5
#000000
#FFFFFF
LIVE COVERAGE
Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Further
Michigan/America Is Not For Sale
Wowza, rare glimmer of good news. We take a moment to honor the stunning Michigan victory of Abdul El-Sayed, who was outspent 12-1 by his opponent's millions from establishment Dems, Zionist PACS and corporations and still managed to win even though he is a progressive Muslim who calls genocide genocide and wants Medicare for all in a Trump state that isn't communist New York. Ha. What millions in dark money buys you these days: "Sweet fuck all, as it turns out."
El-Sayed's inspiring win came against a candidate, Haley Stevens, who was bankrolled by over $60 million from party leaders and outside money from a murky nesting doll of super-PACS and shell corporations but whose campaign still had the audacity to bill her as “the grassroots choice of Michigan working families.” Total spending on the race in a key swing state was about $80 million, most from fat cats, making it "the fattest cat in the history of primaries." El-Sayed reportedly got about $4.6 million in outside money; Stevens and Netanyahu got about $60 million, the plurality of it from AIPAC's United Democracy Project (sic) super PAC - the most they've dumped into a single race, making it what observers call AIPAC's biggest defeat. From I Fucking Love Australia: AIPAC shoved 30 million dollars up Michigan's arse, and Michigan shat it straight back out."
Born in Detroit in 1984, Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed was raised by his father Mohamed, an Egyptian immigrant, and his stepmother Jackie, whose Michigan roots go back to the 1800s. After graduating from the University of Michigan Phi Beta Kappa, he earned an MD from Columbia and a doctorate in public health from Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, worked as an epidemiologist and became the youngest health official in a major American city when he was appointed Director of Detroit's Health Department, gutted rwhen it was privatized during the city’s bankruptcy, at age 30. Rebuilding it, he went after corporate polluters, stripped lead out of schools, starting offering free glasses to kids in need, expanded Narcan access, and spearheaded a program cancelling up to $700 million in medical debt for 300,000 state residents.
Faced with that resume, AIPAC spent their millions on an ad blitz that managed not to mention any of his policies, or even Israel, though he won the first-ever political endorsement from Jewish Voice For Peace. Instead, they focused on the issues that really matter: They attacked El-Sayed for criticizing the Obamas, allegedly helping Trump win, and sitting for an interview with a streamer they don’t like, Hasan Piker. If he wins the general election against the GOP's carpetbagging empty suit Mike Rogers, he'd become the first Muslim in the Senate. His longtime message to Dems: Stop compromising, ban ICE, end sending arms to Israel, Medicare for All, no more forever wars, get dark money out of politics. On election night, at a podium reading, "MIchigan Is Not For Sale," he celebrated "the movement we were able to inspire," and "the idea that we could take our government back."
El-Sayed's victory, while slimmer than predicted, was seen as pivotal; noted Bernie Sanders, "This is an election between Abdul and the billionaire class.” And the candidate the establishment called "unelectable" won with the endorsement of the United Auto Workers, "the beating heart of Michigan labor." His win was the biggest but not the only news out of Michigan: Sunrise Movement co-founder and data center opponent William Lawrence also took the primary for Michigan’s 7th Congressional district. They join progressive wins elsewhere: Zohran Mamdani in New York. Katie Wilson in Seattle. Three Mamdani-backed candidates in New York primaries, two against longtime incumbents. Melat Kiros in Colorado. Troy Jackson in Maine. It's still a long tough road ahead. But take heart from spineless ghoul Mike Johnson: “The insurgent left is on the rise."
Aug 06, 2026
SEE ALL
News
SEC Urged to End Trump Push to Eliminate Climate Disclosure Rules for Major Companies
Consumer and environmental advocates on Monday called for the Securities and Exchange Commission to end its push to rescind rules requiring companies to disclose risks related to climate change.
The SEC first adopted the climate disclosure rules in 2024, with the commission describing them as a response to "investors’ demand for more consistent, comparable, and reliable information about the financial effects of climate-related risks on a registrant’s operations."
But in June, the SEC—now under the leadership of President Donald Trump-appointed chair Paul Atkins—proposed scrapping the rules, which the commission described as "an overreach of statutory authority and unsound policy."
Elyse Schupak, climate policy advocate for Public Citizen, said that ending the disclosure rules would reflect "the desire of Paul Atkins’ SEC to ignore growing financial risks from climate change and to deprive investors of essential information."
"For polluting industries that seek to downplay their role driving the climate crisis and their exposure to related risks, finalizing the proposed rule would be a victory," said Schupak. "The SEC should withdraw this proposal as it contradicts the commission’s responsibility to facilitate transparency for investors and promote well functioning capital markets."
Alex Martin, climate finance policy director at Americans for Financial Reform, noted that many investors spoke up in favor of the disclosure rules when they were first proposed because they saw climate risk assessment as a valuable information to have before making major financial decisions.
If the new proposal is finalized, Martin added, it "will hurt workers saving for retirement by depriving people of information needed to assess companies' financial risks due to climate change—and by endangering other critical disclosures as well."
Benjamin Schiffrin, director of securities policy for Better Markets, similarly argued that scrapping the SEC rules "will deprive investors of material information essential to making informed investment decisions."
"There can no longer be any serious dispute that the climate-related risk companies face matters greatly to their future prospects," Schiffrin emphasized. "An SEC that was serious about protecting investors would be facilitating investors’ access to this information, not preventing them from understanding how climate-related risks are impacting the companies in which they invest their hard-earned money."
Janet Ranganathan, managing director at the World Resources Institute, said repealing the rule was particularly nonsensical at a time when the country is dealing with multiple climate-related disasters, including wildfires in the Pacific Northwest.
"Rescinding the rule would not eliminate climate risk from the market—it simply blindfolds investors to it, at their own expense," said Ranganathan. "Climate risk should not become the exception to smart financial management simply because it has become politically contentious."
Aug 03, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Progressive Caucus Leader Says Trump 'Too Busy Cashing In' to Regulate AI
President Donald Trump on Monday faced accusations of being "asleep at the wheel" when it comes to regulating artificial intelligence—as well as being focused on how he can personally profit from the industry.
Trump in June signed an executive order that gave federal agencies 60 days to develop a regulatory framework where AI companies could voluntarily submit their new models for government review before being released.
However, details about the AI evaluation program are still lacking.
CNN's Hadas Gold reported on Monday that "as of last Friday several industry sources told me they hadn’t seen draft details" about the program, although an administration official said that the framework has been completed and that "discussions with industry about next steps are underway."
Gold also reported that major AI firms OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Meta, among others, are expected to meet with White House officials on Tuesday to discuss the plan.
Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that the president's voluntary approach to regulation is "completely failing to keep us safe from the dangers of AI."
"He took millions from AI billionaires," wrote Casar in a Monday social media post. "Now in the wake of extremely dangerous AI cybersecurity problems he says he’s set up 'voluntary' review that no one has seen. Asleep at the wheel. Too busy cashing in to protect our jobs or national security."
Companies in the AI industry are among those that have donated to Trump's effort to build a $600 million ballroom, and to the president's 2024 campaign.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) also slammed the administration's approach to regulation, arguing that it is "letting the AI industry run wild."
"The upcoming executive order on AI is COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY," Lieu emphasized. "That means any AI company can totally ignore it. Ridiculous."
Both OpenAI and Anthropic last week revealed that their AI systems recently went rogue and hacked into other companies during cybersecurity testing.
Trump's refusal to make the government review optional for AI giants comes after a previous order he signed last year, aimed at preventing state-level regulation of the industry.
Aug 03, 2026
SEE ALL
News
'Stand for Something!' All Eyes on Cassidy After Murkowski Says She's a No on Blanche
Attention turned to Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy on Friday after his colleague, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, announced her opposition to confirming President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer Todd Blanche as US attorney general, leaving the GOP without any additional votes to spare.
With Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) expected to be absent and Sens. Murkowski and Susan Collins (R-Maine) planning to vote no, Cassidy (La.)—who lost reelection in May to a Trump-backed challenger—is seen as the last-remaining obstacle to confirming Blanche. The Trump lackey is currently leading the Justice Department in an acting capacity.
Murkowski said in a statement that she decided to oppose Blanche's confirmation because of the Justice Department's "handling of the release of the Epstein files; the sweeping immunity protections granted to the President, his family, and their businesses; the statements that have been made to anti-abortion groups; and the repeated targeting of individuals ranging from former administration staff to sitting US senators."
“I am also keenly aware that the Department’s nearly $2-billion dollar slush fund—which likely would have rewarded January 6 protesters—is only off the table because this nomination is pending and the Senate has leverage. Once we vote, that will end, and there is no telling what the future holds," the Republican senator added. “The country needs an attorney general who will check the worst impulses of this administration. I hope Mr. Blanche is able to achieve that, if confirmed, but I simply do not have confidence that will be the case.”
Cassidy met with Blanche earlier this week but has not indicated publicly how he intends to vote. Republicans were hoping to confirm Blanche before senators leave for August recess on Friday.
In an interview earlier this week, Cassidy said that he has to be convinced that Blanche "is an attorney general who just happens to have once been President Trump’s personal attorney, as opposed to President Trump’s personal attorney who is now the attorney general."
"I think there’s a big difference between the two," the Louisiana senator.
Cassidy has repeatedly drawn Trump's ire since voting to convict him in 2021 for inciting the January 6 insurrection. Earlier this year, Cassidy reportedly got into a shouting match with Trump over the Iran war after the Republican senator voted to advance a war powers resolution that sought to bring the illegal conflict to an end.
But in some cases, Cassidy has aided the administration. In February, for instance, the Louisiana Republican cast the deciding vote to confirm Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as head of the Health and Human Services Department. Cassidy, a physician, has since criticized Kennedy's leadership of the health department.
Sarah Longwell, a former Republican and publisher of The Bulwark, wrote Friday that "considering his disastrous decision to confirm RFK and Trump’s attacks against him in the primary, this vote offers one last shot [for Cassidy] to use his power to do what he knows is right."
"For God’s sake man, stand for something!" Longwell added.
If Cassidy announces his opposition, it's possible that Republicans will try to summon McConnell to cast the deciding vote on Blanche.
McConnell was hospitalized in June after a fall, according to his office. On Thursday, McConnell said he was discharged and planned to continue his recovery at home.
McConnell's primary residence is in Washington, DC.
Aug 07, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Palantir: Surveillance State Profiteer Making Billions in Profits, But With an Effective US Tax Rate of... Zero
Palantir Technologies, one of the world's most influential—and controversial—surveillance tech companies, enjoyed an effective tax rate of just 1.4% globally last year while paying no US federal income tax despite recording substantial profits, an analysis released on Wednesday revealed.
The study, Who Pays for the Surveillance State?, was written by the Center for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research (CICTAR) in partnership with the European Federation of Public Services Unions. The report "examines how Palantir is capturing ever-larger government contracts while paying no US federal corporate income tax and shifting much of its foreign profits back to the US, avoiding taxes in Europe."
"In 2025 the company reported $1.657 billion in pre-tax profit, booked $22.7 million [in] corporate tax paid globally, and paid $0 in US federal income tax, resulting in an effective tax rate of just 1.4% globally," CICTAR found.
"The report's core claim of profit-shifting is based on the gap between revenue and profit location: 26% of Palantir's revenue came from outside the US, but 96% of pre-tax profit was booked in the US," the analysis states.
"The Trump administration has not only been granting record amounts in new contracts to Palantir but is running a global protection racket to help it—along with larger US tech giants—avoid paying tax both in the US and globally," the report contends.
"In Europe, the report finds a pattern of subsidiaries providing services to the US parent on cost-plus terms, leaving low taxable margins locally while related-party payments move value back to the US," CICTAR added.
Palantir maintains that it complies with applicable tax laws in every jurisdiction where it operates. Company representatives have said that transfer pricing arrangements and other accounting practices cited by critics are standard among multinational corporations and comply with existing regulations.
The Palo Alto, California-based company's soaring revenues are partly driven by government contracts, with the US Department of Defense being the data analytics specialist's biggest client. Palantir is also integral to the Trump administration's deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, selling technology used by Department of Homeland Security agencies—including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—to identify, track, and target people for arrest and deportation and manage their cases.
Palantir has also drawn scrutiny from Democratic US lawmakers, including Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon and New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who demanded answers following reporting last year that the company was "amassing troves of data on Americans to create a government-wide, searchable ‘mega-database’ containing the sensitive taxpayer data of American citizens.”
Palestine defenders have also denounced Palantir and other tech giants for selling technology to the Israeli government and military despite findings by rights groups, scholars, national governments, and a United Nations commission of inquiry that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
Alex Karp, the billionaire co-founder and CEO of Palantir, told CNBC last month: “I am the most publicly supportive CEO of Israel. I think Israel is on the side of good.”
In Europe, advocacy groups have raised concerns about Palantir's contracts involving sensitive medical records, immigration systems, and predictive analytics. Campaigners argue that centralized data platforms create attractive targets for misuse, unauthorized access, or mission creep beyond their original purposes.
CICTAR's report concludes that "European public authorities should be able to exclude companies that take public money while shifting profits away from the national tax base that funds public services, and provide the basis for national security that Palantir claims to defend."
Responding to the report, Andrea Egan, general secretary of UNISON, the largest trade union in the United Kingdom, said that "a big multinational aggressively avoiding tax and dodging its responsibility to pay a fair share is probably no surprise. But the fact the UK and other countries are rewarding Palantir with massive government contracts is what beggars belief."
“Systems that enable tax to be shirked on an industrial scale clearly have to change," she added. "The likes of Palantir need to stump up what's due. Tech giants raking off billions in profit can’t be free to pay what they please. Ministers shouldn’t award contracts to run public services to firms that are starving them of cash.”
Aug 06, 2026
SEE ALL
News
Board of Peace ‘Betraying the Very Agreement They Just Made' by Accepting Israel’s Refusal to Withdraw Troops in Gaza
US President Donald Trump's Gaza Board of Peace appears to be going back on the disarmament deal it reached last week with Hamas in order to meet Israel's demands, and it may throw the entire process into jeopardy.
A roadmap agreed to last week, which Trump touted as a massive diplomatic breakthrough, stated that Hamas would begin to decommission its arms in tandem with Israel halting its attacks and withdrawing its forces to the so-called "yellow line" agreed to during the first phase of the ceasefire in October 2025.
In the ten months since the deal, Israel has been gradually advancing its forces deeper into Gaza beyond the ceasefire line to the point where it now controls around 60-70% of Gaza, while its more than 2 million inhabitants are crammed into an area that has largely been reduced to rubble.
Last week's peace roadmap said explicitly that the gradual decommissioning of Hamas' heavy weapons, arms depots, production facilities, and tunnels "shall be linked to an Israeli withdrawal, in phases." Trump echoed this last week, stating that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) would withdraw as disarmament proceeds.
Though Trump claimed Israel was "very happy" with the deal, its leaders have spent days crying foul, stating that withdrawal would only occur after Hamas completely disarms. Meanwhile, Hamas said it would only go along with the disarmament if Israel withdraws at the same time.
In defiance of the agreement's language calling to honor ceasefire commitments "without delay," Israel launched attacks across Gaza on Sunday that killed at least 18 Palestinians, the largest daily toll in weeks. Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, a member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's security cabinet, told Israel's Army Radio that there was no deal for it to halt attacks on Gaza.
The strategy appears to have worked. Following meetings between Netanyahu and the Board of Peace Gaza envoy, Nickolay Mladenov, on Monday, the board released a statement posted to social media that essentially rewrote the original agreement to match Israel's demands and claimed it had been part of the agreement from the start.
"Contrary to inaccurate reports, we note that the withdrawal of the IDF beyond the Yellow Line will take place only once decommissioning is complete, as Hamas committed to the mediators," the board said. "This applies to light weapons, heavy weapons, and the tunnels alike."
Hamas responded by reiterating that it and other armed factions in Gaza “remain committed to what was agreed regarding the implementation of the second phase of the ceasefire agreement, including all parties’ obligations,” and called for “a clear and official response” from Mladenov regarding what was agreed upon.
The new statement from the Board of Peace directly contradicted Mladenov's flat statement on Thursday that "withdrawal must move in lockstep with decommissioning."
Muhammad Shehada, a political analyst from Gaza at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said that the Board of Peace was "betraying the very agreement they just made" and "taking Netanyahu’s side fully."
"The roadmap explicitly said withdrawal must move in lockstep with decommissioning," he wrote on social media. "It never said withdrawal would happen only after decommissioning is fully completed."
"The roadmap made a distinction between 'heavy weapons' (e.g. tunnels, rockets, RPGs) and 'personal/light weapons,' and allowed Palestinian factions to retain light weapons for protection in case Israel reneges," he added. "Including light weapons now in this tweet is Netanyahu’s way of sabotaging the agreement."
Tariq Kenney-Shawa, the associate director of editorial for the Institute for Middle East Understanding, said the Board of Peace's abrupt reversal "shouldn’t surprise anyone."
"The Board of Peace is just the administrative and fundraising arm of Israel’s occupation of Gaza," he said. "It exists to facilitate Gaza’s ethnic cleansing and concentration camps in a way that is palatable and profitable for the international community."
Since the so-called “ceasefire” went into effect last October following two years of genocidal war, Israeli attacks have killed more than 1,200 Palestinians, bringing the official death toll above 73,000. Experts warn the true number of Palestinians who have been killed since Israel began its attacks in October 2023 is likely far higher.
July was the deadliest month for Palestinians this year, with more than 150 Palestinians killed. Israeli leaders have discussed fully "conquering" the strip, controlling it indefinitely, and moving in illegal Israeli settlers.
Aug 04, 2026
SEE ALL
LATEST NEWS
'Good Start': Meta Fine Now Nearly $1 Billion for Social Media Giant's Harm to Kids
"We cannot allow Meta to put its short-term profits above the emotional well-being of our kids," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Aug 07, 2026
A New Mexico court on Thursday ruled that Meta must pay an additional $567 million fine on top of the $375 million a jury fined the tech giant in March for harms caused to teens and children who use its Instagram and Facebook social media platforms.
First Judicial District Judge Bryan Biedscheid said in his 68-pager ruling that "significant numbers of people in New Mexico experience harm from Meta’s products due to risks of sexual exploitation, interference with education, and adverse mental health outcomes."
"The harm to the impacted New Mexicans is not doubtful, eventual, or contingent, but an immediate, temporally connected, and highly probable result of Meta’s actions," he continued.
"The youth mental health crisis has inflicted significant and widespread harm in New Mexico in terms of the number of youth suffering mental health harms, the profound suffering they and those in their families suffer, and the resulting interferences with the functioning of the schools, law enforcement, [and] healthcare systems in New Mexico," the judge added.
The case centered on allegations that Meta knowingly designed and operated Facebook and Instagram in ways that exposed children to harmful content, encouraged excessive use, and failed to adequately protect minors from exploitation. New Mexico officials argued that internal company knowledge and outside warnings showed Meta was aware of risks associated with its platforms but did not act sufficiently to address them.
Most of the new fine—$420 million—will go toward funding youth treatment services, while the rest is designated for awareness and prevention, screening services, and other costs.
Biedscheid's order also compels Meta to make changes to its platforms in New Mexico, including removing "like" counts and only showing them to minors with parental consent, and prohibiting overnight push notifications for users under age 18.
"Regardless of whether it is labeled as an 'addiction' or 'problematic use,' the evidence at trial proved that design elements, such as autoplay, infinite scroll, 'like counts,' and push notifications create a product that, particularly for adolescent users, is highly rewarding psychologically and neurochemically," he wrote. "As a result, for many, it is irresistibly compelling to start scrolling and very difficult to stop or abstain from its use."
"In addition," the judge added, "algorithmic content recommendations can create harmful feedback loops and 'rabbit hole' users. Within a similar vein, 'like counts'... can provide a potentially harmful focus for adolescent users."
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the company would appeal the ruling, claiming: “We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and have been transparent about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors and harmful content. We remain confident in our record of protecting teens online and will continue to defend ourselves against claims that misrepresent the facts."
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez hailed the ruling, saying that “Meta built products it knew would fuel addiction, deepen a youth mental health crisis, and expose children to sexual exploitation, then lied to parents and policymakers about the danger. Today, it pays for that choice.”
At Fairplay—a children's advocacy group—executive director Josh Golin hailed the "landmark ruling" as "the clearest indication yet that the tide is turning when it comes to protecting kids from social media."
"For the first time, Meta is being compelled by a court to change its dangerous and harmful design," he continued. "And with so many states lined up to sue Meta and other social media companies, we should expect to see a lot more injunctive relief to make online platforms used by young people safer."
“This ruling also clearly indicates why families need the Kids Online Safety Act," Golin added, referring to a controversial bill advanced this week by the Senate Commerce Committee. "The judge said it was up to Congress to address the addictive features on Instagram and other social media platforms. KOSA’s duty of care against compulsive use is the key to ensuring that Meta and other social media companies stop designing for addiction, as addictive design is the root of all social media harms.”
Justin Mazzola, deputy director of research at Amnesty International USA, said in a statement: "This verdict is an important step towards creating safer social media for children and young people. For years, Amnesty International has warned that major social media platforms have been designed to maximize engagement and profit, while failing to adequately protect children’s rights."
“Crucially, the court went beyond imposing a financial penalty," he continued. "By ordering changes to platform features, including removing 'like' counts for people under 18 and restricting overnight notifications, the ruling recognizes that the harms children experience online are often the result of deliberate design choices."
“Amnesty has been calling for exactly this kind of action," Mazzola added. "Child safety must be built into platforms from the start, not added as an afterthought once harms are identified. This decision sends a clear message that social media companies cannot continue to prioritize engagement at the expense of children’s well-being and rights.”
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said on Bluesky: "This is good news. For far too long, Big Tech corporations have put their bottom lines ahead of the health and safety of kids on their platforms."
"Congress must continue to push for accountability and real guardrails for companies like Meta as tech giants continue to grow," added Jayapal, who was critical of the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act approved by the House of Representatives in June.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also welcomed the ruling, posting on X that billionaire Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's "greed is fueling a youth mental health crisis in America."
"Today, a judge ordered Meta to pay a $567 million fine for the damage it has done to our kids," Sanders added. "Good start. We cannot allow Meta to put its short-term profits above the emotional well-being of our kids."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'We Must Pass Medicare for All,' Says Troy Jackson as 12th Maine Maternity Unit Closes in 11 Years
"It's past time that we fix our broken, profit-centered healthcare system that leaves many of us struggling to get care, and most of us struggling to pay for it when we do," said the US Senate candidate.
Aug 07, 2026
Democratic US Senate candidate Troy Jackson on Friday was among the Maine leaders expressing anger over the decision by MaineHealth, the state's largest nonprofit healthcare system, to close a labor and delivery unit that's crucial to families in three counties after local residents organized a monthslong grassroots effort to keep the department open.
"I'm angry," said Jackson, the former state Senate president who officially became the Democratic candidate last month. "This marks the 12th labor and delivery ward we've lost in this state since 2015."
With rural hospitals across Maine expected to continue closing—partially due to nearly $3 billion in Medicaid cuts over the next decade, which were included in President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act along with tax cuts for the wealthy—Jackson repeated his call for a government-funded universal healthcare system.
"It's past time that we fix our broken, profit-centered healthcare system that leaves many of us struggling to get care, and most of us struggling to pay for it when we do," said Jackson. "We must pass Medicare for All."
MaineHealth's Board of Trustees voted Thursday in favor of closing the labor and delivery unit at Lincoln Hospital on the health network's Miles Campus in the coastal town of Damariscotta. The decision leaves Lincoln, Waldo, and Sagadahoc counties without any labor and delivery units, and leaves half of the state's 34 hospitals without birthing wards.
The hospital system said it had reached the decision because it cannot "continue providing safe, reliable care for every mother and every baby, every day and every night," according to CEO Andrew Mueller.
Labor and delivery "requires highly specialized teams that are available around the clock and prepared to respond immediately to routine deliveries and unexpected emergencies," said Mueller. "We concluded that we could no longer consistently ensure that level of staffing and clinical coverage at Lincoln Hospital over the long term.”
Cindy Wade, president of Lincoln Hospital, told community members ahead of the vote that the potential closure was "not driven by finance," while acknowledging that staffing is a problem for the facility.
The day before the decision was announced, a woman named Corinna Stum, who had been set to deliver her baby at Miles in January—a month after the unit is set to close—filed a lawsuit in an effort to stop the closure. Stum requested an emergency injunction while the court determines whether MaineHealth violated its obligation to serve the public and be transparent in its review process
A grassroots organization called Miles Delivers Action Coalition, started by three women from the area, has held rallies alongside Jackson, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Hannah Pingree, and other local leaders, as well as working with clinicians to determine how the Miles Campus could deliver sustainable care for parents and babies and finding obstetricians who would be willing to work at the hospital.
The group also examined the finances of the $4 billion healthcare network, finding that the Miles Campus outperformed its parent system in terms of profitability and that deliveries at the hospital are on the rise, despite declining birth rates nationwide.
"A CEO paid $2.2 million should be expected to find solutions, not simply eliminate services," said the coalition as it rallied 10,000 supporters in a matter of months to help convince the hospital to keep the unit open.
When the coalition reached out to MaineHealth with its ideas for continuing to provide maternity services, the company argued that pregnant patients will be able to travel to Mid Coast Hospital for their deliveries—a 26-mile, 43-minute drive from Damariscotta.
When announcing the closure, MaineHealth also suggested families could also transfer their obstetrical care to Pen Bay Hospital, which is roughly the same distance from the town.
Dr. Tim Goltz, a family physician at Miles, told NPR earlier this week: "There's no doubt in my mind that if OB goes away at Miles, that there will be mothers and babies who die because of that decision. The literature is very clear that the further you have to travel to deliver a baby, the higher the risk is of serious complications and death. "
Miles Delivers Action Coalition said the vote on Thursday resulted in "one of the most harmful decisions our community will ever see," and accused MaineHealth of "cowardice."
“They have ignored the voice of our governor, politicians on all sides, the local ambulance service, businesses, far and wide, and they are creating a maternity desert in Lincoln County,” the group said. “This isn’t a hospital, it’s a morgue.”
Former US Senate candidate and organizer Jordan Wood, also an advocate for Medicare for All, said decisions like MaineHealth's would lead Mainers to "lose trust and faith in democracy."
"Millennials, women, moms, young moms, pregnant women organized in our community the minute that news broke that there was a possibility that Miles would close," said Wood. "It can feel like a failure, but it's not... We will fix this problem. This is a setback, it's not a failure."
MaineHealth just voted to close labor and delivery at Miles. The last birthing unit in Lincoln County. You can't make a birth profitable. So this system cuts it. Every time.
This isn’t the end of our fight. pic.twitter.com/fpXLzkAYKi
— Jordan Wood (@JordanWood) August 7, 2026
"There is no way to make labor and delivery profitable," said Wood. "We are living in an absolutely broken healthcare system by profit. By for-profit health insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies that only make money off of us being sick... This is the reminder for so many of us about why this healthcare system is so corrupt and broken and in need of a total overhaul."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Renewables Surge Despite Trump Cuts, With Solar as Top May Power Source in 2 States
"Wind plus solar is on a tear right now," said one expert.
Aug 07, 2026
Despite the Trump administration's staunch support for the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry and equally aggressive attacks on renewable energy, the US is generating more power from the sun and wind than ever, according to the latest figures on the matter.
Updated state-level data confirmed this week that solar generation eclipsed every other source of electricity in Utah for the first time in its history, with photovoltaic panels producing nearly 1 terawatt-hour in May. That's enough to power roughly 90,000 homes for an entire year, according to the US Department of Energy.
That amount represented nearly one-third of all electricity generated in Utah that month, according to data from the global energy think tank Ember. Natural gas generated 32% of Utah's electricity in May, while coal produced 28%, and wind 2%.
“The trend of more and more solar in Utah is wonderful news for air quality, it’s wonderful news for the climate, and it’s wonderful news for jobs and the economy,” Dan Schroeder, a physics professor at Weber State University in Ogden, told Grist in an article published on Thursday.
Meanwhile, California achieved an even more significant milestone. Solar was already the largest source of electricity generation in the Golden State. In May, solar produced 51% of California's electricity, the first time a renewable energy source generated more than half of a state's power for an entire month. Solar also outproduced natural gas in every month of 2026 through May, the last month confirmed.
Also in May, solar supplied more of the nation's electricity than coal for the first time, and solar and wind combined generated the majority of electricity in seven states and more than 30% of power in 20 states.
Good morning with good news: Solar & wind generated more than 50% of electricity in 7 US states & more than 30% in 20 states in May 2026! Top 10 S&W states:IA 67%SD 64%NM 63%CA 58.9%KS 58.3%MA 56.9%CO 51.8%VT 49%OK 48.6%ME 45.7%S&W generated 24.2% of US power in May.#energysky
[image or embed]
— John Hanger (@jrfhanger.bsky.social) August 7, 2026 at 4:42 AM
“We’re going to see milestones like this increasingly happen,” Logan Mitchell, a climate scientist and energy analyst with Utah Clean Energy, told Grist.
According to the US Energy Information Administration, approximately 51% of new utility-scale electricity generation in the United States is projected to come from the sun this year, as the nation is expected to add another 43.4 gigawatts of solar, compared to 6.3 gigawatts of natural gas generation and no new coal.
More broadly, the US produced nearly three times as much solar, wind, and geothermal power in 2025 than it did in 2016, with renewables accounting for more than 20% of the nation's power production, as shown by the recently launched State of Renewable Energy online dashboard published by Environment America Research & Policy Center and Frontier Group.
Renewables accounted for 21.4% of national retail electricity sales in 2025, up from just 8% in 2016. South Dakota led the nation by generating the equivalent of 95% of its retail electricity from wind, solar, or geothermal.
“In 2026, America is getting more power from the sun and wind than ever,” Wendy Wendlandt, president and chairwoman of Environment America Research & Policy Center, said in May. “Renewable energy is reliable, resilient, and shows up for free every day. When we replace polluting energy sources with solar and wind, it delivers a cleaner, healthier future for all Americans.”
The surge in renewables comes amid efforts by the administration of President Donald Trump—who ran on a "drill, baby, drill" energy platform during a 2024 presidential campaign generously supported by the fossil fuel industry—to boost oil, gas, and coal and roll back clean power initiatives.
At times, the Trump administration's animus toward renewables has been downright inane, like when Interior Secretary Doug Burgum—a billionaire who has personally profited from an oil lease on family land—infamously trashed solar by saying that "when the sun goes down, you have a catastrophic failure called sunset and there’s no solar energy produced," prompting some observers to question whether he's aware of batteries or how they work.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed into law by Trump last year includes billions of dollars in handouts for the fossil fuel industry, boosts drilling on millions of acres of public lands, mandates oil and gas lease sales, and imposes new fees on renewable development. A report published last month by BlueGreen Alliance revealed that "23 manufacturing, clean energy, and industrial projects are already facing cancellations and delays representing at least $82.8 billion in capital investment, which could cost 111,765 jobs."
Last month, Common Dreams reported that Trump's rollback of clean energy policies will cost American consumers $650 billion in additional energy bills by 2040, based on figures from the San Francisco-based energy and climate policy think tank Energy Innovations.
Trump has also twice withdrawn the US from the Paris Agreement, rolled back Environmental Protection Agency rules, signed pro-fossil fuel executive orders—including one declaring what critics say is a "phony" energy emergency—resumed and accelerated approvals for new natural gas export terminals following a moratorium enacted during the Biden administration, and paid billions of taxpayer dollars to kill clean energy projects around the world.
The “energy emergency” has been invoked to fast-track fossil fuel permits, including for extraction projects on public lands. This, despite overwhelming evidence that burning fossil fuels is the leading driver of the climate emergency.
Still, clean energy advocates are buoyed by recent reports of rising renewables.
"Wind plus solar is on a tear right now," said Mitchell. "We may have achieved liftoff."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Each President Is a Temporary Tenant': DC Appeals Court Orders Halt to Trump Ballroom Construction
"The president has no... constitutionally assigned authority over that property."
Aug 07, 2026
A federal court on Friday ruled that President Donald Trump must halt most construction of his $400 million White House ballroom project, siding with a lower court that said it must be authorized by Congress.
“Each president is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its executive residence,” wrote judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia in a 2-1 decision for the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. "The president has no—and claims no—constitutionally assigned authority over that property."
Friday’s ruling only affects the above-ground portions of the project. The construction of a fortified underground bunker and other “national security facilities” beneath the site is allowed to continue.
Trump has already demolished the East Wing of the White House to make room for the project, which he has said will be entirely privately funded, mostly by corporate donors, many of whom had business before the executive branch. However, reporting from The Washington Post in June revealed that he had secretly planned to dip into $300 million worth of taxpayer dollars for the project.
At Trump's urging, Republicans have attempted to add $1 billion in taxpayer money to the federal budget to pay for the project's security features, but the proposal to pass it through budget reconciliation without approval from Democrats was rejected by the Senate parliamentarian.
The court's majority said it’s ruling “has nothing at all to do with whether the proposed ballroom is desirable, or not, as a matter of policy… What it does mean is that the defendants may not do so during the district court’s expeditious litigation without securing Congress’s authorization, as the Constitution and laws require.”
Brent Leggs, the CEO of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued to block the ballroom’s construction in December, said Friday was “a great day for our country and for the American people’s right to voice their opinions about the historic places they cherish, including the White House.”
"The White House, a global landmark that symbolizes American identity and the ideals of democracy, belongs to the American people," he said.
Trump reacted with predictable fury on Truth Social.
"We will be immediately appealing to the United States Supreme Court," he wrote. "The Military and Secret Service are viewing this horrendous, politically motivated, and unlawful ruling as a National Security threat to our Nation in that the entire Complex is being built for the protection of our Country and, additionally, all future Presidents."
The ruling is the second blow to one of Trump’s vanity projects this week. A report by the National Park Service recently found that his planned “Arc de Trump” near the National Mall could compromise the historical significance and "integrity" of dozens of other historic landmarks.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Cassidy's Yes on Blanche Again Shows Collins Only Votes Against Trump 'When Her Vote Doesn't Matter'
"The moment Collins announced she was a no on Blanche, you knew they had the votes," said MS NOW host Chris Hayes.
Aug 07, 2026
Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana announced Friday that he would vote yes on Todd Blanche's nomination for US attorney general, rendering vulnerable Sen. Susan Collins' opposition to President Donald Trump's former personal attorney effectively meaningless.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) on Friday morning came out in opposition to Blanche's confirmation—but Cassidy hours later announced that he would vote in vote in favor of the former personal attorney to President Donald Trump.
In a speech announcing the decision, Cassidy acknowledged that Blanche—who as deputy attorney general arranged for convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to be transferred to a minimum-security jail and who orchestrated the widely criticized $1.8 billion slush fund for Trump allies—is "not perfect."
I will support Todd Blanche for U.S. Attorney General. pic.twitter.com/PKWr3atuvA
— U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (@SenBillCassidy) August 7, 2026
"But the choice is not between perfection and Mr. Blanche," Cassidy continued. "It is between Mr. Blanche and another acting attorney general who may not run the department effectively under President Trump, and who indeed may not be as good as Mr. Blanche."
The Louisiana Republican added that he expected to "be criticized for this vote," before adding, "What's new?"
The sequence of Collins (R-Maine) and Murkowski announcing their opposition to Blanche, only for Cassidy to clinch his confirmation shortly after, made MS NOW host Chris Hayes suspicious that the fix was in from the start.
"The moment Collins announced she was a no on Blanche," Hayes wrote, "you KNEW they had the votes."
The social media account of Susan Collins Watch, a website that has tracked the Maine Republican's voting patterns for decades, made a similar observation.
"Of the thousands of GOP nominees Susan Collins has voted on over a 29-year career, NOT ONCE has she cast a tie-breaking vote against the GOP," they wrote. "But she's cast dozens of tie-breaking votes for GOP nominees, bills, etc. Are we supposed to believe this is some quirky statistical anomaly?"
Sam Stein, reporter for The Bulwark, argued Cassidy's yes vote on Blanche "doesn't help Collins" politically, as she "will continue to be tagged with only voting against Trump when her vote doesn't matter."
Collins in 2018 was the decisive vote in favor of confirming US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. During her speech announcing her vote for Kavanaugh, she insisted that he would uphold the precedent set by Roe v. Wade establishing the constitutional right to an abortion.
Four years later, however, Kavanaugh joined the Supreme Court majority in overturning Roe.
Former Maine state Senate President Troy Jackson, who is running against Collins as the Democratic Party's nominee for the US Senate, has highlighted the vote to confirm Kavanaugh as a major reason why she must be unseated.
“When Susan Collins was helping overturn Roe v. Wade,” Jackson said in a recent interview, “here in Maine... I co-sponsored one of the most progressive reproductive rights bills in the country—fought incredibly hard for it."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'As Toxic as AIPAC': Casar Urges Dems to Reject AI Industry Money and Protect Workers
"We need to clearly be 100% on the side of workers who are vulnerable, kids who are vulnerable, everyday people who are vulnerable to mass surveillance."
Aug 07, 2026
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar this week urged fellow Democrats to reject campaign support from artificial intelligence industry lobbyists and unveiled a bill intended to help protect workers from AI-related mass unemployment.
The Texas congressman took aim at Leading the Future (LTF), a pro-industry super political action committee (PAC), and "AI billionaires that are lobbying for no regulation," during a Thursday interview with MS NOW. He argued that "we need to clearly be 100% on the side of workers who are vulnerable, kids who are vulnerable, everyday people who are vulnerable to mass surveillance."
Casar drew a comparison to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, whose super PAC is spending millions against Democratic candidates critical of the Israeli government and its forces' genocidal violence in the Gaza Strip. He predicted that LTF and the "big anti-AI regulation donors" would soon be "as toxic as AIPAC is today."
According to AI Money Watch, a project launched in June by the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, "LTF entered 2026 with $70 million cash on hand and operates through affiliated super PACs (Think Big PAC in New York, American Mission PAC in Texas) and a dark-money 501(c)(4) arm called Build American AI."
AI Money Watch found that the two candidates with the most LTF money spent on them so far during this cycle are both former congressional Democrats from Illinois. The group poured over $1 million into supporting Jesse Jackson Jr., who lost the primary for the 2nd District, and AIPAC-backed Melissa Bean, who beat a progressive in the state's 8th District.
LTF also spent over $1 million each on Ben McAdams, a former Democratic congressman running in Utah's 1st District, and Congressman Ritchie Torres (D-NY), who is formally endorsed by the group. Rounding out the top 5 is James Kingston, a Georgia Republican who won the 1st District primary, with over $960,000 spent on him.
Casar told MS NOW that rejecting such support could help his party earn the trust of voters: "If Democrats clearly stand with the 75% plus of Americans that want sensible AI regulations to prevent mass unemployment, mass surveillance, or mass national security risks, I think we should win over the voters... Even if it means we don't win over all the money."
Gallup found last September that 80% of US adults believe the government should prioritize "maintaining rules for AI safety and data security, even if it means developing AI capabilities at a slower rate." In March, 76% of respondents to a Americans for Responsible Innovation poll said that they had concerns about AI tools enabling unprecedented government surveillance of citizens.
A June poll conducted by Justice Research Group for Working Families Power found that 85% of working-class voters support large-scale retraining and apprenticeship programs for workers whose jobs are changed by artificial intelligence, 73% worry that AI will lead to job losses, and 62% fear the rapidly developing technology would personally affect them or people close to them.
Casar partnered with Reps. Valerie Foushee (D-NC) and Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) on Thursday to introduce the AI Tax and Work Protection Act, a bill that would tax industry giants to fund a Work Protection Administration charged with creating jobs to offset layoffs.
"This bill says: We will not let AI billionaires get rich by putting you out of work," said Casar. "Right now, the path we are on is clear: AI will turn a couple of billionaires into trillionaires but leave millions without work. That is unacceptable. And right now, the federal government is doing nothing to protect workers from the threat of AI mass unemployment. Our bill would protect American workers by making big AI companies pay their fair share."
The bill is backed by various policy experts and advocacy organizations, including the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees; Groundwork Action; and Demand Progress Action—whose executive director, Sean Vitka, applauded Casar's "continued leadership on artificial intelligence."
"Serious, resilient proposals to address the unfolding impacts of this rapidly advancing technology are far too hard to find in Congress," said Vitka. "Some policymakers don't take AI seriously enough, and some don't understand it at all. With this legislation, Rep. Casar is instead demonstrating the kind of policymaking vision needed to meet the moments ahead."
Related legislation recently introduced by progressives in Congress includes the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act proposed in June by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), which would give the public "a direct ownership stake" in the largest artificial intelligence companies in the country, and the landmark data center moratorium bill unveiled in March by Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
In a sign of how the public is feeling about "AI taking our jobs," data centers driving up utility bills, and "surveillance tech tracking our every move," a coalition of groups is planning a week of action from August 9-16 "to demand that our elected officials stand with the people—not Big Tech billionaires."
Keep Reading
Show Less
‘Like the Gestapo’: Trump-Voting Businessman Horrified After ICE Arrest of His Fiancée
"The most horrible things shouldn’t have to happen to you in order to oppose them," said one critic.
Aug 07, 2026
A Trump voter is in shock after the president's ongoing effort to conduct the largest mass deportation campaign in US history impacted him personally.
In an interview with CBS News published Thursday, Texas businessman John Gannon expressed regret for supporting President Donald Trump in the 2024 election after federal immigration officials last month detained his fiancé, a Venezuelan immigrant named Yasmin Suarez Reyes.
Gannon said that he expected that Trump's mass deportation campaign would only go after criminals who are unlawfully in the US, but instead found "they are picking up law-abiding citizens" and "destroying families, jobs."
Texas businessman John Gannon says he feels "totally betrayed" after his Venezuelan fiancée, Yasmin Suarez Reyes, was detained by ICE at Houston's international airport.
A lifelong Republican who says he voted for President Trump, Gannon told CBS News' @camiloreports he now… pic.twitter.com/7dDvGH1TrM
— CBS News (@CBSNews) August 6, 2026
Gannon, the owner of over 1,000 billboards in the US and of a hotel and restaurant in Mexico, explained that Suarez Reyes was detained in July by multiple US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents after passing through security at the George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston.
According to Gannon, the ICE officers "swarmed" Suarez Reyes and "wrestled her off into a car" without providing an explanation.
"This is like the Gestapo," Gannon said.
Anne Kennedy, an attorney representing Suarez Reyes, told CBS that her client entered the US legally and had a pending asylum case and had been able to get a work permit and a Texas driver's license before she was detained. Kennedy also noted that Suarez Reyes had no criminal record.
"For almost two weeks now, she has been in a physical jail cell," said Kennedy, "when she has done nothing more than follow the laws of the United States and do what our immigration laws allow her to do."
When asked by CBS what message he had for Trump, Gannon encouraged the president to "go after the criminals" but "leave the mom and pops and the kids alone."
"Man, he's destroying families," Gannon added.
Some critics expressed little empathy for Gannon's situation, however, given Trump's decades of racist attacks on immigrants.
"You voted for Trump to do this to other people," commented journalist Molly Knight. "You’re mad because he’s not doing this to 'the right people,' as defined by you."
Election forecaster Rachel Bitecofer was similarly unsympathetic, and sarcastically summed up Gannon's position as, "I only wanted other people's relatives deported!"
Gun safety activist Shannon Watts questioned why Gannon needed to be personally impacted by Trump's policies to turn against them.
"The most horrible things shouldn’t have to happen to you in order to oppose them," Watts wrote.
Keep Reading
Show Less
'How Cruel': Child Advocates Rip Trump's Plan to Gut Head Start
"This proposed rule would fundamentally alter Head Start and break the promise that America has made good on for decades to offer the children born furthest from opportunity with the best our country has to offer in early childhood education.
Aug 07, 2026
Advocates for early education and vulnerable children are denouncing a new rule issued Thursday by the administration of President Donald Trump that would severely weaken the Head Start program relied on by families and communities nationwide.
"At a time when the US faces the highest rate of child poverty of any major country, how does Mr. Trump respond?" asked Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), in response to the rule. "Instead of expanding access to early childhood education, he is moving to dismantle Head Start and the standards that keep its 700,000 kids safe. How cruel."
Head Start—created as a federal program in 1965 and "designed to prepare America’s most vulnerable young children to succeed in school and in life beyond school"—has been an ongoing target of the Trump administration, which has moved to eviscerate the program's funding and voiced support for scrapping it completely.
Speaking with NPR, journalist Coral Davenport, who reports for the New York Times, explained that early childhood educators fear the changes being proposed represent the most sweeping changes—more like "erasure" than "reforms"—to the program since its founding:
The Trump administration is proposing a major overhaul of Head Start, with new guidelines that could fundamentally change how the program is run nationwide.
Launched in 1965 as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, Head Start serves 700,000 children ages three to… pic.twitter.com/YsDgM4OzX7
— PBS News (@NewsHour) August 6, 2026
The Children's Defense Fund (CDF) warns that the new rule, published in the federal register by the US Department of Health and Human Services, represents a new attack on Head Start that would "dismantle the program from the inside out."
The rule, according to the CDF, will result in the "stripping away of most of the quality standards that define what children and families actually receive" when they are part of the program, "including the requirements that ensure children are safe and supported, that hold programs accountable to the families they serve, and that guarantee the comprehensive services children need to arrive at kindergarten ready to learn."
In a letter stating their opposition to the attack, CDF—joined by EdTrust, Legal Defense Fund, NAACP, National Center for Learning Disabilities, National Urban League, The Arc, and UnidosUS—warned that Head Start "will exist in name only, offering unequal services based on where the child lives," if the rule is finalized.
According to the coalition:
The proposal strips away most of the quality standards that define what services children and families actually receive, including the requirements that ensure children are safe and supported, that hold programs accountable to the families they serve, and that guarantee the comprehensive services children need to arrive at kindergarten ready to learn. We urge the administration to withdraw it.
Over the past year, the administration has delayed funding that programs depend on to keep their doors open, cut the federal staff who support them, and proposed eliminating Head Start entirely. Each of these moves has created uncertainty for the providers who run these programs and the families who count on them. We oppose this latest attack on Head Start, which will harm the children and families the program was built to serve.
The signers of the letter called on the administration to rescind its proposal and said Congress must "stand behind Head Start and reject these changes so that we maintain the promise of Head Start for future generations."
Democratic lawmakers in the US House and Senate joined Sanders in slamming the move.
"Trump is trying to destroy Head Start—and he's hoping you won't notice," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). "He's gutting basic standards and protections for over 700,000 kids, after he already tried and failed to defund the program altogether. We need to speak up and SAVE Head Start."
Trump is trying to destroy Head Start—and he's hoping you won't notice.
He's gutting basic standards & protections for over 700,000 kids, after he already tried and failed to defund the program altogether.
We need to speak up and SAVE Head Start. pic.twitter.com/zDgGqFxVaC
— Senator Patty Murray (@PattyMurray) August 6, 2026
"Head Start is not just preschool," said Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) in a social media post. "For hundreds of thousands of children from low-income families, it is where they learn to read, receive basic health screenings, get support for disabilities, and begin kindergarten with a real chance to succeed."
The regulations that govern Head Start, which Trump's HHS now wants to eliminate, said Levin, "are the difference between children getting the care and support they need or being left to fall through the cracks. Why on earth would anyone want to take that away from them?"
As Murray noted, "this rule is not final," meaning there remain avenues to defeat it.
When a previous Trump memo detailing the desire to eliminate Head Start leaked, said Murray, "we got loud and he backed off. We can protect Head Start again, but it's going to take all of us speaking up and taking a stand for our kids."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Trump Is Tanking the US Economy': Dismal Report Shows 23,000 Jobs Lost, Slowing Wage Growth
"However the White House tries to spin these numbers, their talking points ring hollow for people who are actually experiencing Trump’s weak economy."
Aug 07, 2026
Federal data released Friday shows the US economy shed 23,000 jobs last month, but one analyst said that figure was "only the beginning of the bad news" for the country's job market under the leadership of President Donald Trump.
"This is a bleak jobs report," said Heather Long, the chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, noting that the unemployment rate fell slightly in July—but primarily because more people left the labor force—and year-over-year hourly wage growth slowed to 3.2%, not keeping up with inflation.
Breyon Williams, the Groundwork Collaborative's top economist, said in response to the new Labor Department numbers that "regardless of having a job or not, everyone is paying high prices from Trump’s chaotic tariffs and war with Iran."
"Today’s report shows a patchwork economy that is fraying at the seams," said Williams. "Trump’s economic mismanagement has injected so much uncertainty into the economy that employers are not confident enough to add more people, but also have not initiated massive layoffs, creating a frozen job market where those with jobs are afraid to leave them and those without are stuck on the sidelines."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) wrote on social media that "Trump is tanking the US economy."
In addition to the loss of 23,000 jobs last month—far worse than forecasters' expectation of an increase of 80,000 jobs—the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised job growth downward for both May and June. BLS said job growth in May was actually 20,000 (down from the earlier estimate of 57,000), and job growth in June was 63,000 (down from 129,000). The healthcare sector has accounted for a disproportionate share of US employment growth this year.
"This economy is running on fumes," said Angela Hanks, a former Labor Department official who now works as chief of policy programs at The Century Foundation. "However the White House tries to spin these numbers, their talking points ring hollow for people who are actually experiencing Trump’s weak economy."
White House spin efforts began almost immediately after the release of the new figures.
Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, claimed during a Fox Business appearance that the dismal job numbers were a testament to the success of Trump's mass deportation campaign, even though the largest job losses in July occurred in state and local government.
"Because we have a tight border and because we've been deporting folks who aren't citizens, then that puts downward pressure on what the sort of breakeven job number is," said Hassett.
Speaking to reporters outside the White House, Hassett also blamed the "end of the World Cup," which "meant that a lot of hospitality workers were then laid off."
Kevin Hassett thinks Americans are very very stupid. This spin is ridiculous, transparent BS. pic.twitter.com/h0qX7c8fbI
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 7, 2026
"Is this the ‘Golden Age’ that Donald Trump and JD Vance keep talking about?" asked Kendall Witmer, the Democratic National Committee's rapid response director, following publication of the BLS report. "Trump’s disastrous economic agenda has caused irreparable damage to the job market, as layoffs mount and it’s nearly impossible to find a job."
"Working families are already drowning under the weight of skyrocketing costs on everyday goods like groceries, gas, and healthcare, and their paychecks aren’t keeping up," said Witmer. "Americans are barely keeping their heads above water—and Trump can’t even be bothered to care."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Stand for Something!' All Eyes on Cassidy After Murkowski Says She's a No on Blanche
"This vote offers one last shot to use his power to do what he knows is right."
Aug 07, 2026
Attention turned to Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy on Friday after his colleague, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, announced her opposition to confirming President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer Todd Blanche as US attorney general, leaving the GOP without any additional votes to spare.
With Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) expected to be absent and Sens. Murkowski and Susan Collins (R-Maine) planning to vote no, Cassidy (La.)—who lost reelection in May to a Trump-backed challenger—is seen as the last-remaining obstacle to confirming Blanche. The Trump lackey is currently leading the Justice Department in an acting capacity.
Murkowski said in a statement that she decided to oppose Blanche's confirmation because of the Justice Department's "handling of the release of the Epstein files; the sweeping immunity protections granted to the President, his family, and their businesses; the statements that have been made to anti-abortion groups; and the repeated targeting of individuals ranging from former administration staff to sitting US senators."
“I am also keenly aware that the Department’s nearly $2-billion dollar slush fund—which likely would have rewarded January 6 protesters—is only off the table because this nomination is pending and the Senate has leverage. Once we vote, that will end, and there is no telling what the future holds," the Republican senator added. “The country needs an attorney general who will check the worst impulses of this administration. I hope Mr. Blanche is able to achieve that, if confirmed, but I simply do not have confidence that will be the case.”
Cassidy met with Blanche earlier this week but has not indicated publicly how he intends to vote. Republicans were hoping to confirm Blanche before senators leave for August recess on Friday.
In an interview earlier this week, Cassidy said that he has to be convinced that Blanche "is an attorney general who just happens to have once been President Trump’s personal attorney, as opposed to President Trump’s personal attorney who is now the attorney general."
"I think there’s a big difference between the two," the Louisiana senator.
Cassidy has repeatedly drawn Trump's ire since voting to convict him in 2021 for inciting the January 6 insurrection. Earlier this year, Cassidy reportedly got into a shouting match with Trump over the Iran war after the Republican senator voted to advance a war powers resolution that sought to bring the illegal conflict to an end.
But in some cases, Cassidy has aided the administration. In February, for instance, the Louisiana Republican cast the deciding vote to confirm Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as head of the Health and Human Services Department. Cassidy, a physician, has since criticized Kennedy's leadership of the health department.
Sarah Longwell, a former Republican and publisher of The Bulwark, wrote Friday that "considering his disastrous decision to confirm RFK and Trump’s attacks against him in the primary, this vote offers one last shot [for Cassidy] to use his power to do what he knows is right."
"For God’s sake man, stand for something!" Longwell added.
If Cassidy announces his opposition, it's possible that Republicans will try to summon McConnell to cast the deciding vote on Blanche.
McConnell was hospitalized in June after a fall, according to his office. On Thursday, McConnell said he was discharged and planned to continue his recovery at home.
McConnell's primary residence is in Washington, DC.
Keep Reading
Show Less
See More
Most Popular
Progressive Newswire
Blanche Is (Still) Unfit to Be Named Attorney General
Aug 07 2026 · 01:26pm EDT
Food & Water Watch Applauds Failure of Bad Senate Farm Bill
Aug 06 2026 · 03:07pm EDT
New National Policy Agenda Offers Blueprint for Shifting and Keeping People Power
Aug 06 2026 · 01:39pm EDT
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy