

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.
Rep. Keith Ellison today won unanimous consent from his colleagues to assume leadership of former Rep. John Conyers' historic single-payer health care bill, "The Expanded And Improved Medicare For All Act" (H.R. 676) as its lead sponsor. The bill, first introduced in 2003 with 25 cosponsors, would expand Medicare to become a publicly-financed national health care system that guarantees coverage to every single American through a modest new payroll tax, a financial transaction tax, and tax increases on the wealthiest households. H.R.
Rep. Keith Ellison today won unanimous consent from his colleagues to assume leadership of former Rep. John Conyers' historic single-payer health care bill, "The Expanded And Improved Medicare For All Act" (H.R. 676) as its lead sponsor. The bill, first introduced in 2003 with 25 cosponsors, would expand Medicare to become a publicly-financed national health care system that guarantees coverage to every single American through a modest new payroll tax, a financial transaction tax, and tax increases on the wealthiest households. H.R. 676 today has the support of 121 cosponsors and a similar bill in the Senate, led by Sen. Bernie Sanders, is backed by 17 senators.
"I'm honored to be charged by my colleagues with carrying on the legacy of John Conyers' historic bill to establish health care as a right," said Rep. Keith Ellison. "Every year, more and more Americans rightly question why the United States spends so much more on health care than any other industrialized nation in the world, yet still forces people to choose between paying their health care bills and putting food on the table. This is an idea whose time has come, and it is a crucial lynchpin in our fight for fairness and economic justice."
"I am excited to have Keith take the lead in the House on the fight to pass a Medicare-for-all health care system," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "With his leadership, I know that we will be able to take on the greed of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries and finally join every other major country in guaranteeing health care as a right, not a privilege."
"I congratulate my friend and colleague Keith Ellison for taking over leadership of H.R. 676 and the fight for Medicare for All," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky. "John Conyers championed this effort throughout his career, not just in the halls of Congress but across the country. As co-chair of the Seniors Task Force, I know how vital Medicare is for seniors and people with disabilities, and I believe the time has come for all Americans to have access to the health care security Medicare provides. Keith Ellison will help us turn that vision into reality. I know that he will not stop organizing until every person in our country is able to get the quality health care they need at a price that they can afford. I will be with him every step of the way."
"It is time for America to transition away from a health system that is centered around private insurance companies reaping profit off of sickness," said Rep. Raul M. Grijalva. "All Americans deserve access to preventative care and should never have to worry about an illness bankrupting their family. Medicare for All can provide the security and quality health care that they need once and for all. Under Congressman Ellison's leadership, the movement for a single payer health care system will be stronger than ever, and I am proud to stand by my friend in the fight to recognize the right of all Americans to live healthy lives."
"Congressman Ellison has long fought to expand access to affordable, lifesaving care and he strongly believes that health care must be a human right, grounded in justice, access, and dignity - not profit," said Rep. Mark Pocan. "Congressman Ellison is the right choice to lead the fight on Medicare for All and build support in Congress to make this bill a law. Along with the millions of Americans calling on Congress to fix our nation's broken health care system, we can make Medicare for All a reality and ensure that health care is a right for all Americans, not just the privileged few."
"We spend more on health care than any other country in the world - and yet, some Americans are just one health care crisis away from complete bankruptcy. This is unacceptable. We need universal health care that ensures every American has access to the care they need, " said Rep. Pramila Jayapal. "I'm so proud to join my good friend Keith Ellison, as he leads the fight for Medicare for All in the House. This is not merely a "progressive" dream. Countries around the world have shown that government funded health care works in delivering quality, affordable and accessible health care to all - and saves us money as we improve health care for all. I urge my colleagues to join us. Let's get this done."
"Health care is a fundamental human right," said Rep. Barbara Lee. "In the richest nation on Earth, no parent should have to choose between paying the bills and taking their sick child to the doctor. That's why I'm proud to cosponsor Medicare For All legislation. At the end of the day, it is patients - not corporate profits - that should come first."
"The simple fact is, it's long past time that we instituted a single-payer, 'Medicare for All' system that provides everyone with affordable, top-quality health care," said Rep. Rick Nolan. "Advanced nations with universal health care systems pay far less than we do and achieve better health outcomes, as measured by life expectancy and infant mortality. As one of the first champions of single payer legislation more than 30 years ago, I am proud to support this bill, and I will keep fighting to ensure that every American has access to the high-quality care they deserve."
"National Nurses United commends Representative Keith Ellison for taking over the lead sponsorship of HR 676, the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act," said Jean Ross, co-president of National Nurses United. "Representative Ellison has long been a leader in the fight for a single payer, Medicare for All health care system, and we are looking forward to working with him to finally win guaranteed healthcare for all people living in the United States. As registered nurses, we see the horrific impacts of our for-profit health insurance system everyday at the hospital bedside. Too many patients can't afford the care they need - millions of Americans go without preventative care or lifesaving medications because they don't have insurance or can't afford the copays. We see the devastation this system causes for so many families when patients lose their lives from preventable illness and injury. As nurses, we have a duty to advocate for our patients - and we know that Medicare for All is the best solution for our patients."
"The crushing cost of health care is the top financial problem facing American families, who often postpone or avoid needed care because of cost," said Dr. Carol Paris, a Nashville-based psychiatrist and president of Physicians for a National Health Program, a nonprofit research and education organization of more than 22,000 doctors and health professionals. "We applaud Rep. Ellison's leadership on H.R. 676, which would provide medically necessary care to everyone in America for a fraction of the cost of our current system."
"We know that the richest country in history can afford to provide guaranteed health care to all of its people because every other wealthy country already does so," said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen. "It's long past time for the United States to adopt a single-payer, Medicare-for-All system that will cover every American as a matter of right. Rep. Ellison is ready to fight for Medicare-for-All so that we can finally join the rest of the industrialized world in guaranteeing health care to everyone."
"We congratulate Rep. Ellison for taking the lead on the Medicare for All bill, and encourage all Members, regardless of party affiliation or political ideology, to take another look at the model followed in some way, shape, or form by the rest of the industrialized world," said Richard Master, Board Member of Business Initiative for Health Policy and CEO of MCS Industries. "Without partisan blinders, they will see that the elimination of wasteful middlemen and administrative complexity in our healthcare system will be a boon to our businesses, workers, and economy."
H.R. 676 has been introduced in Congress since 2003, and has a broad base of support among health care activists, organized labor, physicians, nurses, and social justice organizations across the nation. The bill has been endorsed by 26 international unions, Physicians For A National Health Program, two former editors of the New England Journal of Medicine, National Nurses United, the American Medical Students Association, Progressive Democrats of America, and the NAACP.
For text of The Expanded and Improved Medicare For All Act, click here.
Rep. Keith Ellison has represented the Fifth Congressional District of Minnesota in the U.S. House of Representatives since taking office on January 4, 2007. The Fifth Congressional District is the most vibrant and diverse district in Minnesota with a rich history and traditions. The Fifth District includes the City of Minneapolis and the surrounding suburbs.
White House officials "just straight up fabricated shit," said the Democratic senator from Connecticut.
Just hours before the Trump administration conducted what it claimed were "self-defense strikes" against "Iranian military facilities," The Washington Post reported Thursday that the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that "Iran can survive the US naval blockade for at least three to four months before facing more severe economic hardship."
Citing four unnamed officials familiar with the analysis, the newspaper highlighted that "the CIA analysis might even be underestimating Iran's economic resilience if Tehran is able to smuggle oil via overland routes."
Militarily, "Iran retains about 75% of its prewar inventories of mobile launchers and about 70% of its prewar stockpiles of missiles," the Post added. "There is evidence that the regime has been able to recover and reopen almost all of its underground storage facilities, repair some damaged missiles, and even assemble some new missiles that were nearly complete when the war began."
Drop Site News' Murtaza Hussain responded that if this assessment along with a previous one from the Center for Strategic and International Studies about "remaining US munitions and interceptor capacity are even approximately correct, it goes a long way to explaining why Trump seems so eager to end the war whereas the Iranians have either dug in or escalated their negotiating positions. The missile math of continuing the conflict would be much more favorable to the Iranians, especially if the war continued for a significant time."
"Prior to the war, interceptor capacity compared to the size of the Iranian missile stockpile seemed like the most rationally incontrovertible reason to avoid fighting such a conflict, even for people who found it politically desirable," he added. "This also might explain why the US and Israel pivoted towards the end to threatening countervalue strikes against civilian targets if attempts to destroy the underground missile cities by air were ineffective."
The Post's reporting came one month into a fragile ceasefire and starkly contrasts the recent framing of conditions in Iran from President Donald Trump and others in his administration, including Defense Secretary Pete Hesgeth.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) responded to the Post's reporting by quoting Hegseth, who said in March that "never before has a modern, capable military, which Iran used to have, been so quickly destroyed and made combat ineffective."
Murphy declared: "They lied through their teeth. Just straight up fabricated shit."
Still, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly stuck to the administration's framing in a Thursday statement to the Post.
"During Operation Epic Fury, Iran was crushed militarily," Kelly said. "Now, they are being strangled economically by Operation Economic Fury and losing $500 million per day thanks to the United States military's successful blockade of Iranian ports. The Iranian regime knows full well their current reality is not sustainable, and President Trump holds all the cards as negotiators work to make a deal."
Meanwhile, some experts were unsurprised that the CIA privately delivered a "sober" assessment contradicting the administration's public commentary on the conflict—which it now claims is no longer an active "war," seemingly to dodge a key congressional deadline.
"Nice to know that a confidential CIA analysis is confirming what close observers of the Iranian economy have been saying publicly for weeks! Intelligent policymakers rely on intelligence. But Trump jeopardized diplomacy by instigating a blockade that was never going to work," said Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies in Europe and founder of the think tank Bourse & Bazaar Foundation.
Sharing the reporting on social media, Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow and director of military analysis at the think tank Defense Priorities, wrote: "As I argued a week into the U.S. blockade, Iran can hold out for months without economic collapse. The costs for the US and the world are increasingly unsustainable, however."
Earlier this week, Stephen Semler, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, estimated that the US government spent $71.8 billion on the Iran War during its first 60 days, an average of $1.2 billion daily. The International Monetary Fund warned last month that the conflict could cause a global recession.
Last Friday, Trump responded to the War Powers Act's 60-day deadline by claiming to Congress that his war—which already violated US and international law—had been "terminated." The White House said at the time that no fire had been exchanged since April 7, when a ceasefire deal was reached just hours after the president issued a genocidal threat against the Iranian people.
However, on Thursday evening, United States Central Command announced that Iran "launched multiple missiles, drones, and small boats" at American warships. CENTCOM added that it "eliminated inbound threats and targeted Iranian military facilities responsible for attacking US forces, including missile and drone launch sites; command and control locations; and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance nodes."
"Local hospitals and emergency rooms could shut their doors forever because billionaires insist on paying less than the rest of us," said Emmanuel Saez, the French economist who designed California's wealth tax proposal.
The architect of California's wealth tax proposal called out The Washington Post and its multibillionaire owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, on Thursday for peddling what he said is "misinformation" to readers.
Emmanuel Saez, a French economist and professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who was tapped by California's largest union to design the tax proposal, singled out an opinion piece by the Washington Post editorial board from earlier this week that argues the proposal would backfire and cost California billions of dollars in tax revenue each year.
Saez said the article contains glaring falsehoods and omits key information about the proposal, which aims to create a one-time tax of 5% on the total assets of California's roughly 200 billionaire residents in order to recoup about $100 billion in revenue for healthcare, food assistance, and education stripped from the state by last year's Republican federal budget legislation, which will hand $1 trillion in tax breaks to the wealthiest 1% of Americans over the next 10 years.
The piece, published on Monday with the headline "California already losing with billionaire tax referendum," argues that even if California voters don't ultimately approve the measure, "the specter of such a wealth tax has already cost the state more in lost future revenue from income taxes than it would raise" due to an exodus of wealthy people from the state—an oft-used but weakly substantiated talking point by opponents of the measure.
The Post cited a paper by Jared Walczak, a visiting fellow at the California Tax Foundation, which it said demonstrates that billionaire flight "will cost California’s state government somewhere between $3.5 billion and $4.5 billion every year in other tax collections, and up to $19 billion in lost [gross domestic product]."
But Saez argued that his study makes a "basic mistake" by "modeling a mobility response of billionaires to a permanent annual and recurrent 5% wealth tax." In reality, though, the tax would be imposed only once and would apply to any billionaires who resided in the state after January 1, 2026, which has already passed, so it no longer creates an incentive to move.
Saez argued that in any case, "Walczak’s estimation of the California income tax paid by billionaires who have threatened to leave is also wildly exaggerated."
Walczak's figure for lost tax revenue, he said, hinges on the idea that the three richest men who've threatened to leave the state, Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, pay $1.7 billion in California income taxes each year.
"If only they paid so much!" Saez quipped.
"In reality, using Securities and Exchange Commission data on stock sales, stock donations, dividends, and executive compensation, we can directly estimate that they paid only [$269 million] in California income tax in 2025, 6.3 times less than Walczak’s assumption," he said, citing a paper he co-wrote in March responding to a similar argument by a conservative think tank.
He cited tax data showing that the tech tycoons—who own a combined $810 billion according to Forbes—only collectively paid about [$22 million] per year on average between 2019-25, with Brin and Page paying no taxes on their wealth from stock in Google's parent company Alphabet during three of those years because they didn't sell stock, get dividends, or receive executive compensation. This is despite 90% of their wealth coming from those holdings.
"The one-time wealth tax finally makes them contribute in proportion to their enormous wealth gains," Saez said.
The Post also claimed that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) United Healthcare Workers West, the union leading the charge in support of the referendum, is "pretend[ing] that the tax is needed to save California’s health system from 'collapse'" and is instead dishonestly using that framing to covertly pursue the "redistribution of wealth."
But Saez said that the federal cuts of roughly $20 billion annually are already having devastating effects on Californians that could be alleviated with more tax revenue.
As a result of the cuts, "more than 400 California hospitals have already laid off more than 3,400 healthcare workers as of mid-March, with a second wave of layoffs expected as funding cuts tied to recent federal policy changes are phased in over the next several years," he said. "Statewide, projections show the cuts could result in the loss of up to 145,000 healthcare jobs, impacting hospitals, clinics, and home care providers alike."
Eighty-three more hospitals in California may be at risk of closing due to the federal funding cuts, according to a recent nationwide analysis by Public Citizen. But Saez said the billionaire's tax would go a long way toward closing the gap.
"Right now, California’s billionaires pay much lower tax rates than what working families pay out of every paycheck," Saez said.
Despite claims otherwise by the Post editorial board—which last month ran another piece arguing that due to progressive taxation, "the rich already pay more than their fair share"—according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, at all levels of government from 2018-20, billionaires paid just 24% of their total income in taxes, while the US-wide average was 30%. This disparity arises largely due to loopholes that allow the rich to avoid taxes on business and investment gains that are not sold.
"Local hospitals and emergency rooms could shut their doors forever because billionaires insist on paying less than the rest of us," Saez said.
Debru Carthan, the executive vice president of SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, said it was not surprising that the Post "completely ignores that the billionaire tax would keep hospitals from closing and healthcare costs from skyrocketing for millions of Californians" because it is "a crisis that comes as a direct result of the tax breaks handed out to Jeff Bezos and his buddies."
Since the return of Donald Trump to the presidency, the Amazon founder has taken a much heavier hand over the content of his flagship paper, including its opinion section, which he last year mandated to exclusively publish pieces on economics that promote “personal liberties and free markets," leading to the resignation of opinion editor David Shipley.
But Saez marveled at how blatant Bezos' thumb on the scale has appeared in his paper's coverage of California's billionaire wealth tax and similar proposals, which it has denounced on several other occasions.
“Are readers meant to take this seriously?" Saez asked. "‘Board of billionaire-owned paper comes out against tax on billionaires’? Everyone knows this board makes political decisions at the behest of Jeff Bezos, but this one is the most transparent of them all."
"Saying so privately to some big donors is very different than publicly calling for transparency from the DNC, which is badly needed," said Norman Solomon of RootsAction, which has led calls for the release.
Even former Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly "has no problem with a public airing" of the Democratic National Committee's internal "autopsy" report on her 2024 loss to Republican President Donald Trump—which the DNC has continued to conceal, despite mounting demands for transparency.
Harris' position was reported Thursday by NBC News, which noted that "while she indicated to donors that she had no issue with releasing it, Harris has not discussed the postmortem with DNC Chairman Ken Martin and did not know about his decision to keep it under wraps until it happened."
NBC cited "a person who has heard the conversations," one of multiple sources journalists Jonathan Allen and Natasha Korecki spoke with for their broader report exploring "turmoil over the Democratic Party’s future" and Harris' consideration of a 2028 run.
For months, Martin has resisted pressure to release the autopsy—which, as Axios revealed in February, found that the Biden administration's support for Israel's genocidal assault on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip contributed to Harris' defeat.
Citing a "person close to Harris," NBC also reported Thursday that the former VP "is signaling privately that she has more to say about the Middle East now that she is freed from the Biden White House policy," and "she is likely to do so after the midterm elections," either "from the perspective of a party elder or from the perspective of a candidate seeking votes."
While touring the country for the book she wrote after her loss, Harris has publicly acknowledged that she is weighing another White House run. Though the 2028 election is two and a half years away, she has led early polling. However, the party's potential primary field is incredibly crowded, featuring dozens of current or former governors and members of Congress.
Potential contenders include governors from the Trump 2.0 era—such as Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois, Andy Beshear of Kentucky, and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan—as well as leading progressive voices in Congress, such as Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
Norman Solomon, national director of RootsAction, which has spearheaded calls for publishing the full postmortem, wrote in a recent opinion piece for Common Dreams that "Martin's concealment of the autopsy report puts a thumb on the scale for one candidate: Kamala Harris."
Solomon highlighted the DNC's reported conclusion about the role of the Gaza genocide in the election result, and suggested that "renewed attention to the Harris 2024 finances would also be unwelcome."
In response to Harris' reported remarks to donors, Solomon said Thursday that "more than four months have passed since Martin announced he was reneging on his promise to release the autopsy.
"But Harris still hasn't made any public statement that she believes it should be released," he added. "Saying so privately to some big donors is very different than publicly calling for transparency from the DNC, which is badly needed."