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
republicans
David Valadao Was the Deciding Vote for Trump’s Big Ugly Bill. Randy Villegas has a Plan to Defeat Him
Villegas, a working-class champion, is running to defeat Valadao this November.
Jul 07, 2026
Just over a year ago, Republicans passed the Big Ugly Bill into law. The bill slashes over $1 trillion from Medicaid, SNAP, and the Affordable Care Act—even as it gives massive tax handouts to the wealthiest people in America. Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are richer, while working families suffer and die without the health care they need.
Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) represents California’s 22nd district, where two-thirds of his constituents rely on Medicaid. That’s over half a million people! And it’s the highest number of Medicaid enrollees of any Republican-held congressional district in the country.
Before the vote, Valadao pledged that “I will not support a final reconciliation bill that makes harmful cuts to Medicaid.” Then, he turned around and voted for this cruel monstrosity of a bill.
The Big Ugly Bill passed the US House by one vote. That means Valadao’s vote was decisive. He could have stopped families in his district from losing their health care. He could have stopped hospitals from cutting services and even closing their doors. He could have stopped Affordable Care Act premiums from skyrocketing. Instead, David Valadao betrayed the people he represents and showed where his true loyalties lie—with billionaires and Donald Trump.
The good news is that Randy Villegas, a working-class champion, is running to defeat Valadao this November. Villegas just won the Democratic nomination. I was proud to stand alongside him last week as we rallied outside Valadao’s office to mark the one-year anniversary of the Big Ugly Bill.
Villegas electrified the crowd, reminding us that: “Rep. Valadao voted to cut Medicaid to give tax breaks to billionaires. Meanwhile, Valadao has a government-sponsored health care plan that we pay for as taxpayers. He needs to use that plan to schedule a physical — to look for the spine that he's been missing.”
Rep. Valadao voted to cut Medicaid to give tax breaks to billionaires.
Meanwhile, Valadao has a government-sponsored health care plan that we pay for as taxpayers. He needs to use that plan to schedule a physical — to look for the spine that he's been missing. - @villegas_CA22 pic.twitter.com/RE5iEWOhIC
— Social Security Works ❌👑 (@SSWorks) July 1, 2026
Yet as hard as Villegas is fighting to repeal the Big Ugly Bill and save Medicaid, he also understands that just opposing Republican cuts isn’t enough. He declares that "I will be a proud co-sponsor of Medicare for All on day one because health care is a human right."
When I asked Villegas what he would do differently than past Democrats who have tried unsuccessfully to defeat Valadao, he gave a truly phenomenal answer:
"We can't just offer people not Trump or not David Valadao.
We've got to offer people a vision for something more.
Not only are we going to stop the attempts to privatize Social Security, but we're going to expand Social Security." - @villegas_CA22 pic.twitter.com/xhnV2bzirV
— Social Security Works ❌👑 (@SSWorks) July 1, 2026
“We can't just offer people not Trump or not David Valadao. We've got to offer people a vision for something more. Not only are we going to stop the attempts to privatize Social Security, but we're going to expand Social Security.”
That says it all.
Keep ReadingShow Less
We Crisscrossed America to Tell Republicans: Stop Taking Our Healthcare
In over 35 events across the US, patients, healthcare workers, and advocates came together to highlight the pain that Republicans are inflicting on their own constituents.
May 09, 2026
Republicans voted to slash $1 trillion from Medicaid. They ended Affordable Care Act subsidies, putting healthcare out of reach for millions of Americans. All to give massive tax handouts to the Epstein class, so they can buy another yacht.
Now, America’s already rotten healthcare system is spiraling into crisis. Hospitals across the country are at risk of closing, with those in rural areas most at risk. Those that remain will have longer waits and fewer resources. Even those with private insurance are not spared the consequences of Republicans removing $1 trillion in resources from the healthcare system. If you aren’t a billionaire, your healthcare is about to get worse and more expensive—if it hasn’t already.
This spring, Americans are fighting back. The Stop Taking Our Healthcare campaign included over 35 events across the country, concentrated in congressional districts with vulnerable Republicans. Many of these events took place in front of hospitals at risk of closure.
I want to share the stories of just a few of these events, where patients, healthcare workers, and advocates came together to highlight the pain that Republicans are inflicting on their own constituents.
Everywhere I go, Americans are worried about losing their healthcare and the threats to their local hospitals.
Rahway, New Jersey is located in New Jersey’s 7th District, currently represented by Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr. At our protest across the street from Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, resident Theresa Luoni worried about her children’s future: “Human beings with real needs are dropped off at homeless shelters when Medicaid runs out. As I watch this happen, I can’t help but see my children’s future. I’m the mother of two autistic boys. Without the right therapies, their needs escalate. My children are not statistics. They are not just autistic. They are human. They deserve safety. They deserve dignity. We go to bed every night and wonder if the care we depend on will go away.”
When healthcare is cut, when Medicaid is reduced, when services disappear, the impact is not theoretical. It's a child losing access to therapy that helps them communicate. - Theresa Luoni, #NJ07 resident
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) April 28, 2026 at 9:42 AM
Sadly, Theresa is far from alone in needing to worry about her family’s healthcare: 16.5% of the residents of Rahway rely on Medicaid and 400,000 patients across New Jersey are projected to lose their healthcare as a result of the $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid thanks to the law passed by Rep. Tom Kean Jr. and his fellow Republicans.
In New York’s 17th District, currently represented by Republican Rep. Mike Lawler, Hudson Valley community members gathered at Northern Westchester Hospital to raise awareness of the dangers to their hospitals and healthcare posed by the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts Rep. Lawler and other Republicans passed into law.
Karen, a family caregiver who lives in NY-17, spoke about her efforts to take care of her parents, who are 88 and 94. One of them has dementia. Her parents need full-time support, and rely on Medicaid for round-the-clock care. Rep. Lawler recklessly voted for a law that will cut $128 billion from New York’s Medicaid program over the next decade, putting 45 hospitals in New York at risk of closing, including two hospitals in his own district. Like Karen’s parents, 211,500 people in New York’s 17th District rely on Medicaid. Rep. Lawler is willing to put the health of his constituents at risk to give massive tax breaks to billionaires.
When I hear about cuts to Medicaid, I know exactly what that means for families here in #NY17. Fewer services, overwhelmed providers, and people going without the care they need.But despite what families like mine are going through, Rep. Mike Lawler voted to cut Medicaid. - Karen Rubinson
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) April 29, 2026 at 11:58 AM
In Bakersfield, California, residents gathered at Kern Medical College to demand healthcare, not warfare. Jon “Bowzer” Bauman, president of Social Security Works PAC, raised alarms about the impact of Republican healthcare cuts on local residents in nearby communities, including the people living in Republican Rep. David Valadao’s district. Sam Hardman, a local resident and US Army veteran, expressed his feelings that congressional Republicans like Reps. David Valadao and Vince Fong “have no idea what it is to care for another person” while speaking about how his family’s healthcare needs.
In Montana, our protests in Missoula and Polson focused on the concerns of local community members worried about losing their healthcare. In front of Providence St. Patrick Hospital in Missoula and Providence St. Joseph Medical Clinic in Polson, several local elected officials and candidates, including MT-01 Congressional candidate Sam Forstag, joined me in bringing attention to the eight hospitals around Montana in danger of closing.
Over 218,000 Montanans have healthcare coverage through Medicaid, but Republican cuts are putting the health of Montanans at risk and leaving vulnerable communities without access to affordable care.
In Colorado’s 8th District, currently represented by Republican Rep. Gabe Evans, neighbors gathered outside the Clinica Family Health clinic in Westminster. At least nine hospitals in Colorado are at risk of closing or reducing services. In Colorado’s 8th District, 1 in 4 people are covered by Medicaid. Yet Rep. Gabe Evans supported $1 trillion in healthcare cuts, so the richest of the rich don’t have to pay their fair share.
Alex Lawson: Let's remind ourselves WHY they cut $1 trillion out of Medicaid. Why 56K people are going to die every year.To give TRILLIONS in tax handouts to the richest people the world has ever known so they can buy another golden yacht to sail to Epstein's Island or whatever it is that they do.
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) May 5, 2026 at 1:58 PM
Donna Smith, a local resident, attended the protest, and described standing in the freezing rain to deliver a message of defiance. Joining Donna in demanding that those who take away healthcare be held accountable, Dr. Vince Markovchick spoke about his experience running the emergency medicine department at Denver Health for 26 years, and what happens when patients cannot afford the care they need.
To conclude our Stop Taking Our Healthcare campaign, Michigan’s Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell and other lawmakers joined us as part of a national virtual town hall to discuss the effects of the $1 trillion in Republican healthcare cuts. Rep. Dingell declared: “Across this country, people are feeling the continued attacks on their healthcare.” Rep. Dingell mentioned hearing from parents, seniors, and workers who are all worried about losing their healthcare and what could happen to them next.
While the Stop Taking Our Healthcare campaign has finished, the fight for our healthcare must continue. Everywhere I go, Americans are worried about losing their healthcare and the threats to their local hospitals. The Republicans who decided to cut $1 trillion from our healthcare to hand out massive tax giveaways to the richest of the rich will face the consequences this November.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Polling Shows Dems Have the Backing to Fight Trump on ICE—Will They Use It?
One thing is for certain: If the Democrats fail to end some of ICE’s most flagrant abuses, it will not be because a lack of political support for their positions.
Feb 07, 2026
National polling released by Quinnipiac University on February 4 shows that just over three out of four voters (78%) say that they have seen the shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis by federal immigration agents. Sixty-two percent say that the shooting was not justified, 22% say justified, and 16% are not sure. A 94% majority of Democrats see the Pretti shooting as unjustified as do 2 out of 3 (66%) Independent voters. Republicans offer a more split position (55% justified, 20% not justified, and 25% say they do not know).
Voters also strongly feel (61%) that the Trump administration has not given an honest account of the shooting of Pretti. Just 1 of 4 voters (25%) think that the Trump administration has given an honest account of the Pretti shooting. It is important to note that President Donald Trump does not receiving a ringing endorsement from Republicans (60% honest, 19% not honest, and 21% not sure). Not surprisingly Democrats (93% not honest) see the Trump administration as dishonest as do just under two-thirds (65%) of Independent voters.
The Quinnipiac University research also shows there is widespread discontent with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Fully 63% disapprove of the way ICE is enforcing immigration laws, while just over 1 in 3 (34%) approve and 4% are not sure. GOP support for ICE is quite strong but not overwhelming (77% approve). Democratic opposition to ICE is close to unanimous (97% disapprove). Independent voters are extremely critical of ICE (28% approve, 68% disapprove).
The Quinnipiac University data shows that Democrats have the political—and moral—high ground to win significant concessions about how ICE operates from Trump and the Republicans.
What must be most concerning for the Trump administration, 60% support the recent protests against ICE. Just under 2 out of 3 Independents (65%) support the anti-ICE protests. Furthermore, 56% believe that the Trump administration has deployed ICE to Minneapolis for political purposes as compared with legitimate law enforcement purposes. Independent voters strongly see Trump’s deployment of ICE to Minneapolis as a political stunt (61% political, 31% law enforcement).
Over the next two weeks, Democrats will have an opportunity to demand concessions from their GOP counterparts and President Trump as they wrangle over future appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security. The Quinnipiac University data shows that Democrats have the political—and moral—high ground to win significant concessions about how ICE operates from Trump and the Republicans. We can only hope that they have the political spine to reign in ICE. One thing is for certain: If the Democrats fail to end some of ICE’s most flagrant abuses, it will not be because a lack of political support for their positions. It will simply be because they lack the will to fight for what they know is right.
Keep ReadingShow Less
More and More Americans Want to Abolish ICE
Even before the Minneapolis shooting, polls showed public support for dropping Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Jan 11, 2026
In polling conducted on January 8, YouGov showed that American public opinion has turned sharply against Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This polling was conducted on the same day Renee Good was killed during an ICE operation in Minneapolis, so it does not fully incorporate the public outrage generated by this event.
Fully 52% disapprove of how ICE is doing its job (42% strongly disapprove), while 39% approve. Furthermore, 51% say that ICE’s tactics are “too forceful," while just over 1 in 4 (27%) say they are “about right.” A 44% plurality (30% strongly approve) approve of “recent protests against ICE.”
Support for ICE’s work is clustered strongly among Republicans (53% strongly approve, 27% somewhat approve). Democrats give ICE failing grades by an overwhelming margin (72% strongly disapprove, 13% somewhat disapprove). The most significant finding in the YouGov poll is that a 56% majority of Independents (44% strongly, 12% somewhat) disapprove of ICE.
To put this issue in perspective, in February of last year YouGov polling found that ICE had a plus 16-point approval rating.
As more people see video from the Good killing, public opinion will continue to shift.
Axios points out that support for abolishing ICE has dramatically increased.
- In September 2024, just 19% supported abolishing the agency, according to survey data from research firm Civiqs, while 66% opposed.
- This month, 42% support abolishing the agency and 49.5% oppose.
- Abolishing ICE has become a consensus view among Democrats, per the Civiqs data, with 69% of Democrats now supporting the idea.
As more people see video from the Good killing, public opinion will continue to shift. In response to the White House reaction, we may see more Republican support for ICE. An equally likely conclusion is that ICE will hemorrhage support from Independents.
Despite what President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance say, the polling data clearly shows that the majority of Americans are not on the side of ICE, but are with those putting their lives on the line to protest ICE’s aggressive actions.
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Polling Shows That the Bottom Has Fallen Out for Trump’s Economic Job Performance
These numbers are so dramatic that they argue for a reboot of the Trump administration’s economic messaging.
Dec 12, 2025
Polling released by the AP/NORC on December 11 shows that the bottom has fallen out for President Donald Trump on his job performance on the economy. Just under a third (31%) approve of Trump’s work on the economy. This is a nine-point drop and is the lowest that the AP/NORC has recorded in either Trump’s first or second terms. Fully 80% of Independent voters give Trump negative scores on his economic stewardship. As you could have guessed, Democrats are nearly unanimous in giving Trump failing grades on the economy (93%). What is quite significant is that 29% of Republicans give Trump failing grades on the economy.
Voters’ perceptions of the economy are also very pessimistic. Overall, 68% say that the economy is in poor shape. Both Democrats (84%) and Independents (80%). Republicans offer a more mixed picture (56% good, 44% poor).
The most significant part of the AP/NORC findings is not Trump’s scores on the economy as they have been poor for some time. What is striking is that on his two signature issues of crime and immigration, Trump fares very poorly. Fully 60% of voters disapprove of Trump’s work on immigration including 70% of Independents. Trump’s grades on immigration are boosted by his GOP support (80% approve, 19% disapprove).
Only in relative terms, does Trump fare better on the issue of crime. Forty-three (43%) approve. Two-thirds (66%) of Independents give Trump failing grades on the economy. As was the case with immigration, Trump’s scores on crime are boosted by his strong support among Republicans (80% approve, 19% disapprove).
If the Trump administration is looking at the data honestly, they must be troubled that Independents and Democratic are on question after questions almost in alignment on their negative assessment of Trump’s job as president.
There is literally no good news for Trump or for that matter the GOP in the AP/NORC polling. These numbers are so dramatic that they argue for a reboot of the Trump administration’s economic messaging. Trump’s ratings on crime and immigration are a real problem, but what really threatens Trump are voters’ perceptions of his economic stewardship. Trump won the presidency in large part because voters thought that he would do a better job on the economy than Vice President Kamala Harris.
Rather than change course on the economy, the Trump administration seems likely to continue to blame the Biden administration for the state of the economy. There is nothing in polling data that would indicate that this will work. Furthermore, Trump’s remarks in Pennsylvania on December 9 also indicate that he is not aware or willing to accept voters’ perceptions of his handling of the economy. This is a clear warning sign of a Democratic landslide in 2026.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The NYT's Myopic Analysis of Trump’s Polling Misses the Story by Centering His Base
Focusing only on GOP voters distorts Trump’s real standing, and his party's chances heading into the midterms.
Oct 02, 2025
The New York Times is an incredibly reliable source for anyone seeking to understand the world we live in. In addition, the Times’ polling partner Sienna College is one of the best and most accurate polling organization. So, I was shocked by the analysis in an article “After Volatile Summer, Trump’s Approval Remains Low but Stable, Poll Finds” by Shane Goldmacher and Ruth Igielnik. In their article, Goldmacher and Igielnik argue that:
President Trump’s efforts to send National Guard troops to big cities, punish media organizations, and pressure universities and private businesses are all unpopular with voters. But the continued torrent of policies and tactics has not further weakened Mr. Trump’s overall standing, according to a new poll from The New York Times and Siena University. Instead, Mr. Trump continues to retain the support of roughly nine out of 10 Republican voters. The net result: an unpopular president with an unchanged approval rating of 43 percent.
Now, in all fairness, the Times’ reporting is technically correct. However, it misses the real point: Independent voters have abandoned US President Donald Trump. Saying that Trump is unpopular, but his approval rating is stable is like saying that a student is getting a C minus grade, but he or she has not fallen to a D plus. Let’s look a little deeper into the Times/Sienna College polling.
As the Times reported, 68% of Republican voters strongly approve of Trump’s job performance. On the other hand, 86% of Democrats and 50% of Independent voters strongly disapprove of Trump’s job performance. Furthermore, just under 1 in 3 of Trump’s base, white non-college voters (31%) strongly disapprove of Trump’s job performance.
Overall, 45% of registered voters say that Trump has made the economy worse while 32% say better and 20% are not sure. A 48% plurality of Independent voters think that Trump has made the economy worse. As other polling has found, Trump’s standing with Hispanic voters continues to drop. The Times/Sienna polling finds that fully 58% of Hispanic voters think Trump has made the economy worse.
Rather than drawing the conclusion that “Trump’s polling is bad, but stable,” the Times could have concluded that: “Fully 43 percent of registered voters strongly disapprove of Trump’s performance on his key signature issue of immigration.” The second paragraph of the Times story could have easily argued that “Just 39 percent of Independents approve of Trump’s job performance on immigration.”
Another key point that the Times missed was that among Independent voters, a 49% plurality say they would vote for the Democratic candidate for Congress, while 39% say the GOP and 12% are undecided. While the 2026 midterms are a long time for now and lots of things cad and will happen, a 10-point advantage for a generic Democrat is a substantial advantage.
Thus, while it may be true that Trump’s poll numbers have stabilized, they have stabilized at a very low level. Voters are critical of Trump’s stewardship of the economy and far from impressed on his key signature issue of immigration. In what may be the most important piece of data from the Times/Sienna polling, looking toward the 2026 midterm election, Independents are giving the Democrats a substantial advantage.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressives Fear Schumer Will 'Cave' Again in Budget Fight
In an interview Sunday, the top Senate Democrat hesitated to commit to voting 'no' on a Republican funding bill, even without any concessions on a policy that would lead to higher healthcare premiums for millions.
Sep 22, 2025
Progressives are beginning to fear Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer may once again "cave" in budget negotiations with Senate Republicans, even as Democrats hold a crucial bargaining chip related to healthcare costs.
Democrats are pushing the GOP to make concessions in order to fund the government, namely by extending a health insurance subsidy that, if allowed to lapse, will result in tens of millions of Americans paying higher premiums at the end of the year.
They are also hoping to use the negotiations to curtail Trump's ability to rescind federal funding appropriated by Congress and restore funds that have been stripped from public broadcasting and foreign aid.
On Friday, after Republicans passed their version of the bill through the House, both the Republican and Democratic versions of the Senate bills were struck down by the other side.
In an interview Sunday with Dana Bash on CNN, Schumer (D-NY) lamented that Republicans were attempting to ram a bill through with "zero input from Democrats," adding that "that’s not how to get things done."
Congressional Democrats have described a refusal to extend the healthcare subsidies as a red line. But Schumer has come across somewhat shakier in his commitment to that fight, saying last week that “We don’t have a red line, but we know we have to help the American people.”
Later in the interview with Bash, Schumer said, "I hope and pray that Trump will sit down with us and negotiate a bipartisan bill. That's how it's always been done in the past. That's how shutdowns have been avoided in the past."
Bash pushed Schumer to clarify his position: "If he doesn't—I'm just confirming here—You will vote 'no,' is that correct?"
Schumer responded: "We are hoping that he will negotiate with us. So far, he hasn't. We've had two bills in the House and Senate and neither of them have passed. Our Democrats are firm. We need to get something done to relieve the distress the American people are in."
Bash again asked for clarity: "That sounded like a 'yes,' but you can confirm that, and we can move on. Is that accurate?"
Once again, he neglected to give a clear answer, instead reiterating that "The bottom line is that we must—we must—get a better bill than what they have, plain and simple."
Schumer's antics during his last budget showdown with Republicans are looming large in the minds of progressives. In March, the Democratic leader faced perhaps the greatest groundswell of outrage in his career when he abandoned promises to hold firm against a Republican-led continuing resolution that funded the government for six months and expanded Trump's power to override Congress's control over spending.
Many Democrats accused him of "caving," with some calling for him to resign from leadership altogether.
Schumer justified the decision at the time by warning that a temporary shutdown would give Trump greater latitude to consolidate his power. Democrats who voted to break the stalemate also reportedly worried about the political ramifications of being blamed for a shutdown, which could disrupt the functioning of many government services and result in more layoffs of federal workers.
Republicans are reportedly betting that Schumer will cave once again. CNN's Manu Raju reported that late last week, House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) told him that "Chuck Schumer is not gonna shut the government down."
His unwillingness to make a firm commitment on Sunday has reignited fears that yet another capitulation may be coming—even as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and others warn that Republicans' budget proposal would cause healthcare premiums to rise by an average of 75% for millions of Americans who are already struggling with the cost of living.
Sam Seder, host of the progressive talk show The Majority Report, called Schumer's comments "pathetic."
"It’s not an ultimatum if there are no consequences," Seder said. "This is just Schumer begging Senate Republicans for a fig leaf to justify his coming cave and weak leadership."
Mehdi Hasan, founder of the media outlet Zeteo, expressed bewilderment that Schumer had been reduced to "literally hoping and praying" for Republicans to act differently rather than using leverage.
Sixty votes would be needed for a continuing resolution to pass through the Senate, meaning that seven Democrats would need to join all 53 Republicans in order for it to pass. On Friday, just one Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.), joined Republicans in voting for their version of the bill while Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Rand Paul (Ky.) joined Democrats in voting against it.
The progressive activist group Indivisible has urged constituents to call their Democratic senators and pressure them to use their bargaining power and reject any deal that does not include significant GOP concessions.
Your Members of Congress need to hear from you.Urge Senate Democrats to keep holding their ground.If you’re represented by Sen. Fetterman or Rep. Golden (or Rep. Gluesenkamp Perez, who was recorded as not voting), be sure to let them know how you feel about their support for the GOP’s proposals.
[image or embed]
— Indivisible ❌👑 (@indivisible.org) September 20, 2025 at 8:55 AM
"The GOP is threatening to shut the government down at the end of this month unless Dems let them take healthcare away from millions and hand Trump another blank check to continue his power grab," the group said in a call to action on Bluesky. "Democrats need to keep opposing any funding deal that enables GOP healthcare cuts or allows Trump’s chaos and lawlessness to go unchecked. We must make sure Democrats are fighting like hell and Republicans are held accountable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Say They'll Stand Firm Against Budget Deal Unless GOP Halts Attack on Healthcare
Health insurance premiums are expected to rise significantly for approximately 22 million Americans after Republicans ended a tax credit for those enrolled in programs under the Affordable Care Act.
Sep 11, 2025
Democratic leaders said Thursday that they plan to hold up negotiations on a potential government shutdown unless Republicans agree to forfeit a policy change that is expected to dramatically raise health insurance premiums for millions of Americans.
Health insurance premiums are expected to rise significantly for approximately 22 million Americans enrolled in Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace plans after Republicans refused to extend enhanced tax credits when passing Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" in July.
In remarks on Capitol Hill Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he and Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) were in total agreement not to negotiate unless Republicans agree to extend the tax credits.
“On this issue, we’re totally united. The Republicans have to come to meet with us in a true bipartisan negotiation to satisfy the American people’s needs on healthcare, or they won't get our votes, plain and simple,” Schumer warned at a press conference.
"We will not support a partisan spending agreement that continues to rip away healthcare from the American people. Period. Full stop,” Jeffries said.
The enhanced tax credits, which were created in 2021 under the American Rescue Plan Act and later extended through the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, are credited with reducing the insurance premiums of millions of people who purchase health insurance through government exchanges.
The tax credits have reduced insurance premiums by 44% on average—over $700 per enrollee—and have contributed to the number of people purchasing insurance on the exchanges more than doubling to over 24 million in 2025.
According to a report released Wednesday by KFF:
Nine in 10 enrollees (92%) receive some amount of premium tax credit. If these enhanced tax credits expire at the end of 2025, out-of-pocket premiums would rise by over 75% on average for the vast majority of individuals and families buying coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplaces.
The increases come as insurance companies, citing "slumping share prices," per the Financial Times, are planning the largest hike to premiums in 15 years, including an 18% increase for those buying from ACA exchanges.
These increases will come on top of those already expected as a result of a Trump administration rule passed in June, which increased the maximum percentages of income and raw dollar amounts that insurance plans could charge patients out-of-pocket for care.
According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, these changes "will make coverage less affordable for millions of people." The CBPP estimates that "a family of four making $85,000 will have to pay an additional $197 in premiums for coverage in 2026" while a "family of two or more people on the same plan could face an additional $900 in medical bills if a family member is seriously ill or injured in 2026, and an individual enrolled in self-only coverage could face an additional $450 in medical bills."
In all, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in May that as a result of these mounting costs, over 5 million people will no longer be able to afford their health insurance plans.
"The death star of American healthcare, the insurance companies are preparing to blow up the lives of millions of middle-class families," warned journalist David Sirota in a podcast for The Lever.
Republicans in Congress are facing mounting pressure to extend the tax credits and stave off the premium hikes. Last week, 11 Republicans in Congress signed onto a bill that would extend the credits through 2026, allowing them to avoid the issue until after the midterm elections.
A survey conducted in July by two of Trump's most trusted pollsters, Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward, found that for Republicans in the most competitive districts, "a 3-point deficit becomes a 15-point deficit" against the generic Democrat if they allow the healthcare premium tax credit to expire.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has stayed coy about whether he and the Republican caucus plan to support extending the credits.
"I'm not going to forecast that right now," Johnson told reporters earlier this week, while also saying, "There's a lot of opposition to it as well."
Democrats, meanwhile, have proposed a competing bill to make the subsidies permanent and are hoping to use this month's budget showdown to force Republicans to make concessions on the issue.
As David Dayen wrote Monday for the American Prospect, it sets up a challenging strategic and moral dilemma for Democrats:
On the one hand, Democrats fighting for healthcare benefits speaks to an issue where they have the highest level of support from the public. They would credibly be able to tell voters that they fought for lower costs during an affordability crisis and won, and that more of that will happen if they are given power in the midterms.
On the other hand, Republicans willingly drove the healthcare system toward the point of oblivion, and some may question why Democrats would offer a lifeline to bail them out. In this reading, relieving Republicans of the consequences of their health care plans would be harmful to Democratic midterm chances; Trump would take credit for keeping health care costs low.
What's clear, Dayen said, is that "unless action is taken, it will be an enormous example of Trump's failure to rein in the runaway cost of living."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, urged Democrats to stand firm as the fight over a potential government shutdown heats up.
"If Republicans refuse to negotiate and move away from their cost-increasing agenda, then it is Republicans who will be forcing a government-wide shutdown," Gilbert said. "There should be no deal without assurances that the budget will be honored and not impounded, and one that returns care to the American people.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Investigation Pressures Wikipedia to Reveal Identities of Editors Accused of 'Bias' Against Israel
The effort furthers the goals of the Heritage Foundation, which has launched a plan to "identify and target Wikipedia editors" using a number of underhanded tactics.
Aug 28, 2025
A pair of House Republicans is moving forward with an investigation that will seek to reveal the identities of Wikipedia editors who have edited articles to include information that portrays Israel negatively.
On Wednesday, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chair of the House Oversight Committee, and Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), chair of the House Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government Innovation, sent a letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that owns the free encyclopedia.
The representatives asked Wikimedia's CEO, Maryana Iskander, for "assistance in obtaining documents and communications regarding individuals (or specific accounts) serving as Wikipedia volunteer editors who violated Wikipedia platform policies as well as your own efforts to thwart intentional, organized efforts to inject bias into important and sensitive topics."
The letter requested information about "nation state actors" or "academic institutions" that may have been involved in efforts to "edit or influence content identified as possibly violating Wikipedia policies."
A spokesperson for the Wikimedia Foundation told The Hill that they were reviewing the request.
"We welcome the opportunity to respond to the committee's questions and to discuss the importance of safeguarding the integrity of information on our platform," the spokesperson said.
The GOP investigation coincides with a long-standing objective of the far-right Heritage Foundation, which has accused Wikipedia of anti-conservative bias and promoting content that portrays Israel in a negative light, and sought to unmask the identities of the internet users who run it.
The letter sent by Comer and Mace requests that Wikimedia provide Congress with "records showing identifying and unique characteristics of accounts (such as names, IP addresses, registration dates, user activity logs) for editors" who have been "subject to actions" by Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, which resolves internal disputes between editors.
It was, in essence, a request by Congress for Wikipedia to "dox" many of its editors.
"In the culture of Wikipedia editing, it is common for individuals to use pseudonyms to protect their privacy and avoid personal threats," wrote tech writer and Wikipedia expert Stephen Harrison for Slate in February. "Revealing an editor's personal information without their consent, a practice known as doxing, is a form of harassment that can result in a user's being permanently banned from the site."
Of chief concern to the legislators is investigating Wikipedia's handling of content related to Israel. They cited a report from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a pro-Israel lobbying group, which the legislators said "raised troubling questions about potentially systematic efforts to advance antisemitic and anti-Israel information in Wikipedia articles related to conflicts with the state of Israel."
The ADL report makes the allegation that 30 "bad-faith" Wikipedia editors, whose identities are not public, were collaborating to edit pages about the Israel-Palestine conflict by "spotlighting criticism of Israel and downplaying Palestinian terrorist violence and antisemitism," and in the process violating Wikipedia's commitment to neutrality.
That report, however, has been heavily criticized, including by some of the academics it cited. In a piece for The Forward, Shira Klein, whose research on Wikipedia's documentation of the Holocaust appears in the report, said the ADL "inaccurately" used her work, and the work of others, as part of its "ramped-up efforts to police public discourse about Israel," and quoted other researchers who felt the same.
Klein described the study's interpretation of the facts as "very skewed" and said it was reliant "on a faulty premise: that criticism of Israel or Zionism is inherently antisemitic."
"To establish foul play, the ADL would need to demonstrate that Wikipedia content about Israel and Zionism regularly expresses as fact ideas that diverge from broadly held scholarly opinions on the matters in question," Klein said. "But where is the evidence of editors repeatedly misrepresenting or contradicting peer-reviewed literature? There is none. The report simply wants us to take the ADL's word for it."
The ADL's report, as well as a similar report from the Atlantic Council alleging that Wikipedia editors had conspired to spread pro-Kremlin propaganda, are the sole pieces of evidence cited by Comer and Mace in their request for identifying information on Wikipedia's editors.
However, right-wing efforts to undermine Wikipedia's independence and attack the privacy of its editors go back much further.
In January, documents obtained by The Forward's Arno Rosenfeld revealed a secret plan by Heritage, the think tank behind the authoritarian Project 2025 playbook, to "identify and target Wikipedia editors" who the organization said were "abusing their position."
Among the methodologies it directed Heritage employees to use include "analyzing text patterns, usernames, and technical data through data breach analysis, fingerprinting, [human intelligence], and technical targeting."
The targeting methods also included "creating fake Wikipedia user accounts to try to trick editors into identifying themselves by sharing personal information or clicking on malicious tracking links that can identify people who click on them."
According to Rosenfeld, "The Heritage Foundation sent the pitch deck outlining the Wikipedia initiative to Jewish foundations and other prospective supporters of Project Esther, its roadmap for fighting antisemitism and anti-Zionism."
Jewish Voice for Peace has described Project Esther as Heritage's "blueprint for using the federal government and private institutions to dismantle the Palestine solidarity movement and broader US civil society, under the guise of 'fighting antisemitism.'"
"Even if you take issue with how the site is currently framing the conflict, that doesn't justify Heritage's plan," Harrison wrote. "Targeting Wikipedia editors personally, instead of debating their edits on the platform, marks a dangerous escalation."
Coming amid the Trump administration's crackdowns against campus protests and efforts to deport immigrants over pro-Palestine speech, critics have described the House Republican investigation as the latest GOP attempt to censor criticism and the spread of unflattering information about Israel.
Adam Johnson, a co-host for the political podcast Citations Needed, described it in a post on X as "House Republicans working with the ADL and Atlantic Council to discipline Wikipedia into parroting the Israeli and NATO line."
Johnson noted that this push was coming as the clear majority of Americans, including an overwhelming number of Democrats, now oppose US support for Israel, with many now believing the country is committing a genocide.
"Rather than end the genocide," Johnson said, "the response instead is to continue firing, doxing, smearing, and attempting to censor inconvenient narratives."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressive Group Takes Aim at Four Texas Republicans Who Voted to Cut Medicaid in New Ads
"We're holding these members of Congress accountable for voting for the Republican tax law that strips health care away from millions of Texas families," said Unrig Our Economy campaign director Leor Tal.
Jul 28, 2025
The progressive advocacy group Unrig Our Economy launched a new $2 million advertising campaign Monday against four Texas Republicans who voted for the massive Medicaid cuts in this month's GOP megabill.
At the behest of President Donald Trump, Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is mounting an unusual mid-decade effort to redraw Texas' congressional map to keep control of the U.S. House of Representatives come 2026.
The plan is expected to net the GOP five seats. But the flipside is that some seats that were once GOP locks may become more vulnerable to Democratic challengers.
Those include the ones held by Republican Reps. Lance Gooden (5), Monica De La Cruz (15), Beth Van Duyne (24), and Dan Crenshaw (2)—all of whom voted for the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act."
Put together, these four congresspeople alone represent around 450,000 Medicaid recipients, according to data from KFF.
The law remains dismally unpopular, with the majority of Americans believing that it benefits the rich, while providing little to ordinary Americans. According to a Navigator survey conducted last week, 7 in 10 Americans said they were concerned about its cuts to Medicaid.
The Congressional Budget Office projects that 10 million Americans will lose health insurance as a result of the law's Medicaid cuts.
Around 200,000 of them are in Texas according to KFF. In total, up to 1.7 million people in the state may lose their insurance as a result of other subsidies that were also cut.
Those are the people Unrig Our Economy hopes to reach with its new ad blitz.
One ad hits Crenshaw—whose district has nearly 92,000 Medicaid recipients—for making false promises to protect the program.
(Video: Unrig Our Economy)
It shows a video of the congressman from May 14 assuring Texans: "You have nothing to worry about. Your Medicaid is not going anywhere," less than two months before voting for "the largest Medicaid and healthcare cuts in history."
Another singles out De La Cruz—who represents over 181,000 Medicaid recipients—for her vote for the bill after warning that the cuts "would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities where hospitals and nursing homes are already struggling to keep their doors open."
Among hundreds at risk across the country, 15 rural hospitals in Texas are in danger of closing because of the cuts, according to a study by the health services research arm of the University of North Carolina.
The ads targeting Gooden and Van Duyne, meanwhile, draw more attention to the effects of their cuts on Texan families: "Medicaid covers a third of all children, half of all pregnant women, the elderly in long-term care, and the disabled."
(Video: Unrig Our Economy)
Gooden's district contains more than 120,000 Medicaid recipients—over half of whom are children. In Van Duyne's district, children make up close to two-thirds of the more than 57,000 enrollees.
According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the bill cuts more than $930 billion in total from Medicaid over the next ten years. Over that same ten-year period, the wealthiest 1% of Americans will receive over $1 trillion worth of tax breaks.
All the ads hammer home the fact that these devastating cuts were passed "to fund tax breaks for billionaires."
Unrig Our Economy's ad blitz is the first salvo of a $20-million effort by the House Majority PAC—the largest national PAC supporting Democrats—to beat back the effects of the Republican gerrymandering effort.
"We're holding these members of Congress accountable for voting for the Republican tax law that strips healthcare away from millions of Texas families," said Unrig Our Economy campaign director Leor Tal.
Unrig Our Economy has launched similar ads against vulnerable Republicans across the country, such as first-term Rep. Rob Bresnahan, whose northeast Pennsylvania constituency is made up of more than one-fourth Medicaid recipients.
"These ads," Tal said, "are just the latest in our nationwide campaign to show the horrible impacts of this law, which benefits the superwealthy at working families' expense."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy