News
Trump names former Texas state Rep. Scott Turner to lead Housing and Urban Development
President-elect Donald Trump’s first administration repeatedly sought to make deep cuts to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s budget. Those plans never passed Congress. But many housing and anti-poverty advocates think this time will be different.
Alastair Pike/AFP/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Alastair Pike/AFP/Getty Images
President-elect Donald Trump has chosen former Texas state Rep. Scott Turner to serve as secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Turner spent nine seasons in the NFL with teams in Washington, San Diego and Denver before being twice elected to the Texas House of Representatives, serving from 2013 to 2017.

Turner now chairs the Center for Education Opportunity at the America First Policy Institute, a think tank set up by former staffers from Trump’s first presidency.
In a statement, Trump said during his first term, Turner was the first executive director of the White House Opportunity and Revitalization Council, “helping to lead an Unprecedented Effort that Transformed our Country’s most distressed communities.”
“Those efforts, working together with former HUD Secretary, Ben Carson, were maximized by Scott’s guidance in overseeing 16 Federal Agencies which implemented more than 200 policy actions furthering Economic Development,” the statement read. “Under Scott’s leadership, Opportunity Zones received over $50 Billion Dollars in Private Investment!”
Trump’s first administration tried to restrict housing aid and cut HUD’s budget
The first Trump administration repeatedly proposed deep budgetcuts to HUD, but they never passed Congress. Some executive action to restrict public assistance — for housing and other benefits — was made later in the term and never finalized. But many housing and anti-poverty advocates think this time will be different.
Scott Turner, chairman of the Center for Education Opportunity at the America First Policy Institute, speaks during an event at the institute in January 2022
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
“The agenda is much more organized now,” says Peggy Bailey, executive vice president for policy and program development at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “We do anticipate some pretty significant budget fights.”
For one thing, she says, there will be fewer moderate Republicans likely to push back in the next Congress. And the Trump team will enter office with an extensive agenda of policy proposals laid out in Project 2025. Trump has denied any connection to the Heritage Foundation document, but the chapter on HUD was written by his first-term HUD Secretary, Carson, and includes many proposals from his time leading the department.
The Project 2025 proposals include:
- Ban families with undocumented members from living in federally assisted housing. Undocumented immigrants are already barred from receiving subsidies. But a HUD analysis found the rule would have put tens of thousands of their family members who are U.S. citizens or legal residents, mostly children, at risk of eviction or homelessness.
- Eliminating a new federal fund to boost the supply of affordable housing. A footnote to this item says federally subsidized housing distorts the market by raising demand. It suggests a better approach is to encourage construction by loosening local zoning rules and streamlining regulations.
- Repealing (again) a rule meant to prevent segregation and comply with the Fair Housing Act. Carson had argued the rule demanded “unworkable requirements.”
- Ending a homelessness policy known as Housing First, which places people in subsidized housing and then helps them address drug and mental health addictions. Trump and conservative allies have said sobriety should be the first requirement, something homelessness advocates say has been tried before and failed.
- Tightening work requirements for people who receive federal housing subsidies. (The first Trump administration also tried this for recipients of food aid, but it was blocked in federal court.)
Beyond Project 2025, Bailey and others point out that congressional Republicans have continued to propose major funding cuts to HUD, along with trillions of dollars in cuts over a decade across a wide array of other social safety net programs including healthcare, food aid and assistance with heating and cooling bills.
When it comes to deep funding cuts, ‘the optics there might not be great’
If all these budget proposals were to be enacted, “you should expect large increases both in the scope of poverty and in the depth of poverty,” says Bob Greenstein, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and the founder and former president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Dr. Ben Carson, former secretary of Housing and Urban Development, speaks during this summer’s Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.
Paul Sancya/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Paul Sancya/AP
He also sees an irony, since many of the programs target not only the poor but also modest and moderate-income people. “Among the people who would be hurt most seriously are working-class families, the very people who are now part of [Trump’s] political base,” he says.
But not everyone thinks that’s likely.
“I would be surprised if there were substantial budget cuts actually enacted,” says Kevin Corinth, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who served as an economic adviser in the Trump White House.
The presidential campaign made clear that the high cost of living is a huge issue for many Americans, he says, and “the optics there might not be great to roll things back.”
He does think the administration will be better able to push through the regulatory changes it started in its first term, restricting noncitizens in public housing and tightening enforcement of work requirements.
Corinth also supports longer-term goals that Project 2025 lays out for HUD. They include selling land owned by public housing agencies to private developers for “greater economic use.” That could mean fewer people living in traditional public housing, and more instead using federal vouchers to rent in the private market. Project 2025 also calls for shifting rental assistance to other agencies, and pushing people to become self-sufficient by setting time limits on rental subsidies.
Corinth says time limits make sense because people do not have a right to rental aid like they do with food or health care; only 1 in 4 people who qualify can actually get it. “So it’d be much more fair to families to say, ‘Look, you’re going to get this assistance but it’s only for a couple of years, get you back on your feet,’” he says.
But none of those changes are “a real solution,” says Sarah Saadian, with the National Low Income Housing Coalition. She says breaking up HUD would only shift responsibility. And most residents who can work already do, “they’re just not getting paid wages that are high enough to afford housing,” she says.
In any case, Corinth thinks the next Trump administration will have more urgent priorities than a sweeping transformation of HUD’s role. They include pushing through a major tax cuts package in its first year. If housing does then rise on the agenda, he thinks it’s more likely to focus on the private market – and addressing the massive shortage that has sent home prices and rents skyrocketing.
News
A New Worry for Republicans: Latino Catholics Offended by Trump
When Stuart Sepulvida arrives at St. Francis de Sales Roman Catholic Parish in Tucson, Ariz., for Mass, which he attends most mornings, he passes a display honoring local soldiers and encouraging parishioners to pray for their safety. Hundreds of small cards record their names: Robles, Arenas, Grajeda. A portrait of Pope Leo XIV hangs across the lobby.
Mr. Sepulvida, 81, is a Vietnam veteran whose patriotism and Catholicism are deeply intertwined. He voted for President Trump three times but has never felt more betrayed by an American president than when Mr. Trump denounced Pope Leo as “weak on crime” and “terrible for foreign policy.”
“It was very disturbing to me to hear both of them clashing like they did,” Mr. Sepulvida said, standing outside the church one morning this week. Now, he is reconsidering whether he will vote Republican this year.
The Republican Party is struggling to hold onto the support from Hispanic voters who helped propel Mr. Trump back into the White House in 2024. Yet as many party leaders have acknowledged the urgent need to stop the backsliding among Latinos, the president has enraged many of even his strongest supporters by clashing with the pope.
On Easter Sunday, Pope Leo, the first U.S.-born pontiff, spoke of the need to “abandon every desire for conflict, domination and power, and implore the Lord to grant his peace to a world ravaged by wars.” Within days, Mr. Trump, who has led the United States into a war with Iran, said the pope was “catering to the radical left” and posted an AI-generated image portraying himself as a Jesus figure. Mr. Trump later deleted the image, saying he thought it depicted him as a doctor.
“It just isn’t what a president should do,” Mr. Sepulvida said. “The pope speaks for his people. He is beyond politics.”
Mr. Trump won 55 percent of Catholic voters in the 2024 election, compared to 43 percent who voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris, according to Pew Research Center. The most sizable gains came from Hispanic Catholics. While Joseph R. Biden Jr. won their votes by a 35-point margin in 2020, the Democratic advantage shrunk to 17 points in 2024. Now, just 18 percent of Hispanic Catholics said they support most or all of President Trump’s agenda, according to a poll from Pew released earlier this year.
If the president’s quarrel with the pope sours more Latinos on the Republican Party, it could affect midterm races across the country, including in South Florida and South Texas, where Republicans have notched important victories in predominantly Hispanic districts in recent years.
In Arizona’s Sixth Congressional District, which stretches from north of Tucson to the Mexican border, voters were still grappling with the fallout this week.
The district is roughly evenly divided among Republicans, Democrats and independent voters. Nearly a third of the district is Hispanic, and there is a significant population of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as a large Catholic community with deep history in the region. It also has one of largest numbers of military veterans of all congressional districts in the country.
“The president is looking for a lot of attention from everything,” said Maria Ramos, 60, who regularly attends weekday Mass at St. Francis. A registered independent, she usually votes for Democrats but often declines to cast a ballot if she views a candidate as too liberal. “He believes he can put God in his place. He’s meddling in countries that he’s not in control of — he wants to control the world.”
“It is not just a very serious lack of respect — it is a mortal sin,” she said, shaking her head. One word comes to her mind again and again, she said: disgust.
Like so many others in southern Arizona, Ms. Ramos has several relatives who serve in the military — a path they saw to both serve the country and as an entry into the stable middle class. Many of them, she said, voted for Mr. Trump for president.
The Tucson district is now widely seen as one of the most competitive in the country. Republican Juan Ciscomani narrowly won the district in 2022, in part by emphasizing his biography as a Mexican immigrant and a devoted father of six children. He is also an evangelical Christian, a group that has driven much of the growth among Hispanic Republican voters in recent years.
Mr. Ciscomani declined a request for an interview, but when a local radio host asked Mr. Ciscomani what he thought of Mr. Trump’s comments “as a man of faith,” the congressman declined to criticize the president but said, “You can trust that you won’t see any meme like that coming out of my account.”
JoAnna Mendoza, the Democrat challenging Mr. Ciscomani this fall, has made her 20-year career in the U.S. Navy and Marines a key aspect of her story on the campaign trail. While she rarely speaks about her religious background and no longer considers herself a practicing Catholic, she said she briefly considered becoming a nun as a teenager. She criticized Mr. Ciscomani for not condemning the president’s remarks.
“You can’t make faith a central part of your campaign and then allow this to stand,” she said in an interview.
Across Tucson, Latino Catholics, regardless of their past voting preferences, were similarly quick to condemn the president’s remarks.
When Cecilia Taisipic, 71, heard about it, she said, she winced with shame about her vote for him in 2024.
“I thought he would make the country better, but apparently it’s the opposite,” she said as she left Mass at St. Francis earlier this week. She is so fed up with politics, she said, that she is unlikely to vote at all this year. “When it comes to my faith, I don’t like anybody to challenge it. Now I don’t want to hear anything on the news. I just want to pray.”
Matilde Robinson Bours, 63, teaches a weekly Spanish Bible study class at St. Thomas the Apostle Parish, and like nearly all of the women in her class, she immigrated from Mexico decades ago. She has voted for Republicans in nearly every election since she became a citizen. Though she has never liked President Trump, she said, his comments about the pope enraged her more than anything else he has said or done in the past.
“This surpassed everything, every social and political norm — this is personal to all Catholics,” she said. “The arrogance and ego is disgusting. To think that he is God? The pope has every right and responsibility to talk about peace.”
Still, Ms. Robinson Bours said, nothing will stop her from supporting Republicans again this year. She has been delighted that her adult children have stopped supporting Democrats in recent elections.
“Almost everyone I know thinks the way I do,” she said.
Patricia Martinez, 86, who has attended the same Bible study as Ms. Robinson Bours for years, shook her head in disagreement. She said she cannot imagine voting for a Republican who supports Mr. Trump.
“This is different — this shows he is out of his mind,” said Ms. Martinez. “We have to have basic respect and teach that to people in this country.”
Patrick Robles, a 24-year-old native of Tucson, spent years alienated from the Roman Catholic Church, but returned to his faith more recently. “The craziness of the world sort of caused me to seek some sort of answers,” he said. Now, he attends Mass at the St. Augustine Cathedral in downtown Tucson, a few blocks from the office where he works as an aide to Representative Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat.
Mr. Robles said he saw Mr. Trump’s battle with the pope as both a personal affront and a political opportunity.
“The president is basically trying to draw a line between Catholics and what we perceive to be patriotism,” he said. “I believe we can be both.”
Last week, he texted one of his uncles who has supported Mr. Trump in every election asking him what he thought.
“I’m afraid we need divine intervention,” the uncle replied.
News
After 2 failed votes, Mike Johnson unveils new plan to extend key U.S. spy powers
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., takes questions at a news conference at the Capitol on Tuesday.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Speaker Mike Johnson, R.-La., is forging ahead with his latest proposal to renew a key American spy power. His bill, revealed Thursday, is largely unchanged from a previous plan which failed in a series of overnight votes earlier this month.
The program at center of the debate, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), is set to expire on April 30.
FISA 702 allows U.S. intelligence agencies to intercept the electronic communications of foreign nationals located outside of the United States. Some of the nearly 350,000 foreign targets whose communications are collected under the provision are in touch with Americans, whose calls, texts and emails could end up in the trove of information available to the federal government for review.

For almost two decades, privacy-minded lawmakers from both parties have sought to require specific court approval before federal law enforcement can conduct a targeted review of an American’s information gathered through the program. The lack of any such warrant requirement helped sink an effort last week to extend the program for 18 months, as well as a separate vote on a five-year renewal.
Trump officials, like those in past administrations, have argued that such a warrant requirement would overburden law enforcement and endanger national security. Johnson’s latest proposal would reauthorize the program for three years, but does not include a warrant requirement. Instead, the bill calls for the FBI to submit monthly explanations for reviews of Americans’ information to an oversight official as well as criminal penalties for willful abuse, among other tweaks.
“I am willing to risk the giving up of my Rights and Privileges as a Citizen for our Great Military and Country,” the president wrote on Truth Social last week, advocating for the program to be extended without changes. “I have spoken with many in our Military who say FISA is necessary in order to protect our Troops overseas, as well as our people here at home, from the threat of Foreign Terror Attacks. It has already prevented MANY such Attacks, and it is very important that it remain in full force and effect.”

Glenn Gerstell, who served as general counsel at the National Security Agency during the Obama and first Trump administration, says Johnson’s reforms look like an attempt to find a middle ground.
“There’s not a lot of really substantive changes to the statute, but some gestures are made to people who are worried about privacy and civil liberties,” Gerstell said. “It seems like a pretty reasonable compromise that is going to be satisfactory to the national security agencies and yet at the same time represents some gesture to the privacy advocates.”
“This is not a reform bill and it’s not a compromise,” Elizabeth Goitein, a privacy advocate and senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, wrote on X. “It’s a straight reauthorization with eight pages of words that serve no serious purpose other than to try to convince members that it’s NOT a straight reauthorization.”
A bipartisan reform deal is still out of reach
Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, told NPR on Wednesday, before the release of Johnson’s new proposal, that lawmakers were working on a bipartisan solution. He said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., was in touch with Johnson on the issue.
“There’s a lot of work being done here,” Himes said. “We’re sort of working out a process that will be inclusive rather than exclusive.” Himes said he was negotiating with Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat and constitutional law scholar, on a reform proposal they hoped could preserve and reform the program — reauthorizing it with bipartisan support.
But Johnson’s new bill appears to fall short of the inclusive approach Himes hoped for.
NPR obtained a memo written by Raskin to his colleagues urging them to oppose the bill, which he said “continues the disastrous policy of trusting the FBI to self-police and self-report its abuses of Section 702 and backdoor searches of Americans’ data.”
“FBI agents can still collect, search, and review Americans’ communications without any review from a judge,” Raskin wrote.
FBI agents must receive annual training on FISA and are generally barred from searching for information about people in the U.S. if the goal of the search is to investigate general criminal activity, rather than find foreign intelligence information, and those searches need approval from a supervisor or an attorney.
Republican hardliners — who sunk Johnson’s last reauthorization attempt — also don’t all appear to be on board for Johnson’s latest revision. Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, a past chair of the Freedom Caucus, said “we’re not there yet” in a video he shared to X on Thursday.
“I didn’t take an oath to defend FISA, I didn’t take an oath to defend the intelligence community,” Perry said. “We can’t have them spying on American citizens and, when they do, there has to be accountability and I haven’t seen any that I’m satisfied with yet.”
The House Rules committee meets Monday morning, the first step toward advancing the renewal bill toward a vote.
News
Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks
President Trump announced a three-week extension of a cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon that had been set to expire in a few days, after hosting a meeting between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats at the White House on Thursday.
Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group that has been attacking Israel from southern Lebanon, did not have representatives at the meeting and did not immediately comment on the announcement. The prime minister of Israel and the president of Lebanon also did not comment.
A successful peace agreement would hinge upon Hezbollah halting attacks, which Lebanon’s government has little power to enforce because it does not control the militia. Lebanon’s military has mostly stayed out of the fighting and is not at war with Israel.
The cease-fire, which was scheduled to end on April 26, would last until May 17 if it takes effect as Mr. Trump described it. Before the cease-fire was brokered last week, nearly 2,300 people were killed in Lebanon and 13 in Israel. Since then, the number of Israeli airstrikes and Hezbollah attacks have been dramatically reduced, though the two sides have continued exchanging fire.
The Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadeh, credited Mr. Trump for extending the cease-fire, saying that “with your help and support, we can make Lebanon great again.” Mr. Trump replied, “I like that phrase, it’s a good phrase.”
Asked about the potential of a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, Mr. Trump said that “I think there’s a great chance. They are friends about the same things and they are enemies on the same things.”
But Lebanon and Israel have periodically been at war since Israel’s founding in 1948. Israel has invaded Lebanon for the fifth time since 1978, incursions that have destabilized the country and the delicate balance of power between Muslim, Christian and Druze communities.
In the hours before the president’s announcement on social media, Israel and Hezbollah were trading attacks in southern Lebanon, testing the existing cease-fire.
Mr. Trump said the meeting at the White House had been attended by high-ranking U.S. officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the U.S. ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon.
Earlier on Thursday, an Israeli strike near the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh killed three people, according to Lebanon’s health ministry. Hezbollah claimed three separate attacks on Israeli troops who are occupying southern Lebanon, though none were wounded or killed.
Hezbollah set off the latest round of fighting last month by attacking Israel soon after the start of the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign in Iran. Israel responded to Hezbollah’s attacks by launching airstrikes across Lebanon and widening a ground invasion of the country’s south.
-
Connecticut3 minutes agoConnecticut Diocese Debuts ‘Maria,’ an AI Fundraising Personality ‘Rooted in the Church’s Mission’
-
Delaware9 minutes agoMan shot on Delaware Ave.
-
Florida15 minutes agoGrowing wildfires blamed for death of Florida firefighter, destruction of 120 Georgia homes
-
Georgia21 minutes ago
Ole Miss baseball vs Georgia opener postponed due to forecast, doubleheader planned
-
Hawaii27 minutes agoHawaii Traveler Just Found This 186% Hawaiian Airlines Fee Hike
-
Idaho33 minutes agoLab Findings Reveal Idaho Trout May Swim Further On Cocaine
-
Illinois39 minutes agoIllinois expands ABLE accounts to more residents with disabilities
-
Indiana45 minutes agoIndiana State Senate District 23 candidates discuss top voter issues