HOUSTON (AP) — Cade Cunningham scored 21 points and made two free throws with 5.5 seconds left to help the Detroit Pistons hold on to beat the Houston Rockets 115-111 on Friday night.

Paul Reed’s layup made it 113-110 before Houston cut the lead to two when Alperen Sengun made 1 of 2 free throws with 1:32 remaining.

Both teams missed 3-point attempts before Detroit’s Ausar Thompson missed a 3 with 35 seconds left and Reed blocked Sengun’s shot in the lane 16.4 seconds to go.

Houston was forced to foul and Cunningham sunk both free throws to make it 115-111 and give the Pistons their first win of the season after they lost to Chicago in their opener.

Thompson had 19 points for Detroit to outdo identical twin brother Houston’s Amen Thompson, who finished with 10.

Kevin Durant had 37 points for the Rockets and was 16 of 18 from the free throw line. He was 3 of 3 from 3-point range after missing all four of his long-range shots Tuesday in his first game with the Rockets after this summer’s blockbuster trade from Phoenix.

The Pistons led by 5 after a 3-pointer by Cunningham with about 8½ minutes to go before Durant scored all of Houston’s points in an 8-3 run to tie it at 101-all midway through the quarter.

The Rockets trailed by 3 with about five minutes left when Durant tied it at 105 with a 3-pointer.

Detroit used a 6-0 run to take a 111-105 lead with three minutes left. Jabari Smith Jr. hit a 3-pointer for Houston after that and Durant made a pair of free throws to get Houston within 1 with less than two minutes to go.

Up Next

Pistons: Host Boston on Sunday.

Rockets: Host Brooklyn on Monday night.

— By KRISTIE RIEKEN, Associated Press

By BILL BARROW and THALIA BEATY

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute is drawing a volatile mix of blowback and praise for arguing that a Canadian government advertisement playing in U.S. markets misrepresented the 40th president’s words to blast President Donald Trump’s tariff policies.

It is not clear how the California-based Reagan Foundation decided to enter the fray over the ad, which was purchased by Ontario Premier Doug Ford and used portions of a 1987 Reagan speech on trade in which he questioned the wisdom of using tariffs as economic policy. But shortly after the foundation said on social media that the ad misused “selective audio” of the former president, Trump cited the foundation when, in his own social media critique, he threatened to stop all trade with America’s northern neighbor and blasted the ad as unduly interfering in U.S. politics.

The foundation statement seemingly aligned Reagan, a free-trade acolyte, with Trump, a protectionist who has flouted decades of U.S. policy with high border taxes, including on goods from top U.S. trading partners. The foundation, which helps support the Reagan Presidential Library & Museum, also suggested it could take legal action against Ontario’s provincial government, which sponsored the ad.

Reagan’s speech is included in millions of administration records governed by the Presidential Record Act signed in 1981 by his predecessor, President Jimmy Carter. That law puts presidential remarks in the public domain, meaning no one must seek permission from presidential foundations or libraries to redistribute them.

Ford said Friday that the ad would be phased out so the U.S. and Canadian administrations can resume trade talks. He said the ad had achieved its goal but would continue to air during the first two games of the World Series.

‘Easily intimidated by a call from the White House’

The backlash on social media was explosive, immediate and far from unanimous.

“Incredible cynicism and betrayal of Reagan by his own foundation,” Paul Novosad, a Dartmouth College economist, wrote on X. Novosad said anyone who followed the foundation’s advice to listen to Reagan’s full remarks “would see he says exactly what the Ontario ad claims.”

Jason Kenney, a former Canadian cabinet minister in a Conservative government, questioned the leadership of the Reagan Foundation on X. He said the entity had been “easily intimidated by a call from the White House, yet another sign of the hugely corrosive influence of Trump on the American conservative movement.”

Trump supporters countered on social media with echoes of the president’s assertions and accusations that Canada was meddling in U.S. politics.

Foundation staff did not respond to Associated Press questions about how it has handled the matter. But one board member said in a brief interview that he knew nothing about the statement and had not been asked to participate in any deliberations ahead of its release.

“There may have been discussions about it, but I wasn’t a part of any of them,” Bradford Freeman, a private equity executive, told the AP.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt also did not immediately respond when asked via email whether the White House or anyone on the president’s behalf asked the Reagan Foundation to intervene.

Several other board members also did not reply to AP inquiries.

An atypical role for a presidential foundation

At the least, the developments represent an unusually tense application of the foundation’s typical mission, which is to buttress Reagan’s legacy. The situation also highlights the foundation as the latest U.S. establishment institution to be drawn into the controversies of Trump’s aggressive second administration.

Trump previously has elicited policy concessions from multiple U.S. universities, including elite public and private schools, after withholding or threatening to withhold federal funding. Presidents at Columbia University and the University of Virginia resigned as the Trump administration pressured their institutions.

Some U.S. corporations voluntarily rolled back diversity initiatives. More recently, high-profile firms including Amazon, Apple, Coinbase, Comcast, Google, Lockheed Martin and Meta Platforms have agreed to help finance the ballroom Trump plans for the White House after ordering the building’s East Wing to be demolished. Many of those firms have regulatory business before Trump’s administration.

On Truth Social, Trump called the Canadian ad “fake,” despite the TV spot featuring clear audio excerpts from Reagan’s April 25, 1987, radio address.

“CANADA CHEATED AND GOT CAUGHT!!! They fraudulently took a big buy ad saying that Ronald Reagan did not like Tariffs, when actually he LOVED TARIFFS FOR OUR COUNTRY, AND ITS NATIONAL SECURITY,” he posted Friday.

Reagan used the radio address to explain why he was imposing targeted levies on some Japanese products as leverage in the countries’ trade dispute over computer chips.

That gives Trump and his backers a hook to argue that Reagan might not oppose at least some of the current president’s moves on trade. Yet Trump has imposed tariffs, often at unusually high rates, far more broadly than Reagan and other recent U.S. administrations. And even while explaining his Japan policy, Reagan spent much of the 1987 speech – less than 10 minutes long – emphasizing that he remained an opponent of tariffs, a characterization the Ontario ad appeared to accurately represent.

Reagan’s speech affirmed his broad tariff opposition

“Throughout the world there’s a growing realization that the way to prosperity for all nations is rejecting protectionist legislation and promoting fair and free competition,” Reagan said.

He expounded:

“You see, at first, when someone says, ‘Let’s impose tariffs on foreign imports,’ it looks like they’re doing the patriotic thing by protecting American products and jobs. And sometimes for a short while it works — but only for a short time.

“What eventually occurs is: First, homegrown industries start relying on government protection in the form of high tariffs. They stop competing and stop making the innovative management and technological changes they need to succeed in world markets. And then, while all this is going on, something even worse occurs. High tariffs inevitably lead to retaliation by foreign countries and the triggering of fierce trade wars. The result is more and more tariffs, higher and higher trade barriers, and less and less competition.

“So, soon, because of the prices made artificially high by tariffs that subsidize inefficiency and poor management, people stop buying. Then the worst happens: Markets shrink and collapse; businesses and industries shut down; and millions of people lose their jobs.”

The Reagan foundation is a tax-exempt nonprofit that helps fund his library, which is part of the National Archives and Records Administration. As part of its tax-exempt status, the foundation is prohibited from endorsing political candidates and, generally, must be nonpartisan in its activities.

Barrow reported from Atlanta and Beaty from New York.

By JOHN HANNA

The CEO of the nonprofit managing the Alamo resigned after a powerful Republican state official criticized her publicly, suggesting that her views aren’t compatible with the history of the Texas shrine.

Kate Rogers said in a statement Friday that she had resigned the day before, after Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick wrote a letter to the Alamo Trust’s Board of Directors suggesting that she either resign or be removed. Patrick criticized her over an academic paper questioning the GOP-controlled Legislature’s education policies and suggesting she wanted the historic site in Texas to have a broader focus.

“It was with mixed emotions that I resigned my post as President and CEO at the Alamo Trust yesterday,” Rogers said in a statement texted to The Associated Press. “It became evident through recent events that it was time for me to move on.”

Several trust officials did not immediately respond to email or cellphone messages Friday seeking comment.

Patrick had posted a letter to the board Thursday on X, calling her paper “shocking.” She wrote it in 2023 for a doctorate in global education from the University of Southern California. Patrick posted a portion online.

“I believe her judgment is now placed in serious question,” Patrick wrote. “She has a totally different view of how the history of the Alamo should be told.”

It is the latest episode in an ongoing conflict over how the U.S. tells its history. Patrick’s call for Rogers’ ouster follows President Donald Trump’s pressure to get Smithsonian museums in Washington to put less emphasis on slavery and other darker parts of America’s past.

The Alamo, known as “the Shrine of Texas Liberty,” draws more than 1.6 million visitors a year. The trust operates it under a contract with the Texas General Land Office, and the state plans to spend $400 million on a renovation with a new museum and visitor center set to open in 2027. Patrick presides over the Texas Senate.

In San Antonio, Bexar County Judge Peter Sakai, the county’s elected top administrator, decried Patrick’s “gross political interference.”

“We need to get politics out of our teaching of history. Period,” he said in a statement Friday.

In the excerpt from her paper, Rogers noted the Texas Legislature’s “conservative agenda” in 2023, including bills to limit what could be taught about race and slavery in history courses.

“Philosophically, I do not believe it is the role of politicians to determine what professional educators can or should teach in the classroom,” she wrote.

Her paper also mentioned a 2021 book, “Forget the Alamo,” which challenges traditional historical narratives surrounding the 13-day siege of the Alamo during Texas’ fight for independence from Mexico in 1836.

Rogers noted that the book argues that a central cause of the war was Anglo settlers’ determination to keep slaves in bondage after Mexico largely abolished it. Texas won the war and was an independent republic until the U.S. annexed it in 1845.

Rogers also wrote that a city advisory council wanted to tell the site’s “full story,” including its history as a home to Indigenous people — something the state’s Republican leaders oppose. She said she would love the Alamo to be “a place that brings people together versus tearing them apart.”

“But,” she added, “politically that may not be possible at this time.”

Traditional narratives obscure the role slavery might have played in Texas’ drive for independence and portray the Alamo’s defenders as freedom fighters. Patrick’s letter called the siege “13 Days of Glory.”

The Mexican Army attacked and overran the Texas defenses. But “Remember the Alamo” became a rallying cry for Texas forces.

“We must ensure that future generations never forget the sacrifice for freedom that was made,” Patrick wrote in his letter to the trust’s board. “I will continue to defend the Alamo today against a rewrite of history.”

By DIDI TANG and PAUL WISEMAN

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. officials are launching an investigation into whether China lived up to its commitments under a 2020 trade pact that President Donald Trump described at the time as “an incredible breakthrough.’’

The announcement Friday by U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer came the same day Trump was scheduled to head to Asia, where he said he will meet Chinese President Xi Jinping in an effort to ease trade tensions between the world’s two biggest economies.

Beijing has announced that Xi will travel to South Korea to attend a regional economic meeting and for a state visit, but it has yet to confirm that he will meet with Trump while both are in South Korea.

The possible leaders summit is highly watched as trade tensions have risen again, with both countries imposing more trade restrictions on the other and Trump threatening a new 100% tariff on China. Beijing has demanded that the U.S. not threaten new restrictions while seeking talks with China, and it’s not immediately clear how Greer’s announcement could affect the negotiations.

In starting the investigation, “the administration seems to be looking for new sources of leverage to use against Beijing, while adding another pressure point to get China to buy more U.S. soybeans as well as other goods,” said Wendy Cutler, a former U.S. trade negotiator who is now vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute.

During his first term, Trump imposed tariffs on a wide swath of Chinese imports — and Beijing retaliated by targeting American products — in a dispute over China’s aggressive efforts to supplant U.S. technological leadership. The Americans charged that China unfairly subsidized its own tech companies, stole technology and forced U.S. and other Western companies to hand over trade secrets in return for access to the Chinese market.

The two countries held talks over two years and ultimately reached a truce that took effect in early 2020. The so-called Phase One deal called for China to dramatically step up purchases of U.S. exports, especially soybeans and other farm products. But it left tougher issues — such as China’s subsidies — for future talks.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted trade between the two countries just as the Phase One deal went into effect. In 2022, U.S. farm exports to China did hit a record but then fell. They are down sharply this year as tensions between the two countries have escalated over a new tariff war following Trump’s return to the White House.

In fact, China has stopped buying American soybeans. It had been the top overseas market for U.S. soybean farmers.

An analysis by the Peterson Institute for International Economics shows that China purchased only 58% of the total U.S. goods and services exports in 2020 and 2021 that it had committed to buy under the agreement.

Cutler said it is “no secret that China did not live up to its obligations under the Phase One agreement, most notably its commitments to buy more U.S. goods.”

The investigation announced Friday is being carried out under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which is meant to counter unfair trading practices by other countries. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has scheduled a public hearing on the case for Dec. 16.

The investigation could result in additional trade sanctions on China. U.S. tariffs on Chinese products already come to 55%, including tariffs left over from Trump’s first term.

The president in early October threatened to add an additional 100% levy, possibly bringing the total to 155%, after Beijing expanded export rules on rare earth materials. However, Trump also said the triple-digit tariff would be “not sustainable.”

By KEVIN FREKING

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is rejecting the idea of using roughly $5 billion in contingency funds to keep food aid flowing into November amid the government shutdown, according to a Department of Agriculture memo that surfaced Friday. States temporarily covering the cost of benefits next month will not be reimbursed, the memo says.

Democratic lawmakers and various advocacy groups have been calling on the administration to use the contingency fund to provide partial benefits into November though the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly referred to as SNAP.

But the two-page document states that “contingency funds are not legally available to cover regular benefits.”

The prospect of SNAP benefits running out as a result of the shutdown has become a major concern in the states. Lawmakers from both political parties are blaming the other for the hardship that would ensue. The program helps about 1 in 8 Americans buy groceries.

The document states that the contingency fund is reserved for such things as helping individuals in disaster areas. It cited Tropical Storm Melissa, which could become a major hurricane in the coming days, as an example of why it’s important to have funds available to mobilize quickly in the event of a disaster. The document was obtained by The Associated Press and was first reported by Axios.

The document blames Democrats for the government shutdown that began Oct. 1 and states that November SNAP benefits would be paid on time “if not for Congressional Democrats blocking government funding.”

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries earlier Friday told reporters the administration has the resources to ensure than not a single American goes hungry on Nov. 1. He accused Republicans of “trying to weaponize hunger” and called it unconscionable.

Meanwhile, Democrats in the House and Senate have written Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins requesting that she use the contingency fund to cover the bulk of November benefits.

“Choosing not to ensure SNAP benefits reach those in need this November would be a gross dereliction of your responsibilities to the American people,” said a letter sent Friday by 214 House Democrats.

The latest department guidance on the contingency fund appears to contrast in some respects with the department’s 55-page plan for operations in the event of a shutdown. That plan stated that it’s evident Congress has intended for SNAP operations to continue since the program has been provided with multi-year contingency funds to cover state administrative expenses and to pay for participant benefits should a funding lapse occur in the middle of the fiscal year.

The department guidance that surfaced Friday says the contingency fund is not available to support the current budget year’s benefits because “the appropriations for regular benefits no longer exists.”

The shutdown began when a short-term measure to fund the government failed to advance in the Senate. The current impasse is now the second-longest on record. The administration took steps leading up to the shutdown to ensure SNAP benefits were paid in October, with states and lawmakers looking for guidance from the administration for what would happen next month.

The SNAP program is administered by the states. Officials in Louisiana, Vermont and Virginia pledged Thursday to keep food aid flowing to recipients in their states, even if the federal program is stalled because of the shutdown. Other states have explored using their own funds to prop up the program but have run into technical roadblocks.

Some states have been telling SNAP recipients to be ready for the benefits to stop. Arkansas, for example, is advising recipients to identify food pantries and other groups that might be able to help, and to ask friends and family for aid.

By PAUL WISEMAN, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump pulled out of trade talks with Canada Thursday night, furious over what he called a “fake’’ television ad from Ontario’s provincial government that quoted former U.S. President Ronald Reagan from 38 years ago criticizing tariffs — Trump’s favorite economic tool.

The ad features audio excerpts from an April 25, 1987 radio address in which Reagan said: “Over the long run such trade barriers hurt every American worker and consumer.’’

Trump attacked the ad on Truth Social Friday posting: “CANADA CHEATED AND GOT CAUGHT!!! They fraudulently took a big buy ad saying that Ronald Reagan did not like Tariffs, when actually he LOVED TARIFFS FOR OUR COUNTRY, AND ITS NATIONAL SECURITY.″

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute criticized the ad on X Thursday night posting that it “misrepresents the ‘Presidential Radio Address to the Nation on Free and Fair Trade’ dated April 25, 1987.”

While Trump called the ad fake, Reagan’s words were real. But context is missing.

Here’s a look at the facts:

Reagan, who held office during a period of growing fear over Japan’s rising economic might, made the address a week after he himself had imposed tariffs on Japanese semiconductors; he was attempting to explain the decision, which seemed at odds with his reputation as a free trader.

Reagan did not, in fact, love tariffs. He often criticized government policies – including protectionist measures such as tariffs – that interfered with free commerce and he spent much of 1987 radio address spelling out the case against tariffs.

“High tariffs inevitably lead to retaliation by foreign countries and the triggering of fierce trade wars,” he said. “The result is more and more tariffs, higher and higher trade barriers, and less and less competition. So, soon, because of the prices made artificially high by tariffs that subsidize inefficiency and poor management, people stop buying. Then the worst happens: Markets shrink and collapse; businesses and industries shut down; and millions of people lose their jobs.”

But Reagan’s policies were more complicated than his rhetoric.

In addition to taxing Japanese semiconductors, Reagan slapped levies on heavy motorcycles from Japan to protect Harley-Davidson. He also strong-armed Japanese automakers into accepting “voluntary’’ limitations on their exports to the United States, ultimately encouraging them to set up factories in the American Midwest and South.

And he pressured other countries to push down the value of the currencies to help make American exports more competitive in world markets.

Robert Lighthizer, a Reagan trade official who served as Trump’s top trade negotiator from 2017 through 2021, wrote in his 2023 memoir that “President Reagan distinguished between free trade in theory and free trade in practice.’’

In 1988, an analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute even declared Reagan “ the most protectionist president since Herbert Hoover, the heavyweight champion of protectionists.’’

Reagan, though, was no trade warrior. Discussing his semiconductor tariffs in the April 1987 radio address, he said that he was forced to impose them because the Japanese were not living up to a trade agreement and that “such tariffs or trade barriers and restrictions of any kind are steps that I am loath to take.’’

Trump, on the other hand, has no such reticence. He argues that tariffs can protect American industry, draw manufacturing back to the United States and raise money for the Treasury. Since returning to the White House in January, he has slapped double-digit tariffs on almost every country on earth and targeted specific products including autos, steel and pharmaceuticals.

The average effective U.S. tariff rate has risen from around 2.5% at the start of the 2025 to 18%, highest since 1934, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University.

Trump’s enthusiastic use of import taxes — he has proudly called himself “Tariff Man” — has drawn a challenge from businesses and states charging that he overstepped his authority. The Constitution gives Congress the power to levy taxes, including tariffs, though lawmakers have gradually ceded considerable authority over trade policy to the White House. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in the case early next month.

Trump claimed Thursday that the Canadian ad was intended “to interfere with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, and other courts.’’

By CHRISTOPHER RUGABER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The government shutdown likely means there won’t be an inflation report next month for the first time in more than seven decades, the White House said Friday, leaving Wall Street and the Federal Reserve without crucial information about consumer prices.

“Because surveyors cannot deploy to the field, the White House has learned there will likely NOT be an inflation release next month for the first time in history,” the Trump administration said in an email.

Some of the inflation data is collected electronically, but most is gathered in person by government employees who visit stores across the country. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, which prepares the inflation report, has already reduced the data collected each month because the Trump administration’s hiring freeze left some cities without surveyors.

The announcement follows Friday’s release of September inflation data, which showed prices ticked higher but remained lower than many economists had expected. That report, which was delayed by nine days from its originally-scheduled release, was based on data that was collected before the shutdown began Oct. 1.

In past shutdowns the consumer price index — the government’s principal inflation measure — was compiled based on partial data. But it may be too late to gather even that level of information, the Labor Department said.

NEW YORK (AP) — The stunning indictment that led to the arrest of more than 30 people, including Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier and other NBA figures, on charges of illegal sports betting has drawn new scrutiny of the booming business of professional sports gambling across the U.S.

Since widespread legalization, the multibillion-dollar industry has made it easy to place wagers on everything from the outcome of games to that of a single play with just a few taps of a cellphone. It’s just about impossible to go to a basketball, football, baseball or other pro game today — or watch a matchup on TV — without seeing ads for sports betting.

Fans can place wagers from their stadium seats, while “Bet” tickers scroll on TV sports broadcasts. Star athletes are frequently at the center of ads promoting it all.

Regulating sports wagering has proven to be a challenge — and experts warn about the ramifications for gamblers who typically lose money. Professional leagues’ own role in promoting gambling has raised eyebrows.

Sports betting also faces criticism for opening the door to addictive gambling.

“The fact that it’s normalized, the advertising is aggressive, it’s available 24/7, the micro bets — all of this is adding up to tremendous increase in usage across individuals,”  Wayne Taylor, a professor of marketing at Southern Methodist University, told the Associated Press, citing algorithms and other incentives betting platforms use to increase engagement.

Isaac Rose-Berman, whose research focuses on sports betting as a fellow at the American Institute for Boys and Men, noted that platforms make the most off of returning “biggest losers.” Recent research suggests that young men in low-income communities are particularly affected by financial consequences tied to sports gambling.

“Upwards of 90% of sports bettors are not really going to experience significant negative impacts — but it’s really concentrated among those big losers and it’s going to be devastating for them,” he said.

So, how do you know if you have a gambling problem?

If you’re hiding the fact that you gamble to your friends and family, do it when you’re stressed and experience mood changes, you may be showing warning signs of a gambling addiction. The Associated Press explains in the video below:

The post NBA head coach and player charged in sprawling sports betting and Mafia-backed poker schemes appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

MIAMI (AP) — As a new NBA season opened this week, coach Rick Carlisle and the Indiana Pacers received their annual briefing on the do’s and don’ts of gambling.

Betting in casinos is generally allowed. Betting on other sports, provided it is legal, is also allowed.

For veterans of the sport, it’s the type of training that can seem routine — almost boring, perhaps. But the potential repercussions for breaking the rules are now abundantly clear after Portland coach Chauncey Billups and Miami guard Terry Rozier were among nearly three dozen people arrested Thursday for what federal law enforcement officials described as their involvement in various illicit gambling activities.

The developments pose an unexpected challenge for a league that hoped to begin its season on a strong note, fueled by an opening night game watched by millions as it went into a thrilling double overtime. There have been amazing performances already: Victor Wembanyama scoring 40 points in his season debut with San Antonio, reigning MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander scoring 55 for Oklahoma City, Golden State’s Stephen Curry and Denver’s Aaron Gordon putting on an I-can-top-this show.

Those should be the talk of the league right now. That’s not the case. All that has been overshadowed. The NBA now faces questions about the pervasiveness of gambling in basketball, and uncertainty about what might happen next.

“A shocking day,” said Carlisle, who said he unsuccessfully tried to connect with Billups to offer support. “This is a very serious situation.”

The accusations against Rozier and Billups

Rozier, who was arrested in Orlando, Florida, where the Heat opened the season against the Magic, stands accused of telling an associate that he was going to play sparingly in a game on March 23, 2023, when he was with the Charlotte Hornets. Rozier played just under 10 minutes and fell well short of many of the lines set for prop bets regarding his performance.

More than $200,000 worth of wagers were won, federal officials said, based on the information Rozier shared.

Billups — a Hall of Fame player — was arrested in Lake Oswego, Oregon, and charged with being involved in a poker scheme that federal officials said cheated victims out of at least $7 million. Billups was one of 31 people arrested on the poker-related charges, and some of those arrested were, according to officials, members of three Mafia families.

The indictments for the insider betting and poker cases were separate, but it appears Billups was mentioned — albeit not by name — in the betting one as well. Someone who matches Billups’ resume, an Oregon resident who played in the NBA from 1997 through 2014 and has been a coach since 2021, was alleged to have given insider information to someone who used it to craft wagers involving Trail Blazers’ games in 2023.

That person is described in that document only as Co-Conspirator 8.

Billups and Rozier appeared in court on Thursday and are out of the league indefinitely, being placed on leave by the NBA just hours after their arrests. An attorney for Billups called his client a “man of integrity” while a lawyer for Rozier said the player is “not a gambler” and “looks forward to winning this fight.”

In a statement, the NBA said it takes “these allegations with the utmost seriousness, and the integrity of our game remains our top priority.”

Betting is big in pro sports

Yet betting has become big business for the NBA, as it has with virtually all pro sports leagues in this era where sports wagering is legal in much of the country. The practice is allowed in some form in 38 states now. Missouri will join that list later this year, and it’s also permitted in the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.

“It’s a world that’s a different world than it was a few years ago with the advent of legalized gambling,” Carlisle noted.

Some leaders in the league encouraged the growth of legalized gambling. In 2014, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver wrote an op-ed in The New York Times noting a “thriving underground business” of illegal sports gambling that “operates free from regulation or oversight.” He called for a “different approach.”

A 2018 Supreme Court decision ultimately cleared the way for the modern era of legalized sports gambling. Today, the NBA has two official gaming partners, FanDuel and DraftKings Sportsbook, and has relationships with at least 12 authorized gaming operators. There is even a portion of the NBA’s website devoted to gambling — NBABet.

As legalized gambling has taken off, Silver has expressed some worries about the implications.

“Obviously, I’m very concerned if there’s any illegal activity going on in our league,” he said in July. “But I’d say similar to the way a public financial market works, the fact that there might be insider trading doesn’t mean you’re necessarily going to shut down those public markets. Often the way they are catching insider traders is because they have a system, a complex system, that detects aberrational behavior.”

“But,” he added, “anybody in this league, any player who engages in that activity, there’s no question they are putting their livelihood at risk.”

Golden State coach Steve Kerr said an unfortunate reality for players and coaches in this betting era is that fans reach out — often angrily, sometimes while sitting courtside — to complain that this or that happened and they lost their bet or parlay.

Kerr has even gotten emails from people who want to complain about how they believe he has personally cost them money.

“Our guys get nasty social media posts from people who have bet on games,” Kerr said. “And that’s the thing that I don’t like about this the most. Our players should not have to deal with that, but they do. … It’s just kind of the modern life.”

Billups’ arrest hit home for the Denver Nuggets. Rodney Billups, Chauncey’s brother, is a member of Denver’s coaching staff.

Michael Porter Jr. was with the Nuggets in 2024 when his brother, Toronto Raptors player Jontay Porter, was banned for life after a league probe found he disclosed confidential information to sports bettors and wagered on games — sometimes even betting on the Raptors to lose.

There have been other probes since, none quite like what the NBA finds itself dealing with now.

“This is not how we want to start the season in the NBA,” Nuggets coach David Adelman said.

— By TIM REYNOLDS, Associated Press

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A 2018 Supreme Court decision opened the floodgates to legalized sports-betting industry, now worth billions of dollars a year, even as it recognized that the decision was controversial.

That high-court ruling is back in the spotlight after the arrests on Thursday of more than 30 people, including an NBA player and coach, in two cases alleging sprawling criminal schemes to rake in millions by rigging sports bets and poker games involving Mafia families.

What did the Supreme Court decide?

The court’s ruling struck down a 1992 federal law, the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, that had barred betting on football, basketball, baseball and other sports in most states.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his majority opinion that the way Congress went about the gambling ban, barring states from authorizing sports betting, violated the Constitution’s Tenth Amendment, which protects the power of states.

“The legalization of sports gambling requires an important policy choice, but the choice is not ours to make,” Alito wrote. The court’s “job is to interpret the law Congress has enacted and decide whether it is consistent with the Constitution. PASPA is not.”

The trouble with the law, Alito explained, was that Congress did not make betting on sports a federal crime. Instead, it prohibited states from authorizing legalized gambling, improperly infringing on their authority. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, Neil Gorsuch and Elena Kagan joined Alito’s opinion.

Dissenting justices said the court should have acted more narrowly

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote that even if the part of the law regulating the states’ behavior should be struck down, the rest of it should have survived. In particular, Ginsburg wrote that a separate provision that applied to private parties and betting schemes should have been left in place.

Writing for Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer, Ginsburg said that when a portion of a law violates the Constitution, the court “ordinarily engages in a salvage rather than a demolition operation,” preserving what it can. She said that instead of using a “scalpel to trim the statute” her colleagues used “an axe.” Breyer agreed with the majority that part of the law must be struck down but said that should not have doomed the rest of the law.

But Alito, in his majority opinion, wrote that Congress did not contemplate treating the two provisions separately.

Opponents of gambling warned about corruption

Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, a former college and NBA star, was a sponsor of the law that he said was needed to protect against “the dangers of sports betting.”

All four major U.S. professional sports leagues and the NCAA had urged the court to uphold the federal law, saying a gambling expansion would hurt the integrity of their games. They also said that with legal sports betting in the United States, they’d have to spend a lot more money monitoring betting patterns and investigating suspicious activity.

The Trump administration also called for the law to be upheld.

Alito acknowledged in his majority opinion “the legalization of sports gambling is a controversial subject,” in part for its potential to “corrupt professional and college sports.”

He included references to the “Black Sox Scandal,” the fixing of the 1919 World Series by members of the Chicago White Sox, and the point-shaving scandal of the early 1950s that rocked college basketball.

But ultimately, he wrote, Congress couldn’t require states to keep sports gambling prohibitions in place.

The post Trump stops trade talks with Canada appeared first on WDET 101.9 FM.

By MATTHEW LEE and WAFAA SHURAFA, Associated Press

KIRYAT GAT, Israel (AP) — Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday toured a U.S.-led center in Israel overseeing the Gaza ceasefire, as the Trump administration worked to set up an international security force in the territory and shore up the tenuous truce between Israel and Hamas.

Rubio was the latest in a series of top U.S. officials to visit the center for civilian and military coordination. Vice President JD Vance was there earlier this week where he announced its opening, and U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, were also in Israel.

Around 200 U.S. troops are working alongside the Israeli military and delegations from other countries at the center, planning the stabilization and reconstruction of Gaza. On Friday, an Associated Press reporter saw international personnel there with flags from Cyprus, Greece, France, Germany, Australia and Canada.

“I think we have a lot to be proud of in the first 10 days, 11 days, 12 days of implementation, where we have faced real challenges along the way,” said Rubio.

He named the U.S. ambassador to Yemen, Steven Fagin, to lead the civilian side of the coordination center in southern Israel. The center’s top military official is Adm. Brad Cooper of the U.S. Central Command.

Optimistic tone

The United States is seeking support from other allies, especially Gulf Arab nations, to create an international stabilization force to be deployed to Gaza and train a Palestinian force.

Rubio said U.S. officials were working on possible language to secure a United Nations mandate or other international authorization for the force in Gaza because several potential participants would require one before they can take part. He said many countries had expressed interest, and decisions need to be made about the rules of engagement.

He said such countries need to know what they’re signing up for, including “what is their mandate, what is their command, under what authority are they going to be operating, who’s going to be in charge of it, what is their job?” He also said Israel needs to be comfortable with the countries that are participating.

Rubio met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday. Israeli media has referred to the parade of American officials visiting their country as “Bibi-sitting.” The term, using Netanyahu’s nickname of Bibi, refers to an old campaign ad when Netanyahu positioned himself as the “Bibi-sitter” whom voters could trust with their kids.

Rebuilding in rubble

In Gaza City, Palestinians who have been trying to rebuild their lives have returned home to rubble.

Families are scrounging to find shelter, patching together material to sleep on with no blankets or kitchen utensils.

“I couldn’t find any place other than here. I’m sitting in front of my house, where else can I go? In front of the rubble, every day I look at my home and feel sorrow for it, but what can I do?” said Kamal Al-Yazji as he lighted pieces of sponge to cook coffee in Gaza City.

His three-story house, once home to 13 people, has been destroyed, forcing his family to live in a makeshift tent. He said they’re suffering from mosquitos and wild dogs and they can barely afford food because their banknotes are so worn that shopkeepers won’t accept them.

Rubio said on Friday a conglomerate of up to a dozen groups would be involved in aid efforts in Gaza, including from the United Nations and other humanitarian organizations. However, he said there would be no role for the U.N. aid agency in Gaza, known as UNRWA.

“The United Nations is here, they’re on the ground, we’re willing to work with them if they can make it work,” said Rubio. “But not UNRWA. UNRWA became a subsidiary of Hamas.”

Earlier this week the International Court of Justice said that Israel must allow UNRWA to provide humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian territory.

Israel has not allowed UNRWA to bring in its supplies since March. But the agency continues to operate in Gaza, running health centers, mobile medical teams, sanitation services and school classes for children. It says it has 6,000 trucks of supplies waiting to get in.

The agency has faced criticism from Netanyahu and his far-right allies, who say the group is deeply infiltrated by Hamas.

Shurafa reported from Deir al-Balah.

By ADRIANA GOMEZ LICON and AMELIA THOMSON-DEVEAUX, Associated Press

President Donald Trump’s favorability has fallen among Hispanic adults since the beginning of the year, a new AP-NORC poll shows, a potential warning sign from a key constituency that helped secure his victory in the 2024 election.

The October survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that 25% of Hispanic adults have a “somewhat” or “very” favorable view of Trump, down from 44% in an AP-NORC poll conducted just before the Republican took office for the second time. The percentage of Hispanic adults who say the country is going in the wrong direction has also increased slightly over the past few months, from 63% in March to 73% now.

The shift could spell trouble for Republicans looking to cement support with this group in future elections. Many Hispanic voters were motivated by economic concerns in last year’s election, and the new poll shows that despite Trump’s promises of economic revitalization, Hispanic adults continue to feel higher financial stress than Americans overall. Hispanic voters made up 10% of the electorate in 2024, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of interviews with registered voters, and the number of eligible Hispanic voters has been growing rapidly in recent decades.

Alejandro Ochoa, 30, is a warehouse worker in Adelanto, California. He identifies as a Republican and voted for Trump last year, but he’s now unhappy with the president. He criticized some of Trump’s budget cuts, adding that the cost of groceries is too high and buying a home is still unattainable for him.

“He was kind of relying on essentially the nostalgia of, ‘Hey, remember, before COVID? Things weren’t as expensive,’” Ochoa said. “But now it’s like, OK, you’re in office. I’m still getting done dirty at the grocery store. I’m still spending an insane amount of money. I’m trying to cut corners where I can, but that bill is still insanely expensive.”

Declining approval on economy and immigration

Hispanic voters shifted toward Trump in the last election, though a majority still backed Democrat Kamala Harris: 43% of Hispanic voters nationally voted for Trump, according to AP VoteCast, up from 35% in the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

But the poll now finds that Hispanic adults are slightly less likely to approve of Trump’s handling of the economy and immigration — two issues that were major strengths for him in last year’s presidential campaign — and their views of his overall presidential performance have slipped a little as well.

In March, 41% of Hispanic adults approved of the way Trump was handling his job as president, but now that has fallen to 27%.

Over the past few months, Hispanic communities have also been a target of the president’s hard-line immigration tactics. The poll found that Hispanic adults’ approval of his handling of immigration has declined slightly since March.

Some see the two issues as linked. Trump’s attacks on immigration have affected low-wage and high-skilled workers alike, at a moment when the economy is already uncertain because of his erratic trade policies.

Fel Echandi, of Winter Haven, Florida, is a behavioral specialist who identifies as a Democrat but sometimes votes for Republican candidates. He said he appreciates Trump’s views on transgender issues, including restroom access for transgender women.

But he’s concerned that Trump’s immigration policies leave many people living in fear, with negative effects on the economy.

“A lot of people rely on immigrants to do labor in certain areas,” Echandi said. “When that gets affected, all prices go up. Our food costs more because of the costs to get people to do that work.”

The poll found particularly high levels of financial stress among Hispanic adults, compared with the rest of the country. More Hispanics say the cost of groceries, housing and health care and the amount of money they get paid are “major” sources of stress, compared with U.S. adults overall.

Favorability among Hispanic Republicans drops slightly

Views of Trump have even soured a little among Hispanic Republicans.

In the latest poll, 66% of Hispanic Republicans said they have a “very” or “somewhat” favorable view of Trump. That’s a slight shift compared with where Trump stood in an AP-NORC poll from September 2024, when 83% of Hispanic Republicans viewed him at least “somewhat” favorably. About 8 in 10 white Republicans had a favorable view of Trump in the new poll, which was unchanged from the year before.

In another potentially worrying sign for the president, younger Hispanics and Hispanic men — two groups that swung particularly dramatically toward him in last year’s election — also see him a bit more negatively.

About two-thirds of Hispanic adults under age 45 and Hispanic men now view Trump unfavorably, according to the new poll. That’s a slight uptick from September 2024, when about half in both groups had a negative opinion of him.

Other concerns about Trump’s chaotic second term emerged in interviews.

Teresa Covarrubias, a 65-year-old retired schoolteacher from Los Angeles, feels things are going in the wrong direction and said she was troubled by how some of Trump’s actions have defied norms and may impact social safety net programs.

“My major concern is the disregard for the Constitution and the law, and then also the level of cronyism,” said Covarrubias, who is an independent voter. “The people at the top are just grifting and taking, and then there’s the rest of us.”

Hispanic adults are more likely to prioritize immigration

There are signs in the poll that Trump’s tough immigration approach may be alienating some Hispanic adults. Over the past few months, the president has doubled down on his pledge of mass deportations, with escalating crackdowns in Latino neighborhoods in cities including Chicago.

The poll found that, in general, Hispanic adults are more likely to say immigration is an important issue to them personally. About two-thirds of Hispanic adults prioritize immigration, compared with about 6 in 10 white adults and about half of Black adults.

And although their views on immigration enforcement aren’t uniform, Hispanic adults are much less likely than U.S. adults overall to favor deporting all immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. About one-quarter of Hispanic adults support this policy, the new poll found, while roughly half of them are opposed and the rest don’t have an opinion. Among U.S. adults overall, about 4 in 10 favor deporting all immigrants in the U.S. illegally, while 34% are opposed and about 2 in 10 don’t have an opinion.

Rick Alvarado, 63, a Republican who lives in San Diego, says he still supports Trump and praised his actions to cut public spending. Alvarado, a property manager, is behind Trump’s immigration crackdown in cities including Los Angeles and Chicago, saying he believes some immigrants are involved in organized crime.

But he added that he would like to see a solution for those without criminal records to obtain legal residency status.

“The people who are productive should have a pathway to stay here somehow,” Alvarado said.

The AP-NORC poll of 1,289 adults was conducted Oct. 9-13, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points. The margin of sampling error for Hispanic adults overall is plus or minus 6.9 percentage points.

LANSING, Mich. (AP) Michigan is demanding millions of dollars in incentives back from a Chinese company after plans to build an electric vehicle battery plant collapsed following years of pushback against the project from neighbors and members of Congress.

Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer supported the $2.36 billion factory in 2022, and state lawmakers approved nearly $175 million in incentives for the project. The state is now holding Gotion Inc. in default of $23.6 million, accusing the company of abandoning the project.

While this is not the outcome we hoped for, we recognize the tremendous responsibility we have to the people we serve to make sure their hard-earned tax dollars are spent wisely and appropriately, Danielle Emerson, a spokesperson with the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, said in a statement.

Representatives for Gotion, which is headquartered in California, did not respond to multiple messages seeking comment.

In a letter dated Sept. 17, Michigan informed Gotion that it was in default of economic development grant obligations because no eligible activities had occurred on the site's property in over 120 days.

According to the MEDC, the state is seeking to claw back $23.6 million that was disbursed toward the purchase of the sites land near Big Rapids, about 200 miles (322 kilometers) northwest of Detroit. $26.4 million remaining from the grant that was not spent will be returned to the state, Emerson said. Citing a lack of progress on the project, a different $125 million grant was not distributed to Gotion.

The news was first reported by Crains Detroit Business.

The state also said two project-related lawsuits are imposing a material adverse effect on its progress, which counts as grounds for default. The letter said that if the defaults are not resolved in 30 days, the state expects repayment of $23.6 million. That deadline passed Oct. 17.

Residents of nearby Green Township so firmly opposed the project, some over environmental concerns, that voters in 2023 recalled five local elected officials who supported bringing the factory to the area.

Auto manufacturing is the lifeblood of Michigans economy, which has been hard hit by tariffs imposed this year on the industry and Canada. When the project was proposed, officials said the factory would produce cathodes and anodes, two components key to electric vehicle batteries, as well as over 2,000 jobs. The original economic development incentives came as officials sought to bolster manufacturing in the state.

Whitmer's office did immediately respond to a request for comment.

Republican U.S. Rep. John Moolenaar, who represents a swath of rural Michigan, had been the loudest and most prominent critic of the project, accusing Gotion of ties with forced labor and the Chinese Communist Party. Moolenaar chairs the House Select Committee on China and introduced a bill that stopped companies like Gotion from receiving electric vehicle tax credits from President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. Moolenaar's bill was signed by President Donald Trump earlier this year.

Now that its contract with the State of Michigan and MEDC is set to be terminated, the people of Green Charter Township can finally move on from Gotions lies and broken promises, Moolenaar said in a press release.

__

By GABRIELA AOUN ANGUEIRA, Associated Press

President Donald Trump approved major disaster declarations for Alaska, Nebraska, North Dakota and the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe late Wednesday, while denying requests from Vermont, Illinois and Maryland and leaving other states still waiting for answers.

The decisions fell mostly along party lines, with Trump touting on social media Wednesday that he had “won BIG” in Alaska in the last three presidential elections and that it was his “honor” to deliver for the “incredible Patriots” of Missouri, a state he also won three times.

The disaster declarations authorize the Federal Emergency Management Agency to support recipients with federal financial assistance to repair public infrastructure damaged by disasters and, in some cases, provide survivors money for repairs and temporary housing.

While Trump has approved more disaster declarations than he’s denied this year, he has also repeatedly floated the idea of “phasing out” FEMA, saying he wants states to take more responsibility for disaster response and recovery. States already take the lead in disasters, but depend on federal assistance when the needs exceed what they can manage alone.

Trump has also taken longer to approve disaster declaration requests than in any previous administration, including his first, according to an Associated Press analysis.

Approvals fell mostly along party lines

The states approved for disaster declarations include Alaska, which filed an expedited request after experiencing back-to-back storms this month that wrecked coastal villages, displaced 2,000 residents and killed at least one person. Trump approved a 100% cost share of disaster-related expenses for 90 days.

North Dakota and Nebraska will also receive public assistance for August severe weather, and the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe in Minnesota was approved for both public and individual assistance for a June storm that felled thousands of trees across its tribal lands.

Trump denied four requests, including Maryland’s appeal for reconsideration after the state was denied a disaster declaration for May flooding that severely impacted the state’s two westernmost counties.

Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, denounced the decision in a statement Thursday, calling the final denial “deeply frustrating.”

“President Trump and his Administration have politicized disaster relief, and our communities are the ones who will pay the price,” said Moore. The state has been supporting impacted individuals itself, deploying over $450,000 for the first time from its State Disaster Recovery Fund.

Maryland met the conditions necessary to qualify for public assistance, according to a preliminary damage assessment, but Trump, who has the final decision on the declarations, denied the state’s July request. Maryland appealed in August with further data showing the counties experienced $33.7 million in damage, according to the state, more than three times its threshold for federal assistance.

Trump also denied Vermont a major disaster declaration for July 10 floods after the state waited over nine weeks for a decision. The damages far exceed what some of the small towns impacted can afford on their own, said Eric Forand, Vermont’s emergency management director.

“It’s well over the annual budget or two years’ budget (of some towns), to fix those roads,” Forand said.

The other denials included an application from Illinois for individual assistance for three counties impacted in July by severe storms and flooding, and one from Alaska to rebuild a public safety building that burned in a July electrical fire.

Asked why the states were denied, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said, “President Trump provides a more thorough review of disaster declaration requests than any Administration has before him.” She said Trump was “ensuring American tax dollars are used appropriately and efficiently by the states to supplement — not substitute, their obligation to respond to and recover from disasters.”

Assistance granted after weekslong wait

Several states and one tribe still await decisions on their requests.

Not knowing whether public assistance is coming can delay crucial projects, especially for small jurisdictions with tight budgets, and sometimes leaves survivors without any help to secure temporary housing or repair homes now too dangerous to live in.

Before its approval Wednesday, the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe was straining to cover the costs of clearing thousands of trees felled across its reservation by a June thunderstorm. As a tribe, it is entitled to apply for assistance independently of the state where it is located.

The tribe had spent about $1.5 million of its own funds so far, said Duane Oothoudt, emergency operations manager for the Leech Lake Police Department.

The tribe was “doing a lot of juggling, using reserve funding to operate and continue paying our contractors,” Oothoudt said just hours before being notified of the disaster declaration, nine weeks after submitting the request.

With federal funding approved for both public and individual assistance, Oothoudt said Thursday his one-man emergency management department would focus on helping survivors first.

“There’s a lot of work to do,” he said. “People were hurt by the storm.”

Associated Press writer Brian Witte in Annapolis, Maryland, contributed.

By GEOFF MULVIHILL, Associated Press

Officials in Louisiana, Vermont and Virginia pledged Thursday to keep food aid flowing to recipients in their states, even if the federal program is stalled next month because of the government shutdown.

The fate of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which helps about 1 in 8 Americans buy groceries, is becoming a deep concern as it gets closer to Nov. 1, when the benefits could dry up without either a resolution of the federal government shutdown or other action.

Other states have explored using their own funds to prop up the program but have run into technical roadblocks, and it wasn’t clear whether the three newly announced plans have answers for those. Legislative officials in Vermont said they’re waiting word from the state administration on how the benefit would be delivered.

Here’s what to know.

Some states are announcing plans, but details have been scarce

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, said he was declaring a state of emergency to provide food benefits to SNAP beneficiaries. A spokesperson said details on how it would work are coming later.

Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, another Republican, said he was making it a top priority to make sure “seniors, individuals with disabilities, and children who rely on food stamps do not go hungry in Louisiana,” but he has also not detailed how.

New Hampshire officials announced a plan to increase access to food through food banks and mobile pantries. It would require approval of a legislative committee in the GOP-controlled state.

Vermont lawmakers also said Thursday they intend to have the state cover both the food aid and heating fuel assistance that’s at risk.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said this week that he would deploy the National Guard to help food banks. “This is serious, this is urgent – and requires immediate action,” he said.

States have limited ability to help

Officials from Alaska, New Mexico and North Dakota have said that they’ve considered using state money to keep the food aid flowing but fear a federal government directive may make that impossible.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees SNAP, told states earlier this month not to send information to the vendors who provide the debit cards because of uncertainty about whether the program would be funded in November.

Officials in the states say that federal control of the system appears to stand in the way of their attempts to fund the program on their own.

“Without action from USDA, I think it is highly unlikely that any states would issue November SNAP benefits,” Carolyn Vega, a policy analyst at the advocacy group Share Our Strength, said in an email. “On top of the technical challenges, states can’t shoulder that cost, especially with the risk it wouldn’t be refunded.”

It’s not certain the program will be paused, but it’s looking likely

Lower-income families who qualify for SNAP receive debit cards loaded each month by the federal government that work only for groceries at participating stores and farmers markets.

The average monthly benefit is $187 per person. Most beneficiaries have incomes at or below the poverty level.

Time is running short to keep benefits flowing in November.

Congress and President Donald Trump could strike a deal to end the federal shutdown that started Oct. 1.

It’s also possible that the Trump administration would allocate money for the program even if the shutdown continues. The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that about $5 billion is available in a contingency fund and is calling on the administration to use that for partial benefits in November, but it’s not clear if that’s being seriously discussed.

Forty-six of the 47 Democrats in the U.S. Senate sent a letter Thursday to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins calling on her to release the contingency money.

The USDA has not answered questions from The Associated Press about whether those funds might be tapped.

States have also indicated that there could be a delay in benefits even if a deal is struck to fund SNAP for November.

Losing SNAP could mean tough choices for beneficiaries

Sylvia Serrano gets $100 every month to help buy groceries for herself and the four grandchildren she’s raising in Camden, New Jersey.

Two of her grandkids have autism, and because of their aversions to certain textures they eat only certain foods that are unlikely to be available at food banks.

The act of getting food could also be harder for her without SNAP. She now does her shopping while the kids are at school, using a grocery store that’s close to home due to her not-so-reliable car.

She says that with SNAP, she can mostly stay up on her other expenses. Without it? “I would have to send less payment into a bill or something in order to cover the needs and then the bills are going to get behind,” Serrano said.

Some states are encouraging stocking up and seeking other help

Some states are telling SNAP recipients to be ready for the benefits to stop.

Arkansas is advising recipients to identify food pantries and other groups that might be able to help, and to ask friends and family for aid.

It’s unclear whether any benefits left on recipients EBT cards on Nov. 1 will be available to use. Arkansas officials suggest people who have balances on their cards to use it this month on shelf-stable foods.

Missouri and Pennsylvania officials, on the other hand, expect previous benefits will remain accessible and are telling beneficiaries to save for November if they can.

Oklahoma is encouraging people who receive benefits to visit a state website that connects people with nonprofits, faith-based groups, Native American tribes and others that may be able to help with food.

Food banks could be the fallback for many beneficiaries

Separate federal program cuts this year have already put food banks that supply food pantries in a tough spot, said George Matysik, the executive director of Share Food Program in Philadelphia.

So dealing with an anticipated surge in demand could be tough.

Matysik said it’s especially acute for his organization and others in Pennsylvania, where a state government budget impasse has meant at least a pause in another funding stream. He said the group has had to cut about 20% of its budget, or $8.5 million, this year.

“Any time we have a crisis, it’s always the working class that feels the pain first,” he said.

Associated Press reporters Sophie Austin in Sacramento, California; Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin; Becky Bohrer in Juneau, Alaska; Jack Brook in Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Jack Dura in Bismarck, North Dakota; Susan Haigh in Hartford, Connecticut; John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas; Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; Morgan Lee in Santa Fe, New Mexico; Michael Casey in Boston; and Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City contributed to this article.

By MICHAEL BIESECKER

WASHINGTON (AP) — New satellite images taken Thursday show the scale of the demolition of the White House East Wing as President Donald Trump moves forward with the construction of a new ballroom at the White House.

See the change in images from Oct. 23 and Sept. 26, 2025 in images from Planet Labs PBC:

East Wing demolished, photos show

The East Wing, where first ladies created history, planned state dinners and promoted causes, is now history itself. The two-story structure of drawing rooms and offices, including workspace for first ladies and their staffs, has been turned into rubble, demolished as part of the Republican president’s plan to build what he said is now a $300 million ballroom nearly twice the size of the White House.

Trump said Wednesday that keeping the East Wing would have “hurt a very, very expensive, beautiful building” that he said presidents have wanted for years. He said “me and some friends of mine” will pay for the ballroom at no cost to taxpayers.

Trump allowed the demolition to begin this week despite not yet having approval from the relevant government agencies with jurisdiction over construction on federal property.

Preservationists have also urged the Trump administration to halt the demolition until plans for the 90,000-square-foot (8,361-square-meter) ballroom can go through the required public review process.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation said the review process, including time for members of the public to comment on plans for the ballroom, would “provide a crucial opportunity for transparency and broad engagement — values that have guided preservation of the White House under every administration going back to the public competition in 1792 that produced the building’s original design.”

The Trust also expressed concern to the National Capital Planning Commission, the National Park Service and the Commission of Fine Arts that the size of the proposed ballroom will overwhelm the Executive Mansion, which stands at 55,000 square feet “and may permanently disrupt the carefully balanced classical design of the White House.”

Both commissions have jurisdiction over changes to the White House. The park service manages the White House grounds and has a role in the process as several trees on the South Lawn have been cut down as part of the construction. Both agencies currently are closed because of the government shutdown. Trump installed top aide Will Scharf as chairman of the planning commission.

The National Park Service said in August, after the White House announced the ballroom project, that it had provided historic preservation guidance and support as part of a broader consultation process. It said final decisions are made by the Executive Office of the President.

By MARY CLARE JALONICK and KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate on Thursday rejected dueling partisan bills to pay federal workers during the government shutdown, with both Republicans and Democrats deflecting blame as many employees are set to miss their first full paycheck at the end of this week.

With unpaid staff and law enforcement standing nearby, Republicans objected as Democrats proposed a voice vote on their legislation to pay all federal workers and prevent President Donald Trump’s administration from mass firings. Democrats then blocked a Republican bill to pay employees who are working and not furloughed, 54-45.

The back and forth on day 23 of the government shutdown comes as the two parties are at a protracted impasse with no signs of either side giving in. Democrats say they won’t vote to reopen the government until Republicans negotiate with them on extending expiring subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Republicans say they won’t negotiate on the subsidies until Democrats vote to reopen the government. Trump is mostly disengaged and headed to Asia in the coming days.

Dueling bills to pay workers

The Republican bill by Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin would pay “excepted” workers who still have to come to work during the current government shutdown and any future shutdowns. The bill would “end this punishing federal workers for our dysfunction forever,” Johnson said.

But Democrats say the legislation is unfair to the workers who are involuntarily furloughed and could give Cabinet secretaries too much discretion as to who gets paid.

Johnson’s bill is “nothing more than another tool for Trump to hurt federal workers and American families and to keep this shutdown going for as long as he wants,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said ahead of the votes.

The Democratic bills would have paid a much larger swath of workers as most federal workers are set to miss paychecks over the next week.

“It seems like everyone in this chamber agrees we should pay federal workers,” Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., said ahead of the vote. But because of the shutdown, “they are paying a price.”

Essential services start to dwindle

As Congress is unable to agree on a way forward, money for essential services could soon reach a crisis point.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said Thursday that his message to air traffic controllers during the government shutdown is “come to work, even if you do not get a paycheck.”

Duffy said that air traffic controllers will miss their first full paycheck on Tuesday and that some are having to make choices to pay the mortgage and other bills, at times by taking a second job.

“I cannot guarantee you your flight is going to be on time. I cannot guarantee your flight is not going to be cancelled,” Duffy said.

Payments for federal food and heating assistance could also run out soon, along with funding for Head Start preschool programs, several states have warned.

Open enrollment approaches

Another deadline approaching is Nov. 1, the beginning of open enrollment for people who use the marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act.

Democrats are holding out for negotiations with Republicans as they seek to extend subsidies that started in 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic, and expire at the end of the year. But any solution would be hard to put in place once people start purchasing their plans.

Some Republicans are open to extending the tax credits, with changes, and lawmakers in both parties have been talking behind the scenes about possible compromises. But it’s unclear whether they will be able to find an agreement that satisfies both Republicans and Democrats — or if leadership on either side would be willing to budge.

“Republicans have been perfectly clear that we’re willing to have a discussion about health care, just not while government funding is being held hostage,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Thursday.