SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
baltimore
Want to Help Mothers This Mother's Day? Back a Guaranteed Income
If we are serious about supporting families, then we need to stop romanticizing hardship and start investing in mothers in real, tangible ways.
May 10, 2026
Happy Mother’s Day—because that’s what you’re supposed to say, right?
Motherhood is always dressed up in soft language like community, support, and…“it takes a village.” But I have learned in real time that not all of us actually have one.
I am raising my sons without consistent help, without a built-in break, without the kind of support people assume is just there. Everything falls on me emotionally, financially, and physically, and I still have to show up every single day like I am not carrying all of it alone. And when I do pull back, when I protect my energy or go quiet, it is not because I am distant. It is because I am overwhelmed.
There is this unspoken expectation that mothers, especially single mothers, are just supposed to figure it out, hold it together, and do it gracefully. But the truth is, a lot of us are doing the work of an entire village by ourselves, and nobody wants to say that part out loud.
In Baltimore's guaranteed income pilot, of which I was a part, data shows that I'm not alone: Young parents reported less stress and more stability, and those improvements lasted even after the payments stopped.
And this is where the conversation needs to shift, because how I feel about motherhood and how motherhood is structured in this country are two very different things.
I love being a mother. My children are everything to me. They are the reason I keep going when I am tired, when I am stretched thin, when I feel like there is nothing left to give. But love does not remove the weight. It does not pay bills. It does not create time, energy, or support where there is none. Loving my children deeply does not make the system around me any less difficult to navigate.
When people talk about motherhood like it is just a personal experience, like it begins and ends with love and sacrifice, they miss something critical.
Because motherhood is also structural. It is economic. It is shaped by whether or not you have resources, support, and stability. And when those things are missing, love alone is not enough to carry the load.
That is exactly why I stand behind guaranteed income strongly.
Because when there is no village, money becomes the closest thing to stability, something that's within our control.
It is about investing in the people who hold families together.
It is about acknowledging reality.
Caregiving is labor. Raising children is labor. Holding a household together on your own is labor.
Guaranteed income gives mothers breathing room. It gives us the ability to make decisions from a place of stability instead of survival.
It means not having to choose between rest and responsibility, between being present with our children or being consumed by stress.
In Baltimore's guaranteed income pilot, of which I was a part, data shows that I'm not alone: Young parents reported less stress and more stability, and those improvements lasted even after the payments stopped.
Right now, too many mothers are forced into impossible trade-offs. Work more and lose time with your kids. Stay present and fall behind financially. Ask for help and risk being judged. Stay silent and carry it alone. These are not personal failures. These are policy failures.
People love to celebrate strong mothers, but strength should not have to come from constant struggle. Strength should not be built on exhaustion. And survival should not be the standard we measure good parenting by.
If we are serious about supporting families, then we need to stop romanticizing hardship and start investing in mothers in real, tangible ways. Guaranteed income is one of those ways. It is not a cure-all, but it is a foundation. It is a recognition that mothers should not have to break themselves just to keep their households afloat.
Because the truth is, many of us are not asking for a village anymore…
We are building without one.
We are showing up every day, making a way out of no way, holding everything together with very little support and even less margin for error.
And still, we keep going.
So yes—Happy Mother’s Day.
Not the polished version. Not the performative one. But the real one.
Happy Mother’s Day to the mothers who carry what no one sees, who love without limit, who build without a village, and who keep showing up anyway. You are not invisible. You are powerful. And you are worthy of more than survival.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Blatantly Lying': Crime Is Falling in Every Single City Trump Threatened With Federal Police Takeover
Despite these trends, many Americans are persuaded by persistent claims that crime is rising, even when they are not. Critics say the media's rampant coverage of violent crime has helped to warp their perceptions.
Aug 12, 2025
When U.S. President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard to Washington, D.C. on Monday and claimed during a press conference that the city was overrun by "crime, bloodshed, bedlam, and squalor and worse," critics were quick to point out that crime had actually been falling in the nation's capital.
Violent crime in D.C. has dropped by 26% since this time in 2024, which was already a 30-year low, according to data from the police department.
During that same surreal press conference, Trump threatened to have federal law enforcement occupy several other U.S. cities—Los Angeles, Baltimore, Oakland, New York, and Chicago.
"We're not gonna lose our cities over this," Trump said Monday morning. "And this will go further," he said, referring to his federal crackdown.
Trump said the cities he plans to target are "bad, very bad," concerning crime. But he didn't cite any specifics. Likely because there aren't any.
After temporary upticks in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, crime rates continued the precipitous decline that has been going on for decades. According to nationwide data released on August 5 by the FBI, both violent and property crime rates continued to drop throughout 2024, reaching their lowest points since at least 1969.
Like with D.C., in every single one of the cities he named, crime is actually falling, in some cases reaching historic lows.
Contrary to Trump's characterization that "lawlessness...has been allowed to fester," the Los Angeles Police Department reported last month that homicides had fallen by 20% in the first half of the year and that the city was on pace for the lowest number of killings in more than 60 years.
Violent crime is on the decline more generally across the city, with fewer aggravated assaults, gun assaults, sexual assaults, domestic violence incidents, robberies, and carjackings this year than in the first half of 2019, when Trump was still in his first term.
Baltimore, which Trump has derided as "filthy" and "so far gone" on crime, is likewise the safest it's been in 50 years, with a historically low homicide rate that has declined by 28% over the past year alone. Violent crime has more generally decreased by 17% from the previous year, while property crime has decreased by 13%.
In April 2025, the city saw just five homicides, the fewest in any month since 1970. In Popular Information, journalist Judd Legum noted how this dramatic shift has followed a change in approaches to policing in the city under Democratic Mayor Brandon Scott:
Scott, who was first elected in 2020, has brought the city's homicide rate down by treating violent crime as a public health crisis. That means treating violent crime as a symptom of multiple factors, including racism, poverty, and past violence. Addressing violent crime as a public health issue involves going beyond arresting people after violence is committed and taking proactive and preventative measures...
Under Scott, Baltimore has fought violent crime not only through policing but through a network of programs that provide support for housing, career development, and education.
Chicago has likewise seen a historic drop in homicides, with fewer this year than in any previous year in the past decade and a 30% decline in both shootings and homicides from the previous year. Violent crime on the whole, meanwhile, is 25% lower than it was in 2019—a larger drop than many other cities have seen.
Midyear data from Oakland's police department shows that overall crime is down 28% from the previous year, with the most significant drops in robbery, burglary, and theft crimes. Homicides, meanwhile, dropped 24%. This decrease continues the trend from 2024, when homicides also dropped by double digits.
Trump's ally in Gracie Mansion notwithstanding, crime is also down considerably in New York City. From January to May 2025, the city experienced the lowest number of murders in recorded history, marking an astonishing 46% decrease from the previous year.
And while—unlike most cities—overall crime is still higher in the Big Apple than it was before the pandemic, that comes at the tail end of a total collapse in its violent crime rate over the past four decades. In 1990, there were 30 homicides per 100,000 people, compared with just 3.2 homicides it is on track for in 2025.
Despite these trends, many Americans are persuaded by persistent claims that crime is rising, even when they are not.
In October 2024, even as crime rates were cratering around the country, 64% of Americans still told a Gallup poll that they believed it was on the rise. And even when Americans believe crime is down where they live, they tend to believe it is increasing nationally.
Alec Karakatsanis, a civil rights attorney and author of the book Copaganda: How Police and the Media Manipulate Our News, wrote on X Monday that the press's incessant decontextualized coverage of violent crime has helped to lend credibility to Trump's narrative that it is rising.
"How is this possible? What lays the groundwork for such ludicrous claims?" he asked. "The news media has been fearmongering for years."
According to a survey by Pew Research in 2024, local news covers crime more than any other topic, with the exception of the weather. And although violent crime occurs at about one-fifth the rate of property crime, Americans are shown news stories about it at about the same rate.
Karakatanis says, journalists at major news outlets like The Washington Post have uncritically spread the claim that crime is "out of control" despite its precipitous decline—a narrative that has been seized upon by Republicans hoping to enact authoritarian measures.
The Associated Press has been criticized for its coverage on Monday of Trump's deployment of the National Guard, which Mother Jones reporter Dan Friedman said on Bluesky "manages to treat the objective fact of declining crime in D.C. like it's a difference of opinion" between Trump and Democratic Mayor Bowser.
Really bad AP lead here manages to treat the objective fact of declining crime in DC like it' difference of opinion between Trump and Mayor Bowser.
[image or embed]
— Dan Friedman (@dfriedman.bsky.social) August 11, 2025 at 1:15 PM
"No publication, not the AP, not The New York Post, needs to accept Trump's claim that crime in D.C. suddenly constitutes an emergency as plausible and ignore the actual reasons for this authoritarian move," he added.
"If we get to walk back from the brink," Karakatsanis said, "there must be a rigorous reckoning among people of good will about how mainstream institutions tolerated, accepted, peddled, and even celebrated the lies and mythologies of the far-right."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Halting Trump's Anti-DEI Orders, Federal Judge Says They Promote 'Textbook' Discrimination
"We are grateful for the court's decision to pause these harmful executive orders while it takes a careful look at how the orders blatantly violate our Constitution," said one advocate.
Feb 22, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump's efforts to rid the federal government and corporations of programs that promote inclusive hiring practices hit a roadblock Friday evening when a federal judge in Maryland granted a preliminary injunction blocking portions of Trump's executive orders, saying they would "likely" be found to violate the First Amendment.
The ruling pertained to two executive orders the president issued in the first days of his second term in the White House, which directed federal agencies to end all "equity-related" contracts and required federal contractors to certify that they don't promote "diversity, equity, and inclusion" (DEI)—frameworks used by companies, schools, and other organizations to ensure historically marginalized groups have opportunities and see their histories included in school curricula.
The latter provision, argued the coalition that sued over the orders in Maryland, suppresses the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
The term DEI has been invoked repeatedly by right-wing politicians who have blamed pro-diversity hiring practices for the deadly plane crash near Washington, D.C. late last month and the wildfires that devastated Los Angeles last month, and Trump's billionaire backer and "special government employee" Elon Musk has called DEI "immoral" and "just another word for racism."
Trump's orders targeting DEI have already led to purges of federal workers while corporations including Google, Deloitte, and Target have announced an end to DEI programs and universities have faced the possibility of federal investigations into suspected DEI practices—which are designed to ensure the inclusion of military veterans, first-generation college students, women, people with disabilities, and people of color, among other groups.
U.S. District Judge Adam B. Abelson in the District of Maryland on Friday said Trump's orders promote "textbook viewpoint-based discrimination."
"The government's threat of enforcement is not just targeted towards enforcement of federal law," said the judge, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden. "Rather, the provision expressly targets, and threatens, the expression of views supportive of equity, diversity, and inclusion."
The preliminary ruling was handed down in a case filed by advocacy group Democracy Forward on behalf of the American Association of University Professors, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE), Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, and the mayor and city council of Baltimore earlier this month.
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said in a statement that the U.S. Constitution "protects all Americans—whether you are a university professor or a restaurant worker—from unlawful intrusion on speech, ideas, and expression and entitles all Americans to fair process. The Trump administration's anti-equity directives violate these core protections."
"We are grateful for the court's decision to pause these harmful executive orders while it takes a careful look at how the orders blatantly violate our Constitution," said Perryman. "As our complaint states, in the United States, there is no King."
Paulette Granberry Russell, president and CEO of NADOHE, called the ruling "a crucial victory for higher education and academic freedom and also vindicates the legitimacy of the efforts by individuals, institutions, and organizations nationwide to foster inclusion in ways that have been uncontroversially legal for decades."
"This ruling underscores that ensuring equity, diversity, and inclusion are the very goals of federal anti-discrimination law, not a violation of the law," said Russell. "NADOHE applauds the court for recognizing the irreparable harm of the Trump administration's executive orders in abridging and chilling unquestionably protected speech and in threatening enforcement action based on unconstitutionally vague and undefined standards."
Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott, a Democrat, said Trump's orders "are not only unconstitutional but also clearly oppose our country's core values."
"Our country prides itself on being a melting pot where everyone has equal opportunity to achieve and live the American Dream," said Scott.
The mayor added that as the federal court continues to examine the case, the plaintiffs will fight Trump's pro-discrimination efforts "with every legal tool available, as demonstrated by our ongoing lawsuit."
"This executive order endangers critical federal funding for Baltimore and countless other communities, putting jobs and livelihoods at risk. Moreover, it seeks to establish a legal framework to attack anyone or any organization that dares to celebrate our diversity," Scott continued. "Such actions are fundamentally un-American. We are a nation built on diversity, unity, and the belief that everyone deserves a fair chance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular