

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.
A call for a new labor Bill of Rights in the age of automation.
Ask the warehouse worker training her replacement robot if progress feels inevitable.
Automation is not destiny. It is design, and design can be changed.
Internal Amazon documents reveal plans to replace more than half a million warehouse workers with robots by 2033. Executives call it innovation. Investors call it efficiency. The workers who made the company what it is call it what it feels like: erasure disguised as progress.
If Amazon can erase 500,000 jobs without consequence, every company will follow. Walmart is rolling out automated checkout. Target is testing robotic fulfillment. UPS and FedEx are developing delivery drones. Each step is described as modernization, but modernization without accountability becomes abandonment.
If we fail to govern this transition, we will inherit an economy that no longer needs its citizens.
The United States cannot afford another era of abandonment. Since 1979, productivity has risen by more than 80%, while hourly pay for most workers has barely moved. Automation threatens to widen that divide until it defines the economy itself.
Technology is not the enemy. The problem is who it serves. Every robot that replaces a worker transfers income from wages to shareholders. Every algorithm that eliminates a job turns public innovation into private accumulation. The challenge before us is not to resist progress but to govern it.
In this political moment, that may sound impossible. Washington is consumed by austerity and spectacle. The Trump administration’s second term has stripped worker protections, defunded training programs, and rewarded corporations that offshore or automate without oversight. But political cycles end, and public memory lasts. As the country heads toward the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election, progressives have a rare opening to propose something larger than repair. We can build a new social contract for the automated age—a Labor Bill of Rights that reclaims the meaning of work and the purpose of progress.
That contract should rest on three pillars: profit sharing, a national transition fund, and public oversight.
The first pillar is profit sharing for automation gains.
When technology increases productivity, a share of those gains should go to the workers who make that productivity possible. France has required large firms to share profits with employees since 1967. Germany ensures worker representation on corporate boards, which prevents modernization from becoming a zero-sum game between labor and capital.
The United States could enact a federal profit-sharing mandate for companies with more than 250 employees or over $1 billion in annual revenue. When automation reduces a company’s payroll by more than 5% in a given year, that company would distribute at least 5% of its net profits as direct employee bonuses or shares. This could be structured through the tax code as a refundable surtax on undistributed automation profits.
If a company eliminates thousands of jobs to cut costs, it would still owe a share of its gains to the people and places that built its success. The rule would keep disposable income in circulation, prevent automation from collapsing demand, and ensure that the people who make automation possible continue to benefit from it.
The second pillar is a national automation transition fund.
Corporations that profit from replacing human labor should help finance the transition for those affected. The fund would be financed by an automation contribution: a 1-2% levy on the annual revenue of large firms that automate more than 5% of their workforce in any 12-month period. The Department of Labor would administer the fund through three channels.
First, wage insurance would guarantee workers at least 70% of their prior income for up to two years while they retrain or find new employment. Second, community investment grants would go directly to counties or cities experiencing major automation-driven job loss, funding small business development, infrastructure, and public employment programs. Third, an innovation dividend would fund training in fields that cannot easily be automated, such as healthcare, renewable energy, and education.
The fund could be modeled on unemployment insurance, with employer contributions adjusted annually based on automation activity. For example, if Amazon eliminated 500,000 jobs averaging $35,000 annually, a 2% contribution on its revenue—roughly $12 billion per year—would cover retraining, income support, and regional stabilization. This policy would turn automation from a corporate windfall into a shared investment in the country’s future.
The third pillar is public oversight of large-scale automation.
Just as environmental laws require companies to study and disclose the effects of pollution, corporations that plan to replace significant numbers of workers should disclose the social impacts of automation before acting. Any company planning to eliminate more than 250 jobs in a single year through automation should file an automation impact assessment with the Department of Labor.
The coming decade will decide whether automation serves democracy or displaces it.
The report would detail expected job losses, affected regions, and projected cost savings. It would also include a transition plan describing how the company will use part of those savings to fund retraining, relocation assistance, or community support. The Department of Labor would then coordinate with local governments and unions to review the plan, identify gaps, and recommend mitigation measures.
Failure to file or implement such a plan would carry penalties scaled to company size and profits. Repeat offenders could lose access to federal contracts, tax credits, or receive fines proportional to earnings. Transparency alone changes incentives. Once corporations must account for the social cost of their decisions, they begin to consider the communities they affect.
Together, these pillars would reattach innovation to justice. Profit sharing would reconnect wages and productivity. The transition fund would convert private efficiency gains into public stability. Oversight would replace secrecy with accountability.
None of this is radical. It is the next step in the unfinished project of democracy. When Franklin Roosevelt proposed an Economic Bill of Rights in 1944, he named the right to a useful job, to fair wages, to security, and to education as the foundations of freedom. We never completed that work. The next generation of progressives can.
That opportunity will not come from Congress as it stands. It will come from a national movement that links labor, climate, and democracy into one fight for a livable economy. The 2026 midterms will likely mark the beginning of that realignment, as voters look for something larger than a defense against decline. The 2028 election could be the first since the New Deal where a coalition wins not by promising safety, but by promising transformation.
Technology does not determine our future. Politics does. A robot can replace a worker, but it cannot replace the dignity of work or the shared purpose of a nation. If we fail to govern this transition, we will inherit an economy that no longer needs its citizens. If we succeed, we can create one where technology frees people from insecurity, not from income.
The wealth created by automation rests on a foundation built by the public. The internet that powers online retail began as a government project. The logistics networks that deliver goods rely on public roads and ports. The data that trains artificial intelligence is drawn from our collective lives. The returns should flow back into the society that made them possible.
The coming decade will decide whether automation serves democracy or displaces it. Progressives have a rare chance to lead with vision instead of reaction. The task is not to slow innovation but to make it answer to the people. The future of work must belong to workers—and that future begins when we decide that technology will serve humanity, not replace it.
People across the country need leaders who will stand with them and fight for them with bold ideas that create real solutions for real problems.
On a crisp November night, I stood shoulder to shoulder at the Brooklyn Paramount Theater with ecstatic New Yorkers celebrating Zohran Mamdani’s victory to become New York City’s first Muslim and South Asian mayor. The ornate hall was filled with people of all races, ethnicities, genders, and ages. I saw elderly South Asian men dancing, young people cheering, women in hijabs and trans women in saris. The venue was filled with hope and promise, and the audience represented the multicultural and multiracial ideals that make America great.
For New Yorkers and millions of people who have felt the political weight of the past years, Mamdani’s ascendance to Gracie Mansion is more than a victory; it is a cultural and emotional reckoning. The current events of the past few years have alienated so many people from politics, but on election night, it was clear that the energy has shifted. Mamdani has ushered in a new generation of politics, one that does not divide across race, religion, or age, but one that brings people together to drive change on the issues that impact their lives.
As a first-generation Muslim immigrant, I felt the November air fill with joy, hope, and an abundance of possibilities. As the CEO of a Muslim voter mobilization organization, I saw how hard the Muslim community worked for this moment, and I recognized the need for leaders like Mamdani and Ghazala Hashmi, who won her race to become Virginia’s first-ever Muslim and South Asian lieutenant governor.
I lead a team of primarily young US-born Muslim Americans, many of whom were born and raised against the backdrop of 9/11. They never lived in an America that embraced their Muslim identities. Yet, they still choose to become activists and organizers working to build a more inclusive and representative America and counter the political machines that demonized them, their families, and their neighbors—both at home and abroad.
New Yorkers showed us that hope and positivity can still win over hate and divisiveness.
Without a doubt, America changed after 9/11, and it slid toward authoritarianism that was largely fueled by rabid anti-Muslim bigotry. Elected officials sought to blame an entire American community for the actions of a few foreigners and waged forever wars that have continued to harm and destabilize entire nations decades later.
Even in today’s Trump era, the America that welcomed me and my family in 1988 from Syria no longer celebrates multiculturalism and the freedom of speech, and it is certainly not seeking peace and justice. Instead, it has continued the war machine of administrations past and fueled new wars against immigrants on American soil.
The election of Donald Trump in 2024 seemed to cement our descent toward isolationism and cruelty—indeed, we are sliding. From the weaponization of Immigration and Customs Enforcement against immigrant communities to the assault against the media to the unabashed corruption and cronyism, American democracy has been severely damaged.
But in the midst of all of this, in the age of Trump 2.0, a young, South Asian man who is unapologetically Muslim was elected mayor of America’s largest city. How could this happen, and what does it tell us about our country? The answer lies in both Mamdani’s platform and in our identity as a nation.
Mamdani’s campaign redefined grassroots organizing, political strategy, and digital outreach. He ran a disciplined and creative campaign that stayed on message no matter what his critics said: Make New York City affordable for all. He spoke the language of unity as his opponents relied on fearmongering and scare tactics. He brought people together under the belief that every day New Yorkers could be agents of change to create the city that they deserve.
Mamdani’s call for affordability was not just a campaign slogan; it was a collective affirmation of what New York City could be. He resonated with voters who are desperately struggling with unaffordable housing, food insecurity, inaccessible transportation, an overburdened healthcare system, and the exorbitant cost of childcare. These issues are not just top of mind for New Yorkers—they are indicative of what most Americans are struggling with. Mamdani remained laser focused on kitchen table issues and committed to a future that cared about the working class. Mamdani transcended his identity and connected directly with everyday people.
But identity does matter, especially for a Muslim-American in New York City. Despite Mamdani’s best efforts to focus on the issues central to his platform, he was forced to confront what his identity meant to the mayoral race—and most importantly, to himself. In the midst of perhaps the ugliest anti-Muslim campaign that we have ever seen directed at a public figure, Mamdani spoke clearly about his values that are grounded in his faith and how it taught him to care for others. He refused to hide it and plainly asked New York to embrace him for who he is. And New York responded with an emphatic yes.
The movement that Mamdani galvanized by meeting everyday New Yorkers where they were led to the highest turnout of voters in a mayoral election since 1969, surpassing all expectations. Over 1 million voters essentially rejected the smears and rose above the hate. They too stayed focused on the issues that actually mattered. New Yorkers showed us that hope and positivity can still win over hate and divisiveness. New Yorkers also showed us that voters can not be bought by deep-pocketed billionaires but can be brought together without demonizing and dehumanizing one another.
Most importantly, Mamdani’s victory showcased that people are hungry for change. We can no longer move forward with politics as usual. Americans across the country need leaders who will stand with them and fight for them. Americans need leaders with bold ideas that create real solutions for real problems.
Past leaders have shown us that America can turn on the people who make this country great. But on November 4, we saw that America is equally capable of producing leaders like Mamdani who fight for the common good.
"For far too long, Democratic leadership has failed to meet the moment," the leader of the youth-led climate movement said.
Amid growing outrage over corporate Democrats' failure to meaningfully stand up against President Donald Trump’s authoritarianism, Sunrise Movement on Thursday launched what it called it "most ambitious" primary campaign to replace feckless incumbents with progressives.
"For far too long, Democratic leadership has failed to meet the moment; it’s time to clear house,” Sunrise Movement executive director Aru Shiney-Ajay said in a statement.
“I’m extremely excited about the crop of candidates running in 2026," Shiney-Ajay added. "This year, we have an unprecedented opportunity to elect a new generation of leaders who are challenging our broken political system and fighting for a livable and affordable country.”
Like many progressive groups, Sunrise Movement has expressed its growing frustration with most congressional Democrats' acquiescence to Trump and Republicans' growing authoritarianism. The youth-led, climate-focused organization was particularly incensed by Senate Democrats' recent capitulation in the government shutdown fight.
"Why the hell would Democrats cave with nothing for the working people? When millions are losing healthcare?" Sunrise asked last week. "If you cave now, you don’t deserve to lead, you deserve to be replaced."
To that end, Sunrise says its new campaign "will include a nationwide field, protest, and communications program targeting over a dozen congressional primaries."
"Sunrise organizers and volunteers will mobilize thousands of young people to knock on doors, make calls, and take direct action to elect progressive champions ready to challenge the Democratic Party’s complacency and reimagine what Democratic leadership can look like," the group continued.
"In the 2026 general election, Sunrise will lead one of the largest youth electoral efforts in the country, organizing students on campuses across the country to ensure young voters turn out to reject authoritarianism at the ballot box and are prepared to mobilize in defense of election results if Trump or his allies attempt to subvert democracy," Sunrise added.
The new Sunrise campaign comes as progressive groups such as Indivisible, MoveOn, and Our Revolution and some Democratic House lawmakers including progressives Ro Khanna (Calif.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.) are urging Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to step down in the wake of the shutdown surrender.