

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.
"One more time for the people in the back: No Labels, and their candidates like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema aren't 'bipartisan,'" said one progressive activist. "They are 'corporate-donor-first.'"
As U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin took his so-called "commonsense" message to a New Hampshire audience on Monday, critics blasted the right-wing West Virginia Democrat for promoting a political organization backed largely by Republican donors and—if he decides to run for president next year as many observers believe he might—possibly helping to return former President Donald Trump to the White House.
Speaking alongside fellow headliner and former Republican Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman at Monday's No Labels "Common Sense Town Hall" at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire—a key primary state—Manchin said that "I haven't made a decision" about running for president next year, when the coal baron and habitual saboteur of his own party's agenda is also up for Senate reelection.
Claiming that Republicans and Democrats have "gone too far right and too far left," Manchin said the two parties can't be moved toward moderation "unless they're threatened."
Manchin said that if voters have viable alternatives to what critics have called the two-party duopoly, Democrats and Republicans "are in trouble."
Rejecting the notion that he would act as a spoiler were he to run for president, Manchin said that "I've never been in any race I've ever spoiled, I've been in races to win. And if I get in a race, I'm gonna win."
Numerous observers derided the notion that No Labels—a billionaire-backed organization seeking to run a so-called "unity ticket" in 2024—is nonpartisan.
"No Labels is nothing more than a Republican front group," the Progressive Change Campaign Committee tweeted. "They're staffed by Republicans, bankrolled by Republicans, and their third-party gambit will only help elect MAGA Republicans like Trump. Joe Manchin just gives them the patina of bipartisanship."
In a message to Manchin, 2020 GOP presidential candidate and former Republican U.S. Congressman Joe Walsh said that "the world doesn't revolve around you."
"What your country is going through right now is bigger than you and your ambition," he added. "Don't even think about this No Labels bullshit idea of running for president. Put your country first dammit."
Journalist, political activist, and comedian Francesca Fiorentini said it is "hard to hold back the rage at the No Labels group trying to float Manchin as a third-party candidate."
"Make no mistake that billionaires would rather see Trump Part 2 than anyone taking action for working people."
"Make no mistake that billionaires would rather see Trump Part 2 than anyone taking action for working people," she added.
Melanie D'Arrigo, who leads the Campaign for New York Health—which is fighting for single-payer universal healthcare—tweeted a megaphone emoji with the message, "One more time for the people in the back: No Labels, and their candidates like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema aren't 'bipartisan.'"
Sinema, a senator from Arizona who is also up for reelection next year, switched from serving as a Democrat to an Independent in December after long facing criticism for obstructing the party's priorities.
"They are 'corporate-donor-first,'" D'Arrigo added. "They help donors who donate to both sides of the aisle and call it 'bipartisanship.'"
If the Supreme Court strikes down the student debt cancellation, said one campaigner, Biden "needs to act, and act fast."
Barring unforeseen circumstances, the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday will hand down its long-awaited ruling on the Biden administration's pending student debt relief program, a decision with huge implications for tens of millions of borrowers and the broader economy.
Organizers are preparing for the worst despite the glaring flaws in right-wing plaintiffs' arguments against debt relief, which rely heavily on supposed harms to a student loan servicer that is not even part of the case.
Astra Taylor, a co-founder of the Debt Collective, tweeted late Thursday that "SCOTUS will likely strike down Biden's current student debt relief plan tomorrow at 10:00 am."
"POTUS better have a Plan B," Taylor added. "He needs to act, and act fast."
White House officials have thus far declined to say whether the administration has an alternative plan ready in the case of an unfavorable ruling from the Supreme Court, which is dominated by conservative justices—including one who has faced calls to recuse over his ties to a billionaire hedge tycoon with financial connections to the groups working to block relief.
Speaking to The Messenger on Thursday, Taylor said it is "imperative" that the Biden administration act swiftly after the Supreme Court's decision even in the case of a ruling that upholds the president's program—a possibility given justices' skepticism over whether the plaintiffs have established legal standing to challenge the plan.
If the administration "moves like a snail" after the high court ruling, Taylor warned Thursday, another right-wing judge could issue "an injunction on baseless grounds."
"They need to deliver," said Taylor, "because people's lives are on the line."
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), echoed Taylor's concerns, telling The Messenger that the White House must "not dilly-dally and let the right-wing file more lawsuits."
Bloomberg reported earlier this week that the PCCC "has a mobilization campaign ready to bombard the White House with emails and phone calls urging Biden pursue an alternative path if the court overturns his student loan forgiveness program."
Debt relief campaigners have long argued that the emergency authority the Biden administration invoked to cancel up to $20,000 in student loan debt per eligible borrower is too narrow and highly vulnerable to legal challenges. Instead, advocates say Biden should use his power under the Higher Education Act of 1965 to cancel all outstanding student loan debt.
"We cannot afford to give up on cancellation, no matter what the Supreme Court decides," Satra D. Taylor, director of higher education and workforce with the advocacy group Young Invincibles, said after a rally outside the White House last week.
"Student debt cancellation is legal," Taylor added, "and we must provide relief for over 40 million borrowers now."
Democrats have an opportunity "to raise the volume on bank reform and accountability—and be seen as challenging power on behalf of everyday people," the poll showed.
The largest U.S. bank collapse since the 2008 financial meltdown has left Americans especially eager for Congress to rein in Wall Street—and impatient with the power the financial sector has over lawmakers, according to polling released Monday.
A month after Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) failed following its decision to invest $91 billion of its deposits in long-term Treasury bonds before their value plummeted as the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, progressive think tank Data for Progress joined the Progressive Change Institute in polling 1,215 likely voters about the bank and banking regulations.
Nearly 7 in 10 respondents said they were "very" or "somewhat" concerned about the health of the banking industry following SVB's collapse, and 82% said they supported Congress taking action to strengthen banking rules in order to avoid another failure.
More than 70% said they would support the reinstatement of "critical banking rules" that were rolled back in 2018. Those rules weakened regulations for banks with between $50 billion to $250 billion in assets, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) said last month that their repeal was a major driver of SVB's collapse as they introduced the Secure Viable Banking Act to impose the rules once again.
The Biden administration said after the collapse that it would take steps including creating an emergency fund to make sure all SVB deposits were covered and demanded that executives be held accountable for bonuses that were handed out in the hours before the bank failed, but 90% of respondents told Data for Progress that they had heard little or nothing about the proposed reforms.
"While voters strongly support reforms in the banking sector and the actions taken by the Biden administration in the wake of SVB's collapse, these results signal that the administration has room to expand communication on the subject and claim this issue for Democrats," said Data for Progress.
The organization noted that likely voters were more supportive of President Joe Biden's plan when told the administration had created an "emergency fund" than when the fund was described as a "bailout" and when they were told that SVB's client base, made up largely of "billionaire tech investors and multimillion-dollar companies," had been helped by the fund.
The poll indicates, said the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, that Democratic leaders have an opportunity "to raise the volume on bank reform and accountability—and be seen as challenging power on behalf of everyday people."