Editor’s Note: This post is from our data newsletter, the Rural Index, headed by Sarah Melotte, the Daily Yonder’s data reporter. Subscribe to get a weekly map or graph straight to your inbox.

---

In a radical move to stave off perceived bureaucratic bloat, the Trump administration has laid off thousands of federal employees, including rural workers in public land agencies.

To pay for a proposed $4.5 trillion in tax cuts, the Trump administration has fired thousands of federal workers, including 1,300 workers at the CDC in Atlanta, more than 1,000 at the Department of Veteran Affairs, and 3,400 at the Forest Service.

GOP lawmakers are also eyeing cuts to social programs, like Medicaid, that help the poor and working class.

When you picture federal employees, you might imagine bureaucrats in suits and ties in pristine DC offices. But over a quarter million federal employees are stationed in rural counties across  the country in positions like park rangers, field biologists, or grazing managers, just to name a few of the possible jobs. 

President Trump’s firings will hurt many rural communities that rely on the federal government for a large share of their economic base.

The following map shows the percent of total wages in 2023 that came from federal employment. 

(The latest county-level data we have on industry wages and employment is from 2023. These figures don’t represent recent federal layoffs. Figures are in 2023 inflation-adjusted U.S. dollars.)

In the above map, I chose to represent the share of total wages rather than the share of total employment because federal jobs pay more, on average, than private sector jobs in rural counties. Wages might therefore be a better indicator of the federal government’s economic importance.

"These higher, more stable wages would result in more local spending, supporting local businesses and communities," said Megan Lawson, Ph.D., of Headwaters Economics in an email interview with the Daily Yonder.

In 2023, wages in rural private sector jobs were $50,600 per job, on average, compared to $79,300 per job in the federal government. 

Federal jobs only make up 1.6% of the total rural workforce, but in many rural communities, they are one of the largest employers.

"Especially in the West, where many federal layoffs are affecting public land agencies, these employees will not be able to manage our natural resources and serve the public,” Lawson said. “Our gateway communities whose economies depend on natural resources or recreation on federal land will feel the ripple effects when the resources and their visitors aren't being managed well. It's unclear how quickly these effects will be felt." 

Federal wages accounted for $21 billion in nonmetropolitan, or rural, counties in 2023.

In 2023,  federal jobs made up 20% of the total workforce in rural Garfield County, Washington, a community in southeastern Washington. Garfield County lies partially within the Umatilla National Forest, which spans 1.4 million acres in southern Washington and northern Oregon.

Employment in the federal government made up 29% of wages, meanwhile, representing a total of $11 million in 2023.

In Santa Cruz County, Arizona, 12% of the workforce was employed in the federal government in 2023, while 25% of all wages came from federal jobs, representing a total of $199 million in wages.

Santa Cruz is a rural county in southern Arizona that borders Mexico. The Coronado National Forest, a 1.7 million acre piece of federal land, lies almost entirely within the county. 

We don’t know whether all of the federal jobs in Santa Cruz and Garfield counties are in the National Forest Service, however. The data doesn’t tell us. Some of those federal positions could have been remote workers for other federal agencies.

The post Federal Layoffs Will Hurt Rural Counties appeared first on The Daily Yonder.

Washed out bridges, soggy sofas, and ruined ductwork: these are just a sampling of the kinds of damage that flood survivors need to thoroughly document to support a government application for financial aid from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Local county and city governments around the state are urging residents on social media to report any damages from extreme weather and flooding.

Whitney Bailey is the disaster response project director with AppalReD — a legal aid group in eastern Kentucky. She said survivors should take photos and, if possible, create an inventory of damaged items. For appliances and electronics, it may even be helpful to log models and serial numbers.

The documentation should extend to any infrastructure on private property too.

“Start taking pictures, if you haven’t yet, of any bridges, culverts, landslides, mudslides, anything around your home. Gravel roads also,” Bailey said. “You can start making repairs but, just make sure you take photos of everything so you have proof of the before and after. And absolutely hold on to every single receipt.”

In the meantime, Kentuckians will need to wait for FEMA to approve the state’s application for individual assistance programs to repair houses and items destroyed by flood waters. Governor Andy Beshear said it submitted the application on Tuesday for 10 eastern Kentucky counties to receive that aid.

If that aid is approved, it could green light immediate grants of more than $700 for survivors and nearly $44,000 for household repairs and replacement of damaged property. Households have 18 months to apply and appeal these financial awards, but can appeal as many times as needed.

Meanwhile, news outlets are reporting that many FEMA staff were fired the same weekend that disaster struck and more firings could come. President Donald Trump has posted on social media recently that FEMA should be “terminated” and offhandedly proposed the same while touring disaster-stricken areas. He has indicated he wants local governments and states to pay for more of the recovery costs.

Trump has approved an emergency declaration to assist Kentucky’s response, but that aid is limited to immediate emergency response and is capped at $5 million. It’s unclear how he might respond to Kentucky’s request for individual assistance programs, which have individual award limits, but typically have no overall limit to local governments.

President Donald Trump’s immigration plan aims to deport thousands of people that are living in the United States without proper documentation.

We wanted to get an idea of how Trump’s plan will impact Kentucky, a place that’s home to nearly 200,000 immigrants, according to the Migration Policy Institute, an independent, nonpartisan immigration policy think tank based in Washington, D.C.

So, we called more than 40 local law enforcement operations — the sheriff’s and police agencies that could be tapped to assist federal immigration agents. And we went inside the state’s only full-time immigration detention center — the Boone County jail, where federal agents can hold up to 175 people to await deportation.

KyCIR reporters Morgan Watkins and Jared Bennett discussed what they found with LPM’s Bill Burton. You can listen to the conversation by clicking the audio player above, or you can read more below.

This transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

Bill Burton: Jared, has the jail been holding more people since President Trump took office?

Jared Bennett: The Boone County jailer, Jason Maydak, told me he hasn’t seen any evidence of raids or increased enforcement here in Kentucky.

And actually he wasn’t really expecting any in this new Trump administration.

So far they have seen a slight bump, though. There were 131 people held for ICE there when I visited. That was January 28. And by February 3rd, that number rose to 175 people, which is the jail’s capacity for ICE detainees.

BB: How long are people held there?

JB: The jailer told me the average stay for ICE detainees at the Boone County jail was around 45 days, that’s a month and a half, but some people are there for much, much longer, and that’s one of the main issues with ICE holds right now.

People are held for ICE either waiting deportation or for their cases to move through immigration courts, and that can take a really long time. There was a backlog in immigration courts of 3.6 million cases at the end of the 2024 fiscal year.

A federal judge this past August found someone’s year-long stay at the Boone County jail without a bond hearing was unconstitutional. There’s no hard and fast rule about when detainment becomes problematic, but lawyers told me that courts start to get skeptical around six months.

And when I looked at the records I found 20 people had been at the Boone County jail for over six months, and three people for over a year.

BB: You got to tour the jail, what’s it like?

JB: For the most part, a jail is a jail. It’s a big facility, it’s clean, a lot of fluorescent lighting, and it was pretty quiet when I visited. It was below capacity. The jail performs pretty well on ICE inspections, they have a lot of different standards they have to meet to hold people for ICE. That inspection found only three deficiencies that the jailer told me were addressed right away.

But the ICE detainees themselves, they tell a different story. I wasn’t able to talk to any directly, but two filed a complaint with the U.S. Office of Civil Rights in 2021 and said the jail wasn’t taking COVID-19 seriously, didn’t provide translators or regular access to outdoors and recreation. One man from East Africa said he was called racial slurs at the jail.

The Office of Civil Rights investigated and in 2024 made 34 recommendations to address civil rights violations they found. We only have a summary of the findings, so we don’t know what all of the findings were, but we do know ICE only agreed with 18 of the recommendations.

BB: Morgan, Trump wants local police to help ICE enforce federal immigration laws. What do Kentucky officers say, though?

Morgan Watkins: I contacted over 40 police departments and sheriff’s offices and a majority of them got back to me. None of them reported having a formal agreement to partner with ICE, but none said they’d refuse to work with the agency, either.

Several officers said they’d have to consider their available resources – which are limited, especially for small police departments – if ICE asks them for help with an immigration operation.

BB: Do the law enforcement agencies have official policies on working with ICE?

MW: Most of the ones I talked to do not have a policy on ICE, specifically. Louisville Metro Police is an exception. LMPD has policies that limit how and when it can help ICE. A couple of Republican state lawmakers are proposing bills that could force Louisville to drop the restrictions, though.

Opioid abuse and rural homelessness create a spiral for some rural residents, a new study has found.

For the study, researchers with the Rural Opioid Initiative at Georgia State University interviewed more than 3,000 people in rural communities across 10 states who had used drugs. Of those, more than half (54%) said they had experienced homelessness in the last six months. 

April Ballard, assistant professor at the Georgia State University School of Public Health, said the research suggests that the number of rural homeless is significantly larger than federal data suggests.

“Houselessness is an issue in rural areas, but it’s not talked about,” Ballard said in an interview with the Daily Yonder. “That’s largely because it looks very different than in urban areas. It can look like couch surfing, or moving from place to place. It’s hard to count in the same way that we do in urban areas.”

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires a nationwide “Point in Time Count” of people experiencing homelessness on a single night in January. On that day, groups of volunteers spread out to count and talk to homeless people in a community. However, Ballard said, because of the nature of rural homelessness, getting an accurate count is difficult.

“In an urban area, there are groups of people that get together and they walk around the city and they talk to people (to get the homeless count),” she said. “That can be challenging, obviously, for urban areas that are really spread out or not walkable. But in rural areas, obviously, you’re not going to go climb mountains and go in the backwoods to count people. That’s just not feasible.”

Rural people without housing may live in different situations — with relatives, or in tents, or in cars, Ballard said — instead of living in shelters or on the street. That makes finding and identifying them difficult at best. And there is a greater prevalence of homelessness because of the nature of rural community economics, she said.

“In some rural areas there are fewer economic opportunities and more economic disparities,” she said. “There’s insufficient public housing infrastructure and a limited acknowledgement of rural houselessness, which means that less money and resources go toward it.”

In one case, the researchers counted up to five times as many people experiencing homelessness in Kentucky than the “point in time” counts had identified. In three counties, the research found, the “point in time” counts estimated there were no people who were homeless, while Ballard and her group found more than 100 people in those same counties who said they had used drugs and experienced homelessness in the previous  six months.

Mary Frances Kenion, vice president of training and technical assistance with the National Alliance to End Homelessness, agrees that homelessness in rural communities is undercounted.

“Every year, communities conduct an annual ‘point in time count, which is comparable to what we see in the Census —where folks go out knocking door to door to count people,” she said in an interview with the Daily Yonder. “But how do you count people that don’t have a door to answer?”

Rural homelessness, she said, stems not only from lower economic opportunities and a lack of affordable housing, but a lack of support services as well.

“We see a lack of service providers that are really responsible for a whole range of services to the community,” she said. “We do not seem to see the same concentration of service providers that you would see in, say, metropolitan Atlanta or Washington, D.C., or New York City.”

Ballard said her team’s research also indicated that there is a link between opioid use and rural homelessness, each one feeding off of the other.

“Obviously, it’s very clear that the opioid epidemic, as well as other sorts of drugs, has just been wreaking havoc on rural America for a while now. And I would say that houselessness has been an issue in rural areas, but it’s not talked about,” she said. “These two things, I think have been happening in parallel, and as the opioid epidemic has dramatically increased, it [has led] to that kind of cycle.”

The social losses that accompany opioid use disorder, Ballard said — such as unemployment, financial ruin, and the loss of family and social networks — can lead to housing instability and homelessness. In turn, the harsh living conditions presented by homelessness can perpetuate drug use as a coping mechanism. Together the two can create a self-reinforcing cycle that contributes to poorer health and shorter lifespans.

Homelessness can also inhibit treatment and medical care, Ballard said. People  without stable housing were 1.3 times more likely to report being hospitalized for serious bacterial infection and 1.5 times more likely to overdose, the study found. Ballard said the lack of access to clean water contributed to a higher infection rate, while the prevalence of homeless people to use drugs alone increased the risk of accidental overdoses.

Although the two often overlap, Kenion cautioned against equating homelessness with drug addiction.

“I would be really careful about drawing parallels to the narrative that sometimes takes over that the majority of people experiencing homelessness are addicted to opioids or other substances, because that’s not supported by the data,” she said.

Rather, many homeless people across the country have experienced financial hardships — even one unexpected expense —that spiraled out of control and forced them from their homes, she said.

“Not a lot of people realize how folks are just often one crisis away from experiencing housing instability and homelessness, but that is felt more acutely in rural communities,” she said. “If you look at the overall snapshot, rural homelessness has actually increased by 17% between the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic and 2023. And 42% of people experiencing homelessness in rural areas are in unsheltered situations, with women and families with children being far more likely to be unsheltered outdoors.”

Both Ballard and Kenion agree that accurately counting the homeless in rural communities in necessary in order to ensure they have the services they need to get back on their feet.

Additionally, Ballard said, having an accurate count can help ensure the rural homeless who have drug abuse issues can get the help that they need.

“I feel like without that awareness, we are not allocating resources to this,” Ballard said. “From a policy standpoint, it’s incredibly important for us to be capturing accurate information and accurate estimates, so that we’re actually dedicating the right amount of resources to communities. If we are trying to stop deaths related to drug use as well as other epidemics related to HIV and hepatitis C, and we’re not considering housing status, efforts to mitigate that are not going to be as effective or as efficient.”

The post Study: Rural Homelessness Is Underestimated and Exacerbated by Opioid Epidemic appeared first on The Daily Yonder.

Editor’s Note: This post is from our data newsletter, the Rural Index, headed by Sarah Melotte, the Daily Yonder’s data reporter. Subscribe to get a weekly map or graph straight to your inbox.

---

People flee at the onset of a natural disaster. We know this. For those willing and able to leave, there’s the usual scramble. Where are my children’s baby pictures, my social security card? What do I do about my grandmother’s china?

But what happens in the weeks, months, and years following a disaster, when the ash settles and our attention shifts to the next  crisis?

In 2017, the Umpqua North Complex fires burned 43,158 acres in Douglas County, Oregon, a rural community in the southwest part of the state. Some people did leave. From 2020 to 2023, 1,100 people moved out of the county. But during the same period, 4,200 people moved into Douglas County, for a net gain of 5,400. . 

Net migration (the difference between the number of people who move to a county minus the people who leave) resulted in a gain of 20,000 residents in rural Oregon counties during the same time period. 

But this phenomenon isn’t particular to Oregon, or even the Pacific Northwest. Across the nation, people are moving to rural counties with a high risk of wildfires, according to data from Wildfire Risk to Communities, a joint project by Headwaters Economics and the Fire Modeling Institute of the Rocky Mountain Research Station of the Forest Service. 

Rural counties with high wildfire risk gained 2.5% of their total 2020 population in net migration between 2020 and 2023, representing a gain of 540,000 residents. Rural counties without high wildfire risk only gained about 1% of their total 2020 population in net migration, meanwhile. 

Nearly two-thirds of high risk rural counties experienced a net positive migration between 2020 and 2023 compared to only 60% of rural counties at-large.

Metropolitan areas with high risk of wildfires only gained about half a percentage point of their total 2020 population in net migration, representing an additional 1 million residents. 

The Wildfire Risk to Communities categorizes counties as high risk of wildfire if they score above the 84th percentile on their dataset’s wildfire risk index. To put it simply, counties are at high risk of wildfires if 84% of all other counties score lower than them on the index.

Nearly half (48%) of the growth in rural counties at high risk of wildfire happened in the Southeast among rural counties like coastal Georgetown, South Carolina, a popular vacation spot. 

These Southeastern counties are not places we usually picture when we think of wildfires, but fire has been a central part of the Southeastern coastal ecosystem for millions of years. Wildfires are particularly important for southern trees like the longleaf pine, which needs fire to germinate its seeds.

But Southeastern counties in general don’t rank as high on the wildfire risk index compared to rural counties in Western states. The average rural county in the South scores in the 60th percentile on the wildfire risk index, but the Coastal West, a region that includes the states of California, Oregon, and Washington, scored, on average, in the 77th percentile. 

When you signed up for “Rural Index,” I promised you one map every two weeks, but I’ve included a second one in this issue. My treat. Don’t get used to it. 

Rural counties that scored higher than the 90th percentile in the wildfire risk index had a net increase of 82,700 people between 2020 and 2023. 

In the Northwest states of Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, rural counties that scored over the 90th percentile had a net migration that equaled 10% of their 2020 population, representing a net gain of about 24,000 newcomers.

The wildfire risk dataset shows a mild relationship between how a county scores on the wildfire risk index and the county’s net migration. The higher the wildfire risk index, or percentile, the greater the net migration. 

But wildfire risk only explains a small portion of the increase in net migration in recent years. Many of rural America’s riskiest counties are in picturesque regions, like the counties surrounding Zion National Park in Utah. My previous reporting for the Daily Yonder explored how areas with outdoor amenities gained population faster than other rural areas. 

I suppose now is a good time to remind you that correlation does not equal causation. Wildfires are not causing people to move to risky areas, in other words. That would be absurd. But wildfires seem to be a risk many folks don’t mind taking if it means they get to live near some of America’s most breathtaking views.

The post Rural Wildfire Risk Doesn’t Stop New Residents appeared first on The Daily Yonder.

In September, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) unveiled its Rural Public Health Strategic Plan, which outlines the priorities, objectives and outcomes the agency hopes to see over the next five years as it collaborates with other federal agencies and various stakeholders on how to improve the health of rural residents.

The plan was developed with the help of more than 50 experts within the CDC who reviewed more than 200 rural initiatives, programs and efforts to identify opportunities. Then the agency enlisted the feedback from more than 230 federal and external partners through listening sessions, lunch meetings and town hall events, Dr. Diane Hall, the director of the CDC’s Office of Rural Health (ORH), said in an interview with the Daily Yonder.

The strategic plan is a guide for ORH and the CDC at large, as it moves forward with programs and research into rural health needs. Developed with stakeholders such as the National Rural Health Association (NRHA) and state offices of rural health, the plan seeks to combat issues that are seen at higher levels in rural communities, like obesity, chronic illnesses and substance abuse.

Opened last year, the ORH came as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. Disparities between urban and rural access to care shined a spotlight on the need for more attention on rural public health, she said. The strategic plan is the office’s first major publication.

“We really wanted the strategic plan to actually be strategic, but also be actionable,” Dr. Diane Hall, the director of the CDC’s Office of Rural Health, said in an interview with the Daily Yonder. “But more than that, we wanted it to be relevant to the lives of people that live in rural communities.”

Stakeholders, like Alan Morgan, CEO of the NHRA, said the plan is an indication of what is coming in rural health. 

“Realistically, this is a blueprint for the future,” Morgan said in an interview with the Daily Yonder. “They have highlighted long-standing issues and now they have a direction and a plan to get to where they need to be.”

The plan focuses on four main priorities – engaging with community health partners, strengthening rural public health infrastructure, advancing rural public health science and improving rural public health preparedness and response.

“CDC is committed to advancing rural public health across America by identifying and addressing gaps in the evidence base, data analytic capabilities, and the workforce in rural communities,” the plan said.

Hall said her office will work alongside stakeholders and other subject matter experts to develop a more specific action plan and to determine how best to serve rural areas.

“A lot of times, rural communities haven’t really been served well by government policies or decisions,” she said. “All of that needs to be addressed when we’re talking about health decisions.”

The plan isn’t regionally or state-specific, but it is a step toward an action plan, Hall said.

“Rural health is an issue that garners bipartisan support in Congress,” Hall said. “And Congress has been very clear that they wanted the CDC to create this office. These are the first steps in a very long process to address the rural urban disparities in healthcare.”

Hall said that before the end of the year, the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), part of the CDC, will release an updated method for urban-rural classification.

That will make researching rural health issues easier, Katy Backes Kozhimannil, the co-director of the University of Minnesota Rural Health Research Center, said in an interview with the Daily Yonder. One of the issues facing researchers is determining the rurality of subjects.

Although the strategic plan doesn’t provide direct actionable items, it is a step in the right direction, Kozhimannil said.

“This is a long process,” she said. “Working with local hospitals and rural public health agencies, as well as research centers like ours, is the beginning of the process. I think we’re all looking forward to the next steps and seeing what action items come out of this strategic plan.”

The post CDC Presents a Five-Year Plan for Rural Healthcare appeared first on The Daily Yonder.

Gov. Andy Beshear announced what he said is the third largest job announcement in Kentucky during his governorship Friday — a $712 million battery manufacturing plant in Shelbyville.

Officials said the plant would eventually become the largest employer in the city; the company is expected to hire 1,572 employees in its first three years.

“We’d already become the [electric vehicle] battery production capital of the United States, but with this investment, we’re putting our stamp on working to become just the battery capital of the United States of America,” Beshear said. “Now with Shelbyville Battery Manufacturing, we’re going to lead in the industrial electrification space.”

The two other major projects of Beshear’s administration — BlueOval SK Battery Park in Hardin County and the AESC battery manufacturing plant in Bowling Green — both produce electric vehicle batteries.

The new plant will create industrial battery cells and modules used in projects like solar and hydroelectric power generation. Shelbyville Battery Manufacturing is owned by e-STORAGE, a subsidiary of Canadian Solar Inc. which is a global renewable energy company based in Ontario.

The facility appears to be on the same site as a previously announced plant. Energy storage firm EnerVenue finished construction of the plant last year, but never began operations.

Because the one-million-square-foot factory is already largely constructed, Colin Parkin, president of e-STORAGE, said they hope to have the plant up and running by the end of next year.

“The products we will build in the Shelbyville factory will be ready, will be installed into energy storage projects nationwide by early 2026,” Parkin said. “That is, of course, a very aggressive timeline.”

The Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority approved a 15-year incentive agreement with Shelbyville Battery Manufacturing, with up to $35 million in tax incentives — and another $5 million besides through the Kentucky Enterprise Initiative Act. The governor’s office said those incentives are based on the company’s investment and an average hourly wage of $25.34 with benefits for 15 years across the nearly 1,600 new jobs.

GOP Senate President Robert Stivers of Manchester said in a statement he celebrated the new investment.

“The General Assembly has worked to foster a pro-business environment in Kentucky, making us an attractive destination for global companies,” Stivers said. “We’ll continue this work, alongside Gov. Beshear, to keep bringing opportunity to our citizens.”

Shelby County Judge/Executive Dan Ison said he wants to increase industry in Shelby County by welcoming “quality business.”

“We don’t just open the door and say, ‘Come in, pollute our community.’ No, we get clean business. We get good business. We get good jobs,” Eisen said.

State government and politics reporting is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made the announcement Friday alongside local and federal Kentucky officials and members of the U.S. military in Greenville, Kentucky.

During a press conference at the local VFW Post, McConnell identified trinitrotoluene – better known as TNT – as a critical explosive for Air Force weaponry, from hand grenades to aircraft bombs, and a key investment priority for the Army. That U.S. investment comes courtesy of a $435 million military contract for Repkon USA – an aerospace and defense manufacturer – to build and operate the first domestic source of the explosive chemical in the Bluegrass State.

McConnell said the future Muhlenberg County facility is part of a larger effort “to get America ready to prevent war by being strong.”

“If I had to describe where we are today, I would say it looks like before World War II,” the Republican leader said. “Let me tell you where we are: We’re up against a network, an actual network, of authoritarian regimes – North Korea, China, Russia, Iran. Iran and Iran’s proxies are all communicating with each other. They hate us, and they want to reform the world order in a way that benefits autocratic regimes.

“So a way to look at this is an impending conflict between authoritarian parts of the world and democratic parts of the world, and we have to be the lead.”

After the presentation, McConnell said that “it’s cheaper to prevent war than it is to have one” and referenced former President Ronald Reagan as he called for increased military defense spending by the U.S., calling the country’s current spending levels “nowhere near adequate.”

“We need to build up our defense industrial complex and spend more in order to avoid having to spend even more in a conflict. As Reagan said it, ‘You get peace through strength.’”

Maj. Gen. John G. Reim commands the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, which is home to 90% of the United States Army’s lethality. He spoke in Greenville about the Army’s need to expand production capacity when it comes to 155 mm artillery – a variable type of munition that’s become a critical component in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

Reim said he hopes for U.S. production of 155 mm artillery to hit 100,000 “shots” – finished rounds with a fuse, an explosively loaded steel projectile principally filled with TNT, a propelling charge and a primer – a month by 2026.

“This new TNT facility is a key part of our munitions production ramp up strategy giving us the added capacity to stay ahead of evolving threats and production requirements,” Reim said. “This history-making initiative underscores our commitment to strengthening our national security and reducing reliance on foreign sources for critical materials.”

Reim said that making TNT on American soil for the first time since 1986 is the best way to meet that commitment.

Repkon USA president Bryan Van Brunt said the facility will increase the resiliency of the United States by ensuring “critical capability for the U.S. military that packs explosive punch.”

“This unique facility will not be like the TNT plants of decades past,” he said. “This TNT facility is going to take advantage of state of the art automation and a novel waste neutralization process to make it one of the most high-tech, safe and environmentally friendly TNT plants ever constructed.”

The Environmental Protection Agency has identified trinitrotoluene as a possible human carcinogen. Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention links the compound with adverse health impacts like blood disorders, abnormal liver function, spleen enlargement and anemia.

Scientists have strived to develop alternatives to TNT over the past decade because of the compound’s environmental properties and its explosive sensitivity.

When asked if Repkon had considered manufacturing alternatives like IMX-101 – which got Army approval in 2010 – or BOM, Van Brunt said this will be a safer TNT facility than those of the past.

“TNT is a proven explosive that’s been used in military munitions for decades and decades. The question is whether it can be produced safely in an environmentally friendly fashion – and it can be,” he said. “One issue with TNT over many years is it’s being produced in World War II-era plants. Back then, the methods of production were a bit different. We’re going to use … the same chemical process [but] it’s a different production method altogether. There won’t be any wastewater, and it will be done in a way to not put out the pollutants.”

Van Brunt said he expects to break ground on the factory in six months with the first batches of TNT coming off the line in around three years. The planned facility in Graham, an unincorporated community of Muhlenberg County, will create around 50 permanent jobs.

McConnell called the announcement an “absolutely spectacular development” for the western Kentucky area.

“This is a breath of fresh air for Muhlenberg County, and an opportunity to be involved in something that’s extremely important for our nation,” he added.

Local officials and veterans were also on hand to celebrate the military contractor coming to the community – which has a history of producing explosives through manufacturers like Dyno Nobel, also located in Graham.

“We’ve been actually at the mercy of other countries for this product that’s going to be built here,” said Muhlenberg County Judge-Executive Mack McGehee. “This is a great day for the United States, bringing this industry back.”

Retired U.S. Army Sgt. Joe Roney – a Vietnam veteran, the senior commander of the local VFW post and a native of Powderly in Muhlenberg County – was overjoyed at the announcement.

“We’ve had explosive plants out there anyway. I think this county is going to receive this very well,” he said. “I’m one of the biggest military supporters there is. I’m happy for it.”

Copyright 2024 WKMS

Donald Trump reclaimed Pennsylvania and the presidency Tuesday when the urban coalition that gave Joe Biden his 2020 victory in the state failed to show up for Vice President Kamala Harris.

Trump won the state by 171,000 votes, primarily by eroding Democratic turnout in the major metropolitan areas of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

Harris earned 89,000 fewer votes in these major metropolitan areas than Biden did in 2020. Trump, meanwhile, earned about 30,000 more votes this year than he did in 2020 in those same counties in and around Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. (The Daily Yonder defines major metropolitan areas as ones with 1 million or more residents.)

The difference was determinative in a state that both candidates needed to win the Electoral College vote.

On a percentage basis, Trump won in all categories of counties except in major metropolitan cities and suburbs. He lost the core counties of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh (major metro) by 39 points, but that was 2 percentage points better than he did in 2020. In the suburbs of these major cities, he lost by less than a point, which was 2 points better than he did in 2020.

Trump swept the board in all other types of counties, from small rural areas to medium sized cities. And he improved on his 2020 performance in doing so. He did about 1.5 points better in medium-sized metro areas; 0.9 points better in small metros; and 0.8 points better in rural (nonmetro) counties.

Rural counties saw the least shift to Trump from 2020 to 2024, but that’s partly because his margin was already so high. Trump won 73.4% of the rural Pennsylvania vote this year, compared to 72.5% in 2020.

Medium-Sized Metropolitan Areas

In medium-sized metro areas , Trump won 38,000 more votes than he did in 2020, while Harris got 19,000 fewer votes than Biden did in 2020.

Trump won both the core counties of these metros and their suburbs by about 11 points, about 1.5 points better than he performed in 2020.

Medium-sized metros have populations of 250,000 to under 1 million. These are the cities and surrounding counties of places like Allenton, Erie, Harrisburg, Lancaster, Reading, Scranton, and York.

Small Metros

Turnout was lower for both candidates in Pennsylvania’s small metropolitan areas, which have populations under 250,000. There are nine small metropolitan areas in the state, ranging from East Stroudsburg (Monroe County) in the east to Johnston (Cambria County) in the west.

In small metros, both Trump and Harris won from 25,000 to 30,000 fewer votes compared to the 2020 election.

Trump got nearly two-thirds of the votes in these counties, a slight improvement from 2020.

Rural Counties

Trump improved his percentage of the rural vote in Pennsylvania by less than a percentage point compared to 2020. Trump picked up about 17,000 additional votes compared to 2020, while Harris lost about 2,100 compared to Biden’s performance in 2020. The net change amounted to about 15,000 additional votes for Trump among rural voters.

Trump won rural counties by over 45 points.

Methodology. The Daily Yonder uses the 2013 Office of Management and Budget Metropolitan Statistical Areas to determine county categories.

The post In PA, Trump Improves Rural Margin Slightly, but Collapse of Urban Dem. Vote Gives Him the Win appeared first on The Daily Yonder.

When the presidential results start rolling in on November 5, the usual battlegrounds will get all the attention. But the real story of the night will be hidden in rural communities across America. These aren’t just dots on the map—they’re bellwethers for how rural America will shape the outcome of the election for presidential, Senatorial, House, and state legislative elections. 

We don’t know who’s going to win on Election Night, but we are pretty sure about one thing: Pundits are going to get rural voters wrong.  

Expect to see red splashed across vast areas on TV maps, with “expert” commentary about this or that “rural” county—many of which don’t meet the definition. And when the post-mortems arrive, lackluster margins in supposedly rural states will have Democrats second-guessing their investment in rural America, all while missing key districts where rural voters delivered pivotal wins.

We’re here to help. We’ll break down the districts that actually matter and look at the counties and districts that could swing the election, helping you focus on the factors that could genuinely swing the election and shape the future of rural communities, nationwide.

Top of the Ticket: Counties to Watch on Election Night

There’s two types of rural counties – classified throughout as non-metropolitan according to the 2023 RUCC (Rural Urban Continuum Code) designation — that matter for the Harris-Trump contest: those that reversed course in the 2020 over 2016 (the flippers) and those that continued the decades long trend in Republican dominance in rural areas. 

The Flippers: 

• Kennebec County, Maine: One of only 19 rural counties to have voted for Trump in 2016 and Biden in 2020, Trump actually improved his overall support from 2016 to 48% while still losing the county. If he does worse than his 2020 numbers, expect similar desertions throughout the rural Northeast.   
• Door County, Wisconsin. A rural county that was a part of Trump’s surprise win in 2016, Biden locked down rural voters here in 2020 and brought the whole state with him. The Harris-Walz campaign has made these marginal victories in the Midwest key; if Trump over-performs his 2020 margins (48.5%) it could be a tough night for Democrats in rural Wisconsin.   
• Inyo County, California. Among the rural counties that flipped, voters in East-Central California, home to Death Valley, flipped the most. In just four years, Trump’s margins were cut by 3 percent and voters broke for the Democrat in 2020– the first time since 1964.  
• Teton County, Idaho: Idaho won’t flip in 2024, but voters in this Eastern part of Idaho have proven to be exceptionally independent, voting for Obama in 2008, Romney in 2012, Trump in 2016, and Biden in 2020. If they swing back again, that could have broader implications beyond the presidential race, hinting at deeper shifts in rural voter alignment, even in a deeply red state.

The Long-Termers

Elections have proven remarkably volatile the last eight years, but the transformation of rural partisanship has been decades in the making. Will 2024 be an inflection point or a continuation of Democrat losses? We’d look to these counties for answers.  

• Jackson County, Tennessee: Democrats aren’t going to win Tennessee anytime soon, and part of that is because rural communities across the rural South have deserted the party in droves. Since 2000 when the county broke for Gore, Democrats have suffered a 49 point drop in support. It went for Obama in 2008, but few rural counties have changed as much as this one…named after Andrew Jackson, a Democrat, to boot. 
• Mingo County, West Virginia: Like Jackson County, Democrats are 47 points under where they were in 2000. One of the worst performing rural counties for Democrats, if Harris stops the bleeding it might signal some important signs for the recovery of two-party competition in this deeply red part of the country. 
• Mower County, Minnesota: Part of Tim Walz’s old congressional district, this was a Democratic stronghold for over 40 years, but broke for Trump in 2016 (a 16-point swing over Obama!). Biden performed better, but still lost the county 52-46. We might see if Walz can do any better.  
• Greene County, Pennsylvania: Despite predictions, it hasn’t been the case that for every voter lost in Western Pennsylvania, Democrats will get two in the suburbs – so don’t neglect trends in the far southwestern corner of the state. Just 20 years ago, Republicans and Democrats ran neck-and-neck. Trump carried it by 40 points in 2016 and 43 points in 2020. If margins close here, they might close throughout rural Pennsylvania. 
• Lake County, Michigan: Another county that voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 only to turn to the GOP in 2016. Unlike many areas in rural Michigan though, Trump added to his tally in 2020 over 2016. If he does so again, things might look like a 2016 redux across the Great Lakes region. 

Looking past “Rural States” to Understand Senate Races 

With Joe Manchin’s seat virtually conceded to the Republicans, the battle for the Senate will come down to a handful of races in states where rural votes will be decisive. 

• Montana: All eyes will be on Montana to see if Jon Tester can keep his seat in a state where rural votes comprise about 45% of the statewide total. Tester has done comparatively well in rural counties in his previous two campaigns — 47.3% of the two-party rural vote in 2012 and 45.7% in 2018, both well ahead of Biden. Can he maintain that share in rural counties with Trump on the ballot? If he does, Tester could pull off a big surprise.
• Ohio: Rural votes could also be decisive in Ohio as Sherrod Brown tries to stave off a strong challenge in a state that has turned deep red in the Trump era. Brown received 38.8% of the rural, two-party votes in his last election, which outperformed Tim Ryan’s Senate try in 2022 against JD Vance and Biden’s 26.7% in 2020. But Trump’s presence on the top of the ticket might draw out more Republican voters or remind them what is at stake in control of the Senate. 
• Wisconsin: Tammy Baldwin has enjoyed strong performances in rural Wisconsin in her two Senate campaigns, gaining 49.4% in 2012 and 48.6% in 2018. (If Russell Feingold in 2016 or Mandela Barnes in 2022 had done as well in rural Wisconsin as Baldwin, either could have defeated Ron Johnson) Baldwin also ran about 10 points better than Biden. With the polls tightening in this race, another strong showing in rural counties, which comprise about one-quarter of the state’s electorate, can assure her of a third term.
• Michigan: This state features an open seat, and rural counties comprise about 17% of the statewide vote. Debbie Stabenow gained 41.2% of the rural vote in 2018 but Gary Peters fell to 37.2% with Trump on the top of the ticket in 2020. Both outpolled Biden’s 2020 performance of 35.8%. Elissa Slotkin can’t afford a bigger falloff in rural counties and hope to keep the seat in Democratic hands.
• Nebraska: Independent candidate Dan Osborn is running a surprisingly competitive race against incumbent Republican Senator Deb Fischer. Polls show Osborn holding a narrow lead, driven by his strong appeals to rural voters, who are frustrated with the current political establishment and who feel ignored by Washington. While a win might not tilt the balance of Senate control, an Osborn victory goes to show that rural politics is so much more than a cult of Trump. Rural communities are not monolithic in their support for the GOP but are seeking representation that genuinely reflects their interests and frustrations with the status quo. 

Control of the House

Many of the races both parties are targeting for control of the House of Representatives feature significant shares of rural voters. In fact, rural voters could well determine which party controls the U.S. House. Key races will also show if any new ways of attracting rural votes have succeeded for the Democrats or if Republicans will maintain a hold on rural America.

• Maine 2: Democrat Jared Golden represents a district where 63.8% of the votes in his narrow 2022 victory over Austin Theriault came from rural counties. It will be interesting to see if Blue Dog Golden can hang on to this seat with Trump on the ballot.
• Colorado 3: Adam Frisch narrowly lost to Lauren Boebert in this district two years ago and is back this time to face Republican Jeff Hurd after Boebert relocated to another district. In Colorado 3, 57.5% of the votes in 2022 came from rural counties.
• New York 19: In another 2022 rematch, incumbent Republican Marc Molinaro will face off again against Democrat Josh Riley. Molinaro won by fewer than 5,000 votes in this district where 48% of the votes are in rural counties.
• North Carolina 1: Incumbent Don Davis is trying to hold this seat for the Democrats in a district where nearly one-half of the vote last election was rural. Many of the counties in this district have higher shares of African American voters which will help his chances.
• Iowa 1: This 2022 rematch pits incumbent Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks against Christina Bohannan. Miller-Meeks won by 7 points in 2022 when 40.3% of the votes were from rural counties.
• New Mexico 3: Gabe Vasquez is the incumbent Democrat in this district where 37.3% of the votes were rural last election. Some of the rural counties in this district have higher percentages of Hispanics and Native Americans where he did very well two years ago.

Of course, these aren’t the only races worth watching. Across the country, crucial battles are unfolding on state ballots, from gubernatorial contests, state referenda, to down-ballot races for state legislatures and local offices. There too, rural voters will be pivotal, if given the chance. Over 38% of all state legislative races are uncontested, many of those in rural America where Democrats haven’t even found a candidate to place on the ballot. But take note of Wisconsin where in a surprise turn of events, Democrats have placed a candidate for every single state Senate contest and all but two of the 99 ballots for state assembly. Whether these rural contests will flip the script or reinforce existing divides it’s a reminder that every race should be fought, because real competition strengthens democracy, holds politicians accountable, and ensures rural voters have the representation they deserve.

So this Election Night, let’s keep the focus on the places that matter: the districts where rural votes will truly decide the outcome and who might give us glimpses into a different political future for rural communities. Instead of fixating on where Democrats fall short, we should be looking at the places where rural voters are exercising their clear-minded independence and where candidates are working to restore two-party competition. These are the contests that will tell us more about the future of American politics than the losses. 

---

Nicholas F. Jacobs is an assistant professor of government at Colby College and the co-author, with Daniel M. Shea, of The Rural Voter: The Politics of Place and the Disuniting of America. Robin A. Johnson is a governmental relations, public policy, and political consultant and host of the radio program and podcast “Heartland Politics.”

The post A Guide to the Rural Vote: The Places and Races to Watch on Tuesday appeared first on The Daily Yonder.