option of charging students an application fee of no more than $10, but with the rates of fraud declining and other solutions that seem to work, the chancellor’s office is no longer pursuing that option, Ferguson said.

    After blaming California officials, the U.S. Department of Education, which shares responsibility for administering federal aid and detecting fraud, said it would implement a “screening process” for applicants. It was supposed to take effect last fall but didn’t launch until last month, according to press releases from the department and statements from the California Student Aid Commission. CalMatters reached out to the U.S. Education Department five times over the last 12 months, seeking clarification, but the department has refused to respond to questions about delays with the screening process.

    When more than a third of college applicants are fake

    After classes suddenly moved online during the COVID-19 pandemic, the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office saw an increase in financial aid fraud on their application portal, CCCApply, which is used by nearly every student as the first step in applying to community college.

    In 2021, the chancellor’s office suspected roughly 20% of applicants were fraudulent.

    The estimate was higher in January 2024, around 25%. Last spring, it was 34%, though some schools saw much higher rates.

    After they apply through CCCApply, students get filtered locally at their college of choice. In the Los Rios Community College District, which represents Sacramento, college officials suspected 64% of local applications from January to March 2025 were fraudulent. And that was after the state already vetted them through its portal, said Gabe Ross, a spokesperson for the district. The San Diego and Los Angeles community college districts also reported spikes in the number of fraudulent applications around the same time.

    CalMatters reached out to the five largest community college districts for an interview. The Rancho Santiago Community College District, which includes parts of Orange County, did not provide sufficient data to draw conclusions about trends in fraud. The State Center Community College District, which represents schools in Fresno and Madera counties, did not respond to CalMatters’ questions.

    Monthly data reports to the chancellor’s office show that once detected, most scammers who applied to community colleges were then caught and kicked out before they could apply for financial aid, but some succeeded.

    This year, both Sacramento and San Diego community colleges say they’re seeing fewer attempts at fraud and are getting better at stopping those who try. The San Diego Community College District is now manually screening for fraudulent applications twice a week and is finalizing a contract with a company to help improve its detection software.

    CCCApply has improved its filtering process, which helped reduce fraud attempts at Sacramento area colleges, said Ross. “When we talked about such a complex dynamic challenge, it's always hard to identify what's the one thing that sort of moved the needle. The truth is that we needed support from the feds, we needed support from the (chancellor’s) office, and we needed to invest in tools locally.”

    This spring, he said the district flagged about 12% of college applications as suspect.

    Using AI to detect AI 

    Measuring fraud is, by definition, imprecise. If a scammer is truly successful, colleges have no way to identify that fraud.

    For a long time, administrators assumed bots enrolling in online classes were responsible for most fraudulent attempts. Yet teachers, students and financial aid administrators say some of the scams are more sophisticated now and are coming from real people impersonating students. Many fraudulent applications to Los Angeles’ community colleges have real names, dates of birth, and addresses that are likely “leaked or stolen,” said Nicole Albo-Lopez, the deputy chancellor of the Los Angeles Community College District.

    In San Diego, Victor DeVore, dean of student services, said the college district only requires ID verification for students flagged as fraudulent. At that point they must prove their identity, either in person or through Zoom. Once, a potentially fraudulent student appeared on Zoom and presented a valid-looking ID that matched their face, but DeVore’s team noticed that the student’s IP address was odd. “One minute they’re logging in from Nairobi, the next minute they'll be logging in from Virginia,” he said, adding that the use of AI, virtual private networks (VPNs) or other technology has made fraud harder to detect.

    Students’ personal data is supposed to be private, but school districts and education technology companies are frequently hacked. Last week, Canvas — one of the go-to learning platforms for California’s community colleges, University of California and California State University campuses — went offline temporarily due to a major hack. Its parent company, Instructure, said last week that it reached an agreement with the hackers to relinquish students’ data.

    The state has turned to AI to fight fraud. Last summer, the state chancellor’s office negotiated a multimillion dollar contract with N2N Services Inc., enabling any college in the state to access the company’s software at a discounted rate. The software uses AI to detect potentially fraudulent applicants. Colleges are not required to use it, and so far, only about two-thirds do. Some districts, such as the Los Angeles Community College District, use a different fraud detection software, known as Socure.

    Colleges and the state chancellor’s office continue to face political pressure and scrutiny of their approach to fraud. Last month, the U.S. Education Department said it had prevented more than $171 million in fraud in California after implementing a new policy regarding ID verification. Hadsell, with the state chancellor’s office, said the federal policy had no impact on California’s colleges. “They issued some interim guidance last year that basically said you should at least have a Zoom call with students and have them show an ID when you're approving their aid. And those were things that were already happening. It was not, you know, some new thing at least for most of our colleges.”

    Kiran Kodithala, the CEO of N2N, which collects its own data on fraud at community colleges, said the education department’s claim makes no sense.

    “I don’t see how $171 million in fraud in California can occur,” he said. “There’s no basis for those numbers. We’re not seeing anything remotely close.” Kodithala estimates that N2N has prevented over $34 million in fraud since last summer, though his platform is not yet in use by all of California's 116 community colleges.

    Collecting more precise data may take months or years. U.S. Representative Young Kim, who represents parts of Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, launched the effort for a federal investigation last spring, but her office could not provide any updates or confirm that an investigation was in fact underway. At the state level, the Legislature last year approved conducting an audit of how California’s community colleges handled fraud but the findings won’t be released until this summer.

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