

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.

Consumers resort to scrapping metal and selling clothes to make ends meet, businesses engage in shrinkflation as Trump’s chaotic tariffs drive up costs
The Federal Reserve released its February 2026 Beige Book, providing an updated snapshot of economic conditions across all 12 Federal Reserve Districts. A growing share of districts reported flat or declining activity as economic uncertainty and price sensitivity weighed on consumer spending alongside rising housing and food insecurities.
The report paints a clear picture of rising tariff costs, higher prices for basic necessities, and Trump administration policies disrupting businesses and squeezing working families.
Groundwork Collaborative’s Chief of Policy and Advocacy, Alex Jacquez, reacted with the following statement:
“Trump sold Americans a bill of goods he can’t deliver on, and he owes working families a refund. The president has driven up costs for consumers and businesses alike with his chaotic tariff policies and foreign wars. The Federal Reserve’s report should serve as a major red flag for the White House that Trump’s economy is flailing.”
BACKGROUND
The Federal Reserve’s Beige Book plays a critical role in informing monetary policy decisions by highlighting regional economic conditions gathered from contacts at businesses, banks, and community organizational contacts at each of the 12 Federal Reserve Districts. Economists have found that the Beige Book can offer early signals about turning points in the economy, including rising recession risks. In the March edition of the Beige Book, contacts reported that:
The Groundwork Collaborative is dedicated to advancing a coherent and persuasive progressive economic worldview and narrative capable of delivering meaningful opportunity and prosperity for everyone. Our work is driven by a core guiding principle: We are the economy. Groundwork Collaborative envisions an economic system that produces strong, broadly shared prosperity and power for all people, not just a wealthy few.
"We don't allow banks to call themselves the U.S. Treasury Investment Fund," said Rep. Mark Pocan. "We don't allow anyone to call themselves USPS Plus. So why allow insurance companies to call private insurance Medicare Advantage?"
A group of Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday reintroduced legislation aimed at reining in for-profit insurance companies who use the Medicare name to market their plans.
The "Save Medicare Act," being reintroduced by US Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), bars private insurers from using the word "Medicare" in marketing their plans, imposing "significant fines" for any insurer that doesn't comply.
At issue, the lawmakers said, is that insurers are flooding the airwaves with ads for Medicare Advantage plans during open enrollment periods. The ads are deceiving Americans into thinking their plans are just variations of Medicare services offered by the federal government, they said.
"Let’s be clear: Medicare Advantage is not Medicare," said Schakowsky. "These private insurance plans use Medicare’s trusted name while too often denying medically necessary care, restricting providers, and overcharging taxpayers by billions. That is unacceptable. We have seen insurers exploit the system to boost profits at the expense of seniors."
Khanna noted that Medicare Advantage is "a private insurance program that too often boosts profits by limiting coverage," even as it "misleads seniors into thinking it's traditional Medicare."
"That's wrong," Khanna emphasized. "This legislation will stop private insurers from cashing in on the Medicare name. We should be working to protect and expand real Medicare instead."
Pocan declared that "only Medicare is Medicare," adding that Medicare Advantage plans "often leave patients without the benefits they need while overcharging the federal government for corporate profit."
"This bill makes clear what is—and what is not—Medicare," added Pocan, "and ensures this essential program will continue to serve seniors and other Americans for generations to come."
Pocan also posted a video on social media where he talked about his elderly mother being unable to see the physician that came to her assisted living home because she relied on Medicare Advantage and the doctor in question was out of network.
"She would have had to go all the way across town to get that care," Pocan explained. "The problem is, she wasn't very mobile and she never got the medical care."
We don't allow banks to call themselves the U.S. Treasury Investment Fund. We don't allow anyone to call themselves USPS Plus.
So why allow insurance companies to call private insurance Medicare Advantage?
I’m reintroducing the Save Medicare Act with @RepRoKhanna and… pic.twitter.com/c6dAXpEJqY
— Rep. Mark Pocan (@RepMarkPocan) March 4, 2026
"We don't allow banks to call themselves the U.S. Treasury Investment Fund," said Pocan. "We don't allow anyone to call themselves USPS Plus. So why allow insurance companies to call private insurance Medicare Advantage?"
Many progressive critics have for years pointed to Medicare Advantage as a legitimate example of wasteful spending by the federal government.
A report released in January by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), an independent congressional agency that advises lawmakers on Medicare, estimated that overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans could total $76 billion in 2026.
One major factor in the overpayments is that patients using Medicare Advantage plans tend to be healthier than patients on traditional Medicare, with the result being that private insurers charge the government more than is necessary to meet these patients' needs.
On Wednesday, Schakowsky said that the "crucial legislation" she joined Khanna and Pocan in introducing "will end deceptive marketing and ensure beneficiaries understand the difference between traditional Medicare and private insurance plans."
"Seniors deserve transparency, accountability, and the full benefits they have earned," she said.
As the US House prepared to vote Thursday on a war powers resolution aimed at ending President Donald Trump's assault on Iran and Democratic leaders whip votes in support of the measure, progressive organizers ramped up pressure on lawmakers to side with the vast majority of the party's voters and support the resolution—or face consequences in upcoming elections.
Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, told Axios Wednesday after Senate Republicans—and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania—voted down a companion resolution, that "any Democrat that votes against war powers is supporting Trump's war on Iran and deserves to be primaried because all voters across the political spectrum are wholeheartedly against it."
A poll released by Reuters/Ipsos this week found that just 25% of voters support Trump's decision to join Israel in launching airstrikes across Iran, which have so far killed more than 1,000 Iranian civilians. At least six US service members have also died or been killed since the unprovoked assault began over the weekend.
Only 7% of Democratic voters support "Operation Epic Fury," as the administration is calling the attacks, while 74% oppose it. A small majority of Republicans, 55%, said they approved of the White House's war on Iran, which the administration has justified with conflicting reasons—none of them convincing experts who say the attacks are a clear violation of international law.
After warning that "the American people will remember who voted to keep our service members in danger by supporting this dangerous, unnecessary, unpopular war" following the Senate vote on Wednesday, the advocacy group Demand Progress urged Americans to call their representatives in Congress and demand they support the war powers resolution introduced in the House by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
The measure is expected to fail due to the GOP majority; Republicans hold 218 seats in the House while Democrats control 214; Massie and one other Republican, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), have indicated support.
Groups are "organizing calls into their districts to make sure that every Democrat votes for" the bipartisan resolution, one House progressive told the outlet.
Organizers are directing particular ire at House Democrats who have a history of staunchly backing Israel and have unveiled a resolution that would allow Trump to continue striking Iran for 30 days.
That resolution was introduced by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), Greg Landsman (Ohio), and Jimmy Panetta (Calif.) and would authorize the attacks for roughly the same length of time the president has said he believes they'll last, although Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war could take twice as long and that, ultimately, there would be no timeline placed on the war.
Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser for Demand Progress, told The Intercept Wednesday that for "any representative that is actually against the war," the resolution introduced by Khanna and Massie is "the vehicle they should be voting for now, and not attempting to give Trump a blank check for 30 days."
“We have already seen in the past four days the death and destruction and escalation with this war. I can’t even imagine what things look like in 30 days," said Kharrazian.
Golden is not seeking reelection this year; the other five co-sponsors of the alternative war powers resolution are up for reelection and facing primaries in the coming months.
Axios asked other lawmakers including Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) how they plan to vote on Khanna and Massie's resolution, but did not receive clear answers, with Suozzi saying only that he was "going to do the right thing."
Moskowitz told The Hill that he has "decided" how he'll vote but is "not ready to say what my vote is."
Oliver Larkin, a democratic socialist running against Moskowitz in the primary, seized on the congressman's comment.
Britt Jacovich, a spokesperson for the grassroots advocacy group MoveOn, told Axios that the organization's members "have no plans to throw their support behind members of Congress who refused to do their job and stop Trump from expanding his war. All options are on the table to make sure that our members' voices are heard loud and clear."
MoveOn also said Wednesday that any lawmaker who supports a $50 billion supplemental funding package "should expect to hear from our members."
"MoveOn members consider a vote for the supplemental a vote in favor of Donald Trump's war," said the group.
In a private Democratic caucus meeting on Wednesday, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member, and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), made an "emphatic" case for Khanna and Massie's resolution, and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) has been leading efforts to whip votes.
One anonymous progressive House Democrat told Axios that a vote against the resolution would be "politically perilous" for any Democrat.
Advocacy groups are "already preparing" to organize primary challenges against Democrats who break ranks or vote to allow Trump to attack Iran for a 30-day window, said the lawmaker.
"If the filing deadline has passed, they'll do it in '28," they told Axios. "It's basically inviting a primary challenge."
Paco Fabian, a spokesperson for Our Revolution, told Axios that "when elected officials... fail to stand with working people demanding peace and accountability, they risk losing the trust of the voters who put them in office."
"And when that trust is broken," he said, "voters often begin looking for leaders who will fight for them."
The SAVE America Act and related bills "aren't about keeping our elections free and fair," warned the ACLU. "They're about politicians setting the stage to interfere with election results they don't like."
In a pair of Truth Social posts on Thursday, President Donald Trump urged congressional Republicans to pass the voter suppression bill that is stalled in the US Senate after being advanced by the House of Representatives last month.
"The Republicans MUST DO, with PASSION, and at the expense of everything else, THE SAVE AMERICA ACT—And not the watered down version. This is a Country Defining fight for the Soul of our Nation!" Trump wrote Thursday morning.
In a separate post about an hour later, the president added:
THE SAVE AMERICA ACT!
1. ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW VOTER I.D. (IDENTIFICATION!).
2. ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP IN ORDER TO VOTE.
3. NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS (EXCEPT FOR ILLNESS, DISABILITY, MILITARY, OR TRAVEL!).
4. NO MEN IN WOMEN’S SPORTS.
5. NO TRANSGENDER MUTILATION SURGERY FOR CHILDREN, WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE PARENTS
The posts came just eight months ahead of the midterms that will determine which party controls each chamber of Congress for the rest of the president's second term—which is also supposed to be his final, under the 22nd Amendment to the US Constitution, but the 79-year-old with a history of lying about election results and voter fraud has repeatedly teased trying to stay in power.
Trump and other advocates of the SAVE America Act—and its state-level copycats—have claimed that the bill is necessary to prevent immigrants from participating in elections, even though noncitizen voting is already illegal and research has made clear that voter fraud is incredibly rare in the United States.
The House-approved version of the bill, led by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), would require states to regularly submit voter rolls to the US Department of Homeland Security, and to obtain proof of citizenship, in person, when registering someone to vote. It would also force voters to present eligible photo identification at the polls.
Critics of the bill have argued that rather than tackling the nonexistent issue of noncitizen voting, the SAVE America Act would disenfranchise eligible voters who don't have access to proof of citizenship documents—such as people who have lost paperwork, can't afford replacements, or have changed their names.
The ACLU has a tool to help Americans contact their senator to oppose the SAVE Act, SAVE America Act, and Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act. The automatic message says in part that "these bills aren't about keeping our elections free and fair. They're about politicians setting the stage to interfere with election results they don't like. Please reject these dangerous, anti-voter bills."
The SAVE Act and its more extreme version, the SAVE America Act, could shut millions of eligible citizens out of our democracy.Tell Congress to reject these attacks on our freedom to vote at aclu.org/stop_anti_voter_
[image or embed]
— ACLU (@aclu.org) March 3, 2026 at 1:29 PM
While House Republicans were able to approve the legislation mostly along party lines—the only Democrat who supported it was Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas, who notably received a pardon from the president recently—the Senate GOP's majority is too slim to get most bills past the 60-vote filibuster without some Democratic support.
Trump also renewed his call for passing the legislation in his State of the Union address last month, specifically calling out Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD). The following day, the Associated Press reported that Thune backs the bill, and Republicans were discussing how to send it to the president's desk.
According to the AP:
Senate Republicans "aren't unified on an approach," Thune said on Wednesday after Trump's speech.
In an effort to get around Democratic opposition, Trump and others have pushed a so-called "talking filibuster," which would bring the Senate back to the days of the movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, when senators talked indefinitely to block legislation. Today, the Senate mostly skips the speeches and votes to end debate, which takes 60 votes in the Senate where Republicans have a 53-47 majority.
Republicans wouldn't have to change the rules to force a talkathon. They could simply keep the Senate open and make Democrats deliver speeches for days or weeks to delay taking up the legislation. But Thune would still need enough support from his caucus to move forward with that approach, and he said this week that "we aren't there yet."
Absent progress in the Senate, several state legislatures are considering similar bills. Citing the Voting Rights Lab tracker, Talking Points Memo reported Tuesday that 15 states have 26 active election bills with proof of citizenship requirements.
"I think what we're often seeing in these states is that there's an effort to send political messages that don't necessarily comport with the reality of election integrity or the needs of election officials," David Becker, a former US Department of Justice lawyer and executive director and founder of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation and Research, told TPM.
"Like the SAVE Act, this would require citizens to regularly work to make up for government deficiencies, digging out and showing their citizenship papers over and over and over again when they've already shown them," Becker said of state-level proposals. "Why are we insisting that citizens have to work for government, rather than government working for us?"