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
elizabeth warren
Why Aren’t Any Senate Democrats Calling On Schumer to Step Down?
Despite outcry from progressives, no Democrats in the Senate have yet expressed support for replacing Schumer as leader.
Nov 11, 2025
With many Democratic base voters up in arms over Senate Democrats caving on the federal government shutdown fight, there have been calls for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to step down from his leadership role.
None of those calls, however, have come from senators currently serving in the Democratic Caucus, including progressive stalwarts such as Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
As reported by The American Prospect on Tuesday, no Democrats in the Senate have yet expressed support for replacing Schumer (D-NY) as leader, despite the fact that "every single one of them has the power to force a vote on Schumer’s continued control of the caucus" if they chose to do so.
According to the Prospect, any senator in the Democratic Caucus "could bring forward a motion to amend the Democratic Caucus Rules to say that he should lose his leadership position if a set number of members disapprove of him." What's more, the Prospect explained, "the motion would be 'self-executing,' resulting in Schumer’s removal at the same time that it’s approved."
As noted in a Politico report, Senate Democrats who were opposed to the shutdown cave did not directly criticize Schumer for his handling of the issue, and some, like Warren, tried to direct voters' anger toward Republicans.
"I want Republicans to actually grow a backbone and say, regardless of what [President] Donald Trump says, we’re actually going to restore these cuts on healthcare," she said on Sunday. "But it looks like I’ve lost that fight, so I don’t want to post more pain on people who are hungry and on people who haven’t been paid."
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) was more directly critical of the deal that Democrats cut on reopening the government, but he nonetheless stopped short of calling for Schumer's removal.
“This bill doesn’t do anything to arrest the healthcare catastrophe, nor does it constrain in any meaningful way President Trump’s illegality,” he said. “I think the voters were pretty clear on Tuesday night what they wanted Congress to do, and more specifically, what they wanted Democrats to do, and I am really saddened that we didn’t listen to them.”
The appetite for ditching Schumer appears much stronger among Democrats serving in the US House of Representatives, however.
Axios on Monday reported that House Democrats' anger at their Senate counterparts erupted during a private phone call among members, as Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) told her colleagues that "people are fucking pissed" at seeing Democrats once again cave in a fight with Trump.
One anonymous Democrat also told Axios that almost "everyone [was] strongly against" the deal Senate Democrats cut to reopen the government without an agreement to extend enhanced tax credits for Americans who buy their health insurance through Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges.
Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), who is running a primary challenge against Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), called on Schumer to step down as minority leader, and challenged his opponent to do the same.
"If Chuck Schumer were an effective leader, he would have united his caucus to vote ‘No’ tonight and hold the line on healthcare," Moulton wrote in a social media post earlier this week. "Maybe now Ed Markey will finally join me in pledging not to vote for Schumer?”
Progressive advocacy organization Indivisible on Monday started ramping up pressure on Democrats to push for Schumer to step down as minority leader, and the group explicitly said that it would "not back any Senate primary candidate unless they call for Schumer to step down as Minority Leader."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Illegal, Immoral, and Absolutely Cruel': Trump Says He'll Defy Court Order on SNAP Payments
“If Trump had any shred of humanity in him, he would do whatever was necessary to prevent hunger and suffering in the country he claims to love," said one critic.
Nov 04, 2025
In apparent open defiance of two federal court rulings, President Donald Trump said Tuesday that his administration will not fund a key federal nutritional aid program until after the Republican government shutdown ends, leaving millions of families even more vulnerable to hunger at a time of crisis-level food insecurity.
In a post on his TruthSocial network, Trump took aim at both the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the administration of former President Joe Biden.
"SNAP BENEFITS, which increased by Billions and Billions of Dollars (MANY FOLD!) during Crooked Joe Biden’s disastrous term in office (Due to the fact that they were haphazardly 'handed' to anyone for the asking, as opposed to just those in need, which is the purpose of SNAP!), will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government, which they can easily do, and not before!" the president wrote. "Thank you for your attention to this matter."
"Trump's message to 42 million Americans: Eat dirt."
Responding to the president's post, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on social media, "After a judge ordered Donald Trump to make SNAP payments, the wannabe king declared he will defy a court order and won't help people afford groceries."
"Trump's message to 42 million Americans: Eat dirt," she added.
Trump is now saying he will only pay SNAP benefits once the Republican shutdown is over, despite a federal court order.As a result, 42 million kids, seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities could go hungry. This is illegal, immoral, and absolutely cruel.
[image or embed]
— Rep. Ted Lieu (@reptedlieu.bsky.social) November 4, 2025 at 8:49 AM
Seemingly contradicting Trump's claim, the White House said later Tuesday that the administration is complying with one of the court orders.
Data from the nonpartisan US Government Accountability Office have shown that approximately 70% or more of working-age, non-disabled adults receiving Medicaid and SNAP benefits work full-time—defined as 35 hours or more per week.
On Friday, federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled against the US Department of Agriculture’s refusal to pay at least part of the $8 billion in SNAP benefits—also known as food stamps—to rightful beneficiaries in November via a contingency fund established by Congress.
The administration responded to the rulings by saying it would only fund around 50% of the total monthly benefits, while warning of likely payment delays.
Plaintiffs in the Rhode Island case—represented by Democracy Forward and the Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island—subsequently filed an emergency request seeking a court order compelling Trump and his administration to comply with Friday's order.
“The Trump-Vance administration continues to play politics with people’s lives through failing to ensure SNAP payments are expeditiously available," Democracy Forward president and CEO Skye Perryman said in a statement Tuesday. "This is immoral and unlawful."
"The political posturing should stop now," Perryman added. "The administration needs to fully fund SNAP benefits so people can eat, today. We should not need to go to court to force the administration to provide food all people are entitled to in this country, but here we are—back in court to demand that the administration acts consistent with the judge’s order."
Alejandra Gomez, executive director of Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), said ahead of a planned Tuesday press conference: “It took two court orders and mounting public pressure for the Trump administration to fund SNAP assistance partially, which is not good enough. Arizona families in need deserve better."
“December SNAP benefits are not guaranteed, and every day that Congress fails to act, children will go hungry, food banks run dry, and working families will pay the price," she added. "It is time to end the shutdown, fund healthcare and SNAP.”
Now in its 35th day, the ongoing federal government shutdown is tied for the longest in US history. Vulnerable people—already reeling from record cuts to social programs to pay for tax breaks for billionaires and corporations under the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed by Trump in July—are feeling even more pain, at a time when more than 47 million Americans, including 1 in 5 children, are living in food insecure households.
"I did not receive any benefits at all... And they said there is no promise of even getting any type of benefits for November," Danielle Rodriguez, a single mother in Pennsylvania who lost $400 in monthly SNAP aid, told MSNBC's Ana Cabrera Monday.
"'Mommy, do you want my piggybank money to help with groceries?'"
"Unfortunately, I've had to reach out to my utility companies and stuff like that to go on payments to use some of my bill money to buy groceries for me and my kids," she continued.
"It's very stressful being a single mom of two kids. I have a 9-year-old, and she is offering her piggybank money," Rodriguez added. "And she's like, 'Mommy, do you want my piggybank money to help with groceries?' And it's sad to hear my child say that to me because I'm mom—I'm supposed to do everything. I'm supposed to be their protector."
Mitch Jones, managing director of policy and litigation at Food & Water Watch, said in a statement: “At a time when rampant corporate consolidation has driven grocery prices sky-high, Trump continues to choose cruelty over the rule of law. He must abide by recent court orders and immediately release SNAP aid to the millions of low-income American families suddenly hanging on the precipice of an unconscionable hunger crisis."
“If Trump had any shred of humanity in him, he would do whatever was necessary to prevent hunger and suffering in the country he claims to love," Jones added.
Update: This piece has been updated with the White House's statement of compliance with one of the court orders.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Scarier Than Halloween Costumes’: Trump Policies Blamed for Jacking Up Candy Prices
"From the grocery aisles to the doctor’s office, Trump’s economic circus keeps jacking up costs and squeezing household budgets."
Oct 31, 2025
President Donald Trump's economic policies have put a damper on this year's Halloween festivities, as his tariffs on imported chocolate in particular have helped jack up the price of candy.
CNBC reported on Friday that data from research firm Circana and the US Bureau of Labor Statistics show that chocolate prices in the US have jumped by 30% over the last year since Trump began slapping hefty tariffs on foreign goods, including staple products such as cocoa, coffee, and bananas that cannot be grown at sufficient scale in the US.
The increased cost of chocolate has now been passed on to consumers in the form of higher candy prices, according to a joint study released this week by The Century Foundation and Groundwork Collaborative.
According to the organizations' analysis, candy prices as a whole have gone up by just under 11% over the last year, which is more than triple the current overall rate of inflation.
Unsurprisingly, the analysis showed that these increases were particularly severe in candies that had significant chocolate inputs, as it found that "variety packs from Hershey’s (maker of KitKats, Twizzlers, Reeses, and Heath bars) are up 22%, while variety packs from Mars (maker of Milky Way, M&Ms, Three Musketeers, and Skittles) are up 12%."
The analysis also cited recent quotes from the CEOs of retail giants Target and Walmart indicating the president's tariffs were having a major impact on US consumers. Target CEO Brian Cornell, for instance, said on a recent earnings call that the tariffs had created a "challenging and highly uncertain" environment, while Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said that "costs increase each week" thanks to Trump's trade wars.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) used the organizations' study to rip the president for raising the price of Halloween candy in a video posted on social media.
"Do you remember when Donald Trump told American families to cut back on buying kids' dolls?" she asked, in reference to Trump earlier this year suggesting parents buy fewer toys for their children after his tariffs on imports raised their costs. "Well now he's making candy more expensive too, just in time for Halloween."
Donald Trump's jacked up candy prices — just in time for Halloween. pic.twitter.com/f3glomQbUK
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) October 31, 2025
The American Federation of Teachers, whose members have likely experienced the increased cost candy first hand, also took a shot at Trump's economic policies while posting a graph illustrating The Century Foundation and Groundwork Collaborative's study.
"The only thing scarier than Halloween costumes? The rising price of candy from Trump's tariffs," the union wrote on X.
Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, said that the increase in Halloween candy prices was just one source of pressure facing US families as a result of Trump's economic policies.
In particular, Jacquez pointed to the cuts to the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) and Medicaid in the Republican Party's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as well as the GOP's inaction on extending tax credits for buying health insurance, as major pain points.
"While inflation eats through paychecks and House Republicans hide in plain sight, working families are slammed by soaring healthcare premiums, frozen food assistance, and rising bills," he said. "From the grocery aisles to the doctor’s office, Trump’s economic circus keeps jacking up costs and squeezing household budgets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular