

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Jubilee USA is running radio spots focused on Puerto Rico's debt crisis in Florida ahead of the state's March 15th presidential primary. The ads first ran in Texas ahead of the state's "Super Tuesday" primary. The radio placement urges presidential candidates to address the crisis. Florida's primary may play an important role in the US presidential election and is home to more than 1 million Puerto Ricans.
"Puerto Rico's debt crisis is a critical campaign issue," stated Eric LeCompte, executive director of Jubilee USA, a religious development coalition. "The American citizens on the island are being treated like second class citizens and the Puerto Ricans in Florida are voting with the crisis on their minds."
Jubilee USA's radio placements emphasize the humanitarian crisis facing the US territory. Puerto Rico cut health funding by $42 million last year and is now battling the Zika virus spreading on the island. Nearly half the population lives in poverty and the government is cutting social services. Puerto Rico's government has said it cannot make its next debt payment in full.
At a recent Republican debate, Florida Senator Marco Rubio repeated his opposition to granting Puerto Rico access to Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection. While former candidate Jeb Bush supported bankruptcy protection, the other remaining Republican candidates have not spoken in detail about the Puerto Rico crisis. The remaining Democratic candidates support bankruptcy protection. Congress is actively considering bankruptcy tools for Puerto Rico to restructure the $72 billion debt.
"Congress needs to provide Puerto Rico with comprehensive tools to resolve the crisis in a timely way," noted LeCompte. "If Congressional action is not comprehensive, Puerto Rico will still be knocking on the doors of Capitol Hill."
Listen to Jubilee USA's Puerto Rico radio spot
Read a timeline of Puerto Rico's debt crisis
Jubilee USA Network is an interfaith, non-profit alliance of religious, development and advocacy organizations. We are 75 U.S. institutions and more than 750 faith groups working across the United States and around the globe. We address the structural causes of poverty and inequality in our communities and countries around the world.
(202) 783-3566While experts hope the justices will reverse an "objectively insane" appellate decision, a ruling in favor of the Republican National Committee could reduce the rights of Americans who vote by mail.
As President Donald Trump on Monday pardoned leaders who tried to overturn his 2020 loss, the US Supreme Court took up the national Republican Party's argument that counting mailed ballots shortly after Election Day violates federal law.
Voting by mail has long been a target of the GOP president, who has falsely claimed that the practice fuels voter fraud. This case concerns a Mississippi law that allows mailed ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted as long as they arrive within five business days, which three Trump appointees on the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit struck down last year.
That lawsuit was brought by the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Mississippi Libertarian Party. Another Republican, Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch‚ is asking the nation's top court to reject the 5th Circuit's decision, arguing that it "defies statutory text, conflicts with this court's precedent, and—if left to stand—will have destabilizing nationwide ramifications."
The Supreme Court—which has a conservative supermajority that includes three Trump appointees—agreed to hear Watson v. RNC and decide "whether the federal Election Day statutes preempt a state law that allows ballots that are cast by federal Election Day to be received by election officials after that day."
The Supreme Court will review an objectively insane 5th Circuit decision that prohibited states from counting ballots that were mailed before Election Day but arrive shortly after. (More than half the states have such laws.) www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...
[image or embed]
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjsdc.bsky.social) November 10, 2025 at 9:44 AM
The Associated Press pointed out Monday that "Mississippi is among 18 states and the District of Columbia that accept mailed ballots received after Election Day as long as the ballots are postmarked on or before that date," and "an additional 14 states allow the counting of late-arriving ballots from some eligible voters, including overseas US service members and their families."
Legal experts have condemned the appellate decision as "awful" and "bonkers." The justices are expected to hear arguments early next year and issue a ruling by the end of June, months before the crucial midterm elections.
National Vote At Home Institute executive director Barbara Smith Warner welcomed their decision to take the case and potentially reverse the 5th Circuit's "upside-down" opinion, telling Democracy Docket: "The idea that a ballot that is postmarked on or by Election Day and received afterwards... is like voting after Election Day? That is ridiculous."
Unfortunately I am here to tell you: it's time to worry about what the Supreme Court is going to do to mail ballots postmarked by election day that arrive after election day, in states across the country. This could be enormous.www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/...
[image or embed]
— jen rice (@jenrice.bsky.social) November 10, 2025 at 11:19 AM
Alexia Kemerling, director of accessible democracy at the American Association of People with Disabilities, was also hopeful.
"We really hope that the Supreme Court takes the responsibility seriously to make sure that every voter can use their power," she said. "'The millions of voters with disabilities who cannot vote in person or voters who are overseas who cannot vote in person—this is their only way to participate in the system. They should not be disenfranchised for the ways that our system moves slowly."
The New York Times noted that Watson v. RNC "is a potential blockbuster and adds to the court's other elections and voting cases for the term, which include a case about who can sue to challenge Illinois' mail-in ballot rules and a challenge to the Louisiana congressional district map that could gut a remaining pillar of the Voting Rights Act."
"Until we elect Democrats that understand that fighting is what we need to do," US Senate primary candidate Graham Platner said, "we're going to find ourselves in this position over and over and over again."
One public opinion researcher said Sunday that there may be one positive aspect of the capitulation of eight Senate Democratic Caucus members—none of whom will face voters in a reelection campaign next year—who joined Republicans in voting to end the government shutdown without securing concessions on the central issue of healthcare.
"The only silver lining about this completely pointless, cowardly, and tone-deaf cave is that it’ll accelerate the complete overhaul of the leadership—and god willing, direction—of the Democratic Party," said Adam Carlson of Zenith Research.
To that end, progressive organizers and lawmakers on Monday morning said that with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) having reportedly coordinated the "yes" vote from the eight senators, voters must remove the lawmakers from office at their earliest opportunity.
"We want to celebrate a Democratic Party that fights back," said the grassroots group Indivisible. "But after this latest surrender, the next step is primaries and new leadership. We get the party we demand, and we intend to demand one that fights."
[image or embed]
— Indivisible ❌👑 (@indivisible.org) November 10, 2025 at 8:11 AM
Ezra Levin, co-founder of the organization, emphasized that anger should be directed not just at the eight Democrats who voted with Republicans on a cloture vote that paved the way to reopening the government without concessions from the GOP.
The eight senators were Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Dick Durbin of Illinois, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Angus King of Maine, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, but Levin said many more centrist lawmakers were likely "in on the play."
On MSNBC Monday, Shaheen acknowledged that Schumer was "kept informed" of the eight senators' negotiations with the GOP regarding reopening the government.
"It's the same reason why they scheduled the surrender for after the election this week," Levin said. "They didn't want people pissed at Democrats right before an election."
This isn’t just about the eight Senate Democrats who surrendered. 👇
[image or embed]
— Indivisible ❌👑 (@indivisible.org) November 10, 2025 at 8:35 AM
The elections last week, along with recent polls, revealed that the Republican Party and the White House are the target of ire from US voters, with President Donald Trump himself saying the Democratic victories showed the GOP would have to take action to end the shutdown.
New Republic writer Greg Sargent said that Schumer had given up crucial leverage by caving to the GOP's demand that the shutdown end and pushing senators to support a deal that contains no restoration of Medicaid funding gutted by the Republicans earlier this year, end to Trump's recissions that cut billions of dollars in public funding, or extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies.
"You've changed the story from 'GOP hurting millions of Americans to please unpopular, failing, delusional despot who's destroying his party' to 'Dems are too weak and divided in the face of Trump's strength to take a stand and protect Americans,'" said Sargent, addressing Schumer on social media.
Attorney Max Kennerly suggested that the Sunday night vote revealed more than just the party's views on the current shutdown, and said Democrats who voted "no" should receive "zero credit until they demand a change in leadership."
"The coordinated nature of this—none [of the lawmakers who voted yes] are facing voters in 2026—means that either Schumer approved it or failed in his job as Senate [minority] leader to stop it," said Kennerly.
Schumer, who is up for reelection in 2028, has topped the list of Democratic lawmakers who should face a primary challenge in recent months, following his refusal to endorse New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani's campaign and his earlier capitulation to Republicans in March, when he supported a continuing resolution to keep the government funded even though to expanded Trump's control over congressional spending.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who is reportedly considering either a 2028 presidential run or a primary challenge to Schumer, suggested the Democratic leader had abandoned the fight to ensure already-high healthcare costs don't rise for people who buy insurance through the ACA marketplace.
"People want us to hold the line for a reason," she said. "This is not a matter of appealing to a base. It’s about people’s lives. Working people want leaders whose word means something."
“Chuck Schumer should step down as Senate minority leader immediately," said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution. "If he secretly backed this surrender and voted ‘no’ to save face, he’s a liar. If he couldn’t keep his caucus in line, he’s inept. Either way, he’s proven incapable of leading the fight to prevent healthcare premiums from skyrocketing for millions of Americans. The country can’t afford his failed leadership any longer.”
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said the cave provided the latest evidence that "Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced," and that "it's time for those in the back to make it to the front and for the old guard to make way."
“You’ve had Schumer cheerleading the Iraq War, cheerleading a blank check to [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, betraying us on the first shutdown," Khanna told "Breaking Points" host Krystal Ball Monday. "This is the culmination of someone who just doesn't get it, who doesn't get how much people are hurting, doesn't get where the base of this party is."
Congressman @RoKhanna goes off on Chuck Schumer. “You’ve had Schumer cheerleading the Iraq War, cheerleading a blank check to Netanyahu, betraying us on the first shutdown…and now he’s not even willing to fight!” pic.twitter.com/TQxu3gcXBr
— Krystal Ball (@krystalball) November 10, 2025
In Maine, US Senate candidate Graham Platner—who is facing Gov. Janet Mills in the Democratic primary to unseat Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) after Schumer pushed Mills to join the race—said millions of families had woken up to a "bleak morning" on Monday after the Democratic leader orchestrated the capitulation.
"Now, up the 20 million Americans are going to watch their healthcare premiums double, triple, and in some cases quadruple," said Platner. "Now we are on a path to watch 15 million Americans possibly lose access to healthcare insurance in the first place. This happened because Chuck Schumer failed in his job yet again, because they do not understand that when we fight, we win."
"We need to elect leaders that want to fight," he added, urging voters to call their senators and "tell them that Chuck Schumer can no longer be leader."
Chuck Schumer should step down. pic.twitter.com/6OhX2cCo9u
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) November 10, 2025
"Until we elect Democrats that understand that fighting is what we need to do," Platner said, "we're going to find ourselves in this position over and over and over again."
“Starbucks must reverse course from its current posture, resolve its existing labor disputes, and bargain a fair contract in good faith with these employees.”
As Starbucks workers prepare to strike amid stalled contract talks with management, more than 80 US lawmakers on Monday demanded that bosses at the world's largest coffee chain stop union busting and negotiate a fair deal for employees.
Starbucks workers—who have been in talks with company bosses led by CEO Brian Niccol for over a year—accuse management of stonewalling on key contract issues including higher pay, more hours, and an end to unfair labor practices and union busting. Last week, members of Starbucks Workers United overwhelmingly voted to authorize an unfair labor practices strike—they're calling it a "Red Cup Rebellion"—at over 650 locations if the company fails to finalize a fair contract by November 13.
Members of the Congressional Labor Caucus led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the Senate and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) in the House sent letters to Niccol expressing their concern over management's "failure to reach a fair first contract with its baristas" and a "troubling return to union busting."
"In February 2024, Starbucks and Workers United announced a path forward to commit to negotiating a foundational framework for contracts, establishing a fair process for organizing, and resolving outstanding legal issues," the Senate letter states. "We were hopeful that the company would abide by this commitment and bargain in good faith with Starbucks workers who exercised their right to form a union."
The lawmakers continued:
As you well know Starbucks is not a poor company. Last year Starbucks made over $3.6 billion in profit and paid out nearly $5 billion in stock buybacks and dividends. In fact, in the first three quarters of the year, Starbucks made $1.7 billion in profit and paid out over $2 billion in dividends. Last year, you made $95 million in compensation for the four months you worked in 2024, roughly 6,666 times more than what your average worker was paid for the entire year.
Despite that extravagant spending on executives and shareholders, Starbucks refuses to reach an agreement with its own workers even though you are less than one average day’s sales apart from a contract. To make matters worse, Starbucks recently began closing stores across the country and laying off hundreds of workers as part its $1 billion restructuring plan. It is clear that Starbucks has the money to reach a fair agreement with its workers.
"Starbucks must reverse course from its current posture, resolve its existing labor disputes, and bargain a fair contract in good faith with these employees," the letter demands.
Starbucks Workers United has already filed more than 100 charges against the coffee giant over the past 11 months, alleging unfair labor practices including reprisals against unionizing baristas. The union calls Starbucks "the biggest violator of labor law in modern history," as administrative law judges and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) have found that the company has committed more than 500 violations of labor law.
Niccol—who last year became Starbucks’ fourth CEO in just two years—brought with him a history of union busting during his previous job as the head of Chipotle. Under his leadership, the fast-food chain closed a store in Augusta, Maine in 2022 after employees there tried to make it the company’s first unionized location. The workers filed a complaint at the NLRB, which ruled that the closure was an illegal act of union busting.
Workers at more than 600 Starbucks locations across the United States have voted to unionize since baristas at a store on Elmwood Avenue in Buffalo, New York became the first to do so in late 2021.
“Union baristas mean business and are ready to do whatever it takes to win a fair contract and end Starbucks’ unfair labor practices,” Michelle Eisen, a Starbucks Workers United spokesperson and 15-year veteran barista, said in a statement announcing last week's strike authorization. “We want Starbucks to succeed, but turning the company around and bringing customers back begins with listening to and supporting the baristas who are responsible for the Starbucks experience."
"If Starbucks keeps stonewalling, they should expect to see their business grind to a halt," Eisen added. "The ball is in Starbucks’ court.”