By James Freeman

Some media reports suggest that Democrats may finally be willing to end their shutdown. Now they're attempting to blame Republicans for cutting off money for food stamps even though Republicans keep voting for it and Democrats keep voting against it. The bizarro claim from the donkeys is that instead of voting to fund the government -- including $9 billion a month for food stamps -- the better course is to keep the shutdown going and sue the administration with a claim that $6 billion from a contingency fund for things like natural disasters can be redirected into regular food-stamp payments. Now even left-leaning CNN anchors and pundits are asking why Democrats won't just vote to fund the food stamps -- especially since their legal gambit, even if successful, would cover only a few weeks.

Here's an excerpt from a CNN transcript of a Tuesday program in which host Jake Tapper questioned Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D., N.M.) about her party's unwillingness to vote to approve funding for food stamps, otherwise known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP):

TAPPER: So, the reason that SNAP is running out of funding, I understand there's a disagreement about the contingency plan, and whether that --

STANSBURY: It's not a disagreement. Literally, Congress approved money for this scenario. The White House is choosing to let Americans go without --

TAPPER: Well, the Agriculture Department argues that the... $6 billion is there for natural disaster. I know that that's disputed. But if you are so concerned about SNAP funds running out, why not ask Democrats in the Senate to vote to open up the government and then the SNAP funding would go? I mean, that's -- I understand the dispute about the contingency fund, and that's a real dispute and that's $6 billion that could fund the SNAP program for two to three more weeks. But if we're actually talking about long-term, why not have Senate Democrats... vote to open up the government?

STANSBURY: Well, so, first of all, I filed legislation in the House of Representatives today, even though Mike Johnson has shut down the House, there are pro forma sessions happening on the House floor, and today I filed the SNAP-backed legislation that would force the administration to release those funds to not cut off EBT cards to millions of Americans, and that would reimburse states and tribes. So, I'm doing my part here in the House.

Rep. Stansbury then filibustered with an extended screed alleging Republicans didn't want to feed hungry children before Mr. Tapper returned to the obvious question for anyone who thinks food stamps should remain available:

TAPPER: Should the Democratic senators from New Mexico, your home state, vote to open the government so that these SNAP funds are not at risk?

STANSBURY: Let me be clear, the administration is choosing to starve American children with money that they already have appropriated... This is the choice by the White House. This is a choice by the White House. They are choosing to cut out food assistance.

TAPPER: Congresswoman, this is also a choice by Senate Democrats to not... vote to open the government. Yes, it is. I understand why they're doing it. They're doing it because they want Medicaid funds restored. They're doing it because they want Obamacare premiums to be extended past the end of the year. I understand the reasoning.

STANSBURY: Sir, let me just be clear, the money for contingency plans is sitting there. That is why the states are suing. The White House is withholding funds from children --

TAPPER: Yes, it's two to three weeks worth of SNAP funds, yes... If you feel so strongly, Congresswoman, why not ask... the Senate Democrats from New Mexico to vote to open the government so that the SNAP funds --

STANSBURY: Sir, I am here in the House of Representatives. It is shut down. I am fighting to get the government reopened.

***

In Other News

After Charlie Kirk

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley writes:

As Democratic leaders like Rep. Dan Goldman (D, N.Y.) insist that Antifa does not exist as a group, two Antifa groups -- Front Range Antifa and Colorado Springs Antifa -- put out a hit list poster on a University of Colorado sophomore and leader in Turning Point USA. He was promptly attacked by a person in the signature Antifa black outfit on roller blades who used a hockey stick to mete out the punishment.

The city of Boulder, Colo., notes in a press release the reported assault that occurred Oct. 23:

Officers responded to the scene shortly after 7 p.m. after a male victim called 911 to report that while he was riding his bike, a man on roller blades approached him from behind and assaulted him verbally and with a hockey stick. The victim was not seriously injured and declined medical treatment...

Based on preliminary information, it appears as if the suspect may have followed the victim from the University of Colorado Boulder campus onto Baseline Road just prior to the assault taking place. In the interest of transparency, detectives are also confirming that they are aware that the victim was the subject of some social media posts and a digital flyer circulated by others prior to last night's incident.

***

Artificially Intelligent, but Not Accurate

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh has been noting the problems that "hallucinations" from artificial intelligence programs can create when relied upon to draft legal filings. Recent examples include citations of fake plaintiffs, fake cases and fake law. Prof. Volokh quotes a recent analysis from one court that may be helpful even for those of us who don't practice law:

Attorneys should understand that chatbots, including legal 'AI' chatbots, are large-language models (LLMs), not a true 'artificial intelligence' out of the pages of science fiction. They are not designed to answer questions factually. They are designed to mimic patterns of words, probabilistically. When they are 'right,' it is because correct things are often written down in the dataset they were trained on.

***

Questions Nobody Is Asking

"Are mushrooms the future of insulation?," Washington Post, October 28

***

James Freeman is the co-author of " The Cost: Trump, China and American Revival" and also the co-author of " Borrowed Time: Two Centuries of Booms, Busts and Bailouts at Citi."

***

Follow James Freeman on X.

Subscribe to the Best of the Web email.

To suggest items, please email best@wsj.com.

(Thanks to Michael Smith.)

***

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

October 29, 2025 16:34 ET (20:34 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.