She's one of just two Democrats voting with Republicans to reopen the federal government.

We speak with Nevada's senior U.S.

Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, plus.

I'm not turning a blind eye.

This is not satisfactory to me.

Why?

Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo says he's not satisfied with his own plan to help Nevadans at risk of losing food assistance.

That's this week on Nevada Week.

Support for Nevada Week is provided by Senator William H. Hearn, stat.

Welcome to Nevada week.

I'm mama Rene Dixon.

About 495,000 Nevadans receive food assistance from the U.S.

Department of Agriculture's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as Snap, the USDA's website.

As of October 30th said there will be no Snap benefits issued on November 1st because of the government shutdown.

How the state should respond.

That's up for debate, and that discussion is ahead.

But we begin with the shutdown itself.

Senate Republicans need a handful of votes from Democrats in order to reopen the government, and fund it until November 21st, but most Democrats say they won't budge until Republicans extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits set to expire at the end of this year.

There are only two Democrats in the Senate who are breaking from their party, though, and one of them joins us now.

Nevada senior U.S.

Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, thank you for joining Nevada Week as we speak.

It is October 30th, day 30 of the shutdown.

You were on MSNBC this morning and about the shutdown ending.

You said the break is going to happen because senators are coming together to talk.

How soon will this shut down?

And do you think?

Well, the only thing I can tell you is the conversations are taking place and they need to.

And, Republicans and Democrats are talking, we're talking about how we end this impasse and move forward.

And I think that's important.

I can't I can't put a timeline on it.

But it's important that we continue to talk and move as quickly as possible.

How would you compare the amount of talking that's being done now compared to maybe a couple of weeks ago?

Well, I can tell you, I have been since the shutdown in constant conversation, with some of my Democratic colleagues and my Republican colleagues.

So that's been ongoing.

And I think it's important it continues.

And, what I have seen is there more of an uptick?

Yes, there is.

I think that is important as well.

And I ask about a timeline because is it possible that the government could reopen in time for Snap recipients to get their benefits on November 1st?

Well, you know, the Republicans are in control.

So today I'm going to find out whether, Republicans, at least on the Senate side, whether Majority Leader Thune is going to keep us here to work or not.

We their control, they control the calendar.

So we'll know this afternoon whether or not he is going to adjourn for the weekend, which I think is crazy.

And we should stay here and work.

And by the way, we don't even understand.

The house isn't even in session.

House has been gone for four weeks.

The speaker of the House has decided it's beneficial for him just to stay and keep everybody home, even though they're getting paid.

Your stance on breaking with Democrats has been that government shutdowns hurt people, and that federal workers should not be pawns.

And for that, you are receiving praise from the Trump administration, including from the US Energy secretary, Chris Wright.

He was in Nevada recently to announce the furloughing of 68 federal employees at the Nevada National Security site.

Let's listen to that.

This is among the most critical workers in our country.

They test, maintain, and ultimately construct the modernized version of our nuclear stockpile.

We need to take that deathly serious.

We've never had to furlough workers in this area before.

We need to end this as soon as possible.

Again, I thank Senator, Cortez Masto and I plead to Senator Rosen, who has stood for these workers and has stood for the importance of our nuclear security, to move her vote from abstain to in favor of continuing the funding.

Senator, your thoughts on what was said?

Well, I think from my perspective, and this is why I've always really focused on doing our job here.

And keeping the government open.

If we close it, people aren't going to get paid.

Federal workers are going to be furloughed or independent contractors that work right out there at the at the test site, may not get paid at all.

Right?

Federal workers will get furloughed.

They eventually get their pay back, but some independent contractors will not.

And then we have federal workers that are airports.

Right.

And so there's a number of people who would be harmed.

I'm also concerned by shutting down the government.

It's going to impact our tourism economy, which is already been impacted by the bad policies of this administration.

And this administration has gone through a process of, really kind of burning down the executive branch.

I don't want to give them more power to decide which agencies they want to open up or not open up.

So I've always been listen, I believe that we can keep the government open, do our jobs as appropriators, and still address what we see happening here, including in Nevada.

Is this looming health care crisis, particularly around the ACA tax credits right now?

And because of that health care crisis, that's why your fellow Democrats are holding out.

Have you spoken with Senator Jacky Rosen, your colleague from Nevada, who has said that she thinks a vote to reopen the government without a solid plan in place about extending those health care subsidies would be a little naive.

I talked to Jackie all the time.

I was just in a meeting with her.

So, let me just say Jackie and I are both fighting for Nevadans, and we're fighting to address the health care crisis in this country.

We just have a different way of going about doing it.

But our end game and the goal here is the same.

What has the political backlash been, if any, to breaking from Democrats I can tell you I have heard from people in our state, listen, I've heard from federal workers who thanked me.

I have heard from individuals, who have supported my position and understood it.

People who may disagree with me when I talk to them about why I felt it was important that, I believe we came to the governor's open and still solve Americans problems, including lowering health care crisis and, lowering prices at the grocery store, lowering energy prices, addressing the housing crisis.

We have, when I explain that, I think we can do both.

That's our job.

They understand it.

So, I, you know, for me, this is really about how we ensure we're working on behalf of Americans and solving their problems, not adding to it.

And I think that is important for us in Congress to do this.

It's okay to work across the aisle.

It's okay to compromise as long as we're working together to solve problems.

And there is too much Partizan bickering right now.

There's too much partizanship in in Congress.

And we've got to get back to a time where we are working together on behalf of the American public, because I can tell you, the number one issue I hear from events is high grocery costs, high prices, that they're dealing with the looming health care crisis.

Those are valid concerns of Nevadans, and that's where our focus should be.

One more note about the Nevada National Security site.

It is in the news because President Trump has directed the Pentagon to test nuclear weapons.

And conceivably that is where it would happen, is here in Nevada.

What do you think about that?

Absolutely not.

Let me just say this is another example of where Jackie and I have been talking together, about this very issue, including the entire delegation.

It's not going to happen.

And it should.

Absolutely not.

We have not tested out Nevada test sites since 1992, because right now they're already doing, testing on our nuclear stockpile in a safe and effective way to ensure that our nuclear stockpile, is, safe.

And there's a way to do it without having to blow anything up.

My concern is this president doesn't understand that.

And that's one of the reasons why I'm concerned about him being, the president of the United States.

But clearly, this is an example of where we need to be focused together and understanding our future and ensuring, by the way, that we have employees out there working.

If you recall, when the president first got into office and Doge happened and they started firing a lot of people, they let people go out at that test site that were actually responsible for protecting our nuclear stockpile.

So this is an example of where we need to work together and understand that we're protecting our national security.

That's a priority.

And you demonstrated bipartisanship, bipartisanship again on Wednesday when you sponsored two bills, one from Republicans, one from Democrats.

And that is to ensure that Americans have access to Snap benefits.

But even if these passed the Senate and they passed the House, why do you think that President Trump would sign them into law when he's already not honoring the money that Congress has appropriated in that contingency fund from the USDA in the event of an emergency that we're currently experiencing?

Well, that's something the president's going to have to explain to the American public.

But for my purposes, we should be saying, first of all, the government should be open.

But if it's not, we should be ensuring that we're protecting Americans.

And one of the eight is ensuring that the appropriations, the appropriate funding for Snap and Wick and everything else we're doing gets to Americans where they need it.

And let me just put a finer point on this.

As appropriators here in Congress, we appropriated the funds, even during a shutdown for that money to go to recipients of Snap.

This president and this administration has decided not to send that money out there.

That is just illegal.

And and it is something that is wrong and it's harming Americans.

And it goes back to what I'm saying.

There's too much partizan bickering, just too much political payments, mischief, for Partizanship here.

And it is harming Americans.

We have to get back to a time where we are working together to solve the problems of Americans across this country.

So of course, I'm going to support programing that gets essential funds to Nevadans, including Snap and Wick and anywhere else that we need to do to solve problems.

It makes life a little bit easier, for for Nevadans and Americans across this country.

Last thing.

All that work requires perhaps a lot of coffee.

Do you drink coffee?

I do, and I'm glad you brought it up, because it's a perfect example of, a policy of this administration.

These blanket tariffs that this administration has imposed is harming this country in the in the form of higher prices.

And these tariffs are taxes on consumers.

One perfect example is because of this blanket tariffs.

There are now taxes on Americans importing coffee from other countries.

Now keep in mind, 99% of the coffee that we consume in the United States comes in from other countries, because we don't have the, the, the opportunity or the enough growth, right, the to grow the coffee that we need.

So we import it most of the coffee comes from Brazil right now there's a 50% tax on Brazil, 50%.

And with a blanket tariffs on the other countries where we import, it's costing consumers more for their coffee.

This is one of the reasons why prior to this administration, we actually didn't put tariffs on coffee because 99% of it we import from other countries.

So we wanted to keep costs low for the consumer.

That's why Senator Paul and I introduced, the No Tax on Coffee Act, because we think this is a perfect example where, where we can have be smart about where we put our tariffs or where we do not.

This is an example where we need to keep costs down for consumers, even when it comes to your cup of coffee in the morning.

Senator Cortez Masto, thank you so much for joining Nevada Week.

Thank you.

We look closer now at Nevada's plans for helping snap recipients at risk of losing their benefits.

Republican Governor Joe Lombardo addressed that with reporters following a press conference about a landmark grant to support the growth of public charter schools in the state.

It took place at Vegas Vista Academy, a public charter school with a dual language program including Spanish and now Hawaiian instruction.

The Las Vegas nonprofit opportunity won 80, received the grant worth $51 million, reportedly the largest U.S.

Department of Education grant ever rewarded to a Nevada nonprofit and a win for Governor.

Lombardo, who in 2023 when he first took office, said he wanted to be known as the education governor.

I would be remiss in not admitting I didn't know everything there was to be known about education and the failures of education and and what programs would bring success.

But I pride myself on bringing, the people who are smarter me together.

And today is a culmination of that.

you can make a clear statement that every child deserves a quality education and every parent deserves a choice.

And, we are in a crisis in education in this country, and it's not an either or.

It's an all of the above.

U.S.

Representative Suzy Lee of Nevada, who you saw there was also at that press conference and after called the Trump administration's plans to cut Snap benefits cruel.

She also said she disagrees with the governor's plan to help the nearly 500,000 Nevadans who may lose their Snap benefits on November 1st.

His plan is called the Food Insecurity Nevada Plan, and would utilize $38.8 million from the state's contingency fund and emergency work programs.

That money would go directly to Nevada food banks and the Nevada National Guard would assist with food distribution.

Representative Lee said that's not nearly enough, considering Nevadans receive about $90 million in Snap benefits every month from the federal government.

She thinks the state should draw on its rainy day fund and pay Snap recipients directly.

Governor Lombardo said it could take the state up to six weeks to do that, and would also violate USDA restrictions, threatening potential reimbursement.

The restrictions in Snap, though, are troublesome.

And what I mean by that, it's administered by the feds through a third party vendor.

So you're saying, well, why don't we do, bonding towards that effort?

Why don't we do loans as a state towards that effort?

Because it's a monumental amount to almost $90 million, right?

We're allocating approximately $40 million to that effort.

I want everybody to keep in mind that we can't seamlessly adopt that into the federal system, because there's confidentiality that goes along with the recipients and the ability to utilize that in that space and future reimbursement.

If we were to engage for the federal government, through bonding or loan programs in that totality of expense, we would not receive future reimbursement for that cause.

They are willing to let 495,000 Nevadans go hungry.

Half of those are children go hungry to prove a political, point, nothing could be more cruel.

And this governor does have a choice, and he is complicit.

If he does not use the emergency fund.

We have $1.3 billion in emergency fund.

And you just heard him put up every excuse to not do it.

Okay?

This is an emergency you can use.

It's $90 million a month to fully fund Snap benefits.

Okay.

You could use data, and there is ways to turn it around quicker than six weeks to provide emergency payments to individuals in lieu of their Snap benefits, so that they can purchase food.

if the end fund balance gets below, 5%, with payment on different functionalities of state government, we can conceivably dip into the rainy day fund.

There's always those availabilities to solve people's problems.

And I'm not turning a blind eye.

This is not satisfactory to me.

To the tune of 38, $40 million.

Obviously that still bothers me even though it is supplemental.

I think we need to make it whole in that aspect as we move forward.

When asked why just $38 million, Governor Lombardo said that's what's available to address the immediate need.

And here now, to help verify that is Zach Conine, Nevada State Treasurer.

Treasurer, welcome back to Nevada Week.

Happy to be here.

$38.8 million.

Is that all that's available for this issue?

Absolutely not.

Right.

And I think we should start with what snap is.

Snap is food and dollars that go on the tables of Nevada's families, says, Congresswoman Lee said 495,000 families, more than half of the individuals that get Snap are children at 495,000 Nevadans.

And you know, when we say it's supplemental, the second words, right, nutrition.

This isn't about making sure that half a million Nevadans can get dessert.

This is making sure that half a million Nevadans don't go to bed hungry.

So what is available then?

We have $1.29 billion in the rainy day fund.

When I took office, we had the pandemic right after the pandemic.

We had $0.

Today we have $1.29 billion.

That's more money than we've ever had in the rainy day fund.

Now, a lot of that has to do with our investment returns, which have been over $1 billion.

Also has to do with the recovery that we had after the pandemic.

But the point of the rainy day fund is to deal with emergencies.

When the governor says that the end fund balance has to get below 5%, is that what's required in order to use that fund, the rainy day fund?

Well, I'm a lawyer, so let's go to the law.

Nevada Revised Statute 353, where it talks about the account for stabilization of government, or as we call it, the rainy day fund.

There are three ways that you can tap into the rainy day fund balance.

If revenues if taxes collected are less than 5% of expectations, that is not the case right now.

If the legislature in full session decides to go into it.

So if we were in a special session, they could go into the rainy day fund that way.

Or if the declaration of a fiscal emergency is called by the legislature and the governor.

Just recently, the speaker of the Nevada Assembly declared that it was a fiscal emergency.

So what we need now is for the governor to also agree that 495,000 Nevadans going hungry is a fiscal emergency.

And so the governor says that this current plan will fund Snap beneficiaries through mid November, which I guess that's that's debatable because this is food banks.

These this is not Snap recipients getting that money directly.

But when he says that that is meant to last through mid November, then he'll consider reversing Arpa funds that are not being used and that do not require legislative approval.

Is that possible?

Is this him being fiscally responsible?

Let's wait until we get to that point.

The thought of 495,000 Nevadans going hungry.

More than 200,000 Nevada children going hungry.

Is this the time for us to say, oh gosh, we should save a penny here.

We should save a penny here.

Know what we should be doing is using every lever available to government to make sure that Nevadans are fed.

Look, this is not the state's fault, right?

We did not do this.

The federal shutdown and the president's desire to remove health care from a massive amount of Americans.

That's not our fault, but it is our problem.

And as Nevada's leaders, we have a responsibility to pull every lever.

If the door is closed, we got to go through the window.

If the windows closed, as some say, we got to go through the wall, right?

We should not, as the speaker said, take no for an answer here.

We just can't do it.

How soon do you think this needs to happen?

Now.

It should have happened last week.

Why?

Why does it have to happen now?

When the governor has this plan that's supposed to go through mid November?

We have amazing food banks in the state of Nevada, both three square, the Northern Nevada Food bank.

We're going to receive a lion's share of the money.

We also have great groups like the just one project who are going to do everything they can, but every dollar that goes into Snap requires $3 into a food bank to have the same level of outcome.

And remember, snap our cards.

These are in people's hands.

They can go to the grocery store without the shame of going to a food bank.

They can go to the grocery store without having to leave work, right when we don't pay snap benefits or.

And if we can't pay Snap benefits.

And this is really important if the mechanics of paying Snap benefits are too hard, we should pay food assistance benefits through the Tanev program.

We should find other ways to get money in people's pockets, because if we don't, it's not just the direct impact of half a million Nevadans being hungry, right?

Which is bad enough.

It's the fact that those Nevadans are going to take money that could be paying their rental payments, and it's going to go to that.

Those Nevadans are going to take that money that could be going to their car payments and general, that they're going to skip prescription drug purchases.

They are going to have a worse life because we have not solved a problem.

We have the resources to solve.

If the governor decided, yes, let's go with that plan and get funding directly into the hands of Nevadans who utilize Snap.

How long would that take to actually happen, that money to get into those bank accounts?

So the vendor has confirmed to us that if we get a list of recipients and amounts.

And that's not a simple thing, right?

We got to use all the government to figure out the best way to do that.

And Congresswoman Lee, you talked about, right.

If we can't use the Snap file because the Trump administration is blocking us from doing it, let's use other files or other programs or I don't think we've covered that.

So when we're trying to send money to Nevadans right through that system, we have to be able to tell the vendor we're trying to send, you know, Bob Smith $10, right.

And Bob Smith, $10, and some information about now the stat file has all the information we need in it.

But the Trump administration just last week said, hey, you can't use that to feed people, which is the point of the file.

And attorneys general around the country have sued because they don't agree.

That's true.

I'm a lawyer, I don't agree that's true.

It's not a privacy issue.

It's we're sending money to people who would have snap benefits.

We're using Snap data to provide food to individuals who is harmed here.

Correct.

But if we can't do that right, we should use the Tanna file, which has a lot of overlap with Snap recipients.

We should use other files of aid that we do.

We should figure out how as government we can solve this problem.

Like look, excuses are great, but nobody can eat excuses.

They need food.

And back to how long that would take to actually get money directly into the hands.

We have confirmed with the vendor that if we have a list of recipients, that is format in the correct way, and that's going to take some time, but it's not going to take months.

How long would that 48 hours after we have the list?

48 hours.

And they confirm that last week.

That's when the Trump administration said, whoa, you can't use that file.

That file that's only for snap.

And we think that files for feeding people.

Okay, so 48 hours to get that data.

And then how long did you say 48 hours to get money in the hands of folks.

Once we get that data, I don't know how long it's going to take to get that data because we don't have those levers.

Those are the governor's levers.

When we talk about a special legislative session, would that be needed in order to declare this emergency, that Assembly Speaker Steve Baker?

No, no, it can be done through the Interim Finance Committee if necessary.

But, you know, again, if we need a special session, we're about to have one that should be on the agenda.

Well, it's interesting that you say that because the governor seemed a little hesitant to commit to a special session actually happening.

You don't know I don't know, you know, I mean, the governor has the power to call a special session of the legislature.

Legislature can also call itself back in.

But that threshold is much higher.

We certainly have been hearing and expect and the governor has said that there will be a special session at some point, probably in November, in order to deal with some unfinished business, quote unquote, from the legislative process.

I think as the speaker of the Assembly said yesterday, it's hard to imagine that there is something else more important out there than feeding half a million.

Nevada fact this is 1 in 5 Nevadans.

These are people on your street.

What the governor said about the special session is that it's still under evaluation.

Last question.

How would you respond to his argument that if we try to put hands, if we try to put money directly into the hands of Nevadans, we will violate USDA restrictions and we may not get reimbursed for the money we are giving.

Well, I'll take the second part first.

I don't think we're going to get reimbursed for any money we put out through these programs regardless.

Correct.

And we moved past that as soon as we realized that it was going to be half a million Nevadans, more than 200,000 children who are hungry, and we've got $1.29 billion in the rainy day fund sitting there.

What is that money for, if not for the protections of Nevadans who are at their weakest, who are at their hungriest?

Right before Thanksgiving, we're going to turn around and say, well, we might not get reimbursed.

Let's not spend this money.

Right?

I absolutely want to make sure we do everything we can to get reimbursed, but whether or not we get reimbursed should not make the determination about whether or not we do the right thing here.

State Treasurer Zach Conine, thank you for joining Nevada.

We are happy to be here.

And thank you for watching.

For any of the resources discussed.

Go to Vegas PBS.org slash Nevada Week and I'll see you next week on Nevada Week.