

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.
Local elected officials representing every U.S. state and the District of Columbia have written a letter to Democrats in Congress telling their delegations not to come home to their districts until they pass the entire Build Back Better Agenda.
The reconciliation package that the House Budget Committee passed would not only create millions of good jobs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030, make permanent the federal child tax credit, and expand Medicare, it will also provide crucial funding for state and local governments.
Now, as Senator Manchin declares his opposition to a clean electricity standard that would cut 30% of the climate benefits out of the package as well as other life saving provisions, the representatives of these jurisdictions are writing to tell Congress to do its job and enact the Build Back Better Agenda that Democrats ran and won on in the last election.
The letter states: "Please do not come home until you have passed the FULL $3.5 trillion Build Back Better Act. We are counting on your leadership to provide the full federal funding that states and localities so desperately need under this Act. So please stay in Washington until you get the job done, and know that you have our support at home."
State and local officials have overwhelmingly supported the Build Back Better Act since it was first proposed. Only a few weeks after President Biden announced the Build Back Better agenda, over 1,200 state and local officials called on Congress to seize this historic moment. Since then mayors, governors, state legislators, and other local leaders have repeatedly shared the need for federal action on clean energy, good paying jobs and justice.
The letter is being sent to Congress by regional advocacy groups across the country who know all too well how badly municipalities need Congress to pass the Build Back Better Act.
"As advocates, we will accept nothing less than policies that reduce pollution 45% by 2030, as Senator Schumer has promised. Cutting the Clean Electricity Performance Program would be a grave mistake and would make it nearly impossible to achieve those reduction mandates," said Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network.
Here is what local elected officials across the country had to say:
"West Virginia needs the Build Back Better plan perhaps more than any other state in the Union. West Virginians are sick and can't get hospital beds, nurses can't find child care, and this bill will provide job opportunities for out-of-work coal miners. Please pass this bill as quickly as possible - West Virginians are desperate for the greater prosperity and equity this bill promises." - Barbara Fleischauer, Delegate, WV-51
"There is no better time for our country to invest big in building the infrastructure we need to compete in the global ecosystem of the future, and to finally move toward a greener, more sustainable energy economy." - Peter Merideth, Representative, MO-80
"Congress has a chance to fight for our environment, create good jobs in the process, and take care of our children and elders. We can build a country that respects the land and values our people." - Attica Scott, Representative, KY-41
"The Build Back Better Act addresses so many important issues facing our constituents. We need childcare so people can return to work, we need to address climate change for the future of our planet, we need to increase the supply of affordable housing so people can have places to live, we need to acknowledge that dental, vision, and hearing care are part of the medical care our seniors need, we need to allow the Federal government to negotiate drug prices, we need wealthy people to pay their fair share - and so much more. Stop playing games and pass the Build Back Better Act for the American people." -Cathy Kipp, Representative, CO-52
"We can't equivocate on challenging the threat of climate change. Our nation needs to act boldly and urgently. Passing the Build Back Better Act will provide the policy and necessary resources and is the most important next step." - Paul Pinksy, Senator, MD-22
"Each day, many Americans struggle to earn a living wage while our nation's infrastructure continues to crumble. America deserves better. We must pass the Build Back Better Act so we can lift up our families, bolster our infrastructure, and recover from this terrible pandemic." - Jeff Waldstreicher, Senator, MD-18
"Climate resilience programs are critical, especially for coastal states. The Build Back Better Act includes funds to ensure structures are prepared to respond to climate change. As a member of my state's Environment and Natural Resources Committee, I urge its passage so our nation can continue to invest in this important infrastructure." - Vicki Doudera, Representative, ME-94
"People really want and need the infrastructure investments in this legislation. Every American will benefit, and when we invest in our people and our future, our economy will grow and all of us will be so much better off. Our children will thank us if we pass the Build Back Better Act." - Shelly Simonds, Delegate, VA-94
"Nevada desperately needs the Build Back Better Act. Access to child care, health care, and affordable housing is dangerously lacking, and our state has already reached "code red" on climate. Our water supply is at risk as 100 percent of Nevada is in drought, months of wildfire smoke choked Reno and Lake Tahoe this summer, and Las Vegas was hit with one heat wave after another. We're overdue for the much-needed relief these federal investments will provide." - Howard Watts, Assemblemember, NV-18
"Since the first MAPS penny sales tax passed in 1993, OKC has demonstrated a proud history of investing in ourselves, reaffirming this approach in December 2019 when residents passed MAPS4 to continue our city's renaissance story with a $978 million investment in our people, parks, and places. Build Back Better represents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to honor our hard work and history at the national level, specifically by bringing home our federal tax dollars to invest further in OKC's infrastructure needs and its people." - James Cooper, Councilman, Oklahoma City Ward 2
"The Build Back Better plan gives us a roadmap to the future our constituents deserve. From protecting our environment, to providing good jobs, to expanding access to childcare and beyond, our communities urgently need this transformative legislation. We know that this plan is overwhelmingly popular with Americans across the country and across partisan lines; now it's time for Congress to do their job and make the Build Back Better Agenda a reality." - Jonathan Brostoff, Representative, WI-19.
The Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) is the first grassroots, nonprofit organization dedicated exclusively to fighting global warming in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. Our mission is to build and mobilize a powerful grassroots movement in this unique region that surrounds our nation's capital to call for state, national and international policies that will put us on a path to climate stability. - See more at: https://www.chesapeakeclimate.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view;=itemlist&...
"His campaign paired moral conviction with concrete plans to lower costs and expand access to services, making it unmistakable what he stood for and whom he was fighting for."
Amid calls for ousting Democratic congressional leadership because the party caved in the government shutdown fight over healthcare, a YouGov poll released Monday shows the nationwide popularity of New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani's economic agenda.
Mamdani beat former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in both the June Democratic primary and last week's general election by campaigning unapologetically as a democratic socialist dedicated to making the nation's largest city more affordable for working people.
Multiple polls have suggested that Mamdani's progressive platform offers Democrats across the United States a roadmap for candidates in next year's midterms and beyond. As NYC's next mayor began assembling his team and the movement that worked to elect him created a group to keep fighting for his ambitious agenda, YouGov surveyed 1,133 US adults after his victory.
While just 31% of those surveyed said they would have voted for Mamdani—more than any other candidate—and the same share said they would vote for a candidate who identified as a "democratic socialist," the policies he ran on garnered far more support.
YouGov found:
Data for Progress similarly surveyed 1,228 likely voters from across the United States about key pieces of Mamdani's platform before his win. The think tank found that large majorities of Americans support efforts to build more affordable housing, higher taxes for corporations as well as millionaires and billionaires, and free childcare, among other policies.

"There's a common refrain from some pundits to dismiss Mamdani's victory as a quirk of New York City politics rather than a sign of something bigger," Data for Progress executive director Ryan O'Donnell wrote last week. "But his campaign paired moral conviction with concrete plans to lower costs and expand access to services, making it unmistakable what he stood for and whom he was fighting for. The lesson isn't that every candidate should mimic his style—you can't fake authenticity—but that voters everywhere respond when a candidate connects economic populism to clear, actionable goals."
"Candidates closer to the center are running on an affordability message as well," he noted, pointing to Democrat Mikie Sherrill's gubernatorial victory in New Jersey. "When a center-left figure like Sherill is running on taking on corporate power, it underscores how central economic populism has become across the political spectrum. Her message may have been less fiery than Mamdani's, but she drew from a similar well of voter frustration over rising costs and corporate influence. In doing so, Sherrill demonstrated to voters that her administration would play an active role in lowering costs—something that voters nationwide overwhelmingly believe the government should be doing."
"When guys like Jeffries and Schumer say 'effective' they're talking about effectively flattering large-dollar donors," said one critic.
Progressive anger and calls for primary challenges followed House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries' Monday endorsement of top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer—under whose leadership numerous Democratic lawmakers caved to Republicans to pave the way to ending the government shutdown without winning any meaningful concessions.
As progressives demanded the resignation or ouster of Schumer (D-NY), Jeffries (D-NY) was asked during a press conference whether the 74-year-old senator is effective and whether he should remain as the upper chamber's minority leader.
"Yes and yes," replied Jeffries. "As I've indicated, listen, Leader Schumer and Senate Democrats over the last seven weeks have waged a valiant fight on behalf of the American people."
"I don't think that the House Democratic Caucus is prepared to support a promise, a wing and a prayer, from folks who have been devastating the healthcare of the American people for years," he said.
Asked if he thinks Schumer is effective and should keep his job, Hakeem Jeffries replies: "Yes and yes."
[image or embed]
— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein.bsky.social) November 10, 2025 at 2:07 PM
Both Schumer and Jeffries say they will vote "no" on the the GOP bill to end the shutdown.
Activist and former Democratic National Committee Co-Vice Chair David Hogg said on social media that Schumer's "number one job is to control his caucus," and "he can't do that."
Eight members of the Senate Democratic caucus—Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.), Dick Durbin (Ill.), John Fetterman (Pa.), Maggie Hassan (NH), Tim Kaine (Va.), Angus King (I-Maine), Jacky Rosen (Nev.), and Jeanne Shaheen (NH)—enabled their Republican colleagues to secure the 60 votes needed for a cloture vote to advance legislation to end the shutdown.
Critics say the proposal does nothing to spare Americans from soaring healthcare premiums unleashed in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed by President Donald Trump in July.
"Standing up to a tyrant—who is willing to impose pain as leverage to compel loyalty or acquiescence—is hard," Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Monday. "You can convince yourself that yielding stops the pain and brings you back to 'normal.' But there is no 'normal.' Submission emboldens the tyrant. The threat grows."
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said on X: "Sen. Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced. If you can’t lead the fight to stop healthcare premiums from skyrocketing for Americans, what will you fight for?"
New York City Councilman Chi Ossé (D-36)—who on Sunday said that Schumer and Senate Democrats "failed Americans" by capitulating to "MAGA fascists"—laughed off Jeffries' ringing endorsement of Schumer's leadership.
Former Democratic Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner called Jeffries and Schumer "controlled opposition" while demanding that they both "step down."
The progressive political action group Our Revolution published a survey last week showing overwhelming grassroots support for running primary challenges to Schumer and Jeffries. The poll revealed that 90% of respondents want Schumer to step down as leader, while 92% would support a primary challenge against him when he’s next up for reelection in 2028. Meanwhile, 70% of respondents said Jeffries should step aside, with 77% backing a primary challenge.
Turner also called for a ban on corporate money in politics and ousting "corporate politicians."
Left Reckoning podcast host Matt Lech said on X that "when guys like Jeffries and Schumer say 'effective' they're talking about effectively flattering large-dollar donors."
In a letter to the British public broadcaster, Trump cited a memo from a Conservative Party-linked former BBC adviser who claimed the network displayed an "anti-Israel" bias, despite ample evidence to the contrary.
The BBC in the United Kingdom is the latest target of US President Donald Trump's attempts to root out all unflattering portrayals of him from media coverage, with the president citing a memo penned by a former BBC adviser reported to have ties to the British Conservative Party.
Trump wrote to the BBC Monday, warning that he would file a lawsuit demanding $1 billion in damages unless the publicly funded broadcaster retracts a documentary film about him from last year, issues a formal apology, and pays him an amount that would “appropriately compensate President Trump for the harm caused.”
The president gave the network until Friday to act in regard to Trump's complaint about a section of the film Trump: A Second Chance? by the long-running current affairs series Panorama.
The film was broadcast days before the 2024 US election, and included excerpts from the speech Trump gave to his supporters on January 6, 2021 just before thousands of them proceeded to the US Capitol to try to stop the election results from being certified.
It spliced together three quotes from two sections of the speech that were made about 50 minutes apart, making it appear that Trump urged supporters to march with him to the Capitol and called for violence.
"We’re going to walk down to the Capitol... and I’ll be there with you... and we fight. We fight like hell," Trump is shown saying in the edited footage.
In the unedited quote, Trump said, "We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.”
BBC chairman Samir Shah said the network's standards committee had discussed the editing of the clips earlier this year and had expressed concerns to the Panorama team. The film is no longer available online at the BBC's website.
"The furor over the Trump documentary is not about journalistic integrity. It’s a power play... It’s a war over words, where the vocabulary of journalism itself is weaponized."
“We accept that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action," said Shah. "The BBC would like to apologize for that error of judgment.”
Two top executives, director general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness, also resigned on Sunday under pressure over the documentary.
The uproar comes days after the right-wing Daily Telegraph published details from a memo by former BBC standards committee adviser Michael Prescott, "managing director at PR agency Hanover Communications, whose staff have gone on to work for the Conservative Party," according to Novara Media.
Prescott's memo took aim at the documentary as well as what he claimed was a pro-transgender bias in BBC news coverage and an anti-Israel bias in stories by the BBC's Arabic service.
According to the Guardian, Robbie Gibb, a member of the BBC board who previously worked as a communications official for former Tory Prime Minister Theresa May, "amplified" the criticisms in Prescott's memo in key board meetings ahead of Davie's and Turness' resignations.
Deadline reported Monday that "insiders" at the BBC have alleged that Prescott's memo, the resignations, and Trump's threat of legal action all stem from a right-wing "coup" attempt at the broadcaster.
Journalists including Mehdi Hasan of Zeteo News and Mikey Smith of The Mirror noted that while Panorama's editing of Trump's speech could be seen as misleading, the documentary wasn't responsible for accusations that the president incited violence on January 6, which pre-dated the film.
"To understand how insane it is that the BBC is being accused of ‘making it look like’ Trump was inciting violence with their bad edit, as opposed to Trump actually having incited violence, we know even his own kids that day were desperately trying to get him to call off the mob," said Hasan.
Others suggested the memo cited in Trump's letter to the broadcaster should be discredited entirely for its claim that the BBC has exhibited an anti-Israel bias—an allegation, said author and international relations professor Norrie MacQueen, that amounted to "an entirely new level" of George Orwell's "newspeak."
While the BBC "has been shaken by one of the smallest of its sins," wrote media analyst Faisal Hanif at Middle East Eye, "the greater one—its distortion of Palestinian reality—goes unpunished."
Hanif pointed to a report published in June by the Center for Media Monitoring, which showed that despite Gaza suffering 34 times more casualties than Israel since October 2023, the BBC "gave Israeli deaths 33 times more coverage per fatality and ran almost equal numbers of humanizing victim profiles (279 Palestinians vs. 201 Israelis)."
The network also used "emotive terms four times more for Israeli victims" and shut down allegations that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, as well as "making zero mention of Israeli leaders’ genocidal statements," even as Israel faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice.
"The furor over the Trump documentary is not about journalistic integrity," wrote Hanif. "It’s a power play: the disciplining of a public broadcaster that still, nominally, answers to the public rather than the billionaire-owned media. It’s a war over words, where the vocabulary of journalism itself is weaponized."
"The BBC is punished for the wrong things. It loses its leaders over an editing error, while escaping accountability for its editorial failures on Gaza," Hanif continued. "The Trump documentary might have been misedited, but the story of Gaza has been mistold for far longer. If the BBC still believes in its own motto—'Nation shall speak peace unto nation'—then peace must begin with honesty."