

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.

More than 60 national and regional organizations on Wednesday issued a joint statement calling for the elimination of the 400 land-based nuclear missiles now armed and on hair-trigger alert in the United States.
The statement, titled "A Call to Eliminate ICBMs," warns that "intercontinental ballistic missiles are uniquely dangerous, greatly increasing the chances that a false alarm or miscalculation will result in nuclear war."
More than 60 national and regional organizations on Wednesday issued a joint statement calling for the elimination of the 400 land-based nuclear missiles now armed and on hair-trigger alert in the United States.
The statement, titled "A Call to Eliminate ICBMs," warns that "intercontinental ballistic missiles are uniquely dangerous, greatly increasing the chances that a false alarm or miscalculation will result in nuclear war."
Citing the conclusion reached by former Defense Secretary William Perry that ICBMs "could even trigger an accidental nuclear war," the organizations urged the U.S. government to "shut down the 400 ICBMs now in underground silos that are scattered across five states -- Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota and Wyoming."
"Rather than being any kind of deterrent, ICBMs are the opposite -- a foreseeable catalyst for nuclear attack," the statement says. "ICBMs certainly waste billions of dollars, but what makes them unique is the threat that they pose to all of humanity."
Norman Solomon, national director of RootsAction.org, said the statement could represent a turning point in the range of options being debated about ICBMs. "Until now, the public discussion has been almost entirely limited to the narrow question of whether to build a new ICBM system or stick with the existing Minuteman III missiles for decades longer," he said. "That's like arguing over whether to refurbish the deck chairs on the nuclear Titanic. Both options retain the same unique dangers of nuclear war that ICBMs involve. It's time to really widen the ICBM debate, and this joint statement from U.S. organizations is a vital step in that direction."
RootsAction and Just Foreign Policy led the organizing process that resulted in the statement being released today.
Here is the full statement, followed by a list of the signing organizations:
Joint statement by U.S. organizations being released on January 12, 2022
A Call to Eliminate ICBMs
Intercontinental ballistic missiles are uniquely dangerous, greatly increasing the chances that a false alarm or miscalculation will result in nuclear war. There is no more important step the United States could take to reduce the chances of a global nuclear holocaust than to eliminate its ICBMs.
As former Defense Secretary William Perry has explained, "If our sensors indicate that enemy missiles are en route to the United States, the president would have to consider launching ICBMs before the enemy missiles could destroy them; once they are launched, they cannot be recalled. The president would have less than 30 minutes to make that terrible decision." And Secretary Perry wrote: "First and foremost, the United States can safely phase out its land-based intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) force, a key facet of Cold War nuclear policy. Retiring the ICBMs would save considerable costs, but it isn't only budgets that would benefit. These missiles are some of the most dangerous weapons in the world. They could even trigger an accidental nuclear war."
Rather than being any kind of deterrent, ICBMs are the opposite -- a foreseeable catalyst for nuclear attack. ICBMs certainly waste billions of dollars, but what makes them unique is the threat that they pose to all of humanity.
The people of the United States support huge expenditures when they believe the spending protects them and their loved ones. But ICBMs actually make us less safe. By discarding all of its ICBMs and thereby eliminating the basis for U.S. "launch on warning," the U.S. would make the whole world safer -- whether or not Russia and China chose to follow suit.
Everything is at stake. Nuclear weapons could destroy civilization and inflict catastrophic damage on the world's ecosystems with "nuclear winter," inducing mass starvation while virtually ending agriculture. That is the overarching context for the need to shut down the 400 ICBMs now in underground silos that are scattered across five states -- Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota and Wyoming.
Closure of those ICBM facilities should be accompanied by major public investment to subsidize transition costs and provide well-paying jobs that are productive for the long-term economic prosperity of affected communities.
Even without ICBMs, the formidable U.S. nuclear threat would remain. The United States would have nuclear forces capable of deterring a nuclear attack by any conceivable adversary: forces deployed either on aircraft, which are recallable, or on submarines that remain virtually invulnerable, and thus not subject to the "use them or lose them" dilemma that the ground-based ICBMs inherently present in a crisis.
The United States should pursue every diplomatic avenue to comply with its obligation to negotiate nuclear disarmament. At the same time, whatever the status of negotiations, the elimination of the U.S. government's ICBMs would be a breakthrough for sanity and a step away from a nuclear precipice that would destroy all that we know and love.
"I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction," Martin Luther King Jr. said as he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. Nearly 60 years later, the United States must eliminate its ICBMs to reverse that downward spiral.
Action Corps
Alaska Peace Center
American Committee for U.S.-Russia Accord
Arab American Action Network
Arizona Chapter, Physicians for Social Responsibility
Back from the Brink Coalition
Backbone Campaign
Baltimore Phil Berrigan Memorial Chapter, Veterans For Peace
Beyond Nuclear
Beyond the Bomb
Black Alliance for Peace
Blue America
Campaign for Peace, Disarmament and Common Security
Center for Citizen Initiatives
Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility
Chicago Area Peace Action
Code Pink
Demand Progress
Environmentalists Against War
Fellowship of Reconciliation
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
Global Zero
Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility
Historians for Peace and Democracy
Jewish Voice for Peace Action
Just Foreign Policy
Justice Democrats
Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy
Linus Pauling Chapter, Veterans For Peace
Los Alamos Study Group
Maine Physicians for Social Responsibility
Massachusetts Peace Action
Muslim Delegates and Allies
No More Bombs
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
Nuclear Watch New Mexico
Nukewatch
Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility
Other98
Our Revolution
Pax Christi USA
Peace Action
People for Bernie Sanders
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Prevent Nuclear War Maryland
Progressive Democrats of America
RootsAction.org
San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility
Santa Fe Chapter, Veterans For Peace
Spokane Chapter, Veterans For Peace
U.S. Palestinian Community Network
United for Peace and Justice
Veterans For Peace
Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility
Western North Carolina Physicians for Social Responsibility
Western States Legal Foundation
Whatcom Peace and Justice Center
Win Without War
Women Transforming Our Nuclear Legacy
World Beyond War
Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation
Youth Against Nuclear Weapons
RootsAction is dedicated to galvanizing people who are committed to economic fairness, equal rights for all, civil liberties, environmental protection -- and defunding endless wars. We mobilize on these issues no matter whether Democrats or Republicans control Washington D.C.
“The swing voters who will decide the midterms are not asking Democrats to sound more like Republicans—they want Democrats to embrace progressive economic policies that will actually work to lower costs."
Democratic strategists have long clashed over whether the path to victory runs through "moderation" or bold progressive ideas, and a new analysis of 2026 swing voters boosts arguments for the latter, revealing the top policies that would sway them to vote Democrat include raising taxes on the wealthy and establishing a Medicare for All-type universal healthcare system.
On Thursday, Data for Progress published a new report identifying a relatively small but electorally crucial bloc comprising roughly 8% of likely 2026 voters who are genuinely persuadable heading into the November midterms. These swing voters, many of whom voted for President Donald Trump in 2024, identify as moderates or independents rather than conservatives, consume relatively little political news, and are primarily focused on one issue above all else: the cost of living.
"A plurality of swing voters aren’t sure which party they trust on the major issues, but Democrats hold a slight advantage on inflation and the cost of living, the top issue for swing voters," Data for Progress found. "Around 1 in 3 swing voters say their biggest issues with the Democratic Party are its 'old and out of touch' leadership and the party 'not doing enough to lower costs.'"
"The most popular proposal was simple: Raise taxes on the wealthy," the report states. "Twenty-eight percent selected it as one of their top three choices. Close behind, at 24%, was creating a Medicare for All healthcare system. Those weren't followed by tougher immigration policies or deficit reduction. Instead, voters also favored banning artificial intelligence from setting prices or wages based on personal data and preventing utility companies from passing unreasonable costs on to consumers."
NEW: Our first report on the swing voters of the 2026 midterms finds that when they are asked which policies would make them definitely vote for a Democrat, the most selected option is “raise taxes on the wealthy,” followed by “create a Medicare for All health care system.”
[image or embed]
— Data for Progress (@dataforprogress.org) July 9, 2026 at 6:30 AM
According to the report, swing voters currently favor a Democratic candidate for Congress over a Republican by a 12-point margin, with 46% undecided.
“The swing voters who will decide the midterms are not asking Democrats to sound more like Republicans—they want Democrats to embrace progressive economic policies that will actually work to lower costs and put workers first,” Data for Progress executive director Ryan O'Donnell said on Thursday. “Voters have been making clear for years that cost-of-living issues are the top priority. Taking more conservative stances is not what voters are asking for from their leaders right now.”
"The federal government shares the tech industry’s vision for AI to be embedded everywhere, displacing human thought and labor, and deepening the strains on the environment and climate."
With backlash against the artificial intelligence industry growing throughout the US, one government watchdog has created a database to help keep tabs on the people it describes as the biggest "AI villains."
The Revolving Door Project on Thursday launched a webpage that tracks the actions of major players in the AI industry and their ties to President Donald Trump's administration.
"The Trump administration is all in on artificial intelligence," the Revolving Door Project explained. "The federal government shares the tech industry’s vision for AI to be embedded everywhere, displacing human thought and labor, and deepening the strains on the environment and climate."
The watchdog added that the government is pursuing an "AI first" policy "despite little proof that its value for the American public is anywhere close to commensurate with its costs."
While there are several well known names on the Revolving Door Project's list—including SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison—it also shines a light on more obscure figures including Chris Lehane, director of government affairs at OpenAI, and Greg Brockman, president of OpenAI.
Lehane is notable due to his long connections to Democratic Party politics, including a stint as a special assistant counsel in the Clinton administration and work as deputy campaign manager for former Vice President Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign. Since then, he has mostly done public relations work for Silicon Valley firms, including Airbnb and Coinbase.
According to The Revolving Door Project, Lehane during the second Trump administration has been a big proponent of an AI regulatory framework that he describes as "reverse federalism" that aims to shut down individual states' powers to put guardrails on the industry.
Brockman, meanwhile, is much more traditionally aligned with the GOP, as he and his wife were the largest donors to the MAGA, Inc. super PAC in 2025, and he is described by the watchdog as "a regular attendee at White House events throughout Trump’s second term."
This coziness has helped Brockman push for policies beneficial to the AI industry such as fast-tracking data center construction and the aforementioned "reverse federalism" regulatory framework.
The Revolving Door Project also pays special attention to Marc Andreesen, co-founder of venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), whose allies the watchdog describes as "deeply entrenched" in the Trump administration.
Among the Andreesen acolytes to have worked in the Trump are Sriram Krishnan, a former general partner at a16z who served as a senior AI policy advisor; Peter Bowman-Davis, former engineering fellow at a16z who served as acting chief AI officer at the Department of Health and Human Services; and Scott Kupor, former managing partner at a16z who serves as director of the Office of Personnel Management.
Andreesen himself serves as a member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, which the Revolving Door Project describes as a "vessel... to freely lobby on behalf of the tech industry’s interests without the need for lobbyist intermediaries—especially at meetings with the president and his closest advisors."
In a newsletter explaining the purpose of the tracker, the Revolving Door Project's Fletcher Calcagno wrote that it was needed to help understand why the Trump administration so far has been willing to "accept Big Tech’s maximally irresponsible recommendations" for AI regulation.
“We don’t expect the truth from the Department of Justice or from the FBI," said the president of a legal group advocating for the family of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo. "We expect a whitewash.”
The family of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo is demanding a full, independent investigation into his killing by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Houston earlier this week, as they and their lawyers warn that the government is being dishonest about the incident.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said the agent shot Salgado, a 52-year-old construction worker from Mexico who has lived in the US for over three decades, in self-defense on Tuesday after he attempted to ram them with his vehicle while trying to evade arrest, though it has not provided evidence to corroborate this account.
At a press conference on Wednesday, Salgado's 29-year-old son, Ronaldo, a teacher in Houston, described coming to the harrowing realization that his father had been shot when he saw video of the incident as it circulated on social media.
"I recognized him immediately," Ronaldo said, beginning to tear up. "Not from his appearance, but from his voice crying for help as he lay on the street, bleeding out."
After hearing rumors that "something bad" had happened to his father, Ronaldo said it took hours for him to figure out what had happened—after going to the scene of the shooting, he found that nobody could give him any answers.
He did not find out where his father was until he approached Conchita Reyes, a representative from the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), who contacted Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) and informed Ronaldo that his father was in the hospital.
"I learned of my father's passing from a news report on social media, not the hospital, not law enforcement," he said.
Ronaldo described his father as a "family man" who "dedicated his life in the United States to giving his family the American dream."
DHS described Lorenzo Salgado as an "illegal alien" who was living and working in the US without legal status. Ronaldo said he had lived in the US for 35 years, had no criminal record, and was in the process of obtaining a legal work permit when he was killed.
"We dotted every I, crossed every T, filled every document, attended every appointment," Ronaldo said. "He was close to obtaining his legal status."
He added that his father "worked the last 30 years of his life building homes in the Houston suburbs" and that "part of his dream was to build a house for himself and his family, just like the hundreds he had built for himself over his career."
"And he did, after he built his own house with his crew composed of family members and other loved ones," Ronaldo said. "You could find him every evening after work, resting on his porch, listening to music, petting his dog."
"I am deeply heartbroken to see that the man who taught me the value of hard work, family values, and education will no longer spend an evening on that porch," Ronaldo said.
Ronaldo said he was "calling for a full investigation into the events that transpired yesterday, July 7."
"He did not deserve to die," Ronaldo said. "He deserved to live a quiet life as Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a husband, a father, and a job creator for dozens of men who also wanted the American dream."
Ronaldo noted that three other men, including his uncle, were also "rounded up" by ICE at the scene.
“I have not heard from them,” Ronaldo said, “but I hope that they are able to provide their own statements to prove that my father feared for his life as unmarked cars followed my dad, who only wanted to get back to work and back to us.”
Security cameras near the scene of the incident have captured some footage of Salgado’s white van appearing to be followed by unmarked ICE vehicles, but none captured the events leading up to the shooting, and there is no publicly available visual evidence of ICE’s claim that Salgado attacked officers.
The lawyers representing Salgado's family have called for DHS to release body camera footage of the incident. LULAC leaders called into question ICE's official account, noting that there had been no damage to Salgado's vehicle.
Ronaldo said his father has "always been aware of what to do in the event that he got pulled over" by ICE agents and that "he wasn’t supposed to give them a hard time.”
The legal team representing his family has said Salgado likely panicked when he saw he was being followed by masked men in unmarked cars and feared that criminals were attempting to steal his van and work equipment.
"One of his worst fears is that someone took away his work tools because that is how he made his livelihood," Ronaldo said.
So far, the federal government has not announced plans for a public, independent investigation into the agents involved in Salgado's shooting. The FBI has said it is investigating the alleged assault on the ICE agent, while the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General is conducting an internal investigation.
DHS has not publicly released the name of the ICE agent who shot Salgado, citing what it said were rising threats to federal agents.
“We want a full and transparent investigation," said Juan Proaño, the CEO of LULAC. "Every piece of evidence, body camera footage, dash cam footage, bystander video, dispatch records must all be preserved and released to an independent investigator and to the public.”
In several cases over the past year, DHS and other law enforcement agencies under the Trump administration have claimed that people shot by ICE agents had attempted to harm them, only for video evidence to later prove those assertions to have been exaggerated or outright fabricated.
LULAC national president Domingo Garcia told The Texas Tribune, “We don’t expect the truth from the Department of Justice or from the FBI. We expect a whitewash.”
Garcia and other Democratic members of Congress sent a letter to DHS and ICE on Wednesday calling for an "immediate, fully independent, and transparent investigation" into Salgado's killing.
"This is not the first time ICE agents have used unnecessary, deadly force," she wrote, referencing the killings of US citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti during a surge of immigration agents to Minneapolis in January.
"ICE shot and killed Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in our community. His family deserves answers," she said in a public statement. "ICE cannot investigate itself."