The Democratic Party was fracturing Friday as a torrent of frustration and anger was unleashed at Senate Democrats, led by Sen. Chuck Schumer, who faced what they saw as an awful choice: shut the government down or consent to a Republican funding bill that allows President Donald Trump to continue slashing the federal government.

After Schumer announced that he would reluctantly support the bill, he bore the brunt of that anger, including a protest at his office, calls from progressives that he be primaried in 2028 and suggestions that the Democratic Party would soon be looking for new leaders.

Nine other members of the Democratic Caucus — a contingent of mostly swing-state and retiring senators — eventually joined Schumer in voting to advance the Republican funding proposal, providing crucial support to bring it to a final vote. It passed late Friday with Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Angus King of Maine voting with Republicans in favor.

Since their election losses, Democrats have been hunkered against a barrage of Trump’s early actions in office, locked out of legislative power and left searching for a plan to regain political momentum. But as Schumer let pass one of the rare moments when the party might regain leverage in Washington, the Democratic Party erupted in a moment of anger that had been building for months.

Many in the party felt the New York Democrat was not showing sufficient fight, arguing that a government shutdown would have forced Trump and Republicans to the negotiating table. Yet for Schumer, who has led Senate Democrats since Trump took office in 2016, the choice ultimately came down to preventing a shutdown that he believed would only hand Trump more power and leave his party with the blame for disruptions to government services.

“A shutdown would allow DOGE to shift into overdrive,” Schumer warned on the Senate floor Friday, referring to the Department of Government Efficiency effort led by Elon Musk.

Schumer voted no on the final vote for the funding bill, which only needed a simple majority to pass. Nonetheless, House Democrats released a stream of angry statements and social media posts aimed at Schumer.

Democratic Rep. Troy Carter of Louisiana shared a photo of Trump and Schumer engaged in conversation with the caption, “A picture is worth a thousand words!”

Even in the Senate, hardly any Democrats were speaking up in support of Schumer’s strategy Friday. It was a remarkable turn for the longtime Democratic leader, leaving him standing practically alone.

Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, his longtime ally and partner in funding fights of the past, said in a statement, “Let’s be clear: neither is a good option for the American people. But this false choice that some are buying instead of fighting is unacceptable.”

Pelosi added that the senators should listen to the women who lead appropriations for Democrats, Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and Sen. Patty Murray of Washington. They had proposed a 30-day stopgap plan instead of the Republican proposal that provides funding until September. The Republican bill will trim $13 billion in non-defense spending from the levels in the 2024 budget year and increase defense spending by $6 billion.

As House Democrats, who almost all voted against the bill earlier this week, concluded a retreat in northern Virginia Friday, they also called for their Senate colleagues to show more fight. House Democratic leadership rushed back to the Capitol to hold a news conference and urge senators to reject the bill.

“We do not want to shutdown the government. But we are not afraid of a government funding showdown,” Jeffries said.

He also repeatedly declined to answer questions about whether he had confidence in Schumer.

Other Democrats, such as Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, who is seen as a potential presidential candidate in 2028 and also visited the Democratic retreat, called for a broader movement. He mentioned the recent 60th anniversary of peaceful civil rights protests in Selma, Alabama, and argued that Democrats need to find “collective courage.”

“When those individuals marched, there wasn’t one voice,” Beshear said. “There was a collective courage of that group that changed the world. That day opened up the eyes of the country to what was really going on.”

Some were ready to start marching.

“We’re ready to get out of this building and head back to the Capitol at any moment and prevent the government from shutting down,” said Rep. Greg Casar of Texas, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

“Now is the moment for Democrats to draw a line in the stand and say that we stand very firmly on the side of working class people and against the ultra-rich that are trying to corrupt our government for themselves,” he added.

Meanwhile, some of the nation’s most influential progressive groups warned of serious political consequences for Senate Democrats and predicted a fierce backlash when members of Congress return home next week.

Ezra Levin, co-founder of Indivisible, which has organized hundreds of protests across the nation, said that nearly 8 in 10 of the group’s activists support primary challenges against “Senate Dems who cave on the GOP bill.”

He wrote on social media that the vast majority of those Democratic activists plan to express their anger at town halls or other public events next week. MoveOn, another progressive group that claims nearly 10 million members nationwide, predicted that its activists would also demand answers from Democratic officials in the coming days

“Clearing the way for Donald Trump and Elon Musk to gut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is unacceptable. It’s past time for Democrats to fight and stop acting like it’s business as usual,” said Joel Payne, a spokesperson for MoveOn.

Senate Democrats were also mostly unwilling to speak up to defend Schumer’s move. Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Georgia Democrat, even suggested that the party should be looking for new leaders in the coming years.

“I think come ’26, ’28, we’ll get some new leadership,” he said. His office later said Warnock was answering the question broadly.

Mostly, though, senators just lamented that they had been jammed by a Republican Party that has found a new sense of unity under Trump. For years, House Republicans have not been able to muster votes for government funding on their own, forcing them into bipartisan negotiations. This time, they passed the bill on party lines and left Washington.

“We’re stuck with two bad choices presented by a unified Republican front,” said Sen. Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat.

He voted against the bill, yet said of Schumer’s decision: “These are tough, tough calls.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Trump administration workforce cuts at federal agencies overseeing U.S. dams are threatening their ability to provide reliable electricity, supply farmers with water and protect communities from floods, employees and industry experts warn.

The Bureau of Reclamation provides water and hydropower to the public in 17 western states. Nearly 400 agency workers have been cut through the Trump reduction plan, an administration official said.

“Reductions-in-force” memos have also been sent to current workers, and more layoffs are expected. The cuts included workers at the Grand Coulee Dam, the largest hydropower generator in North America, according to two fired staffers interviewed by The Associated Press.

“Without these dam operators, engineers, hydrologists, geologists, researchers, emergency managers and other experts, there is a serious potential for heightened risk to public safety and economic or environmental damage,” Lori Spragens, executive director of the Kentucky-based Association of Dam Safety Officials, told the AP.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said federal workforce reductions will ensure disaster responses are not bogged down by bureaucracy and bloat.

”A more efficient workforce means more timely access to resources for all Americans,” she said by email.

But a bureau hydrologist said they need people on the job to ensure the dams are working properly.

“These are complex systems,” said the worker in the Midwest, who is still employed but spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of possible retaliation.

Workers keep dams safe by monitoring data, identifying weaknesses and doing site exams to check for cracks and seepage.

“As we scramble to get these screenings, as we lose institutional knowledge from people leaving or early retirement, we limit our ability to ensure public safety,” the worker added. “Having people available to respond to operational emergencies is critical. Cuts in staff threaten our ability to do this effectively.”

A federal judge on Thursday ordered the administration to rehire fired probationary workers, but a Trump spokesperson said they would fight back, leaving unclear whether any would return.

The heads of 14 California water and power agencies sent a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation and the Department of Interior last month warning that eliminating workers with “specialized knowledge” in operating and maintaining aging infrastructure “could negatively impact our water delivery system and threaten public health and safety.”

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also operates dams nationwide. Matt Rabe, a spokesman, declined to say how many workers left through early buyouts, but said the agency hasn’t been told to reduce its workforce.

But Neil Maunu, executive director of the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, said it learned more than 150 Army Corps workers in Portland, Oregon, were told they would be terminated and they expect to lose about 600 more in the Pacific Northwest.

The firings include “district chiefs down to operators on vessels” and people critical to safe river navigation, he said.

Their last day is not known. The Corps was told to provide a plan to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management by March 14, Maunu said.

Several other federal agencies that help ensure dams run safely also have faced layoffs and closures. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is laying off 10% of its workforce and the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s National Dam Safety Review Board was disbanded in January.

The cuts come at a time when the nation’s dams need expert attention.

An AP review of Army Corps data last year showed at least 4,000 dams are in poor or unsatisfactory condition and could kill people or harm the environment if they failed. They require inspections, maintenance and emergency repairs to avoid catastrophes, the AP found.

Heavy rain damaged the spillway at California’s Oroville Dam in 2017, forcing nearly 190,000 residents to evacuate, and Michigan’s Edenville Dam breached in storms in 2020, the AP found.

Stephanie Duclos, a Bureau of Reclamation probationary worker fired at the Grand Coulee Dam, said she was among a dozen workers initially terminated. The dam across the Columbia River in central Washington state generates electricity for millions of homes and supplies water to a 27-mile-long (43-kilometer) reservoir that irrigates the Columbia Basin Project.

“This is a big infrastructure,” she said. “It’s going to take a lot of people to run it.”

Some fired employees had worked there for decades but were in a probation status due to a position switch. Duclos was an assistant for program managers who organized training and was a liaison with human resources. The only person doing that job, she fears how others will cover the work.

“You’re going to get employee burnout” in the workers left behind, she said.

Sen. Alex Padilla, a California Democrat who pushed a bipartisan effort to ensure the National Dam Safety Program was authorized through 2028, said, “the safety and efficacy of our dams is a national security priority.

“Americans deserve better, and I will work to make sure this administration is held accountable for their reckless actions,” Padilla said.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Tim Spector admits he used to have a Pringles problem. The salty, melt-in-your-mouth snack was a weak spot for the professor of genetic epidemiology at King’s College London and gut health expert.

“I could taste the chemicals on them,” he tells Fortune, “but at the same time there was something that made me addicted to eating them.”

Now, Spector is well-versed in the world of ultra-processed foods as the co-founder of ZOE, a UK-based nutrition company known for its gut health testing, and the author of multiple books including The Diet Myth and Food for Life: The New Science of Eating Well.

Spector optimizes his diet with nutrition, longevity, and gut health in mind.

4 foods he never eats

1. Ultra-processed salty snacks

While Spector used to love indulging in Pringles and Cheetos, those crunchy, salty snacks are no longer a part of his diet, and top the list of foods he avoids. 

“It’s the food industry that’s pushed us into this snack culture,” Spector says. Many ultra-processed snack foods are “hyper-palatable,” he adds, which make them easy to overeat. 

The mixture of fat, sugars, and salt combined with a texture that almost dissolves in your mouth can make it hard to stop eating, not to mention their overly processed nature that can potentially threaten your health. That rapidly dissolving texture also disperses something like a Pringle or a Cheeto into the bloodstream much quicker, avoiding the body’s mechanisms that make you feel full, Spector says. 

2. Sugary breakfast cereals

Spector steers clear of  sugar-packed cereals that are “totally artificially created…that have 20 to 30 ingredients,” and look nothing like the foods they’re made from.

“You sort of feel this chemical rush as you’re eating them,” he says.

Spector recalls being a kid and loving the sugar rush of a chocolatey cereal so much, that he’d eat it to the point of nausea.

“It’s not ever something you’d find in nature,” he says. While a nice, sweet banana might be tasty, he says, that doesn’t mean you’d want to eat five in a row.

“I now know what the food companies are trying to do,” Spector says. “They’ve got the right mix of the salt, the sugar, and the fat. They know how to light up that bit of my brain.”

One study found that foods high in fat and sugar—like many ultra-processed foods—can trigger a sense of reward and a dopamine response in the brain, making them harder to put down.

3. Low-fat yogurt

While the U.S. Dietary Guidelines recommend that Americans include low-fat dairy in their diets, Spector avoids low- or non-fat yogurt—and reaches for full-fat yogurt instead. Part of it is personal preference—he says he enjoys full-fat yogurt more—but it is also for health reasons.

“They’ve just substituted fat with cheaper starch from corn and added all sorts of flavorings and glues to make it feel like it’s still got that milk fat in it,” Spector says.

Additives aside, the processing of low-fat yogurt can also sometimes degrade the quality of the yogurt, he says, removing beneficial fat-soluble vitamins from the yogurt. 

One study stated that fat-soluble vitamins like A and D are removed along with the fat during processing, but they are often added back in to restore the nutritional value—however, since those vitamins are fat-soluble, the body may have more difficulty absorbing them in the absence of fat.

4. Foods labeled ‘low-calorie, high-protein’

Whenever Spector sees a food that is advertised as “low-calorie, high-protein,” it immediately raises red flags. That includes foods like protein bars, powders, and other products infused with protein—which nowadays can include everything from cereals to ice cream.

“That just sends me a red alert that this product has been highly tampered with,” Spector says.

He explains that it’s cheap for companies to add protein to their products—even as they mark up the prices—as they play into the trend of people looking to eat high-protein, low-calorie diets.

Spector’s favorite sweet treat

Despite Spector’s frustration with the pervasiveness of ultra-processed foods in the American diet, he admits that there are some he’s happy to eat. His favorite is Lindt dark chocolate, which Spector considers ultra-processed because of the additive soy lecithin.

Many chocolate brands add the emulsifier soy lecithin, which gives it that velvety texture while binding the chocolate together. Soy lecithin is generally considered a safe additive. One study indicates it could have health benefits like lowering bad cholesterol, but there are concerns about the safety of genetically modified food and the process by which soy lecithin is extracted uses chemical solvents like hexane.

It’s hard to find a chocolate without soy lecithin, he says, “but overall that is a healthy product.”

Dark chocolate does have numerous benefits, as it is rich in flavonols, and important minerals, including iron, magnesium, zinc, copper and phosphorus which support immunity, bone health, and sleep quality.
And in a 2022 study, dark chocolate was found to boost mood due to the polyphenolic compounds in dark chocolate.

For more on nutrition:

• Top nutrition expert shares the No. 1 mistake he sees in American diets
• Just one simple dietary change could help you fight back against cancer and heart disease
• People are adding salt to their water in hopes of helping their hydration and digestion. Are the health benefits real?
• 4 best supplements for an energy boost, according to experts

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com