Over the last few years, we have built a national network of over 700,000 advocates for small towns and rural communities through digital campaigns to protect the Postal Service, defend Medicaid and Social Security, and pass important rural economic development programs such as the RECOMPETE grants included in the CHIPS and Science Act. We built this network together because we believe rural Americans deserve a seat at the table. And we believe that when we have that seat, we will change the direction of this country.

Here’s the demographic reality that should keep every political strategist up at night: By the year 2040, 70 percent of Americans will live in just 15 states. That means the remaining 30 percent of the population, living in 35 disproportionately rural states, will have an outsized opportunity to shape the future of American politics. This is especially true in the Senate, where every state from Wyoming to California gets the same two votes. Rural Americans are not a distraction. We are the future of our democracy.

And yet, rural Democrats are almost always an afterthought in American politics. That’s a strategic disaster when you consider that 19 states have more exurban and rural Democrats than urban and suburban Democrats. Read that again: In nearly two out of every five states, the Democratic base is predominantly rural. Ignoring those voters is just bad math.

Percentage of Democrats Who Live in Rural/Exurban Areas

President Barack Obama received 42 percent of the national rural vote in 2008, and that remains the high-water mark for Democrats in rural America. Since then, the Democratic presidential vote share in non-metro counties has fallen significantly. In 2016, the bottom fell out, and we have barely moved the needle since.

But something is changing. Right now, Democrats have the biggest and best opportunity to engage rural voters that I have seen in nearly two decades.

The cost, chaos, and corruption voters see in Washington are making millions of rural Americans rethink how we will vote in the future. According to the most recent NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll from March 2026, roughly 60 percent of Americans say the country is on the wrong track. That’s not just a big-city phenomenon. Even in rural America, where Donald Trump has long enjoyed his strongest support, the numbers have shifted dramatically. Half of rural voters now say the country is headed in the wrong direction, a sharp increase from last year.

Here’s the number that should make every Democrat pay attention: At the end of Biden’s presidency in mid-2024, just 29 percent of rural voters chose the Democratic candidate on a generic congressional ballot. Today, that number has jumped 10 points. The most recent Marist poll from early March showed 39 percent of rural voters favoring the Democrat on the generic ballot. And small-town voters are even more encouraging, coming in at 45 percent.

Meanwhile, Trump’s approval rating in rural America has dropped from 59 percent in February 2025 to 51 percent in March 2026. That is an eight-point slide in his strongest territory in only one month.

But the biggest movement is happening among the working people who were supposed to be Trump’s base. Among Americans without a college degree, Trump’s job approval has cratered from 49 percent in February 2025 to just 39 percent in March 2026. That’s a 10-point drop. Compare that to college graduates, whose opinion of Trump has moved just one point over the same period.

Rural voters have been hit hard by the economic transitions of recent years. Their communities were devastated by automation and the hollowing out of manufacturing, and now most of us are terrified of AI and what it means for the jobs that remain. We were promised an economic revival. What we got was chaos, rising costs, and a government more interested in corrupt profit than problem-solving.

But rural Americans have been terrified to speak out for the last two decades. The social cost was just too high: You risked alienating your neighbors, your customers, and your congregation. But right now, we are seeing a revival of the rural base that I have never witnessed in my career.

Rural Americans are fed up, and we are starting to speak up and show up.

I have heard from hundreds of rural leaders who are seeing dozens of people at local No Kings rallies and immigrant support trainings in tiny towns that have never seen people turn out to progressive functions.

Last year in Virginia, with the help of Rural Ground Game, Democrats fielded candidates in all 100 seats for the House of Delegates — the first time that’s happened in decades. And turnout for the 2025 Virginia Governor’s race was higher than in the 2018 blue wave midterms. This year, Democrats in North Carolina and Texas have candidates running in every single state legislative race. Idaho will have candidates in every legislative district, too. In all of those races, rural voters will be hearing directly from Democratic candidates, some in places where that hasn’t happened in a long time.

Last summer, I went to the No Kings rally in my hometown of Brookings, South Dakota, and 300 people showed up. This is a town that struggles to get a handful of people to show up to a county Democrats meeting. It’s clear something has fundamentally shifted.

The window is open, and now is our best shot to build a coalition that delivers concrete wins for rural Americans.

So we need to empower the rural base to reach out to their friends, family, and neighbors, because we are our best messengers. An Iowa farmer talking to his neighbor about Medicaid cuts is a thousand times more persuasive than any ad buy or cable news appearance. And a small business owner in Montana explaining how tariff chaos is crushing her bottom line carries more weight than any Beltway policy paper.

But Democrats must show they’re a solid alternative by focusing on concrete solutions that will bring down the cost of living in small towns and rural communities. Rural voters want a higher quality of life with a lower cost of living. That’s especially true for Americans who entered the workforce straight out of high school and are now watching their paychecks stretch thinner every month. They don’t want rhetoric. They want results: Lower prescription drug costs. Affordable broadband. Good-paying jobs that don’t require moving to a city. A post office that still delivers its mail.

The data is clear. The momentum is real. The question is whether Democrats will seize this moment by investing in rural voters or let them slip away. Rural America is ready. The window is open. But it will not stay open forever.

If you were a small-town mayor trying to keep your ambulance service alive or a nonprofit director patching together money for a water line, Rural.gov was one of the few federal websites that felt built for you.

At RuralOrganizing.org, we were incredibly proud of Rural.gov. We spent several months advocating for the White House to build it, and it worked.

Under the Biden administration, Rural.gov gave small-town leaders a single place to find funding opportunities, technical assistance, and programs for residents, families, homeowners, seniors, veterans, small businesses, and agricultural producers. It wasn’t perfect, but it was a solid starting point for rural communities that often didn’t have the staff and experience to compete for federal funding.

Then, when Elon Musk brought his chainsaw to Washington, it vanished. The site went back up for a few months after elected officials complained to the Trump administration, but it was deleted again in February.

What DOGE Did to Rural Communities

By deleting the site, the Trump administration raised the cost of doing basic community work, created chaos for local leaders who already wear five hats, and tilted the playing field even further toward big players who can afford lobbyists, consultants, and inside connections.

But deleting Rural.gov was just the beginning of devastating cuts from Elon Musk, now hurting Rural America. The USDA Rural Development agency has long been a critical lifeline for rural communities. Because rural areas can’t rely on private investment or philanthropy the way cities can, USDA Rural Development is often the only partner available to help local governments and small businesses get off the ground. Now, after DOGE pushed out hundreds of employees, the remaining staff is stretched thin, raising serious concerns about whether the agency can continue delivering the funding and hands-on support that rural communities depend on.

We rural Americans already know how hard it is to cobble together funds from different federal agencies, each with its own requirements, to continue vital services or boost the local economy. A badly needed water utility upgrade might involve USDA, EPA, and state revolving funds. A downtown revitalization effort might require the Commerce, Transportation, Treasury, and Interior departments. A struggling rural hospital might need HHS, USDA, and Veterans Affairs. And a small town trying to keep families from leaving has to stitch it all together with limited staff and limited time.

Introducing RuralFunding.org

That’s why we built RuralFunding.org. It’s designed to fill the gap left by Rural.gov and to do something the federal government keeps failing to do: make the rural federal funding landscape actually navigable.

RuralFunding.org is built around four goals: increasing transparency in federal funding, improving access to opportunity information, highlighting where money is actually flowing, and giving rural leaders better data to work with.

How It Works

RuralFunding.org pulls together multiple federal data sources that have never been connected in one place for rural communities:

• Grants.gov: daily updates on what funding might be available, using three search strategies so you don’t miss a deadline because a listing was buried.

• USASpending.gov: actual awards by county and program, not just what’s posted.

• Census Bureau ACS Data: county-level data on poverty, broadband access, income, and unemployment so you understand what your community is up against.

• USDA Rural-Urban Continuum Codes: a consistent classification system so rural places can be compared to each other, not distorted by metro county data.

• Google News Alerts: a curated list of rural programs and related news coverage so you can track what’s changing.

• A Brookings analysis of the 2019 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance to show what laws and cabinets direct rural funding in areas such as health care, workforce development, and housing.

We also built relevance scoring to make it even easier to vet potential funding opportunities. When you select a county, each grant receives a score based on how well it targets your rural tier and how closely county conditions (like high poverty, low broadband, or high unemployment) match the program’s focus.

These scores are estimates since final eligibility always belongs to the issuing agency. But they’re enough to help rural leaders ask smarter questions and move faster with fewer resources.

The Bigger Picture

RuralFunding.org grew out of years of advocacy work at Rural Progress, a national nonpartisan nonprofit started by the founders of RuralOrganizing.org, working to ensure rural communities have the resources, voice, and federal partnership they need to thrive. Our team at Rural Progress and RuralOrganizing.org has helped secure and influence billions of dollars in federal investment for rural communities, and we’re leveraging that experience to make sure local leaders can better tap into this funding.

We know rural voters have long had reason to doubt the institutions that claim to serve them. Our polling from 2020 found that 64% of rural battleground voters believed USDA programs benefited large corporations and mega farms over small farms and small towns. That distrust didn’t come from nowhere, and it won’t get better until the federal government starts prioritizing everyday rural Americans over the ultra-wealthy.

What rural America actually needs is a coordinating body in Washington with real authority and a mandate that reaches beyond USDA — something like a National Office of Rural Prosperity with White House-level leadership. USDA matters, but it can’t be the only rural strategy when the problems span housing, education, healthcare, small-business development, and job creation across the entire federal government.

RuralFunding.org is just a start. If Washington keeps making it harder to navigate federal resources, we’ll keep building tools that make it harder for Washington to hide the ball. Our ultimate goal is to reform the federal system so it truly benefits rural communities, not just the connected few who already know how to work it.

Because Rural America deserves more than scraps and slogans. It deserves a federal government that shows up, listens, and follows through.

This has been a horrible few weeks, but we may finally be turning a corner.

Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino is leaving Minneapolis as President Trump reshuffles his immigration enforcement strategy amid intense political backlash after the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

Trump has dispatched longtime border official Tom Homan to Minnesota to oversee ICE operations on the ground, and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott is also expected to join him. To be clear, Homan is still a hard-core anti-immigrant leader. Senator Chris Murphy told TNR’s Greg Sargent, “Tom Homan is not some avatar of restraint. He’s been lying through his teeth about what ICE has been doing since he was put on the job. He’s a fundamentally corrupt leader and somebody who has been cheerleading the brutality from the start.” In fact, Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein obtained a Border Patrol memo that their mission in Minneapolis is “steady state and expected to continue as planned.”

For many of us, watching the federal government’s response to the DHS murders in Minneapolis wasn’t just upsetting; it was traumatizing. Not because we didn’t expect violence, as we saw from the Trump administration, but because we watched it happen in public and then watched officials tell us not to believe what we could see with our own eyes.

State-sponsored political violence does something to us as Americans, especially when the message from those in charge is: “This was justified, this could happen again, and no one will be held accountable.”

If you’ve felt on edge these last few weeks, that’s a normal human response to what we’re seeing in our country. Because of the work of fearless legal observers, we all became witnesses to the horrific murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. And we all know that Trump and his thugs lied about both.

The violence that we’re seeing from DHS in Minneapolis and other cities is meant to generate fear far beyond the immediate victims and spread anxiety through families, communities, and entire populations, including people who experience events only through images, video, and media coverage.

But we all know that strong community support is the best way to counter the political violence we’re witnessing from DHS, and by now we’ve all seen people step up to protect their neighbors and communities — not just in Minneapolis, but in cities, small towns, and rural towns across the country.

In moments like this, the best thing we can do is focus on the factors within our control, such as building small, grounded networks of people who share our values and are willing to support one another.

Building a strong, local community helps us stay steady when things feel uncertain and overwhelming. They create space for trust, care, and honest conversation, and they remind us that we don’t have to face difficult times alone.

We saw over the last few weeks in Minneapolis that when small groups of deeply connected community members band together, they can still turn back even the most violent and extreme MAGA Republicans. And each day we are growing stronger.

Day by day, more Americans, even many who stood by President Trump over the last decade, are recognizing and rejecting the unconstitutional atrocities committed by DHS and ICE.

Political scientists call incidents like this focusing events: highly visible moments that collapse abstract policy debates into concrete moral judgments.

While public resentment toward DHS has been growing since Kristi Noem first took over the agency, the killing of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis marked a turning point. The DHS violence in Minneapolis forced American voters to evaluate Stephen Miller’s immigration enforcement surges not as a Washington, DC, policy debate, but as a matter of state violence, accountability, and proportionality.

Polling from G. Elliott Morris showed that ICE’s approval rating collapsed from roughly +16 in early 2025 to around -14 by late 2025, and remains deeply negative entering 2026.

Over the past year, viral videos of masked ICE agents detaining legal residents and U.S. citizens, arresting people in public spaces, and allegations of abuse in detention centers have circulated widely.

YouGov/The Economist found a 20-point margin of voters who believed the Renee Good shooting was unjustified; Quinnipiac and CNN/SSRS report similar majorities rejecting ICE’s conduct.

Recent surveys show that only 20-30 percent of voters approve of how ICE is enforcing Trump’s immigration agenda.

The administration bet that ICE’s highly aggressive, highly visible tactics would project strength. Instead, daily arrests by masked agents in high-profile raids in cities like Los Angeles and Chicago produced a dramatic backlash with the vast majority of American voters.

Having watched the Trump administration’s tactics for years, I’m sure they never expected this response, especially in small towns and rural communities.

One of the earliest protests happened last April in Tom Homan’s hometown of Sackets Harbor in upstate New York after ICE kidnapped three local students and their mother. Over 1,000 people showed up to demand their release.

In Brookings, South Dakota, activists convinced local law enforcement to avoid collaboration with ICE raids, much to the annoyance of Noem’s successor.

It’s clear now more than ever before that majorities disapprove of what they’re seeing, and a majority of Americans now say ICE enforcement makes communities less safe, not safer. Only about a third believe the agency is improving public safety.

Even Joe Rogan — who endorsed Trump in 2024 after a long, high-profile interview — publicly criticized ICE tactics on his podcast, comparing them to the “Gestapo.” He made the remarks during an episode featuring Senator Rand Paul’s reacttions to ICE’s mass deportation strategy.

Rogan also condemned the killing of Renee Good, calling it “very ugly” and “horrific” to watch. While Trump and DHS officials claimed the shooting was self-defense, Rogan pointed to videos and eyewitness accounts that disproved that narrative.

He isn’t alone. Other podcasters who helped Trump reach young, conservative-leaning voters in rural communities, like Andrew Schulz and Theo Von, have also criticized or distanced themselves from the administration’s immigration tactics.

After Alex Pretti’s murder, the intense blowback has spread even further — from sports figures to non-political subreddits to celebrities. This matters because these figures are not operating inside Democratic information ecosystems. They are responding to what they and their audiences can see.

Even major country artists like Zach Bryan have taken a stand with anti-ICE lyrics in his song “Bad News,” released earlier this month.

Bryan, a former Navy veteran and one of country music’s biggest stars, framed the song as a critique of national division, law enforcement abuses, and ICE raids. Trump officials, including Noem, attacked him for it.

But the opposition from American voters isn’t just limited to DHS and ICE. Support for Trump’s broader deportation agenda has also dropped sharply, with net approval falling nearly 30 points between spring and summer 2025.

The share of Americans who hold strongly unfavorable views of ICE doubled over the past year, from 19 percent to 40 percent. A January 2026 YouGov poll finds 51 percent of Americans say ICE uses too much force; only 10 percent want more.

Perhaps most telling: protesters against ICE are now more popular than the agency itself.

One data point would have been unthinkable even just a year ago: pluralities of Americans, registered voters, and independents now say ICE should be abolished.

Support for abolishing ICE surged from a 35-point deficit in January 2025 to just an 8-point gap today. As of January 2026, 42 percent of Americans support abolishing the agency — the highest level ever recorded — and opposition has narrowed to its smallest margin on record.

So what do those of us in small towns and rural communities do to win over voters who are starting to rethink their support for MAGA Republicans, especially as we head into the midterms?

We must connect the political violence from DHS to the affordability crisis we’re seeing across our communities.

David Shor tested a dozen public statements from a diverse set of Democratic elected officials on the murder of Renee Good. His experiments showed that a recent statement from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez consistently performed best among voters.

“I want everybody to understand — the cuts to your health care are what’s paying for ICE to be doing this,” she said. “Understand how these dots connect. You get screwed over to pay a bunch of thugs in the street that are shooting mothers in the face.”

In 2024, Trump ran on going after the “worst of the worst.” It’s a potent talking point, especially among rural audiences, but it was never their true intention. Despite claims of targeting violent criminals, data show the vast majority of those detained have no criminal record, while communities of color are disproportionately targeted through aggressive raids, racial profiling, and constitutionally dubious operations.

Those of us who studied policy deeply knew the true intent of Trump’s immigration policy was far broader. Their plans were spelled out in Project 2025, while Miller, one of its chief architects, vowed his mass deportation scheme would be “greater than any national infrastructure project we’ve done to date.”

Miller is overseeing a highly orchestrated Project 2025 immigration campaign on behalf of the Trump administration. The Atlantic recently reported that Miller holds a daily meeting at the White House where he “demands progress reports on his mass-deportation campaign and issues orders to the full alphabet soup of federal enforcement agencies, including the FBI, CBP, ICE, HHS, and the DOD.”

The average American didn’t have the time, energy, or bandwidth to read through Project 2025 — and, during the 2024 campaign, as Parker Molloy documented, too many in the media bought into the lie that it wasn’t actually Trump’s agenda. It was. There were hundreds of pages, written in bureaucratic language and designed for insiders, not the public. Now, the American public is watching the plans in Project 2025 come to life; they don’t like what they’re seeing, and the shift isn’t confined to right-leaning podcasters.

Bovino’s firing proves that organizing still matters. It’s an important win for everyone who believes in the promise of America. But we also know that as long as Miller is operating out of the White House, the Trump administration intends to double down on the mass removal of immigrants and their families from the United States.

That’s why those of us at RuralOrganizing are committed to standing with our immigrant family members, neighbors, and friends. We know our fight is just beginning, and we draw hope from the fact that every day our movement grows stronger while the MAGA movement continues to crumble under its own weight.

One way you may be able to get involved is through our new initiative, the Rural Defenders Union, a cohort of rural leaders who will get training, meet other rural leaders from across the country, and receive a stipend for local organizing experiments. We’re looking for immigrants, family members of immigrants, friends, and allies to be part of the program.

To apply, fill out this form, and please share it with your allies and friends. We’re looking for people in rural places and small towns (less than 50,000), and we especially want to support people who might not be part of a formal organization but are looking to build with their community. The application should take about 30 min, so please join us!

Overview

RuralOrganizing is tracking a wide, strategically connected set of 2026 House, Senate, and Gubernatorial races in which rural and exurban voters are decisive to the outcome. Across these contests, the dominant throughline is material accountability, including health care cuts, rising insurance premiums, rural hospital closures, water and land use conflicts, ag consolidation, USPS service, and federally funded infrastructure. The memo organizes races by state to highlight where multiple competitive contests stack on the same ballot, creating the greatest leverage for organizing investments. States like Michigan, Pennsylvania, California, New York, Texas, and Arizona stand out because statewide and House races overlap directly with visible service delivery failures, especially around hospital access and affordability of care.

At the district level, a core set of GOP-held House battlegrounds, many of them majority rural or heavily exurban, present clear accountability opportunities even in seats rated Lean or Likely Republican. These districts consistently share three characteristics: high rurality, documented rural hospital vulnerability or recent service loss, and media markets where local consequences can be tied directly to federal votes. Health care access serves as the most reliable entry point for persuasion, reinforced by water scarcity, land-use conflicts, school funding pressures, and postal reliability. States with stacked races offer the chance for compounding impact across offices, while single-race states remain critical for margin control and long-term rural infrastructure building.

As we look to 2026, it’s worth reflecting on how the 2025 elections played out. Democrats overperformed by 14% in the presidential margin in special elections last year. (Based on data compiled by The Downballot, there are currently 47 House GOP districts where the 2024 presidential margin was under 14%.)

One of the premier overperformances, the one that really caused consternation for GOP House leaders, was in TN-07 (a very gerrymandered district that Trump won by 22%.) On December 2, Aftyn Behn lost the race by 9% - overperforming by 13% in a race where turnout essentially matched 2022.

Turnout in Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races, where Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherill won by 15%, exceeded the 2018 blue wave turnout in midterms when they last had statewide races. In California, turnout for Proposition 50, the redistricting ballot measure to counter Texas’ redistricting, matched that of 2022 - and won in a blowout: 64%-36%.

This memo organizes every race on our radar by state, starting with those that present the highest leverage due to multiple competitive contests on the same ballot.

Priority House Battleground Districts

Listed in alphabetical order. All are GOP-held seats with high rural or exurban composition and clear accountability pathways around health care, services, land use, and federal investment.

AZ-02 — Eli Crane

Media Markets: Phoenix; Flagstaff–Prescott; Yuma–El Centro

Arizona’s 2nd District is 93% rural/exurban, making it one of the most rural seats in the country. The district includes multiple rural hospitals identified as financially at risk, reinforcing long-standing concerns about emergency access, staffing shortages, and travel distance for care. Combined with water scarcity, federal land management disputes, and veterans’ health needs, hospital vulnerability makes health care cuts and insurance cost increases especially visible and politically salient even in a Likely Republican seat.

AZ-06 — Juan Ciscomani

Media Markets: Tucson; Phoenix (spill)

Arizona’s 6th District is 54% rural/exurban and rated Even, Toss Up. While the district is not home to many standalone rural hospitals, it depends heavily on regional rural health systems under financial strain, particularly in outlying communities. Water scarcity, rapid development, and access to care heighten sensitivity to federal budget decisions that could further destabilize nearby hospitals.

CA-22 — David Valadao

Media Markets: Bakersfield; Fresno–Visalia

California’s 22nd District is 50% rural/exurban and centered in the Central Valley, where hospital access is already limited and safety-net facilities operate on thin margins. Agricultural labor patterns, Medi-Cal dependence, and provider shortages make the region acutely vulnerable to rural hospital closures, tying federal health policy directly to local outcomes.

CA-40 — Young Kim/Ken Calvert

Media Markets: Los Angeles; San Diego (spil

California’s 40th District is 34% rural/exurban and rated R+1, Lean Republican. Rural and exurban pockets rely on a small number of regional hospitals and clinics, facing staffing and reimbursement challenges. Hospital vulnerability compounds wildfire recovery needs and insurance cost pressures in outlying communities, often decisive in close-margin elections.

IA-01 — Mariannette Miller-Meeks

Media Markets: Cedar Rapids–Waterloo–Iowa City–Dubuque; Quad Cities

Iowa’s 1st District is 73% rural/exurban and rated R+4 but a Toss Up. The district includes communities that have already experienced rural hospital closures or service reductions, resulting in longer travel times and limited emergency care. Combined with heavy reliance on ACA and water quality concerns, hospital instability creates a direct accountability line from congressional votes to lived consequences.

IA-02 — Open (Ashley Hinson running for Senate)

Media Markets: Cedar Rapids–Waterloo–Iowa City–Dubuque; Sioux City (spill)

Iowa’s 2nd District is 74% rural/exurban and faces accelerating rural hospital closures and financial distress across its health system. Communities have seen maternity wards close and emergency services consolidated, making health care affordability and Medicaid-related policy decisions highly salient despite the district’s Safe Republican rating.

IA-03 — Zach Nunn

Media Markets: Des Moines–Ames; Omaha (spill)

Iowa’s 3rd District is 50% rural/exurban and rated R+2, Lean Republican. Rural areas rely on regional hospitals serving multiple counties with narrow margins, amplifying concerns about federal policies that raise premiums or reduce reimbursement. Hospital vulnerability intersects with farm economy stress and insurance affordability.

MI-04 — Bill Huizenga

Media Markets: Grand Rapids–Kalamazoo–Battle Creek; Traverse City–Cadillac

Michigan’s 4th District is 71% rural/exurban and includes rural hospitals identified as financially vulnerable or operating with sustained negative margins. Agricultural consolidation, water quality issues, and long travel distances for care heighten the political impact of hospital instability, even in a Likely Republican seat.

MI-07 — Tom Barrett

Media Markets: Lansing; Detroit (spill); Grand Rapids (spill)

Michigan’s 7th District is 68% rural/exurban and rated Even, Toss Up. Rural hospitals and clinics face persistent staffing shortages and financial pressure, making any federal action that raises insurance costs or accelerates closures immediately tangible. Hospital access, water contamination, and land-use conflicts converge in a true swing environment.

NY-17 — Mike Lawler

Media Markets: New York City; Albany–Schenectady–Tro

New York’s 17th District is 49% rural/exurban, where upstate hospital closures and service consolidations have reshaped care access. Rural communities closely track how state and federal policy choices affect whether local hospitals survive, giving health care accountability cross-party traction.

PA-07 — Ryan Mackenzie

Media Markets: Philadelphia; Allentown–Bethlehem–Easton

Pennsylvania’s 7th District is 38% rural/exurban and rated R+1, Toss Up. While less rural overall, its rural communities depend on a shrinking number of regional hospitals, making access to emergency and specialty care a persistent concern that amplifies accountability messaging.

PA-08 — Rob Bresnahan

Media Markets: Scranton–Wilkes-Barre–Hazleton

Pennsylvania’s 8th District is 70% rural/exurban and shaped by hospital access challenges and limited addiction treatment capacity. Financial stress on rural hospitals increases travel distances and delays care, reinforcing health care as a dominant issue even in a Lean Republican district.

PA-10 — Scott Perry

Media Markets: Harrisburg–Lancaster–Lebanon–York

Pennsylvania’s 10th District is 68% rural/exurban and rated R+3, Toss Up. Rural hospitals and clinics operate under pressure from staffing shortages and reimbursement constraints, while USPS reliability and land-use conflicts add to service delivery anxiety. Health care instability sharpens voter scrutiny of federal budget decisions.

NOTE: Virginia’s Congressional districts are likely to change. The Virginia House and Senate are working on new maps that will be subject to a statewide vote.

VA-01 — Rob Wittman

Media Markets: Richmond–Petersburg; Norfolk–Portsmouth–Newport News

Virginia’s 1st District is 58% rural/exurban and includes communities that rely on a limited number of rural hospitals and outpatient facilities. Aging populations, military families, and long travel distances for care make hospital stability a central political concern despite the district’s Republican lean.

VA-02 — Jen Kiggans

Media Markets: Norfolk–Portsmouth–Newport News; Richmond (spill)

Virginia’s 2nd District is 35% rural/exurban and includes at least one rural hospital identified as financially at risk, underscoring access challenges in coastal and inland rural communities. Hospital vulnerability, insurance costs, and infrastructure needs sharpen accountability dynamics in this Lean Republican seat.

State-wide and Federal Races On Our Rural Radar

Across these states, health care accountability—premium hikes, hospital closures, insurance access—serves as the most consistent entry point into rural persuasion, reinforced by land, water, education, USPS, and federal investment fights. States with stacked races offer the greatest opportunity for compounding organizing impact, while single-race states remain essential for margin control and long-term rural infrastructure. (There will also be state legislative races in these states (except Virginia), and we will monitor developments in those contests.)

Michigan (6 Races)

Michigan is one of the highest-leverage rural states in the country. Senate, Governor, and multiple House races intersect with rural hospital closures, insurance affordability, water contamination, land-use fights, and ag consolidation, putting every level of the ballot in play.

• U.S. Senate — OPEN

• Governor — OPEN

• U.S. House

  • MI-03 — Likely D

  • MI-08 — Lean D

  • MI-07 — R Toss Up

  • MI-10 — OPEN | Lean R

  • MI-04 — Likely R

New York (6 Races)

New York has no statewide races, but it represents a massive rural and exurban House battlefield. Upstate hospital closures, education funding pressures, renewable siting conflicts, and USPS reliability shape voter attitudes across these districts.

• U.S. House

  • NY-18 — Likely D

  • NY-22 — Likely D

  • NY-03 — Lean D

  • NY-19 — Lean D

  • NY-04 — D Toss Up

  • NY-17 — Lean R

California (6 Races)

California’s Central Valley and inland districts are places where rural issues are decisive. Health care access, water scarcity, ag consolidation, and land-use conflicts involving solar, warehouses, and data centers drive trust and turnout.

• U.S. House

  • CA-21 — Likely D

  • CA-25 — Likely D

  • CA-47 — Likely D

  • CA-45 — Lean D

  • CA-13 — D Toss Up

  • CA-22 — R Toss Up

  • CA-48 — R Toss Up

Pennsylvania (5 Races)

Pennsylvania remains a classic rural–metro balance state with multiple persuasion zones. Hospital access, addiction treatment, legacy environmental damage, and warehouse and data-center sprawl all intersect with competitive House races.

• U.S. House

  • PA-17 — Likely D

  • PA-07 — R Toss Up

  • PA-10 — R Toss Up

  • PA-08 — Lean R

  • PA-01 — Likely R

Texas (5 Races)

Texas is a scale state where rural margins matter even when statewide wins are difficult. Non-expansion Medicaid, rural hospital closures, water stress, data-center growth, and eminent-domain land fights create ongoing accountability pressure.

• U.S. Senate

  • TX — John Cornyn (R incumbent)

• U.S. House

  • TX-28 — Lean D

  • TX-34 — Lean R

  • TX-15 — Likely R

  • TX-35 — OPEN | Likely R

Arizona (4 Races)

Arizona is defined by water scarcity and rapid growth pressures that make land use and health care existential issues. Data centers, groundwater depletion, and rural and tribal health access are central to voter decision-making.

• Governor

  • AZ — Katie Hobbs (D incumbent)

• U.S. House

  • AZ-01 — OPEN | R Toss Up

  • AZ-06 — R Toss Up

  • AZ-02 — Likely R

Ohio (4 Races)

Ohio combines high-profile statewide races with competitive House districts where rural service delivery matters. Hospital closures, Medicaid politics, school funding fights, and data-center expansion shape persuasion opportunities.

• U.S. Senate

  • OH — Jon Husted (expected GOP nominee)

• Governor

  • OH — OPEN

• U.S. House

  • OH-13 — Lean D

  • OH-01 — D Toss Up

  • OH-09 — Lean R

Wisconsin (3 Races)

Wisconsin is a margin state where rural turnout and persuasion routinely decide statewide outcomes. Hospital staffing shortages, water contamination, and education funding gaps anchor rural accountability narratives.

• Governor

  • WI — OPEN

• U.S. House

  • WI-03 — R Toss Up

  • WI-01 — Likely R

Georgia (2 Races)

Georgia’s rural politics are shaped by hospital closures, non-expansion Medicaid, and land-use change tied to warehouses and data centers. These issues cut across race and geography and influence both statewide races.

• U.S. Senate

  • GA — Jon Ossoff (D incumbent)

• Governor

  • GA — OPEN

North Carolina (3 Races)

North Carolina features a competitive Senate race alongside rural House districts where health care access and school funding are top concerns. Eastern and western rural regions remain decisive for statewide outcomes.

• U.S. Senate

  • NC — OPEN

• U.S. House

  • NC-01 — Lean R

  • NC-11 — Likely R

Nevada (4 Races)

Nevada’s rural politics are driven by water allocation, federal land management, and limited health care access. Small rural margins can swing statewide races, making service delivery central.

• Governor

  • NV — Joe Lombardo (R incumbent)

• U.S. House

  • NV-01 — Likely D

  • NV-04 — Likely D

  • NV-03 — Lean D

Iowa (3 Races)

Iowa is defined by accelerating hospital closures, water pollution, and school consolidation. Even in a challenging partisan environment, accountability around health care and clean water remains potent.

• U.S. Senate — OPEN

• Governor — OPEN

• U.S. House

  • IA-01 — R Toss Up

  • IA-03 — Lean R

  • IA-02 — OPEN | Likely R

Maine (3 Races)

Maine is a heavily rural state where health care access, aging infrastructure, and USPS reliability carry outsized weight. Split-ticket voting remains possible in the right conditions.

• Governor

  • OPEN

• U.S. Senate

  • ME — Susan Collins (R incumbent)

• U.S. House

  • ME-02 — OPEN | Likely R

New Hampshire (3 Races)

New Hampshire’s small size and rural composition make local service delivery highly visible. Health care access, education funding, and property tax pressures shape statewide dynamics.

• Governor

  • NH — Kelly Ayotte (likely GOP nominee)

• U.S. Senate

  • NH-01 — OPEN | Likely D

  • NH-02 — Likely D

Colorado (2 Races)

Colorado’s competitive House districts include large rural and exurban areas affected by water scarcity, energy development, and health care access. These races offer targeted persuasion opportunities.

• U.S. House

  • CO-08 — R Toss Up

  • CO-03 — Likely R

Virginia (3 Races)

Virginia’s rural and military-connected communities face health care access challenges, school funding gaps, and USPS reliability issues that shape competitive House races.

• U.S. House

  • VA-07 — Lean D

  • VA-02 — R Toss Up

  • VA-01 — Lean R

Washington (2 Races)

Washington’s rural districts are shaped by land-use conflicts, water management, and access to services across large geographies. These issues cut across partisan lines in competitive seats.

• U.S. House

  • WA-08 — Likely D

  • WA-03 — D Toss Up

Kansas (1 Race)

Kansas’s open governor’s race occurs amid ongoing rural health care access challenges, school funding debates, and water depletion concerns that drive statewide accountability.

• Governor

  • KS — OPEN

Minnesota (1 Race)

Minnesota’s targeted House race includes rural and exurban communities where hospital access, broadband, and education funding remain salient.

• U.S. House

  • MN-02 — OPEN | Likely D

Montana (1 Race)

Montana’s at-large House race is shaped by land access, water scarcity, and health care availability across vast rural areas.

• U.S. House

  • MT-01 — Likely R

Alaska (1 Race)

Alaska’s at-large race reflects extreme rural service delivery challenges, including health care access, infrastructure, and mail service across remote communities.

• U.S. House

  • AK-AL — Likely R

Florida (2 Races)

Florida’s targeted House districts include rural and exurban areas where insurance costs, hospital access, and disaster resilience influence voter behavior.

• U.S. House

  • FL-23 — Lean D

  • FL-13 — Likely R

Illinois (1 Race)

Illinois’s targeted House race includes rural regions facing hospital closures, aging infrastructure, and school funding pressures.

• U.S. House

  • IL-17 — Likely D

Indiana (1 Race)

Indiana’s targeted House race reflects rural concerns around hospital closures, Medicaid policy, and education funding.

• U.S. House

  • IN-01 — Likely D

Nebraska (1 Race)

Nebraska’s competitive House race includes rural communities affected by hospital access challenges, ag consolidation, and broadband gaps.

• U.S. House

  • NE-02 — OPEN | Lean D

New Mexico (1 Race)

New Mexico’s targeted House race is shaped by water scarcity, rural and tribal health care access, and federal land management.

• U.S. House

  • NM-02 — D Toss Up

Oregon (1 Race)

Oregon’s competitive House race includes rural regions where health care access, wildfire recovery, and land-use conflicts shape voter trust.

• U.S. House

  • OR-05 — Likely D

Across rural America and beyond, people are making it clear: rural services should not be bargaining chips for political games.

This week, our petition demanding that Donald Trump keep his chaos out of the U.S. Postal Service reached 80,000 signatures.

Earlier this fall, nearly 90,000 people signed our petition calling on the U.S. Department of Agriculture to stop playing politics with food assistance and use the SNAP contingency fund to keep families fed during the government shutdown.

And before the budget bill was passed, we organized rural people across five states in key battleground towns– California, Washington, Iowa, Montana, and Pennsylvania – and collected over 150 rural Medicaid impact stories including farmers, veterans, and rural hospital leaders; placed over 60 LTEs and Op-Eds, and distributed 20,000 Medicaid yard signs -- in addition to supporting and organizing protests at Congressional offices, rural hospitals, and sending rural people to testify before Congress.

For those of us in rural America, these aren’t abstract policy debates. These are very real fights over whether people get their mail, their medicine, and their food.

The U.S. Postal Service is one of the most trusted and beloved institutions in the country—and for good reason. Millions of people rely on it every day for medications, food deliveries, legal documents, ballots, and messages from loved ones.

This week, new reporting revealed that Amazon is considering a major change to its delivery operations that could affect 6.3 billion parcels a year, including the possibility of ending or dramatically scaling back its partnership with the U.S. Postal Service.

That single decision could have massive consequences.

Amazon currently accounts for roughly 7.5 percent of USPS revenue, or about $6 billion annually. If the company walks away and replaces the postal service with a privatized delivery network of its own, it would deal a serious financial blow to one of the most trusted public institutions in the country, while laying the groundwork for exactly what Donald Trump has long wanted: a weakened, privatized post office.

For private companies, delivering mail to rural America simply isn’t profitable. That means higher costs, fewer delivery days, or no service at all for tens of millions of rural people. More than half of USPS offices are in rural areas, and nearly 90 percent of the land serviced by postal workers is rural. Privatization wouldn’t just weaken the post office—it would gut it where it’s needed most.

At the same time, another crisis is unfolding.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 imposes expanded SNAP work requirements, which took effect in December. Policy experts warn that these requirements will likely lead to coverage losses without increasing employment, while shifting more costs onto the states.

For example, Michigan estimates it will cost $75 million per year to implement the new rules, along with an additional $95 million in administrative costs starting in 2027. Advocates warn that, combined with earlier SNAP disruptions during the government shutdown, the changes could worsen food insecurity and strain both state budgets and food banks across Michigan.

But it’s not just Michigan; these attacks hit all rural communities especially hard.

Rural Americans rely on SNAP at higher rates than people in larger cities. When food assistance is delayed or cut off, there often aren’t nearby alternatives—no big grocery stores down the street, no public transportation, no safety net to fall back on.

The same is true for the post office. When public services are dismantled in the name of profit or politics, rural communities are the first to lose access and the last to be heard.

That’s why these fights are connected. Whether it’s mail delivery or food assistance, basic needs should never depend on your ZIP code or your income.

Together, these two petitions represent nearly 170,000 people demanding something fundamental and straightforward: a government that works for everyday people, not billionaires and political strongmen.

We’re continuing to build pressure, elevate rural voices, and demand that public services remain public—and fully funded.

Because hunger is not a negotiating tactic, and the post office is not for sale.

We’re grateful to everyone who has taken action—and we’re just getting started.

Subscribe now

Right now, less than one-third of the folks we’ve heard from have received their November benefits. In some states, families only saw partial payments after their governors authorized emergency payments. The Trump administration is continuing to fight against releasing food assistance to families in the courts, and Republican officials have even threatened to claw back the money governors have already released in food assistance. We’ll be following this closely until everyone gets their food assistance and will share major updates as we get them.

To everyone affected, we want to say: Stay strong, and keep showing up. It’s more important than ever that we remain engaged and refuse to back down. This administration and its Republican enablers in Congress are willing to starve Americans as leverage to cut our healthcare. To fight back for our families, we need to try everything we can: telling our stories, protesting in our communities, and taking care of our neighbors when the government refuses to. If you are fired up and want to take the next steps, fill out our survey so we can match with you with what you need.

The 52 Republican Senators and eight Senate Democrats who caved this weekend do not define the seven million of us who stood shoulder to shoulder, in rural towns and big cities alike, to say no to kings and no to the cruel games that Trump and his allies want to play with our lives. And those same lawmakers do not define the millions more of us who will keep fighting for a life we can afford.

All of us at RuralOrganizing.org are in this fight with you today and for the long haul.

Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are holding food assistance for 42 million Americans hostage to force through Donald Trump’s budget. This plan would raise healthcare premiums for millions of working families while handing out new tax cuts for billionaires.

And our work now is more important than ever. A federal judge ordered the President yesterday to make a payment by Friday to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for November. Already, in what is shocking but, unfortunately, not surprising, Trump is appealing the order.

Yesterday afternoon, Rep. Shontel Brown (OH-11), former Governor and Social Security Commissioner Martin O’Malley, RuralOrganizing.org hosted a virtual press conference featuring voices from rural America calling on the administration to use existing contingency funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

Rep. Shontel Brown’s Comments During the SNAP Press Conference

Gov. Martin O’Malley’s Comments During the SNAP Press Conference

As budget negotiations dragged on over the GOP healthcare plan—a proposal that would raise costs and slash access to care for millions, rural families were once again caught in the crossfire of Washington’s political games.

As I said on the call, feeding people when they’re hungry and healing people when they’re sick aren’t just moral obligations for individuals; they’re among the highest callings of our government. No one should go hungry or go without care simply because the cost of living has gotten out of control.

Among the speakers on the call were Anna Sudol, a 22-year-old recent college graduate from Pittston, Pennsylvania, and Ronald Mohler, a retired senior from California—both of whom rely on SNAP to survive.

“I did everything right. I worked hard, got good grades, earned a degree—and yet I still can’t afford groceries,” she said. “When I lost SNAP before, I went four months barely eating. I’m terrified to go through that again.”

After the press event, USA Today highlighted Anna’s story in this article.

“I relied on SNAP not just for food, but for the distilled water I needed to use my C-Pap machine,” said Mohler. “Without those benefits, I couldn’t afford the basics that keep me alive.”

Hearing from Anna and Ronald was an essential reminder of what’s at stake with SNAP. USDA must use the SNAP contingency fund to keep food assistance programs fully funded during the government shutdown, as is required by law and has been done in every other government shutdown in modern history.

Programs like SNAP are a win–win for rural America. Not only does SNAP help families put food on the table, but it also supports local farmers and small-town grocery stores.

This week’s elections showed that across the country, Americans are looking for fighters against the chaos Trump is inflicting on our economy, our communities, our livelihoods, and our neighbors. At Rural Organizing, that’s our fight, too.

Nearly 65,000 people signed our petition demanding that the Trump Administration stop playing politics with SNAP and ensure that critical food assistance continued during the shutdown. If you haven’t signed on yet, please do so here!

This week, more than 50,000 people across the country signed our new petition demanding that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) keep food assistance programs like SNAP fully operational during Donald Trump’s ongoing government shutdown.

The petition, launched by RuralOrganizing.org in partnership with MoveOn, calls on USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins to use the SNAP contingency fund—something that has been done during every previous shutdown—to make sure no one goes hungry.

But this time is different.

Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are holding food assistance for 42 million Americans hostage to push through a cruel budget that raises healthcare costs for working families while cutting taxes for billionaires.

As I said in our statement:

“It is shocking and despicable that Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are holding food assistance for 42 million Americans hostage to force through their budget. They’re literally denying food to pass a plan that will raise healthcare premiums for millions of working families while handing out new tax cuts for billionaires. A sadistic double whammy for millions across the country.”

For decades, during every shutdown—no matter which party was in power—the USDA has used contingency funds to protect food access. This isn’t a partisan issue; it’s basic decency. But today, that precedent is being ignored.

Democratic governors and attorneys general shouldn’t have to sue the federal government just to make sure families can put food on the table. Yet here we are.

This isn’t just political brinkmanship—it’s cruelty, especially for rural Americans, who use SNAP at higher rates than people in larger cities. Once again, Trump and Republicans—who now control the White House, the Senate, and the House—are proving they don’t care about their own rural constituents.

Our Organizing Director, Shawn Sebastian, put it plainly:

“Donald Trump is holding food for families hostage to force huge cuts to healthcare. People all over the country, particularly rural families who will be the ones disproportionately harmed by Trump’s cruel games, are speaking out for themselves and for their neighbors, by demanding USDA Secretary Rollins meet her responsibilities to the American people, follow precedent, and continue food assistance programs during the shutdown.”

The message from rural America is clear: We won’t be silent while our families are starved for political leverage.

Secretary Rollins has the power—and the legal obligation—to act now.

Join us in demanding she do her job.

Because here’s what’s happening: House Republicans passed a reconciliation bill that would gut Medicaid, slash SNAP, roll back rural hospital funding, and eliminate fire prevention programs—all to hand massive tax breaks to the wealthy.

This bill isn't just a bad piece of legislation—it's a direct attack on rural America.

The Stakes for Rural America

The Republican reconciliation bill would:

• Cut hundreds of billions from Medicaid, threatening coverage for millions and pushing rural hospitals to the brink.

• Slash SNAP benefits, taking food off the tables of low-income families, children, and seniors.

• Cut rural healthcare support, jeopardizing hospitals that serve as the only emergency rooms, labor and delivery units, and eldercare centers for entire counties.

• Eliminate forest service jobs and fire prevention programs, even as the wildfire threat grows across rural regions.

And why? To pay for a huge tax cut for the richest Americans:

• Top 1% of earners would receive an average of $50,000 in tax cuts.

• Bottom 30% of earners—including many rural families—would lose roughly $1,000 each through reduced benefits and higher out-of-pocket costs.

It’s nothing short of a wealth grab—a reverse Robin Hood bill.

Where We Fought Back

With support from SEIU, we mobilized in seven Republican-held congressional districts:

Each of these members voted for this bill—or signaled support—despite public concerns and letters expressing “reservations” about the impact on their own constituents.

What We Did

We launched a rapid-response campaign to break through the noise and make sure rural people knew what was at stake:

• Collected 164 rural stories from farmers, parents, veterans, hospital workers, and community leaders.

• Published over 72 letters and op-eds in local and statewide newspapers, flooding the public narrative with real voices.
  Distributed 18,000+ “Protect Medicaid” yard signs across the seven districts, each sparking 5–7 conversations.

In total, we generated well over 100,000 face-to-face conversations in rural communities about the Republican effort to dismantle Medicaid.

What We Heard

1. The Cuts Are Becoming Real

Before the House vote, it was hard to get attention. But once members voted, people woke up. Medicaid is no longer abstract—it’s personal. People now understand what a cut to Medicaid really means: closed hospitals, fewer nurses, and more deaths.

2. It’s Not Just About Individuals

Yes, many rural residents are on Medicaid—but even those who aren’t are outraged. They know:

“If the hospital goes, the town goes.”

Without Medicaid, rural hospitals lose funding and close. When the hospital goes, the town loses emergency care, OB-GYN services, and jobs. These are not policy issues—they are life-and-death decisions for rural communities.

3. People See the Hypocrisy

Many of the same Republicans who voted to slash Medicaid are now introducing bills to “save rural hospitals.” Rural voters aren’t buying it. They see through the double-talk. As one voter told us:

“You can’t burn the barn and show up with a garden hose and expect applause.”

The Messaging That Works

Our polling and field work both show the same thing: the Republican agenda is deeply unpopular, but people need help connecting the dots. Here’s what breaks through:

• Connect policy to personal impact—Talk about hospitals closing, ambulance rides getting longer, and births happening in parking lots.

• Call out the trade-off—Republicans are cutting rural healthcare so that millionaires can get another tax cut.

• Name names—Point directly at the member of Congress who voted to gut these programs.

• Elevate local voices—Letters to the editor and personal stories change minds faster than TV ads.

What Comes Next

We may not be able to stop this bill in the Senate, but we’re doing something just as important: laying the groundwork for 2026. Every lawmaker who voted for these cuts is on notice. And rural voters are watching.

In this campaign, we’re not just fighting for Medicaid—we’re building rural political power. And we’re just getting started.

RuralOrganizing.org is committed to uplifting rural voices and defending the future of rural communities. If you live in one of the affected districts and want to take action, share your story, or get a yard sign—reach out. Because rural America is worth fighting for.

— Shawn Sebastian, Organizing Director

At RuralOrganizing, we have a different message: rural communities deserve to thrive and prosper.

Last month, we provided an update on our Campaign for Rural Prosperity here on our Substack. You heard from rural recipients living in key battleground towns about the impact of Medicaid cuts on their lives and communities.

This month, we wanted to celebrate significant milestones in our efforts to defend Medicaid as Trump’s “Big, Beautiful, Bill” heads to the Senate for a vote.

Since mid-April, RuralOrganizing.org has been organizing in battleground districts to collect stories, place op-eds and letters to the editor (LTEs), distribute yard signs, and organize protests to communicate the impact on rural communities.

We’ve collected over 150 rural Medicaid impact stories across all geographies, including farmers, veterans, and rural hospital leaders; placed over 60 LTEs and Op-Eds, and distributed 20,000 Medicaid yard signs -- in addition to supporting and organizing protests at Congressional offices, rural hospitals, and more.

We’ve heard from voters in rural Southern California, like Benjamin Parsons, that cuts to Medicaid would lead to the loss of his healthcare, including for the immigrants who helped raise him. Stakeholders such as Jason Smith, the Executive Director of the Montana Consortium for Urban Indian Health, have been vocal about the impact of Medicaid cuts on urban Indian health organizations, which would reduce services, cut staff, shorten operating hours, and limit their ability to address health disparities. A volunteer in Iowa even asked our organizer for a box of signs to hand out at her son's graduation party because Medicaid saved his life and she wanted all the people who loved him to know it.

The Trump administration may think it’s a big, beautiful bill, but in reality, what we’ve heard and seen from the field contradicts the Republicans’ obsession with cutting rural services. Rural voters are more energized now than before the House vote, and they’re realizing that this is not what they were promised. They’re showing up and letting their Representatives know that it’s not just cuts to individuals, but cuts that would compromise their community’s health and well-being.

And now? House Republicans voted to slash Medicaid and food assistance to pay for tax breaks for billionaires. That’s not a budget—it’s a betrayal of rural America.

We’ll continue to collect stories and amplify those of the most impacted—farmers, veterans, caregivers, and rural hospital workers — who earn their benefits and deserve to be heard. We’re organizing in towns the GOP treats like collateral damage, and we’re making it impossible to ignore the cost of their cruelty.

Because rural people and communities aren’t disposable, but the big, beautiful bill is.

In solidarity,

Shawn, Organizing Director for RuralOrganizing

Across five states in key battleground towns– California, Washington, Iowa, Montana, and Pennsylvania – RuralOrganizing.org is amplifying the voices of people who would bear the brunt of these cuts. Our organizers are knocking doors, hosting town halls, and gathering stories to make sure every lawmaker hears the human cost of slashing Medicaid.

In Iowa, State Representative Adam Zabner collected dozens of stories from people like Tom O’Donnell, a retiree in Miller-Meeks’ most rural county, who fears the hospital that serves his community won’t survive more budget cuts. “There aren’t enough fish fries and bake sales to cover what we’ll lose,” he says. For Eric Kusiak, a nurse in Iowa City, cuts to Medicaid could turn emergency room visits into life-or-death gambles: “Imagine your father has chest pain, but the ER wait time is 16 hours.”

In Pennsylvania, our organizer Megan met Bernadette Bowman, a woman who was saddled with $400,000 in medical debt before Medicaid stepped in. “Anyone can get sick,” she says. “No one should be ruined just because they did.” Mari Day, a mother of two children with speech delays, wonders what will happen if Medicaid is gutted. “Every child deserves the chance to be heard,” she writes. “These services aren’t optional; they’re essential to their future.”

California organizer Evin listened as Dawna Sodders-Simpson (pictured below), who uses a walker, described how she might lose her home without Medicaid coverage. “If [Rep. David Valadao] doesn’t vote to protect Medicaid, we will vote him out,” she says. Diane Holcombe echoed her sentiment, warning that 90% of nursing home residents in her rural community rely on Medicaid – and that a single closure could eliminate 1,000 jobs.

In Montana, our organizer, Ella, has been traveling the backroads of MT-01, gathering testimonies from people like Steven Sweeney, who calls out his representative for turning his back on veterans and seniors: “Fellow Montanans, when you voted last November, were you intent on getting rid of your Social Security or Medicaid benefits? Did you vote to cut veterans’ services or eliminate surveillance of our foreign adversaries?” Jason Cronk, the CEO of Immanuel Living, puts it bluntly: “Even if federal funding remains intact, Montana is already failing its seniors by underfunding Medicaid at the state level.”

RuralOrganizing is on the ground, elevating these voices and reminding lawmakers that tax breaks for billionaires come at the cost of closed hospitals, underfunded schools, and lost benefits, such as Social Security and Medicaid. Cuts to these rural services don’t just threaten these families; they endanger entire towns.

Subscribe to our Substack to follow our #DefendRuralServices campaign as we continue to talk to the communities impacted the most.

Share RuralOrganizing

As Congress approaches the March 14th deadline to pass a new budget or face a federal government shutdown, Revolving Door Project wrote a post titled, The Government Shutdown is Already Here, urging Democrats to understand that reality of the moment we’re in. The post noted, “What hasn’t seemed to click into place is the all-important recognition that DOGE has already illegally shut down much of the government.”

That resonated with us because in rural communities, the lawlessness of the Trump administration has already shut down vital government services in rural communities. We are already in the finding out phase in many small towns and rural communities. And, what we’re finding out is that the federal government does matter. A lot.

The lawlessness perpetrated by Trump and Elon Musk is already having a dire impact around the country, and it’s magnified in rural parts of the country. Their actions are upending so many lives, businesses and communities.

Their actions are also showing us how the government impacts our day-to-day lives - for the good. Of course, anyone in rural parts of the country knows the importance of infrastructure, not just our roads, but our bridges, our broadband, our electricity, our airports. That depends on a functioning government. And, there’s so much more

We also see the interconnectedness between rural communities and the rest of the world. I suspect many Americans didn’t think of the impact the cuts at USAID would have on rural America. But, it’s real and impacting many.

For years, starting with Ronald Reagan, we’ve heard the tired tropes about the government being the problem. But, we’re seeing first hand that losing government services is, in fact, a life and death problem. The drastic cuts to Medicaid and SNAP will have a disproportionate impact on rural people. Obviously, it will harm those who lose their benefits, but it will impact employers, small businesses, schools and those who care for our elderly. And, we will lose even more rural hospitals.

And, then there’s the perennial target of Republicans: the postal service. At BlueSky, Jess Piper summed it up:

My husband ran a successful business and used our local rural post office daily. My elderly neighbor’s meds come through the rural post office.

The post office is one of the only places left open in my rural community. Losing it could quite literally kill my town and my neighbors.

She’s right, of course. And, let’s not overlook that major corporations, like Amazon, rely on the USPS to get their products to rural addresses. They won’t do it on their own. Billionaire Jeff Bezos is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the Postal Service. And, his trucks rely on the roads we all pay for too - as do Elon Musk’s Teslas.

The cuts to National Parks are already undermining local economies. Same for the Forest Service.

Closing offices that assist veterans and social security recipients will cause further harm.

This week, we learned, “The Veterans Affairs Department is planning to lay off tens of thousands of employees throughout its organization later this year, according to an internal memorandum distributed to top staff on Tuesday.” Writing at Bluesky, Brandon Friedman, a veteran who worked at the VA under Obama, wrote, “They're going to destroy the Department of Veterans Affairs, specifically the VA healthcare system. Firing this many employees will render it effectively unusable by increasing patient wait times to the point of uselessness.” Last year, a GAO report on VA Health Care found, “In fiscal year 2022, about one-third of the 8.3 million veterans enrolled in VHA lived in a rural area. Comparatively, about one-fifth of Americans lived in a rural area. VA projects rural veterans will continue to represent a significant proportion of the nation's veterans. VA identified rural veterans as an underserved population in its strategic plan and included an objective to increase health care access for rural veterans.” So, the brutal DOGE cuts to the VA disproportionately rural veterans. And, again, this is without any legislative authority.

On immigration, so many of our communities have been revived by the arrival of immigrants. It’s not hyperbole to say they feed America as many farmers know. But, immigrants are also our neighbors, our friends.

Let’s not overlook weather. Decimating NOAA and the National Weather Service could have catastrophic consequences. Weather reports - Accurate weather reports - literally make the difference between life and death, just ask anyone who has monitored potential tornadoes heading their way. The Guardian reported:

Some of the hardest-hit offices were the most prone to severe weather, according to an analysis of publicly available staffing information reviewed by the Guardian. The NWS offices in Miami, Boston, Houston, Cheyenne in Wyoming and Rapid City in South Dakota have all lost more than 30% of their staffing as compared with last fall.

Then communities will try to recover from ever vicious weather without support from FEMA given the deep Trump/Musk cuts to that agency.

The list of harms that we are already experiencing goes on and on.

So, while the rest of the nation waits to see if Republicans will shut down the government, it’s been happening in rural communities these past few weeks because of the illegal actions taken by the Trump/Musk DOGE wrecking crew. What they’re showing is how much government matters to people in small towns and rural communities. So, let’s stop pretending otherwise.

Over the next few weeks, we’re going to use this space to talk to rural leaders, advocates, business owners and others about what’s happening in their communities - and why we must fight back.

Twenty-eight rural residents from across the country have shared how halts to federal funding and cuts to jobs are impacting the daily lives of people in rural places. You can share your story with us in this form. We’ll do our best to share your stories on our platforms, pitch them to national and in-state reporters, and share them with electeds. The world needs to know how this federal funding chaos is hurting rural people.

See how the stories break down in the chart below.