

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.

Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), on work sharing:
"It is encouraging that President Obama recognizes his obligation to take steps to restore the economy to full employment. The government alone has the power to lift the economy out of this downturn. Eventually, the private sector will be able to absorb the unemployed, but there are no remotely plausible projections that show private sector employment closing the gap anytime soon.
"There are many useful steps that President Obama can take to boost the economy. These steps include additional aid to state and local governments to stem the tide of layoffs in this sector. A youth jobs program would also give a chance to millions of teens in pockets of especially high unemployment. In addition the slack in the economy provides a great opportunity to address long-neglected infrastructure needs.
"However the quickest, and likely cheapest, way to increase employment would be to aggressively promote a policy of work sharing, for which President Obama already proposed some funding in his 2012 budget. This path has been effectively followed by Germany. Germany has a lower unemployment rate than it did at the start of the downturn even though its growth has been no better than growth in the United States.
"Work sharing is an effective alternative to an irrational system of unemployment insurance. In the current system, workers are effectively paid to be completely unemployed. Workers will get benefits from the government if they are laid off, however they get nothing if their hours are shortened.
"There is no public interest in encouraging employers to lay off workers. In fact there is a public interest in keeping workers employed, even if at shorter hours. If workers stay on the payroll, they maintain their contact with the workforce and continue to upgrade their skills. By contrast, if they are laid off and end up as a victim of long-term unemployment, they are likely to lose contact with the working population and their skills could deteriorate. This could make it significantly harder for them to find new jobs.
"To prevent this situation, the government should make work sharing an attractive alternative to layoffs. If just 10 percent of the workers who lose their job each month could be retained as a result of an effective work sharing program it would be equivalent to creating 2.4 million jobs over the course of a year.
"This simple logic is the reason that work sharing has been embraced by a large number of economists and policy analysts across the political spectrum, including experts at the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for American Progress, the Center for Law and Social Policy, the Economic Policy Institute, National Employment Law Project, the New America Foundation.
"There are currently two different routes to promote work sharing being considered in Congress . One route would expand the programs that exist in 20 states. Its lead sponsors are Rosa DeLauro in the House and Jack Reed in the Senate. The other would provide an employer tax credit to subsidize costs for companies that participate in the program. Representative John Conyers is the lead sponsor for this bill, which will likely be introduced in the coming weeks."
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380A majority of those polled in a new Data for Progress survey also said that the war "is not worth the risk."
As President Donald Trump says he's "not afraid" of a Vietnam-style invasion of Iran and is reportedly considering sending thousands more US troops to the Middle East, polling published Thursday reveals that most American voters strongly oppose boots on the ground in a war a majority believe isn't worth it.
Just over two-thirds—68%—of respondents to the Data for Progress survey said they oppose deploying US ground troops to Iran, while just 26% support such action. Among Democratic respondents, 86% were against a ground invasion, which is also opposed by 71% of Independents. Republicans were split, with 48% supporting and 48% opposing sending troops into Iran.
Slightly more than half (52%) of those polled said they agree with the statement "going to war with Iran is not worth the risk because it will cost billions of dollars and result in the deaths of civilians and more American service members," 13 of whom have been killed during a war whose globally defining moment thus far has been the massacre of around 175 children and staff at a girls' school bombed by the US.
Among Democrats, 77% of survey respondents said the war isn't worth it. Conversely, 64% of Republicans said the war on Iran is worthwhile.
NEW: A strong majority of voters (68%) would oppose the U.S. putting boots on the ground in Iran.This includes 85% of Democrats, 71% of Independents, and about half of Republicans.
[image or embed]
— Data for Progress (@dataforprogress.org) March 19, 2026 at 8:38 AM
The Data for Progress survey follows Wednesday's publication of a Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft poll revealing that nearly 8 in 10 people who voted for Trump in 2024—when he campaigned heavily on a "no new wars" platform—want a swift end to the war on Iran.
Nearly three weeks into the US-Israeli war that Trump said was "won" more than a week ago, Iran remains undefeated, launching missiles and drones at targets throughout the Middle East, paralyzing international shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, and demonstrating continuity of government as Israel assassinates one of its leaders after another.
As the war grinds on with no clear objective or exit strategy, the Pentagon is reportedly seeking more money and more troops for the fight. Democratic senators have warned that the US is "on a path" to a land invasion of Iran. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reportedly approved the deployment of more warships and thousands of Marines to the region.
Asked Wednesday by a reporter if he is afraid of "another Vietnam"—where more than 58,000 US troops and around 50 times as many Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians were killed over two decades—Trump replied, "I'm really not afraid of anything."
The Pentagon is now reportedly asking Congress to authorize another $200 billion for a war that's already costing taxpayers around a billion dollars a day.
This, as American workers and families struggle to make ends meet as the price of gas and other consumer goods spike amid an expensive betrayal of Trump's campaign promise to "make America affordable again."
"The American people do not want the government to bypass the courts and buy our private information in bulk from data brokers."
With Republican leadership in the US House of Representatives aiming for "a straightforward extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, next week," a diverse coalition on Thursday renewed calls for Congress to impose "much-needed privacy protections against government agencies' warrantless mass surveillance of people in the United States."
Section 702 empowers the US government to spy on electronic communications of noncitizens located outside the United States to acquire foreign intelligence information, without a warrant. However, Americans' data is also collected, and advocates and lawmakers have long demanded reforms to the abused authority, which is set to expire next month unless reauthorized.
As President Donald Trump's White House—including Stephen Miller, his pro-spying deputy chief of staff—pushes for a "clean" reauthorization, 133 artificial intelligence, civil rights, and other progressive groups convened by Demand Progress and the Project On Government Oversight sent a Thursday letter to Republican and Democratic leaders in both chambers of Congress.
The coalition's letter argues that "FISA's sunsets were designed to prompt Congress to consider privacy protections" and calls for "closing the data broker loophole" that intelligence and law enforcement agencies use to buy their way around the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which is supposed to protect Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures.
"Data brokers sell private information about all Americans, often surreptitiously obtaining that data from our phones and other internet-connected devices," the letter explains. "This information paints a mosaic of each and every American's life, which exposes where we sleep, what we believe, whom we vote for, and a staggering amount more."
The loophole "facilitates mass surveillance and circumvents FISA reforms Congress enacted in 2015 to prohibit domestic bulk data collection," the missive continues. Closing it "would ensure government agencies obtain judicial approval before buying information about people in the United States from data brokers if it would otherwise require a court order to seize."
"This would establish a critical legal process to protect privacy before such warrantlessly acquired information is fed into artificial intelligence surveillance systems, and help avert looming and unprecedented threats to Americans' civil liberties," it adds, citing a poll that shows 80% of Americans think the government should have to obtain a warrant before being able to buy such data.
The letter also highlights recent reporting from The New York Times that the US Department of Defense wants AI companies to "allow for the collection and analysis of unclassified, commercial bulk data on Americans, such as geolocation and web browsing data," and appears to have already secured one agreement that could permit any use the government deems lawful.
Demand Progress executive director Sean Vitka warned in a Thursday statement that "by rushing to renew FISA without any reforms, Congress is poised to allow AI companies and government agencies to supercharge mass domestic surveillance systems with our location and web browsing data—all without a warrant or any involvement from the courts."
"The American people do not want the government to bypass the courts and buy our private information in bulk from data brokers," Vitka stressed. "To protect Americans' privacy, our Fourth Amendment rights and the fundamental liberties that privacy protects, Congress must close the data broker loophole before renewing the government's surveillance power."
The letter—whose other signatories include the ACLU, Amnesty International US, Center for Democracy & Technology, Consumer Action, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Fight for the Future, Friends of the Earth US, MoveOn, No Tech for Apartheid, Peace Action, Progressive Democrats of America, Reporters Without Borders, and more—points out that "several already introduced pieces of legislation both reauthorize Section 702 and effectively close the data broker loophole."
Among them is the bipartisan Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act, introduced last month by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), and backed by organizations including Demand Progress.
"Section 702 is a valuable tool to help keep our nation safe," Durbin said at the time. "However, it's being used to conduct thousands of warrantless searches of Americans' private communications. That's unacceptable. Our bipartisan SAFE Act is a commonsense solution to continue protecting our country from foreign threats—while safeguarding Americans' civil liberties and privacy."
“People are excited to vote for someone who will actually fight for them. Not just nibble around the edges.”
US Senate candidate Graham Platner said Thursday that he was looking forward to joining Sen. Elizabeth Warren in the fight to take on "Wall Street and the billionaires waging a class war against the rest of us" after the progressive lawmaker announced her endorsement of the combat veteran who has centered the struggles of working families across Maine in his campaign.
Warren (D-Mass.) became the fourth sitting senator to throw her support behind Platner, following Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.).
The "class war" Platner spoke about figured heavily into Warren's statement announcing her endorsement, which she gave in a video posted on social media.
"He understands what's happening to working people when there's not someone in Washington fighting like hell for your family," said Warren. "We've already seen it. Hospitals are closing down. Gas prices are up. [President Donald] Trump's illegal tariffs have made everything more expensive. And now we're at war with Iran."
"Oh—and God forbid, you want to buy a home," she said, referencing fast-rising median home prices, which have shot up both nationally and in Maine in recent years.
🚨Endorsement Alert! 🚨
“People are excited to vote for someone who will actually fight for them. Not just nibble around the edges.”
Thank you, Senator Warren. Together I look forward to taking on Wall Street and the billionaires waging a class war against the rest of us. pic.twitter.com/BQjKMNaldP
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) March 19, 2026
Like Warren, Platner has pledged to take on "the billionaire economy" by imposing a billionaire minimum tax, and passing a constitutional amendment to stop the ultrarich from "buying elections."
Warren also emphasized that as a combat veteran who was deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, Platner "knows the consequences of Donald Trump sending our service members to fight endless wars in the Middle East."
Platner faces Gov. Janet Mills in the Democratic Senate primary; both are hoping to challenge Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). Numerous polls have shown Platner beating Mills in the primary and Collins by several points in the general election, while Mills has been shown losing to the longtime senator or beating her by a smaller margin than Platner.
Ahead of Warren's endorsement, Mills launched her first attack ad against Platner, showing several women reading old posts the Senate candidate wrote on Reddit about sexual assault survivors several years ago. Platner addressed the posts several months ago, saying they do not reflect his views today. Since the controversy, which first came to light just after Mills entered the race at the urging of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Platner has continued to lead the governor in polls and has addressed overflow crowds at rallies across the state.
Platner also raised $7.8 million last year compared to $2.6 million raised by Mills and $4.6 million raised by Collins.
The enthusiasm for Platner in Maine did not go unnoticed by Warren.
"Graham Platner has the grit to go against the grain and to fight for what is right," said the senator on Thursday. "And the people in Maine are fired up and excited for change... That's the energy, that's the fighting spirit that the Democratic Party needs now more than ever. Graham Platner can help us win back the Senate, and he can help us build a country that doesn't just work for a tiny sliver at the top, but a nation that works for working families."
Platner called the endorsement "an honor."
"Sen. Warren has spent her career fighting those who use power and wealth to take advantage of working families," said Platner. "She's been an inspiration, and I look forward to working by her side in the Senate to take on Wall Street, monopolies, and the corruption in Washington."