Bridget Todd

If likening the run-of-the-mill political graffiti to criminal bigotry is what it takes to keep the feds from padlocking City Hall, the logic goes, maybe it's worth it. No, it's not. I would say it's not. No, it's not.

unlike local governments in Cleveland or Boston, D.C. is really stuck between a rock and a hard place. And, I mean, like, I understand why city officials are taking this, like, appeasement angle, but, like, I guess, as you said, like, I don't know how you can make the argument that it's like worth it. Like, what are we getting if every single day it's going to be a new threat to D.C.

unlike local governments in Cleveland or Boston, D.C. is really stuck between a rock and a hard place. And, I mean, like, I understand why city officials are taking this, like, appeasement angle, but, like, I guess, as you said, like, I don't know how you can make the argument that it's like worth it. Like, what are we getting if every single day it's going to be a new threat to D.C.

unlike local governments in Cleveland or Boston, D.C. is really stuck between a rock and a hard place. And, I mean, like, I understand why city officials are taking this, like, appeasement angle, but, like, I guess, as you said, like, I don't know how you can make the argument that it's like worth it. Like, what are we getting if every single day it's going to be a new threat to D.C.

's autonomy, a new threat to D.C., a new EO from the Trump administration? What are we really getting by playing ball in this way?

's autonomy, a new threat to D.C., a new EO from the Trump administration? What are we really getting by playing ball in this way?

's autonomy, a new threat to D.C., a new EO from the Trump administration? What are we really getting by playing ball in this way?

Well, some might say the big fight is D.C. 's tense budget showdown, which is ongoing. It's a little in the weeds. So, like, I'm not going to get too, too into it, but I'll try to give you the quick and dirty version of what's going on. The district is overseen by Congress thanks to provision in the Constitution. So this means that D.C.

Well, some might say the big fight is D.C. 's tense budget showdown, which is ongoing. It's a little in the weeds. So, like, I'm not going to get too, too into it, but I'll try to give you the quick and dirty version of what's going on. The district is overseen by Congress thanks to provision in the Constitution. So this means that D.C.

Well, some might say the big fight is D.C. 's tense budget showdown, which is ongoing. It's a little in the weeds. So, like, I'm not going to get too, too into it, but I'll try to give you the quick and dirty version of what's going on. The district is overseen by Congress thanks to provision in the Constitution. So this means that D.C.

is occasionally treated like a federal agency rather than like a city or a local government under various laws. This used to mean that D.C. 's budget was regularly delayed because of this. The city had to wait for Congress to approve D.C. 's local budget alongside other federal agencies, which Congress is like almost never does on time. So pretty much everybody agreed like this was a problem.

is occasionally treated like a federal agency rather than like a city or a local government under various laws. This used to mean that D.C. 's budget was regularly delayed because of this. The city had to wait for Congress to approve D.C. 's local budget alongside other federal agencies, which Congress is like almost never does on time. So pretty much everybody agreed like this was a problem.

is occasionally treated like a federal agency rather than like a city or a local government under various laws. This used to mean that D.C. 's budget was regularly delayed because of this. The city had to wait for Congress to approve D.C. 's local budget alongside other federal agencies, which Congress is like almost never does on time. So pretty much everybody agreed like this was a problem.

So in the early 2000s, they changed it so that if Congress was behind schedule, D.C. could just keep spending at its current budget levels without disruption until Congress is able to formally approve a new budget. But in March, that all changed because the language was omitted from a new funding bill that Congress passed in March that would basically force D.C. to omit $1 billion from its budget.

So in the early 2000s, they changed it so that if Congress was behind schedule, D.C. could just keep spending at its current budget levels without disruption until Congress is able to formally approve a new budget. But in March, that all changed because the language was omitted from a new funding bill that Congress passed in March that would basically force D.C. to omit $1 billion from its budget.

So in the early 2000s, they changed it so that if Congress was behind schedule, D.C. could just keep spending at its current budget levels without disruption until Congress is able to formally approve a new budget. But in March, that all changed because the language was omitted from a new funding bill that Congress passed in March that would basically force D.C. to omit $1 billion from its budget.

Just to be clear, if D.C. were to omit $1 billion from the budget, we basically could not function as a city. The things that you need to run a city, schools, garbage collection, all of that would be cut to the point of not being viable. I'm not even sure what that would mean for the city to make that deep of a cut. And the worst part is nobody really knows why Congress did this.

Just to be clear, if D.C. were to omit $1 billion from the budget, we basically could not function as a city. The things that you need to run a city, schools, garbage collection, all of that would be cut to the point of not being viable. I'm not even sure what that would mean for the city to make that deep of a cut. And the worst part is nobody really knows why Congress did this.

Just to be clear, if D.C. were to omit $1 billion from the budget, we basically could not function as a city. The things that you need to run a city, schools, garbage collection, all of that would be cut to the point of not being viable. I'm not even sure what that would mean for the city to make that deep of a cut. And the worst part is nobody really knows why Congress did this.

Like in my capacity as co-host for a local DC podcast, CityCastDC, I've spoken to a lot of people in DC government and reporters. And the best I can come up with is that Congress just really does not understand what they have done. A reporter that I spoke to said that There seemed to be confusion with lawmakers that we were talking about D.C. 's local tax money and not federal money.