View this email in your browser ([link removed])
Forward this email to a friend ([link removed])
[link removed]

[link removed]

A bird flies near the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., U.S. Photo by Nathan Howard/Reuters

It’s Tuesday, the traditional day for elections and for our pause-and-consider newsletter on politics and policy. We think of it as a mini-magazine in your inbox.

BUDGET BATTLE 101
By Lisa Desjardins, @LisaDNews ([link removed])
Correspondent

Let us, this week, turn back to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

Republicans in Congress are focused on passing a sweeping set of Trump agenda items: trillions in tax cuts, billions for the border and deportations, and $1 or $2 trillion in spending cuts to downsize government and help pay for the other items on his wish list.

Here is a very brief cheat sheet, aimed at highlighting why Republicans have a complicated task (and difficult math) ahead.

Let’s look at the tax cuts, the key feature here. (All figures per the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.)

* The base cost here is $3.9 to $4.8 trillion. ([link removed]) That sum is to extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts.
* President Donald Trump’s latest wish list adds a whopping $1.2 trillion to $6.45 trillion more in costs.
* That includes ending taxes on tips, on overtime and on Social Security as well as offering property tax relief for some states – all things Trump promised. (There is a wide range because the specific approach will affect the cost.)
* Total price tag, for Trump’s tax cut agenda: $4.9 to $11.3 trillion.
* House Republicans’ budget outline for the tax cut agenda: $4.5 trillion.
* In other words, the House budget won’t fund all of Trump’s priorities, and may leave half of them on the table.

The Republican budget lays out $1.5 to $2 trillion in spending cuts.

Those have not been specified, but the reason there is so much rising public and political concern about Medicaid is that the Republican budget blueprint specifies that the largest amount of cuts — at least $880 billion — must come from the portion of the budget that includes Medicaid.

All of this is why the debate has been difficult and will only get harder. Republicans will have to choose between all of these priorities — their own math prevents them from getting everything.

And they will also have to choose between tough-to-cut areas. To do that requires both smart reform and determination.

It is a test of math and of some hefty political will.

WHO RUNS THE DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY?
[link removed]

A House Democrat member holds an anit-DOGE sign, as U.S. House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries speaks out against U.S. President Donald Trump's tax-cut agenda at the U.S. Capitol, in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 25, 2025. Photo by Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
By Daniel Cooney @IAmDanCooney ([link removed])
Social media producer/coordinator

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that while Elon Musk is a “special government employee” who is “overseeing” the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, he is not the administrator of the special agency tasked with streamlining the federal government. Leavitt declined to “reveal” the administrator from the White House podium, but promised to follow up with the name.

Federal judges have stepped in to restrict DOGE’s access ([link removed]) to private data and systems and question whether the department’s existence is constitutional ([link removed]) .

During a federal court hearing Monday ([link removed]) over a lawsuit about DOGE’s access to sensitive information maintained by the Treasury Department, the judge repeatedly asked a government attorney to name DOGE’s administrator. The attorney was unable to answer the judge’s questions.

PBS News White House correspondent Laura Barrón-López asked Leavitt during a news briefing Tuesday about the identity of DOGE’s administrator.

Watch Leavitt answer the question at PBS News. ([link removed])

More on politics from our coverage:
* Watch: White House says Trump administration will choose which news organizations get access ([link removed]) .
* One big question: What do voters think of Trump’s actions in office so far? NPR’s Tamara Keith and Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report with Amy Walter discuss ([link removed]) .
* A Closer Look: Why a former IRS commissioner says Musk’s mass layoffs are a mistake ([link removed])
* Perspectives: A former ranger on how Trump’s mass government firings are affecting the National Park Service ([link removed])

SUPREME COURT WEIGHS IN ON A MAJOR DEATH PENALTY CASE
[link removed]

Anti-death penalty activists, including members of MoveOn.org and other advocacy groups, rally outside the Supreme Court in 2015, in an attempt to prevent the execution of Richard Glossip. Photo by Larry French/Getty Images for MoveOn.org

By Adam Kemp, @Adam_WK
Communities correspondent

The Supreme Court on Tuesday threw out the decades-old murder conviction and death sentence ([link removed]) of Richard Glossip, an Oklahoma death row inmate whose case had drawn rare bipartisan scrutiny and calls for clemency.

Glossip, convicted in the 1997 killing of motel owner Barry Van Treese in Oklahoma City, has long maintained his innocence. Prosecutors alleged he orchestrated a murder-for-hire scheme, though no physical evidence ever tied him to the crime.

The justices ruled in a 5-3 decision that Glossip’s trial violated his constitutional rights ([link removed]) , siding with both his defense team and the state of Oklahoma, which had conceded that key prosecutorial missteps undermined his right to a fair trial.

Glossip has faced multiple execution dates and was twice within hours of lethal injection before higher courts intervened. His legal team argued that prosecutors concealed crucial evidence and allowed false testimony to secure his conviction.

The decision sets Glossip up for a likely retrial.

Why was this case heard by justices? Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, a Republican, had urged the court to intervene ([link removed]) in Glossip’s case, arguing that the state’s handling of the case failed to meet constitutional standards.

At the center of the controversy was Justin Sneed, the state’s key witness, who admitted to carrying out the killing but claimed Glossip ordered it. Sneed later recanted his testimony. His history of mental illness, which went undisclosed at trial, as well as evidence of pre-testimony coordination between his attorney and prosecutors discovered during an independent investigation raised alarms about the case’s integrity.

"Our justice system is greatly diminished when an individual is convicted without a fair trial, but today we can celebrate that a great injustice has been swept away," Drummond said in a statement. "I am thankful we now have a fresh opportunity to see that justice is done."

What did the court say? Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The ruling emphasized Sneed’s central role in securing Glossip’s conviction.

“Because Sneed’s testimony was the only direct evidence of Glossip’s guilt, the jury’s assessment of Sneed’s credibility was material and necessarily determinative,” Sotomayor wrote.

Don Knight, Glossip’s attorney, praised the ruling in a statement.

“Today was a victory for justice and fairness in our judicial system,” Knight said. “Rich Glossip, who has maintained his innocence for 27 years, will now be given the chance to have the fair trial that he has always been denied.”

Does this mean anything for the death penalty?

Glossip’s case comes at a time when executions are trending upward ([link removed]) despite the fact that polling shows most Americans are not in favor of the death penalty ([link removed]) . President Donald Trump pledged he will “vigorously pursue” capital punishment ([link removed]) for federal cases. In Oklahoma, some Republican lawmakers have called for a stop to the death penalty until a review is done of every death-row case.

Looking to the Supreme Court, this will likely not do much to sway the court’s position on the death penalty, said News Hour Supreme Court analyst Marcia Coyle. “This is still firmly a pro-death penalty court, evidenced by how many petitions for review they’ve turned away over the years,” Coyle said. Glossip’s case “was just too much for the justices to look away from.”

What’s next? In his statement, Drummond, who announced in January he would run for Oklahoma governor in 2026, alluded to the fact that the state would seek a retrial against Glossip. Drummond said his office will review the ruling and visit with the Van Treese family members before determining next steps.

"I have long maintained that I do not believe Mr. Glossip is innocent, but it is now an undeniable fact that he did not receive a fair trial,” Drummond said.

THIS WEEK'S TRIVIA QUESTION

By Erica R. Hendry, @ericarhendry
Senior managing editor, digital

The Supreme Court has faced all kinds of questions about the death penalty. For a time, it paused executions altogether.

Our question: When did the Supreme Court suspend the death penalty? When did it return?

Send your answers to [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) or tweet using #PoliticsTrivia. The first correct answers will earn a shout-out next week.

Last week, we asked: The Maryland National Guard announced it would pull away from an event that honored the life of which famed abolitionist?

The answer: Frederick Douglass. ([link removed]) Citing Defense Department guidance against DEI initiatives, the Guard said it could not support ([link removed]) the 207th birthday celebration of the civil rights icon. This meant a band, troop presence, a flyover and military vehicles will no longer be provided.

Congratulations to our winners: Dennis Sheehan and Margaret MacKenzie!

Thank you all for reading and watching. We’ll drop into your inbox next week.

Want more news and analysis in your inbox?
Explore all of the PBS News' e ([link removed]) mails. ([link removed])
[link removed]
[link removed]

============================================================
Copyright © 2025 WETA, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:
3939 Campbell Ave.
Arlington, VA 22206

** Update my email preferences ([link removed])

** Unsubscribe from all PBS News emails ([link removed])