

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.

Denae Ávila-Dickson, press@sunrisemovement.org
Today, a coalition of youth-led organizations — Sunrise Movement, alongside College Democrats of America, Gen Z Against Trump, Voters of Tomorrow and United We Dream — released an open letter calling on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to fight for our generation or step aside for someone who will. The signatories called out the Democratic leadership’s failure to stand up to Donald Trump’s agenda and demanded bold action to fight for the future of young Americans.
The letter comes in response to Schumer and nine other Senate Democrats’ recent support for the Republican-led budget bill that prioritized tax cuts for billionaires while enabling Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s plans to gut critical investments in healthcare, education, attack immigrants and trans people, and dismantle climate action.
“Chuck Schumer’s cowardice is inexcusable. Donald Trump and Elon Musk are hurtling our country toward disaster while young people are watching their future go up in flames,” said Aru Siney-Ajay, Executive Director of Sunrise Movement. “Today, Donald Trump is announcing plans to dismantle the Department of Education while Chuck Schumer sits on the sidelines. His failure to act is a betrayal, and he has no business leading if he won’t fight for our future”.
"We demand that Democrats stand up for their values and push back against Republican extremism — not enable it. This is a reckoning for a new generation of Democratic Leadership, said Sohali Vaddula, Vice President of College Democrats of America.
“As young people, the stakes for our future couldn’t be higher,” said Jackson Hurley, Senior Director for Strategy and Outreach at Voters Of Tomorrow. “We already feel like the deck is stacked against us. Trump and Elon are attacking public education, the climate, and our democracy, all for the sake of lining their pockets. And Democratic Senate leadership is not doing nearly enough to stop them. We’ve had enough. We are organizing and mobilizing to fight for the future we deserve, but we can’t win alone. It’s past time for leaders to take a stand and fight for our futures”.
Sunrise Movement is a movement to stop climate change and create millions of good jobs in the process.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren warned that President Donald Trump "wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs."
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren said Thursday that Congress must act to stop a new Trump administration assault on federal nutrition assistance that would strip aid from over 6 million people, compounding the hunger disaster created by the Republican budget law enacted last year.
"This is beyond cruel," Warren (D-Mass.) wrote in a social media post, referring to a rule proposed by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that would curtail a policy known as broad-based categorical eligibility. The USDA's own analysis estimates that its proposal, published in the Federal Register earlier this week, would take Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits from roughly 6.3 million people in 2029, the first year the rule would take full effect.
Warren noted that 5.5 million people have already lost federal nutrition aid since enactment of the 2025 Trump-GOP budget law, which instituted the largest SNAP cuts in the program's history.
"Now, he wants to rip food assistance away from 6 million more who are already struggling to get by because of his sky-high gas prices and chaotic tariffs," the senator wrote. "Congress needs to stop this."
After a rule is published in the Federal Register, Congress has 60 legislative days to introduce a Congressional Review Act resolution to overturn it. Democrats will take control of the House and Senate on January 3, 2027.
The new USDA rule takes aim at broad-based categorical eligibility, which lets states automatically deem recipients of other federal benefits eligible for SNAP—reducing administrative burdens for state officials and program enrollees. Under the Trump administration's rule, which is open for public comment until December 10, households with gross incomes above 130% of the federal poverty line would lose SNAP benefits, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Experts have noted that the Trump administration's attack on broad-based categorical eligibility would, if finalized, have far-reaching impacts, including reduced access to free school meals.
In a statement on Friday, the Children's Defense Fund urged the Trump administration to "reverse course" on its proposal, warning it would harm kids across the US.
"Many public schools use SNAP to automatically enroll children in free meal programs, meaning any child who loses SNAP access could also lose automatic eligibility for free school meals, exacerbating food insecurity in school districts across the country," the group said.
“We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%,” said the senator-elect. “The American people cannot wait two years for change.”
In the first two years of his second term in the White House, "success" according to President Donald Trump has looked like hundreds of thousands of people being detained by federal immigration agents, and families struggling with soaring costs at the grocery store and gas pump as a result of his "incredible" tariffs and so-called "victory" in the deeply unpopular Iran War.
But at the What's Next summit hosted in Denver by Majority Democrats on Thursday, Sen.-elect James Talarico (D-Texas), whose election win last week stunned Republicans, called on the Democratic Party to ensure the president achieves a new kind of success in his final years in office, as he contends for the first time with a US Senate and House that are both controlled by the Democrats.
The party has an opportunity, said Talarico, to "make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any presidency in American history"—but only if he agrees to sign the kinds of legislation that American voters signaled they're demanding when they went to the polls last week, handing Democrats at least 55 US Senate seats and 255 US House seats and rejecting the president's MAGA agenda.
Talarico called on Democrats to emulate the far-reaching domestic policy agenda of former President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who signed the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, created the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and spearheaded early education and legal services programs for low-income families, among other far-reaching initiatives as part of his Great Society agenda.
"We are in striking distance of a supermajority," said Talarico, "and a supermajority requires a super agenda. We must deliver immediate, bold relief during this affordability crisis. We must unrig this economic system that only benefits the top 1%."
Talarico: The American people cannot wait two years for change, so we must work with President Trump. If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits as LBJ, we can help make that a reality. We should make the final two years of his presidency the most productive of any American presidency
— Acyn (@Acyn) November 12, 2026
Talarico called on Democrats in Congress to pass legislation to ban gerrymandering, "invest in our teachers and our students and build an American public education system that is the envy of the world," regulate artificial intelligence, end "forever wars that are driving up prices," and "champion a new, values-based foreign policy." Without naming the broadly popular Medicare for All proposal that has been introduced in the House and Senate numerous times, he called for Democrats to "pass universal healthcare so no one in this country goes bankrupt just because they get sick."
"Some of these reforms may not pass until 2029," said the senator-elect, who emphasized during his campaign that Americans across racial, partisan, and gender divides must join together to fight the influence of powerful billionaire megadonors. "But the American people cannot wait two years for change. So we must work with President Trump."
"If President Trump wants the same plaques and portraits and busts as LBJ, we can help make that a reality," Talarico continued, alluding to Trump's push to build monuments to himself. "This moment is so much bigger and so much more important than the red team or the blue team."
David Sirota of Lever News applauded Talarico's call, suggesting, as Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) has, that Democrats could pass a Medicare for All bill called "Trumpcare" and trade the president's affection for seeing his own name emblazoned on policy initiatives for a new healthcare system that could save more than 100,000 lives and $1 trillion annually.
Sirota compared a far-reaching Democratic agenda to the legislation passed by Congress during Republican President Richard Nixon's five-and-a-half years in office.
Working with Democrats in both chambers of Congress, Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, key workplace safety and anti-discrimination protections, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, among other major legislation.
Talarico's comments echoed those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who appeared undaunted by Trump's threat to veto legislation passed by Democrats.
“If Donald Trump wants to be Mr. Veto, let’s test that out,” the senator said. “The new Democratic majority in Congress should pass bills to make life more affordable and our government less corrupt.”
The Senate minority leader addressed reporters amid a push for progressives in the House to nominate Rep. Ayanna Pressley as an alternative to Jeffries at next week’s Democratic caucus meeting.
Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped a reporter’s questions about a controversial proposal to more closely integrate the US and Israeli militaries on Thursday, underscoring some critics’ argument that he’s unfit to serve as House speaker when Democrats retake the chamber in January.
Democrats in the US Congress are facing growing calls to strip out provisions in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would significantly expand cooperation between the US and Israeli defense industries, making it easier for the two countries to jointly develop weapons, share military technology, and incorporate Israeli tech into US military systems.
One poll from August by Data for Progress showed that 61% of likely voters opposed the measure, known as the "United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative," including 78% of Democrats—a reflection of the public's growing desire for the US to cut ties with Israel following over three years of genocidal attacks on Gaza, expansionist conquest in the West Bank and Lebanon, and military aggression against Iran.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who is challenging Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to lead the Democrats’ Senate majority, said earlier this week that Democrats should oppose the military integration provisions. He and his colleagues warned that these provisions would give Israel even greater leverage over US policy and threaten national security by granting Israel access to sensitive information about US military technology beyond what is shared even with NATO allies.
The NDAA is expected to come up for a vote next month. But it will need Democratic support to pass the Senate, where 60 votes are required to break the filibuster. It may also face obstacles in the House, where Republicans hold a narrow 218-214 majority. Some in the GOP, like Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), and Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.), have already signaled opposition to the measure, meaning that a united Democratic caucus could kill it.
Asked by The Hill's Laura Kelly at a news conference on Thursday whether he agreed with Van Hollen's call to remove the provisions from the NDAA, Jeffries never answered her question directly:
I haven't had a conversation with Sen. Van Hollen, but what I have said is that things have to dramatically change over in the Middle East.
We need dramatic change in the West Bank, which is why I strongly support the West Bank Violence Protection Act. We need dramatic change in Gaza, and we need dramatic change with respect to the memorandum of understanding as it winds down, all of which I've previously said publicly.
And we'll work as a caucus to make sure that we can bring about the just and lasting peace that Israelis and Palestinians deserve over in the Middle East.
The status quo is unacceptable, and we need dramatic change. And that looks like, as far as I'm concerned, making sure you have a safe and secure Israel, living side by side as a Jewish and democratic state with an independent Palestinian state that provides dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people.
Jeffries, who has received more than $1 million in campaign donations facilitated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) since 2022, is already facing criticism over his refusal earlier this week to commit to using next month's government funding bill to force President Donald Trump to end his war in Iran and for failing to ensure the whole Democratic caucus was present for a key vote to advance the impeachment of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that with his noncommittal answer on US-Israeli military integration, Jeffries had “in less than 90 seconds” made it “crystal clear why he should not become the next speaker of the House.”
"Asked whether he supports removing provisions that deepen US defense cooperation and intelligence sharing with Israel from the National Defense Authorization Act—an obvious yes!—he refuses to address the question and instead gives a 1990s answer about a mythological two-state solution," Parsi wrote on social media.
In the Senate, momentum is building behind Van Hollen’s effort to oust Schumer as leader. On Wednesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said that Schumer, another staunch ally of Israel, was “way out of touch with where the American people are at.”
Several incoming Democratic senators, including Abdul El-Sayed (Mich.), Peggy Flanagan (Minn.), Troy Jackson (Maine), Adam Hamilton (Kan.), and Juliana Stratton (Ill.), have said they support Van Hollen or won't back Schumer, while others, including Democratic Sens.-elect Annie Andrews (SC) and Chris Pappas (NH), as well as the centrist Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), have suggested they wanted new leadership.
However, despite growing calls from the Democratic base for new leadership in the House as well, no Democrat has formally stepped up yet to challenge Jeffries’ claim to the speaker’s gavel.
Some newly elected Democrats—like Reps.-elect Melat Kiros (Colo.), Don Leonard (Ohio), and Claire Valdez (NY)—have suggested they would prefer a different leader, but House progressive leaders have so far put the kibosh on an insurgency, with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), and Greg Casar (Texas) standing by Jeffries, at least as long as he's the only choice.
Time is running out for progressives to rally behind an alternative to Jeffries. The Democratic caucus will begin its internal leadership elections on November 18 and choose its nominee for speaker. The entire House will vote to elect a speaker when the new Congress convenes on January 3, 2027.
Some grassroots organizers have pushed for progressive Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) to challenge Jeffries, with one petition to draft her garnering over 90,000 signatures.
She has circulated her own petition pushing for a bolder agenda for Democrats to pursue in the next Congress, including passage of Medicare for All, national abortion protections, restrictions on data centers, and the abolition of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In a speech on the House floor Thursday, she declared that “incrementalism is a recipe for failure” and that Democrats “cannot let money and the special interests dictate our fight.”
No one in the House Democratic caucus has publicly declared support for Pressley. But there is reportedly some movement behind the scenes ahead of Wednesday’s caucus meeting, where a nominee for party leader will be chosen.
One lawmaker, granted anonymity by Drop Site News congressional reporter Julian Andreone, said, "I am hearing that many progressives will be writing Ayanna’s name in.”
“You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists. And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan.”
A coalition of environmental organizations is warning that the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Türkiye is in danger of being co-opted by big polluters.
An analysis released on Friday by the Kick Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition finds that more than 100 polluting corporations and trade associations—including from fossil fuel, Big Tech, and industrial agriculture—have sent delegations to COP31.
Among the largest delegations, the report says, are International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), which sent 29 delegates; BNP Paribas, which sent 22; HSBC, which sent 19; and Amazon, which sent 12.
The analysis also shows that banks "collectively representing more than $2.2 trillion in fossil fuel financing from 2021-2025" have a presence at COP31.
The KBPO report notes that these industries and associations "have demonstrated track records of being notably misaligned with or obstructing climate policy... indicating they can be a threat to the strong climate action COP31 must urgently deliver."
These polluters' delegations are so big that they vastly outnumber delegations sent by many nations that are most endangered by the climate emergency, including Niger, the Philippines, and Nepal.
Maikel Peuki, director of the Papua chapter of the Indonesian Forum for Living Environment (WALHI) and a KBPO partner, said allowing big polluters to have a seat at the COP31 table would have dire consequences for his country's environment.
“In Papua our forests and coastal areas are being targeted for fossil fuel and food estate projects and carbon-offsetting schemes by major corporate emitters,” said Maikel Peuki. “This is not a genuine solution to the climate crisis. Those who cause pollution should be the ones to pay for the damage they have created.”
Peuki's remarks were echoed by Lien Vandamme, senior campaigner for the Center for International Environmental Law's Climate and energy program.
"You can’t put out a fire while handing the matches to the arsonists," said Vandamme. "And you certainly can’t expect the arsonists to write the evacuation plan. It’s therefore no surprise that the UN climate talks continue to fail in delivering the climate action that is needed. It’s time to show Big Polluters the door and fundamentally change the rules that keep rolling out the red carpet for them."
Prakash Dalal, director of Friends of the Earth Nepal, accused big polluters of causing "loss of livelihood, emotional damage, trauma, and survival challenges" for people in his country, adding that "we cannot tolerate the disproportionate space given to them compared to civil society and our country delegations."
"We need to kick these big polluters out!" Dalal emphasizes. "This should be a moral and legal obligation for the COP."
The presence of polluters also drew the ire of climate activist Greta Thunberg, according to a Thursday report in Latin Times.
While protesting outside COP31, Thunberg decried the negotiations for being "filled with lobbyists" who are "paid by the very destructive industries" profiting from continued fossil fuel dependence.
Thunberg also accused governments attending COP31 of using the event to "whitewash themselves" without taking real action.
"Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
A broad coalition of advocacy organizations on Friday urged Democratic lawmakers to aggressively wield their investigative powers in the new Congress to scrutinize US President Donald Trump and his administration's relationship with Jensen Huang, the scandal-engulfed former chief executive of the AI chip giant Nvidia.
"While CEO Jensen Huang has resigned, that should not mean that he escapes scrutiny of Nvidia's actions," Guardrails Action, Indivisible, the American Federation of Teachers, and seven other groups wrote in a letter to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). "Beyond the obvious and pressing concerns regarding legislation on chip exports is a question at the very core of our democracy: Should a handful of billionaires and a corrupt president have the power to sell out the rest of us so they can get even richer, or do the American people get a say in their own future?"
The letter came a day after Huang stepped down as head of Nvidia following revelations of two extramarital affairs—one with a subordinate and another with a woman flagged by US intelligence agencies for potential ties to the Chinese government.
Over the past two years, Huang has developed a close relationship with Trump, and the CEO's professional demise has heightened scrutiny of White House policy decisions that have benefited the company—including licenses to export AI chips to China.
"Nvidia, the second-largest corporation in the world, gave $25 million to Trump’s ballroom," the advocacy coalition noted on Friday. "Its former CEO, Jensen Huang, traveled with Trump on Air Force One to China, and attended Trump’s state dinner with Chinese President Xi Jinping. At the same time, according to recent bombshell reporting, Huang was having an affair with a suspected Chinese spy, who led Megaspeed, a company under investigation for allegedly smuggling restricted Nvidia chips into China."
"Rather than take action, President Trump ignored the warnings; a Commerce Department investigation was even halted after direct intervention by Nvidia’s general counsel," the groups observed.
The coalition specifically called on Democrats in both the House and Senate to commit to three actions:
"The concentration of power and wealth from AI, and the risks that come with it, are historic," the groups wrote. "Countering that power is the most important fight of our lifetime. The American people put their trust in Democrats to put them first; now let’s prove they were right."
As Common Dreams reported on Thursday, a pair of high-ranking congressional Democrats have already launched an investigation into what they characterized as a "scheme" by the Trump administration to "mask an unconstitutional export tax as a national security tariff action—benefiting both Nvidia and the Chinese government."
The Democrats, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), announced their investigation in a letter to Lutnick, a billionaire businessman whose department is under fire for lax oversight of Nvidia chip exports. Wyden and Neal noted in their letter that Lutnick's Commerce Department "has approved sales to Chinese companies with government and military ties—including Chinese 'cutout' companies with no physical presence at their listed addresses."
CNN reported Friday that some of Trump's advisers "have begun discussing" whether Lutnick should be fired. In an interview on Friday morning, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent blamed Lutnick for what he described as "leakage" of Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China.
According to Axios, Lutnick "has repeatedly stood in the way" of efforts to crack down on companies "suspected of diverting Nvidia's advanced AI chips to China."
"Howard Lutnick should resign or be fired," US Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) wrote on Thursday.
"Senator Van Hollen understands this is a fight of workers vs. billionaires and has the courage to deliver the change voters demanded," said the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
A machinists union with around 600,000 members issued a statement on Thursday endorsing US Sen. Chris Van Hollen's bid for Senate majority leader in the new Congress, calling the Maryland Democrat "a proven champion of working people who will fight to unrig an economy stacked against working families."
"The IAM Union proudly supports Senator Chris Van Hollen for Senate Majority Leader," said Brian Bryant, president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "Senator Van Hollen understands this is a fight of workers vs. billionaires and has the courage to deliver the change voters demanded. Workers did their part on election night. Now it’s Senate Democrats’ turn. Senator Van Hollen is the right choice.”
IAM's statement came shortly after Van Hollen, an outspoken supporter of labor unions, announced that he would challenge Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for the majority leader post.
"In this election, Americans called on us to unrig an economy rigged against working people and fueled by political corruption," Van Hollen wrote on social media late Thursday. "To deliver, we need new leadership. This isn't about any one person—it’s about answering that call. That's why I’m running for Senate majority leader."
The Maryland senator acknowledged he would be the "underdog" in the contest but disputed Schumer's claim to have already locked down enough support to win. Senate Democrats are expected to vote for majority leader by secret ballot in early December.
Van Hollen told MS NOW on Thursday that he has the support of "more than 10" of 55 Democratic senators and senators-elect so far, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.).
"Now people will have to make a decision, one way or the other," said Van Hollen, "and they have to decide whether they want to vote for change or whether they want to vote for the status quo."
The progressive advocacy group RootsAction, which says it has more than a million supporters online, announced Friday that it plans to "build on the campaign that we launched early this week, when activists responded to our mass emails by telling their Democratic senators to urge Van Hollen to run for the top Senate post."
"Now that he has done so, the imperative task is for Democrats nationwide to make sure that their voices are heard and heeded within the Capitol bubble," the group said in a statement. "At this historic moment, that bubble must be burst so that grassroots Democrats finally have the bold leadership in the Senate that they deserve. Political business as usual is absolutely unacceptable, and that means Schumer is unacceptable as the Senate Democratic leader."
"The ‘blue tsunami’ could easily become the blue mirage in the wrong hands," warned Sunrise Movement. "And Schumer’s hands are too full of billionaire money to hold young people’s future."
Thursday's announcement that Sen. Chris Van Hollen will challenge Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to lead the upper house of Congress when Democrats retake control in January was met with cautious optimism from progressives, who underscored the mandate for change delivered by voters in last week's Democratic midterm blowout.
"Yes, I am planning to run for the Senate majority leader," Van Hollen (D-Md.) told Jen Psaki on MS NOW Thursday night. "This is not about any one individual but it is about answering the call of the American people."
"We saw a huge outburst of democracy on Election Day; red states, blue states, purple states," the senator continued. "And it wasn't only a rejection of [President] Donald Trump and his corruption, and his wars, and his cruelty. It was also about a call... to take on a broken economic system that's rigged in favor of the very wealthy against working people, and it's fueled by a corrupt political system."
"The call was to reject the status quo, and to reject business as usual," Van Hollen added. "And to do that, I think we need new leadership."
Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) was among the first to hail Van Hollen's announcement, writing on social media that he called on the senator "to lead our caucus as a candidate back in April because he leads with courage and experience."
"We need both right now," El-Sayed added. "Which is why I’m proud to stand with him in his bid to lead our Senate majority."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) soon followed, noting that "the American people voted for change. They want a Democratic Party that will stand up to powerful special interests, take on the billionaire class, and fight for working families."
"That is why I am supporting Senator Chris Van Hollen to lead Senate Democrats," he added.
The secret-ballot vote to choose the next majority leader is expected to take place in early December and would mark the first contested Democratic leadership contest in decades.
Author Courtney Millan said on Bluesky that she is calling her "centrist-ass senators and asking them to back Chris Van Hollen."
Journalist Matt Novak said, "Hell yes, let's go."
BREAKING: Chris Van Hollen officially announces run for senate majority leader against Chuck Schumer! Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at:(202) 224-3121to tell your senators: Vote Chris, NOT CHUCK.
[image or embed]
— 50501: The People’s Movement ❌👑 (@50501movement.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 6:07 PM
The activist group RootsAction said it "will build on the campaign that we launched early this week, when activists responded to our mass emails by telling their Democratic senators to urge Van Hollen to run for the top Senate post."
"Now that he has done so, the imperative task is for Democrats nationwide to make sure that their voices are heard and heeded within the Capitol bubble," the group continued. "At this historic moment, that bubble must be burst so that grassroots Democrats finally have the bold leadership in the Senate that they deserve."
"Political business as usual is absolutely unacceptable, and that means Schumer is unacceptable as the Senate Democratic leader," it added.
The youth-led Sunrise Movement for climate action said on Bluesky that "Young people voted for change on election night. Chuck Schumer can’t give us that, but Chris Van Hollen might."
"The truth is, the ‘blue tsunami’ could easily become the blue mirage in the wrong hands," Sunrise continued. "And Schumer’s hands are too full of billionaire money to hold young people’s future."
"Young people are looking for a fair shot at life, and they haven’t yet been given one," the group added. "While the climate crisis barrels toward us at full speed, politicians like Schumer, who has been in office since 1974, have received plenty of chances."
"Chris Van Hollen has spent the last two years fighting to release his constituents out of [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] custody, spoken out against [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's] corrupting influence, and tried to build the future young people deserve," Sunrise noted.
"But Senate Democrats won't elect him just because young people want change," the group cautioned. "We’ll have to show up at their offices like young people did today at Schumer’s Senate office."
More than 50 Sunrise activists were arrested during Thursday's sit-in at Schumer's Washington, DC office.
Schumer, meanwhile, responded to the news by posting on X:
I welcome any discussion about the future of our caucus and the important work ahead. I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished together—55 seats and counting is an amazing result—and I have the votes to continue serving as Democratic Leader. I look forward to leading our new Democratic majority and delivering for the American people.
Van Hollen drew plaudits from human rights defenders, who noted his opposition to US wars and support for Israel and for authoritarian regimes around the world. The senator has criticized Israel for what a UN commission of inquiry and many other experts have called its genocide in Gaza and what the International Court of Justice has found to be an illegal occupation and apartheid in the West Bank.
Americans, Van Hollen wrote earlier this year in one of his many calls to end US armed aid to Israel, “do not want to be complicit in ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, or what human rights organizations and scholars have determined to be genocide in Gaza.”
“A historic number of voters sent a clear message to Congress this election that they want mass economic relief and financial breathing room,” said one campaigner.
More than 200,000 student borrowers and their allies, as well as a coalition of advocacy groups, demanded Thursday that Democratic congressional leaders seize the moment of their soon-to-be majorities in both houses of Congress to win a student loan repayment pause.
A petition circulated by the Student Debt Crisis Center (SDCC) demanding President Donald Trump act to pause all federal student loan repayments and interest had collected 209,359 signatures as of Thursday afternoon.
The petition accuses the Department of Education under Education Secretary Linda McMahon—who has said she shares Trump's goal of abolishing the DOE—of having "failed Americans" by moving the student loan portfolio to the US Treasury Department, creating lengthy delays in and "egregious account errors" in application processing, not granting loan forgiveness to qualified borrowers, making repayment less affordable, announcing the end of the Saving on a Valuable Education plan, and restarting interest accrual on SAVE plans. Dozens of Democratic lawmakers last week pressed McMahon to answer for these failures.
"Amid an affordability crisis and the current state of affairs, student loan payments should be the last thing on anyone’s mind," the petition states. "Student loan payments are an unacceptable source of additional stress for Americans who are already stretched thin."
Our payment pause petition surpassed 200,000 signatures, but we aren't stopping there. Read the full press release here: www.studentdebtcrisis.org/post/student...Add your name to the petition: actionnetwork.org/petitions/pa...
[image or embed]
— Student Debt Crisis Center (@debtcrisisorg.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 8:10 AM
"We called for a payment pause in 2025, which the Department of Education chose to ignore, but we are resuming our call for a pause right now," the document adds. "Given the growing economic anxiety and hardship facing Americans, an immediate payment pause is not just necessary; it is imperative."
SDCC said in a statement announcing the petition:
Following the midterms, affordability is top of mind for millions of Americans. With a new Congress opening the door for real change, beginning with a payment pause would give student loan borrowers necessary relief while the 120th Congress legislates and conducts oversight. Lawmakers are already demanding answers from the Department of Education on their extensive failures managing the federal student loan system. Now, borrowers are holding those in charge accountable.
“The results of the midterm election are undeniable—Americans need relief from the burden of unaffordable living, and they need it now," said SDCC founder and president Natalia Abrams.
"Implementing an immediate pause on student loan payments and interest wouldn’t just be an effective way of providing relief, it would also free up room in the paychecks of over 43 million borrowers to pay bills, care for their families, and revitalize their local economies," Abrams added. "It’s a no-brainer."
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reported Tuesday that outstanding student loan debt reached approximately $1.66 trillion in the third quarter of 2026, making it the second-largest category of household debt after mortgages.
Meanwhile, Federal Student Aid, a DOE agency, highlighted earlier this year that more than 42 million people hold federal student loans, with the federally managed portfolio alone exceeding $1.64 trillion.
On Wednesday, around 20 advocacy groups wrote to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, both New York Democrats, urging them to pressure Trump to sign legislation pausing student loan repayments after Democrats take back control of Congress in January.
We joined nearly 20 orgs in a letter to Senator Schumer and Rep. Jeffries urging them to win a pause on student loan payments in this next Congress.From widespread administrative errors to high monthly payments, Dems must step up for student debtors.www.forbes.com/sites/adammi...
[image or embed]
— Debt Collective 🟥 (@debtcollective.bsky.social) November 12, 2026 at 9:30 AM
"The student debt system is on the brink of breakdown, and today it functions worse than it did before the COVID-era payment pause," the groups contended in their letter, referring to the suspension of repayments during the first Trump administration that continued during former President Joe Biden's tenure before ending in 2023.
"We do not make this request lightly," the letter continues. "It is grounded in a documented and worsening pattern of administrative failure that is causing real, immediate, and irreparable harm to millions of borrowers."
"The chaos and disarray in the current system are not the fault of borrowers, and borrowers should not bear the consequences," the signers asserted. "A pause is the only responsible course until the department can guarantee that the system works as the law requires."
Groups signing the letter include the American Association of University Professors, Debt Collective, Democratic Socialists of America, Sunrise Movement, SDCC, and the University of California Student Association.
“A historic number of voters sent a clear message to Congress this election that they want mass economic relief and financial breathing room,” Debt Collective co-founder Astra Taylor said on Bluesky. “Trump paused student loans once. Democrats should push him to get it done again.”
Corporate Democrats could also prove to be an obstacle to debt relief. Both Schumer and Jeffries backed legislation that effectively prohibited the Biden administration from extending the pandemic-era payment pause.
Schumer had previously been among the most prominent congressional advocates for student debt relief, repeatedly urging Biden to extend the payment moratorium and cancel as much as $50,000 in debt per borrower.
During Trump's second term, his administration has moved aggressively to resume collections. In April 2025, the DOE announced that it would restart collections on defaulted federal student loans the following month, and that it would seize federal tax refunds and other payments through the Treasury Offset Program.
The department also announced plans to garnish borrowers' wages. In July 2025, it notified borrowers that interest would resume accruing on loans enrolled in Biden's SAVE repayment plan, which had been blocked by a federal court injunction. The administration subsequently announced plans to eliminate SAVE. However, the Trump administration has also twice delayed involuntary collections, including the planned wage garnishments, amid public outcry.
As of September, more than 9.3 million student loan borrowers were in default, owing approximately $234 billion.
"Americans across the political spectrum have good reason to distrust unchecked executive branch surveillance power."
As a few leading congressional Democrats urged their Republican colleagues to reauthorize a widely reviled spying power before Democratic majorities take over in January, a diverse coalition of advocacy groups on Thursday demanded lawmakers refrain from including a provision on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in any critical bills before the year ends.
Rampant abuse of that portion of FISA—which lets the federal government spy on electronic communications of noncitizens located outside the country without a warrant—has fueled calls for reform across the ideological spectrum in Congress and among civil society organizations. Although Section 702 expired in June, surveillance operations will be able to continue through next March.
Noting that various lawmakers have long "sought meaningful reforms," including a warrant requirement for "accessing the private communications of US persons in Section 702 databases and closing the data broker loophole," the new letter calls on top Democrats and Republicans in both chambers of Congress to keep a reauthorization of Section 702 "out of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) or any other must-pass legislation in the waning days of the 119th Congress."
"The principle at stake is fundamental: Foreign intelligence authorities and purchased data should not be used to circumvent Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights," argued more than two dozen groups. "The need for reform is particularly acute as artificial intelligence tools are making it cheaper and easier than ever for the government to compile and analyze Americans' data at scale to reveal our habits, associations, and beliefs."
"Americans across the political spectrum have good reason to distrust unchecked executive branch surveillance power. Conservatives have seen abuses of surveillance authorities targeted at political campaigns and other Americans engaged in lawful, First Amendment-protected activity. And progressives have warned against granting expansive surveillance powers to the current administration," the letter notes. President Donald Trump has both fought for and sabotaged reauthorization efforts.
The letter emphasizes that "in recent years, Section 702 has been abused to spy on protesters on the left and the right; 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign; members of Congress and their staff; and multiple government officials, political commentators, and journalists. No member of Congress knows who will occupy the White House in the years ahead, and constitutional protections should not depend on who is president."
Signatories include the ACLU, Center for Democracy & Technology, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Fight for the Future, Free Press Action, Win Without War, and the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University's School of Law—whose Liberty and National Security Program counsel, Hannah James, stressed that "for too long, Section 702's warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance authority has been abused to spy on Americans. Slipping an extension into must-pass year-end legislation, instead of openly debating and voting on bipartisan reforms, would betray the democratic process and Americans' Fourth Amendment rights."
Hajar Hammado, senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, which helped organize the letter, similarly said in a statement that "following the widespread outcry over Flock cameras, it's clear that the American people don't want mass surveillance. Slipping a renewal of federal mass surveillance powers into a must-pass defense bill during a lame-duck session would be a wholesale rejection of what the American people want."
"Congressional leaders need to reject the failed agenda of out-of-touch Intelligence elites who want unchecked surveillance of Americans by refusing to add FISA to the NDAA or any other must-pass bill," the campaigner continued.
Jason Pye, vice president at the Due Process Institute, another signatory, pointed to Democrats' sweeping victories in the midterms: "Voters just spoke with a resounding voice that they are sick of politics as usual in Congress. They're sick of backroom deals. They're sick of being sold out."
"Putting the reauthorization of Section 702 in the NDAA is a terrible message to send back to voters who are desperately seeking a change in how Congress operates," Pye declared. "Worse, it's coming at a time when there are increasing worries about the executive branch having too much power. The notion that Congress would reauthorize Section 702 without a warrant requirement and without prohibiting the government from buying information on Americans from third-party data brokers is incomprehensible."
The letter came a day after House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Jim Himes (D-Conn.), who will likely chair the panel next year, urged the GOP to act on reauthorization immediately: "My preference would be, let’s just take the win that’s on the table, get it done in the lame-duck,” he told Politico on Wednesday. "If that fails, we'll do something in the first quarter."
Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) also backed a lame-duck reauthorization, acknowledging that "it becomes much more difficult in a new Congress," while Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) told the outlet: "We need to get it reauthorized... As soon as possible."
In response to that reporting, Hammado charged that "Jim Himes has betrayed his own party and the American people," highlighting that a reauthorization is desired by not only Trump but also his controversial new chief of staff, Stephen Miller.
"After seeing a blowout election where Americans overwhelmingly rejected Trump and sided with the Democrats, Himes' first instinct was to urge Republicans to use the little time they have left to hand Donald Trump and Stephen Miller the mass surveillance powers that they're asking for," said the Demand Progress adviser.
"It's incredibly telling that Himes fears the idea of his own party having the leverage to stop Trump from bypassing the courts to spy on everyday Americans, and it is shameful he is advising the administration on how to undermine Americans’ privacy," added Hammado. "Democrats and Republicans alike must reject Himes' agenda and oppose any effort to force a FISA renewal through Congress."
The Michigan Democrat has tried multiple times in the last week to appeal to Trump's ego in the hopes of securing his support for Medicare for All.
Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed on Thursday ratcheted up his campaign to convince President Donald Trump to sign Medicare for All legislation.
In a social media post, El-Sayed (D-Mich.) offered up a mockup of a gold "TrumpCare" card that every American would use to access medical treatment.
"This is a message for Donald Trump," El-Sayed wrote. "Donald, this is on the table. Guarantee healthcare for every American, from cradle to grave."
This is a message for @realDonaldTrump. Donald, this is on the table. Guarantee healthcare for every American, from cradle to grave. https://t.co/f32IYs3FXG
— Dr. Abdul El-Sayed (@AbdulElSayed) November 12, 2026
The Michigan Democrat has been trying for the last week to appeal to Trump's vanity to get the president on board with Medicare for All.
In a Friday interview with Zeteo editor-in-chief Mehdi Hasan, El-Sayed directly addressed the president and said he'd be happy to label America's universal healthcare program as "Trumpcare for All," given that "he seems to like to put his name on things."
"Donald, if you’re watching, we’ll put your name on it," he said. "You get to be the American president who finally guaranteed healthcare for every single American—met the unmet promise of America. You get to be that guy, so let’s talk about it."
During a Thursday interview with NPR, El-Sayed repeated his offer to put Trump's name on the healthcare bill, adding that the US Senate would still be wise to pass it even if the president ultimately vetoes it.
“I dare Donald Trump to veto,” he said. “I dare him, because if you want to make the argument that Democrats want to deliver for you, do that. Make him veto it.”
Zeteo senior correspondent Asawin Suebsaeng poured some cold water on El-Sayed's hopes of a Trumpcare deal in a Thursday social media post.
"I understand the game he’s playing here and I’ll admit defeat if I’m proven wrong," Suebsaeng wrote, "but how many times do we have to go thru this: No, Trump is not going to sign universal healthcare even if you put his name on it."
Suebsaeng then speculated on El-Sayed's political strategy in trying to push the president to back Medicare for All.
"AES is doing this in part because it’s a form of 'fighting' for Medicare for All, even when there isn’t a Dem president," the journalist explained. "And it’s a lot better than saying 'I campaigned on something that won’t be happening soon, but I hope it does eventually.'"