WEST DES MOINES, Iowa -- As the coronavirus pandemic continues to unfold, Iowa's first responders say the state should no longer hold off on declaring Emergency Medical Services an essential service.

That status is something EMS workers in Iowa have sought long before COVID-19. Being declared "essential" would require ambulance service across the state, instead of relying on a patchwork of volunteers, agencies and providers.

Mark McCulloch, deputy chief of EMS for West Des Moines Emergency Medical Services, says he thinks the current crisis will prompt those who have resisted such a move to reconsider.

"The understanding of how important and how critical our services are, I think, is increased," he states.

McCulloch says the lack of guaranteed emergency medical services is especially a problem in rural parts of Iowa, where younger adults are moving away and reducing volunteer ranks.

Having the state approve a plan to guarantee emergency medical services would open the door to funding for EMS in these communities. But some tax revenue would also be needed, a move that some lawmakers oppose.

Stacy Frelund, government relations director for the American Heart Association of Iowa, says even though the state's budget has been battered by the economic downturn, that doesn't mean this funding should fall into a political debate.

"Being able to get them some more resources that they need throughout the state, I think is really, really important, especially now in the time of COVID -- when, you know, there's a lot of uncertainty," she stresses.

And beyond the current crisis, Frelund says rural areas need a stronger network of ambulance service for heart attacks and stroke-related calls.

Just before the pandemic, various bills were being considered in the Iowa House. Their supporters hope they see a revival as lawmakers take a long look at the state budget when they reconvene in early June.

As many Minnesotans dig out from an early Spring snowstorm, the future of a federal program that helps low-income households pay their heating bills is less certain. State-level voices cite new spending cuts under the Trump administration. The most recent mass layoffs may include the entire staff that administers the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program - according to reports seen by the Citizens Utility Board of Minnesota. The "LIHEAP" funds are sent to state agencies for distribution.

Annie Levenson-Falk, Citizens Utility Board of Minnesota director, worries about payment delays for Minnesotans in need if federal staff isn't there.

"It's pretty concerning to see just the complete elimination of the staff on what is a vital and extremely popular program," she explained.

In an e-mailed statement, the Minnesota Commerce Department says so far this season, the program has helped about 107,000 households cover their utility bills. Amid the staffing upheaval, it anticipates running out of funds to help new applicants as early as mid-April.

The loss of LIHEAP staff comes at a time when energy customers are bracing for potentially higher bills economists link to the escalating trade war pursued by President Donald Trump. Levenson-Falk said her organization is watching to see how this region could be affected as America's trade partners respond to sweeping tariffs.

"It's going to really vary depending on where you live. Some utilities get a lot of electricity from Canada and some get much less, but I do think it could have a substantial effect on a lot of Minnesotans," she continued.

Minnesota officials are not only worried about the effects as the last bit of winter weather hangs on. There is also concern about what will happen this summer to households at risk, between the disruption of energy assistance and tariff-induced price hikes.

Levensen-Falk encouraged people who are eligible for aid to keep applying, and reaching out to service providers with questions.


get more stories like this via email

Backlash is mounting across the U.S. in response to the Trump administration's consistent push to cut federal staffing and programs. North Dakotans not happy with these moves will join another wave of protests this weekend. On Saturday, organizers in towns and cities nationwide will lead what are billed as "Hands Off" events. Demonstrators want to bring renewed focus to the level of cuts pursued by the White House, and the abrupt manner in which they're being carried out.

Lyn Dockter-Pinnick, lead of the grassroots group Red River United Indivisible, feels uneasy about what she calls a "slash and burn" mentality within the administration.

"And so, the concept of "Hands Off" is really not only saying, 'This isn't right, this isn't OK,' but also just concern over the speed and the upheaval that is happening," she said.

She is worried about services for military veterans, such as suicide prevention. The White House says it wants to root out waste and fraud. Dockter-Pinnick says reform is important, but adds that checks and balances are being ignored, citing the influence of wealthy adviser Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency. Regional events this Saturday will be held in Fargo, Grand Forks, Bismarck and Minot.

While North Dakota residents express their frustration, state agencies and nonprofits are adjusting on the fly as cuts are announced. This week, federal officials began laying off ten-thousand Health and Human Services workers.

Seth O'Neill, executive director of the North Dakota Domestic & Sexual Violence Coalition, says that includes staffers who oversee grants his network of crisis centers relies on.

"It's unnerving when you don't know who to call to get answers because you don't know who is still employed at the federal government," he explained.

While the actual prevention grants haven't been cut yet, O'Neill is still worried about their fate. He notes that for these crisis centers, federal funding makes up 30% of their budget. Late last month, North Dakota Health and Human Services officials were left scrambling after being notified that several grants, focusing on substance abuse and mental-health treatment, were terminated early.


get more stories like this via email

The Trump administration announces its new wave of tariffs Wednesday, and with U.S. Department of Agriculture funding still a question mark, Minnesota farmers are having trouble planning ahead.

Ag economists say the latest tariffs and retaliatory moves by trade partners could be blows felt by farmers and ranchers, especially for beef and pork.

Cindy VanDerPol and her husband, owners of Pastures A Plenty Farm in western Minnesota, are monitoring market upheavals due to tariffs and just saw a one-year pause in federal grants to help supply locally grown food to schools. She said it makes it hard to map out what they need to buy for the year.

"Do we go and purchase more laying hens? Do we purchase broiler chickens to be processed later on?" VanDerPol asked. "Those all are uncertainties right now."

She pointed out they would already have made such moves. VanDerPol added the uncertainty does not just potentially limit her farm's output but also demand for local meat processors. As in the first Trump administration, the USDA is weighing emergency aid for farmers if needed. But economists warned countries like Brazil are bigger ag competitors now and if a trade war heats up, foreign markets could just look there.

Federal officials have released some agriculture funding initially frozen during downsizing efforts led by the White House.

Jennifer Fahy, communications director for Farm Aid, said there are still not enough details about grants seeing movement again, leaving farmers in the lurch.

"The very fact that this money that is legally due to them is being held up and they're not getting any answers on when they might receive it, if at all, it's creating inordinate stress that really is completely unnecessary and damaging to our entire food system," Fahy contended.

Fahy noted it also could mean layoffs for farmworkers, as some operations downsize or close.

Gary Wertish, president of the Minnesota Farmers Union, said when other things like rising interest rates are factored in, farmers face a crisis similar to the 1980s, when the nation lost millions of farms.

"That's where we're fearful of, that we could very easily be back into that '80s crisis time frame," Wertish cautioned.