Allison Gill (0:00)

MSW Media.

Dana Goldberg (0:23)

Hello and welcome to the Daily beans for Thursday, February 6, 2025. Today, Elon Musk's Children of the Corn are examining Medicare and Medicaid services. A judge has blocked Trump's order to send trans women to men's prisons. Red states will again be shooting themselves in the foot if Trump chooses to dismantle the Department of Education. And Senators Warren and White House want some answers from the Office of Government Accountability. I'm flying solo in the Captain's Chair. I'm your host, Dana Goldberg. Hey, everyone. I am so happy that you are back with us because if you're hearing my voice, you are definitely back with us. Listen, if you're new to the podcast, and a lot of you are, because, hey, some of you know us from Blue sky because Twitter used to block all of our external links. And so some of you are hearing about us for the first time because you're on Blue sky and the joy of Less hate. Less hate. There's still some trolls that have made their way in, but there is definitely less hate over there. Welcome to the family. If this is your first episode. I normally have a badass motherfucking co host cursing alongside me, but she has taken a few days nerding out on the high seas. And by high, I mean. Well, you know what I mean. It's Allison. I'm holding down the fort until Allison returns and bringing you the good, the bad, and sometimes the really bad news. So we're just gonna get right into it. Let's do it. We got a lot of news, so let's hit the hot notes.

Allison Gill (1:50)

Hot notes.

Dana Goldberg (1:53)

All right, everyone. First up, from Casey Parks and Derek Hawkins at the the Washington Post, A federal judge in Washington has temporarily blocked the Federal Bureau of Prisons from carrying out President Donald Trump's executive order to move incarcerated transgender women into men's facilities and stop gender transition medical treatments. U.S. district Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the plaintiffs in the case, and these are three transgender women who said that they were set to be moved into men's facilities, had shown they were likely to succeed on their claims that the order violated the Constitution's protections against cruel and unusual punishment. The ruling applies nationwide. Lamberth, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan, found that the plaintiffs had, quote, straightforwardly demonstrated that irreparable harm will follow if their request for restraining order is denied. Now, lawyers for the women said that they were, quote, extremely pleased with the decision and went on to say, it's a relief to the transgender women we represent that they will not be moved and that their medical care must continue. This is from Jennifer Levy, and she's the senior director of the Transgender and queer rights at Glad Law G L A D1D law, and that's one of two nonprofit legal groups representing the plaintiffs. She went on to say, and it's so important that judges are preserving constitutional values in the face of the Trump administration's naked power grabs coming at the cost of the lives of vulnerable people. I'm glad someone is calling this stuff out for exactly what it is. So the Federal Bureau of Prisons. It did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the ruling. The suit is one of several legal challenges the Trump administration is facing as the president attempts to make sweeping changes through executive actions. Again, remember, everyone, these are wish lists. Many of them are unconstitutional, they're illegal, and people are pushing back. Others have filed suits involving transgender young people and military service members. This week, a judge indefinitely blocked Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and temporary foreign visitors. A previous ruling in Massachusetts also temporarily blocked the Bureau of Prisons from transferring another incarcerated transgender woman who said in court documents that she had been moved to solitary confinement. Tuesday's ruling is the response to an executive order Trump signed on Inauguration Day. So it's already been almost a couple weeks, even though it's felt like 42 fucking years. The order, one of the several president had signed targeting transgender people, issued a wide array of directives that Trump said would restore, quote, biological truth to the federal government. Which is bullshit because they can't even define science in the actual executive order. In the order, Trump wrote that his administration would ensure that, quote, males are not detained in women's prisons or housed in women's detention centers. Okay? Now, shortly after he signed the order, the three women who filed the suit anonymously were told they'd soon be moved to male facilities. That's according to court documents. All three were removed from the general population and placed in segregated housing with other transgender women. Roughly 2,230 transgender people are housed in federal custodial facilities and halfway houses. That's according to the Justice Department. About two thirds of them, about 1500, are trans women, but only 16 of those are housed in women's prisons. 16. In a hearing Tuesday, lawyers of the government argued that the plaintiffs don't have standing because the bureau has not yet crafted a policy in response to Trump's order. But the judge found that the order left the bureau no discretion to defy it. The government's lawyers also argued that the Plaintiffs had not exhausted their administrative remedies by attempting to resolve their issue with prison officials and wardens. But the judge found that the plaintiffs had, quote, the rare sort of case wherein the bureau could not provide relief for the alleged constitutional violations. In the suit, the women alleged that if they were moved to a men's facility that they would be at high risk of harassment, abuse, and sexual assault. This is 100% true, and it has been proven they may also be forced to shower in front of men. Two of the plaintiffs said in court documents that they had been sexually assaulted in men's prison before that they were transferred to a woman's facility. Federal researchers, they. They have found that transgender prisoners that are at a higher risk of sexual victimization than other prisoners are. In an email to the bureau, one of the plaintiff's families wrote that transferring her to a male prison would be, quote, the end of her. I know a lot of this is really hard to hear, especially for the trans non binary community listening, so thank you. Thank you for getting through this story with me. And this is a quote. She will get sexually assaulted and even possibly killed for being who she is. They wrote, she's a citizen designated as a female and deserves protection like any other human. This could mean life or death, and she has not received a death penalty as her sentence. That statement right there is so powerful. This could mean life or death, and she has not received a death penalty as her sentence. According to court documents, bureau officials responded to the family and said Trump's executive order prohibited them from keeping her in a female prison. The incarcerated women also argue that their gender dysphoria would worsen if they were housed with men because they may be forced to dress as men and may be referred to as their former names, otherwise known as dead naming them. Trump has said he signed the Order to Protect Women, quote, unquote. But the judge in this case noted that the government has not alleged that the three women who sued pose any threat to other women incarcerated with them. Thus, he wrote, the public interest in seeing the plaintiffs relocated immediately to male facilities is slight at best. And just a personal note on this, if you notice, they're not talking about worrying about trans men in male facilities, which I found fascinating, because under this, they're saying that trans men are technically still women. Listen, under this, under the. Under the administration. So why wouldn't they care about protecting those, quote, unquote, women in the male facilities? Do you understand how this is all fucked up? Because it's not about transgender issues. It is about, in many ways, misogyny and controlling women. Otherwise, if it was about the transgender community, they would be addressing this in both cases. So I hope you followed that. And it makes me angry. A lot of this is just about misogyny and their desire to control women. Thank you for getting through that story with me. We are going to move on to the red states again, just fucking themselves with who they elected as president. Elon Musk, you can file this one next under fifo, which, as you know, if you're new to the podcast, is around. And find out. This one's from April Rubin at Axios. President Trump's campaign promised to dismantle the Department of Education. It could prove way more costly for red states than blue. Now this is why this matters. Funding for public schools primarily falls to local and state governments, but federal funds, those work to fill those gaps. States that voted for Trump last November, on average use more federal funding in their education apportions than states that voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris. That dependence, and this is a quote, that dependence is in large part because they're just lower wealth states and they don't have the same capacity to step in and make up that difference. This is from Kevin Wellner, the director of National Education Policy center. And that's what he told Axios. Now, the state of play in this whole thing. Average federal spending in the 2021-2022 school year was about 17% in Trump voting states. That's compared to only 11% in states that voted for Harris at 23%. Mississippi has the highest proportion of federal public school funding that school year. And South Dakota and Arkansas followed with 22% each. And this is per the USA fax. New York was at 7%. 7%. They had the lowest, by the way. Mississippi spends an average of 12,390 on public K12 spending per student, compared to New York's 33,440. This is all for the Education Data Initiative. Now, if you zoom out and look at this from the big picture, anywhere from 11 to 14% of public school funding is federal. This is again from Wellner. That figure was on the high end after the start of the pandemic, but has since decreased. The intrigue of all of this, even if the Education Department is disbanded, programs within its purview could fall to other federal agencies, like Head Start, for example. That's already run by the Department of Health and Human Services, which is fucking scary if RFK gets approved. Now this is a quote, moving program administration to other departments is going to be highly disruptive if that happens. Again, this is Wellner. And he went on to say, but the bigger question is what Congress decides to do in response to any requests from the administration to cut these programs. The threat level on this states would likely handle cuts to federal education funding in vastly different ways. Those that have more low income families, let's say in turn, they're going to receive higher shares of Title 1 funding that they would feel the impact the most in wealthier states. And this is a quote, we would probably see some reduced spending for students and some increased state allocations. And he went on to say, in states that are already financially strained because they have less wealth, this could result simply in less funding and fewer resources for the students. Again, this is all from Wellner. Now, the big picture of this whole story, student performance, which was already in decline before the pandemic, has worsened since 2020, making federal funds to help bridge academic gaps all the more important. Federal funds include grant programs to help at risk or disabled students. And this is per Peter G. Peterson Foundation. So the context for this entire story. Trump regularly floated eliminating the Department of Education on the campaign trail. And he's called agency an example of federal outreach. Okay, Trump promised to sign an executive order curtailing the Department of Education's powers, and dozens of its employees were placed on administrative leave last week. Okay, but we have to remember the president does not have the authority to create or dismantle a federal agency. Only Congress has that power. The legislative branch has historically resisted such moves, including during Trump's first term when he proposed merging the Education Department and the Department of Labor. Those efforts, they never gained traction with the lawmakers. House Republicans introduced a bill last month to terminate the education department on December 30th of 2026. Now, there's slim majorities in both chambers. And so this is very unlikely that it's going to pass if it even reaches to a floor vote. Now, there's two things I want to say on this. I think it's hysterical that the Trump administration would rather disband the Department of Education than giving Betsy DeVos her job. So that tells you what a horrible fucking job Betsy DeVos did trying to bury the Department of Education. And this is the other thing, and it goes back to the story I was just talking about transgender people in general, Title 9. If all of these transphobes that were up in arms about trans girls playing women's sports in high school are not up in arms at the fact that they're going to get rid of the Department of Education, which enforces Title 9, which protects girls in school, then we have to admit this was never about protecting girls in the first place. So all of these are really starting to show their true colors. And now people are so misinformed in every single one of these subjects that has to do with our transgender community. All right, everyone, this next story's short, but it sort of ties in with the last story in the hot notes. This one's from the Wall Street Journal, the Department of Government Efficiency that we've been calling dodgy. The initiative superheaded by Elon Musk. Well, they've been studying and I love that they say studying because they've broken into these agencies. They've been studying the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This is from the Wall Street Journal, citing sources familiar with the situation. The dodgy team has been granted access to essential payment and contracting systems within the CMS gr. Limited access is carrying a lot of weight right here because again, this is from the Wall Street Journal. I would disagree with that. I would say they have broken into these offices. None of them have security clearance. These children that he has working for him. Now, the dodgy representatives were reported to be at the agency's offices this week. Their objective is to scrutinize the technology of the systems and the spending that transpires through them. They're particularly interested in identifying potential instances of fraud or waste. And let's see who those would affect more with a supremacist ideology happening. I don't know, maybe people of color, low income people. Think about it. In addition, the dodgy team is evaluating the agency's organizational structure and staffing. The representatives are investigating how the agency is designed and the personnel that operate within it. Now, the White House and Doji, the officials, of course, have not released any comments on this matter. It should put everyone into a five. What is it? Five alarm fire, if that. That's what it's called. This is not okay. Like, these really are 19 to 24 year olds that are breaking into these offices and taking Social Security information, Medicaid, Medicare payments, anyone who's ever gotten a federal check directly deposited into a bank account. Everyone should be up in arms about this. And thank God two senators have had a enough. Senators Warren and White House. They decided that they were going to write a letter and this is the joint letter. I'm going to read the whole thing in its entirety because it's important to hear. And they wrote this to the Office of Government Accountability. All right, this is the letter in its entirety. Dear Mr. Darrow, we write to ask that the Government Accountability Office otherwise the GAO conduct an investigation of reports indicating that Treasury Secretary Scott Besant granted Elon Musk and other, quote, Department of Government Efficiency employees unprecedented access to the federal government's payment system on January 1st of 2025. These reports are deeply troubling. These critical systems process trillions of dollars of transactions each year contain sensitive personal and financial information for tens of millions of Americans. These systems ensure that Social Security checks, tax refunds, Medicare benefits are paid on time are essential to preventing a default on federal debt. GAO must investigate and determine who was granted access to these systems, why and how this access was granted, and the implications of the nation's economic and national security. According to the public reporting, newly confirmed Treasury Secretary Scott Besant was personally involved in granting Mr. Musk and his team access to these systems and in pushing out the Department of Treasury's top career official, Mr. David Lieberich, who has long overseen the federal government's financial infrastructure and its operations, including managing the extraordinary that the Department has been taking to avoid a default on US debt. The process by which Mr. Musk's team obtained access to these systems is troubling, as are the implications. First, the access may threaten economic and national security. These systems control the flow of over $6 trillion in payments to American families, businesses, other recipients each year, with millions relying on them for Social Security checks and Medicare benefits, federal salaries, government contract payments, grants and tax refunds this filing season. Information in these systems is also critical to the Department's managing payments on the national debt, and Mr. Lieberich was a key official responsible for the extraordinary measures the Department has been taking to avoid a default that could have devastating consequences. A misstep here could result in a global financial meltdown that cost trillions of dollars and millions of jobs. In addition, the access provided to Mr. Musk and his team has important policy implications for millions of Americans. The treasury payment systems include sensitive personal information about the millions of Americans who receive Social Security checks, tax refunds, and other payments from the federal government. It is not clear while these individuals were granted unfettered access to such data, what they could do with it once inside these systems, and what protections are in place to ensure the Department has been complying with its legal obligations under the Privacy Act 26 U.S.C. 6103, as well as other statutes and treasury regulations that protect such sensitive information about millions of Americans. Finally, with access to These critical systems, Mr. Musk and others in the Trump administration may be able to illegally, quote, enact a political agenda and unilaterally restricted disbursement of money approved for specific purposes by Congress. His team reportedly sought access, in part, so Mr. Musk could, quote, deploy his engineers to find ways to turn off the flow of money from the Treasury Department to things that Mr. Trump wants to defund. Given the threats to Americans privacy and the national economic security risks posed by Mr. Musk and his team's access to critical federal payment systems, we ask that the GAO conduct this investigation as rapidly as possible. Now, this investigation should answer the following questions, and this is why I love Senators Warren and White House. Number one, under what circumstances were Mr. Musk and members of his team granted access to the Treasury Department's federal payment system? Number two, what specific systems were accessed? Number three, which individuals at the department provided Mr. Musk and members of his team with access? Like, who the fuck is helping him here? Number four, did the White House or Secretary Besant place any undue pressure on career officials to grant this access? Number five, did the individuals who were granted to access these systems have appropriate training and clearances? Next, what information in this system have these individuals accessed? What have they done with it, and what was their rationale? Number seven, what laws, rules, regulations, or policies are in place to protect privacy with regard to these payment systems, including the protection of tax data under 26 USC 6103, were there any laws, rules, regulations, or policies breached? I'm going to go ahead and answer that one and say yes. What laws, rules, regulations, or policies are in place to protect economic and national security, such as protecting programs or individuals from missed payments or preventing those with access to key information in these systems from sharing it with foreign adversaries? With regard to these payment systems, were any of these laws, rules, regulations, or policies breached? Number nine, once obtained access to these systems, Mr. Musk or others in the Trump administration may have been able to illegally enact a political agenda by unilaterally restricting disbursement of money approved for specific purposes by Congress? Again, Congress holds the, you know, the, the purse strings and they are doing a smash and grab here. Where protections in place to prevent these abuses? And just a few more. Number 10, these treasury payment systems are critical to ensuring payment of the national debt and avoiding default. And Mr. Lieberich, who was put on leave when Mr. Musk and others were given access, was a key official responsible for enacting the extraordinary measures the Department has been taking to avoid a default on debt. Did circumstances leading up to Mr. Lieberck's departure increase the threat of a default on the national debt. Number 11 Elon Musk's Twitter announced that it would be partnering with Visa on a payment system to launch its plans this year. This raises the possibility that individuals granted access to these payment systems may be using information they obtain, being this access for their own personal gain. Were appropriate protections in place to identify and manage individuals with conflicts of interest who may have access to these systems? Let's also point out before I get to the last one, they have all our Social Security numbers and now they have a deal with Visa. I don't feel fucking good about it, do you? I didn't think so. Now number 12 and the last one. Elon Musk Tesla has significant ties to China, where the company operates its largest factory by output and receives favorable treatment from the Chinese government. Were appropriate protections in place to identify and manage national security risks related to individuals who may have had access to the systems? We thank you for your attention to this important matter of the economic and national security. Sign Sincerely, Elizabeth Warren and Senator Whitehouse There is going to be a link to this letter in the show notes, and I say that because some of you had started some good trouble in a previous episode and said that you were infiltrating Republican groups on Facebook and posting facts. Because whatever they're watching, whatever news sources they're watching, whatever articles they're reading is not giving them this information. And I think, and I do believe you're right, they might care about this stuff. They may have a lot of different morals and values than us. They may be bigots, they may be racist. They do care about their money and they care about their privacy. So if you do have an opportunity to sneak this into one of those Facebook pages, we're going to make sure that you have the letter to do that. So that's it. You got the hot notes. We're going to be back with some good trouble.