
The United States Postal Service (USPS), which unlike the banks has an obligation to serve all communities, has more than enough retail locations to serve all of these under-served consumers. (Photo: tales of a wandering youkai/flickr/cc)
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
The United States Postal Service (USPS), which unlike the banks has an obligation to serve all communities, has more than enough retail locations to serve all of these under-served consumers. (Photo: tales of a wandering youkai/flickr/cc)
Fact: Tens of millions of Americans do not have a bank account. As a result, many of these Americans spend a reported $89 billion annually in interest and fees by using predatory services such as payday loan and check cashing services. It's a perpetuating cycle of poverty in which the poor get poorer just by accessing their own money. Fortunately, there is an ideal solution staring us in the face. An important voice driving the conversation is Professor Mehrsa Baradaran of the University of Georgia Law School. Her excellent new book, How the Other Half Banks: Exclusion, Exploitation and the Threat to Democracy describes how, for decades, big banks have shed their social contract with the American public and transformed themselves into modern monstrosities which serve corporations and the wealthy and exploit or avoid the less affluent members of our society. Setting the stage with this historical context, Professor Baradaran makes a compelling case for a postal banking system which would greatly benefit millions of struggling "unbanked" Americans.
Predatory payday loan companies and check cashing services soared like hawks in the 1980's to take advantage of communities where community banks and credit unions were displaced by the creep of large banking institutions. The payday lending industry now has more storefronts than McDonald's and Starbucks combined. These alternative "fringe banks" charge outrageous interest rates and fees-- millions of Americans turn to fringe banks each year, which allows them to bring in $40 billion a year in high-interest loans.
Where are the so-called large conventional banks? They are increasingly closing up shop in low-income areas. According to Bloomberg, from 2008 to 2013: "Banks have shut 1,826 branches.... and 93 percent of closings were in postal codes where the household income is below the national median." If you are living in a low-income neighborhood, just finding a bank is difficult. In 1993, we released a detailed report offering strong evidence that 49 major mortgage lenders had engaged in racial redlining in violation of federal Fair Lending laws in 16 major U.S. cities. Redlining occurs when banks and other mortgage lenders either exclude minority neighborhoods from their "effective lending territories," or substantially under-serve such neighborhoods.
The unbanked now pay up to 10 percent of their income just to use the money they have already earned. To put it into real world terms, an American family without a bank account, earning $25,000 a year spends about $2,400 of that income on interest and fees. To put it even more bluntly--that's more than they spend on food! (This statistic includes the chance of unpredictable financial emergencies in which those in need turn to payday lenders to bail them out at huge interest rates--50% of Americans need to borrow money for emergencies costing over $400.)
In her book, Professor Baradaran gives some real life examples: Tanya Burke, a single mother of two, racked up more than $2,000 of debt in fees and interest by taking out $600 from a payday lender to cover rent and unexpected medical costs for her son. Thelma Fleming, a mother and grandmother, took out a $300 loan to cover costs after losing one of her jobs. Forced to take out other loans to buy herself time, she ended up paying $2,500 over the course of ten months to pay back that initial $300 loan. These stories are far too common in America.
Until the 1970's and 80's, usury laws used to be in place to protect consumers by capping the maximum amount of interest that could be levied. Due to financial industry lobbying efforts, many states now have no usury caps (or there are ways around them.) This deregulation gave way to the enormous growth of the payday loan industry.
Another telling example from Professor Baradaran deals with a high wage earner who experiences a different borrowing outcome. "Steven" made some bad investments and could no longer afford his daily expenses. Luckily, he found a "miracle lender" who gave him very generous loans with low interest rates, saving him from financial ruin. "Steven" is, of course, America's big banks. When the reckless banking industry was in financial duress, it received a sweetheart deal when the American taxpayers bailed it out. Millions of struggling Americans, like Tanya Burke and Thelma Fleming, are not afforded that same luxury--and the banks have not repaid the goodwill forward by respecting their needs.
This brings us to postal banking, which could help break the cycle of madness that keeps millions of Americans in financial quicksand.
From 1911 until 1967, the Postal Savings System offered simple savings accounts to Americans who preferred an alternative to a private bank. It was a successful system until the bank lobby forced its cessation. (In many foreign countries post offices still offer simple savings accounts with no fees and reasonable minimum balance requirements.)
The United States Postal Service (USPS), which unlike the banks has an obligation to serve all communities, has more than enough retail locations to serve all of these under-served consumers. Last year, the office of the USPS inspector general released a report detailing the ways in which postal banking would be beneficial to both the public and the USPS itself, which has been made to endure an unprecedented advanced payment of $103.7 billion by 2016 to cover future health benefits of postal retirees for the next 75 years. No other government or private corporation is required to meet this unreasonable prepayment burden.
While the USPS already offers some financial services such as money orders and international fund transfers, it could expand to include paycheck cashing, pre-paid debit cards, bill payments, ATMs, savings accounts and small dollar loans. The introduction of these services would offer millions of Americans a local, reliable and affordable alternative to managing their finances. With over 30,000 locations, Post Office branches are everywhere in America.
A notable supporter of postal banking is Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who has been a leading advocate on this issue. Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders also supports it, recently stating in an interview that "...the postal service, in fact, can play an important role in providing modest types of banking service to folks who need it."
The time is ripe to implement postal banking. What is needed is a rising rumble from the people focused on Postmaster General Megan Brennan--who has the authority to act now on implementing surcharge free ATMS, payroll check cashing, bill-paying services and electronic money transfers --and on Congress to allow loans and other new services. For more on the issue and to find out how easy it is to get active and involved, visit The Campaign for Postal Banking.
To listen to Ralph's in-depth conversation with Professor Mehrsa Baradaran go to ralphnaderradiohour.com.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just hours away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Fact: Tens of millions of Americans do not have a bank account. As a result, many of these Americans spend a reported $89 billion annually in interest and fees by using predatory services such as payday loan and check cashing services. It's a perpetuating cycle of poverty in which the poor get poorer just by accessing their own money. Fortunately, there is an ideal solution staring us in the face. An important voice driving the conversation is Professor Mehrsa Baradaran of the University of Georgia Law School. Her excellent new book, How the Other Half Banks: Exclusion, Exploitation and the Threat to Democracy describes how, for decades, big banks have shed their social contract with the American public and transformed themselves into modern monstrosities which serve corporations and the wealthy and exploit or avoid the less affluent members of our society. Setting the stage with this historical context, Professor Baradaran makes a compelling case for a postal banking system which would greatly benefit millions of struggling "unbanked" Americans.
Predatory payday loan companies and check cashing services soared like hawks in the 1980's to take advantage of communities where community banks and credit unions were displaced by the creep of large banking institutions. The payday lending industry now has more storefronts than McDonald's and Starbucks combined. These alternative "fringe banks" charge outrageous interest rates and fees-- millions of Americans turn to fringe banks each year, which allows them to bring in $40 billion a year in high-interest loans.
Where are the so-called large conventional banks? They are increasingly closing up shop in low-income areas. According to Bloomberg, from 2008 to 2013: "Banks have shut 1,826 branches.... and 93 percent of closings were in postal codes where the household income is below the national median." If you are living in a low-income neighborhood, just finding a bank is difficult. In 1993, we released a detailed report offering strong evidence that 49 major mortgage lenders had engaged in racial redlining in violation of federal Fair Lending laws in 16 major U.S. cities. Redlining occurs when banks and other mortgage lenders either exclude minority neighborhoods from their "effective lending territories," or substantially under-serve such neighborhoods.
The unbanked now pay up to 10 percent of their income just to use the money they have already earned. To put it into real world terms, an American family without a bank account, earning $25,000 a year spends about $2,400 of that income on interest and fees. To put it even more bluntly--that's more than they spend on food! (This statistic includes the chance of unpredictable financial emergencies in which those in need turn to payday lenders to bail them out at huge interest rates--50% of Americans need to borrow money for emergencies costing over $400.)
In her book, Professor Baradaran gives some real life examples: Tanya Burke, a single mother of two, racked up more than $2,000 of debt in fees and interest by taking out $600 from a payday lender to cover rent and unexpected medical costs for her son. Thelma Fleming, a mother and grandmother, took out a $300 loan to cover costs after losing one of her jobs. Forced to take out other loans to buy herself time, she ended up paying $2,500 over the course of ten months to pay back that initial $300 loan. These stories are far too common in America.
Until the 1970's and 80's, usury laws used to be in place to protect consumers by capping the maximum amount of interest that could be levied. Due to financial industry lobbying efforts, many states now have no usury caps (or there are ways around them.) This deregulation gave way to the enormous growth of the payday loan industry.
Another telling example from Professor Baradaran deals with a high wage earner who experiences a different borrowing outcome. "Steven" made some bad investments and could no longer afford his daily expenses. Luckily, he found a "miracle lender" who gave him very generous loans with low interest rates, saving him from financial ruin. "Steven" is, of course, America's big banks. When the reckless banking industry was in financial duress, it received a sweetheart deal when the American taxpayers bailed it out. Millions of struggling Americans, like Tanya Burke and Thelma Fleming, are not afforded that same luxury--and the banks have not repaid the goodwill forward by respecting their needs.
This brings us to postal banking, which could help break the cycle of madness that keeps millions of Americans in financial quicksand.
From 1911 until 1967, the Postal Savings System offered simple savings accounts to Americans who preferred an alternative to a private bank. It was a successful system until the bank lobby forced its cessation. (In many foreign countries post offices still offer simple savings accounts with no fees and reasonable minimum balance requirements.)
The United States Postal Service (USPS), which unlike the banks has an obligation to serve all communities, has more than enough retail locations to serve all of these under-served consumers. Last year, the office of the USPS inspector general released a report detailing the ways in which postal banking would be beneficial to both the public and the USPS itself, which has been made to endure an unprecedented advanced payment of $103.7 billion by 2016 to cover future health benefits of postal retirees for the next 75 years. No other government or private corporation is required to meet this unreasonable prepayment burden.
While the USPS already offers some financial services such as money orders and international fund transfers, it could expand to include paycheck cashing, pre-paid debit cards, bill payments, ATMs, savings accounts and small dollar loans. The introduction of these services would offer millions of Americans a local, reliable and affordable alternative to managing their finances. With over 30,000 locations, Post Office branches are everywhere in America.
A notable supporter of postal banking is Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who has been a leading advocate on this issue. Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders also supports it, recently stating in an interview that "...the postal service, in fact, can play an important role in providing modest types of banking service to folks who need it."
The time is ripe to implement postal banking. What is needed is a rising rumble from the people focused on Postmaster General Megan Brennan--who has the authority to act now on implementing surcharge free ATMS, payroll check cashing, bill-paying services and electronic money transfers --and on Congress to allow loans and other new services. For more on the issue and to find out how easy it is to get active and involved, visit The Campaign for Postal Banking.
To listen to Ralph's in-depth conversation with Professor Mehrsa Baradaran go to ralphnaderradiohour.com.
Fact: Tens of millions of Americans do not have a bank account. As a result, many of these Americans spend a reported $89 billion annually in interest and fees by using predatory services such as payday loan and check cashing services. It's a perpetuating cycle of poverty in which the poor get poorer just by accessing their own money. Fortunately, there is an ideal solution staring us in the face. An important voice driving the conversation is Professor Mehrsa Baradaran of the University of Georgia Law School. Her excellent new book, How the Other Half Banks: Exclusion, Exploitation and the Threat to Democracy describes how, for decades, big banks have shed their social contract with the American public and transformed themselves into modern monstrosities which serve corporations and the wealthy and exploit or avoid the less affluent members of our society. Setting the stage with this historical context, Professor Baradaran makes a compelling case for a postal banking system which would greatly benefit millions of struggling "unbanked" Americans.
Predatory payday loan companies and check cashing services soared like hawks in the 1980's to take advantage of communities where community banks and credit unions were displaced by the creep of large banking institutions. The payday lending industry now has more storefronts than McDonald's and Starbucks combined. These alternative "fringe banks" charge outrageous interest rates and fees-- millions of Americans turn to fringe banks each year, which allows them to bring in $40 billion a year in high-interest loans.
Where are the so-called large conventional banks? They are increasingly closing up shop in low-income areas. According to Bloomberg, from 2008 to 2013: "Banks have shut 1,826 branches.... and 93 percent of closings were in postal codes where the household income is below the national median." If you are living in a low-income neighborhood, just finding a bank is difficult. In 1993, we released a detailed report offering strong evidence that 49 major mortgage lenders had engaged in racial redlining in violation of federal Fair Lending laws in 16 major U.S. cities. Redlining occurs when banks and other mortgage lenders either exclude minority neighborhoods from their "effective lending territories," or substantially under-serve such neighborhoods.
The unbanked now pay up to 10 percent of their income just to use the money they have already earned. To put it into real world terms, an American family without a bank account, earning $25,000 a year spends about $2,400 of that income on interest and fees. To put it even more bluntly--that's more than they spend on food! (This statistic includes the chance of unpredictable financial emergencies in which those in need turn to payday lenders to bail them out at huge interest rates--50% of Americans need to borrow money for emergencies costing over $400.)
In her book, Professor Baradaran gives some real life examples: Tanya Burke, a single mother of two, racked up more than $2,000 of debt in fees and interest by taking out $600 from a payday lender to cover rent and unexpected medical costs for her son. Thelma Fleming, a mother and grandmother, took out a $300 loan to cover costs after losing one of her jobs. Forced to take out other loans to buy herself time, she ended up paying $2,500 over the course of ten months to pay back that initial $300 loan. These stories are far too common in America.
Until the 1970's and 80's, usury laws used to be in place to protect consumers by capping the maximum amount of interest that could be levied. Due to financial industry lobbying efforts, many states now have no usury caps (or there are ways around them.) This deregulation gave way to the enormous growth of the payday loan industry.
Another telling example from Professor Baradaran deals with a high wage earner who experiences a different borrowing outcome. "Steven" made some bad investments and could no longer afford his daily expenses. Luckily, he found a "miracle lender" who gave him very generous loans with low interest rates, saving him from financial ruin. "Steven" is, of course, America's big banks. When the reckless banking industry was in financial duress, it received a sweetheart deal when the American taxpayers bailed it out. Millions of struggling Americans, like Tanya Burke and Thelma Fleming, are not afforded that same luxury--and the banks have not repaid the goodwill forward by respecting their needs.
This brings us to postal banking, which could help break the cycle of madness that keeps millions of Americans in financial quicksand.
From 1911 until 1967, the Postal Savings System offered simple savings accounts to Americans who preferred an alternative to a private bank. It was a successful system until the bank lobby forced its cessation. (In many foreign countries post offices still offer simple savings accounts with no fees and reasonable minimum balance requirements.)
The United States Postal Service (USPS), which unlike the banks has an obligation to serve all communities, has more than enough retail locations to serve all of these under-served consumers. Last year, the office of the USPS inspector general released a report detailing the ways in which postal banking would be beneficial to both the public and the USPS itself, which has been made to endure an unprecedented advanced payment of $103.7 billion by 2016 to cover future health benefits of postal retirees for the next 75 years. No other government or private corporation is required to meet this unreasonable prepayment burden.
While the USPS already offers some financial services such as money orders and international fund transfers, it could expand to include paycheck cashing, pre-paid debit cards, bill payments, ATMs, savings accounts and small dollar loans. The introduction of these services would offer millions of Americans a local, reliable and affordable alternative to managing their finances. With over 30,000 locations, Post Office branches are everywhere in America.
A notable supporter of postal banking is Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who has been a leading advocate on this issue. Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders also supports it, recently stating in an interview that "...the postal service, in fact, can play an important role in providing modest types of banking service to folks who need it."
The time is ripe to implement postal banking. What is needed is a rising rumble from the people focused on Postmaster General Megan Brennan--who has the authority to act now on implementing surcharge free ATMS, payroll check cashing, bill-paying services and electronic money transfers --and on Congress to allow loans and other new services. For more on the issue and to find out how easy it is to get active and involved, visit The Campaign for Postal Banking.
To listen to Ralph's in-depth conversation with Professor Mehrsa Baradaran go to ralphnaderradiohour.com.
Their "astonishing, powerful op-ed," said one professor, "drives home what we are losing and what's already been lost."
Nearly every living former director or acting director of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from the past half-century took to the pages of The New York Times on Monday to jointly argue that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "is endangering every American's health."
"Collectively, we spent more than 100 years working at the CDC, the world's preeminent public health agency. We served under multiple Republican and Democratic administrations," Drs. William Foege, William Roper, David Satcher, Jeffrey Koplan, Richard Besser, Tom Frieden, Anne Schuchat, Rochelle Walensky, and Mandy Cohen highlighted.
What RFK Jr. "has done to the CDC and to our nation's public health system over the past several months—culminating in his decision to fire Dr. Susan Monarez as CDC director days ago—is unlike anything we have ever seen at the agency, and unlike anything our country has ever experienced," the nine former agency leaders wrote.
Known for spreading misinformation about vaccines and a series of scandals, Kennedy was a controversial figure long before President Donald Trump chose him to lead HHS—a decision that Senate Republicans affirmed in February. However, in the wake of Monarez's ouster, fresh calls for him to resign or be fired have mounted.
This is powerful. Nine former CDC leaders just came together to defend SCIENCE.Maybe it’s time we LISTEN TO THEM—not the loud voices spreading MISINFORMATION.Science saves lives. Lies cost themwww.nytimes.com/2025/09/01/o...
[image or embed]
— Krutika Kuppalli, MD FIDSA (@krutikakuppalli.bsky.social) September 1, 2025 at 10:35 AM
As the ex-directors detailed:
Secretary Kennedy has fired thousands of federal health workers and severely weakened programs designed to protect Americans from cancer, heart attacks, strokes, lead poisoning, injury, violence, and more. Amid the largest measles outbreak in the United States in a generation, he's focused on unproven "treatments" while downplaying vaccines. He canceled investments in promising medical research that will leave us ill-prepared for future health emergencies. He replaced experts on federal health advisory committees with unqualified individuals who share his dangerous and unscientific views. He announced the end of US support for global vaccination programs that protect millions of children and keep Americans safe, citing flawed research and making inaccurate statements. And he championed federal legislation that will cause millions of people with health insurance through Medicaid to lose their coverage. Firing Dr. Monarez—which led to the resignations of top CDC officials—adds considerable fuel to this raging fire.
Monarez was nominated by Trump, and was confirmed by Senate Republicans in late July. As the op-ed authors noted, she was forced out by RFK Jr. just weeks later, after she reportedly refused "to rubber-stamp his dangerous and unfounded vaccine recommendations or heed his demand to fire senior CDC staff members."
"These are not typical requests from a health secretary to a CDC director," they wrote. "Not even close. None of us would have agreed to the secretary's demands, and we applaud Dr. Monarez for standing up for the agency and the health of our communities."
After Monarez's exit, Trump tapped Jim O'Neill, an RFK Jr. aide and biotech investor, as the CDC's interim director. Critics including Robert Steinbrook, director of Public Citizen's health research group, warn that "unlike Susan Monarez, O'Neill is likely to rubber-stamp dangerous vaccine recommendations from HHS Secretary Kennedy's handpicked appointees to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and obey orders to fire CDC public health experts with scientific integrity."
The agency's former directors didn't address O'Neill, but they wrote: "To those on the CDC staff who continue to perform their jobs heroically in the face of the excruciating circumstances, we offer our sincere thanks and appreciation. Their ongoing dedication is a model for all of us. But it's clear that the agency is hurting badly."
"We have a message for the rest of the nation as well: This is a time to rally to protect the health of every American," they continued. The experts called on Congress to "exercise its oversight authority over HHS," and state and local governments to "fill funding gaps where they can." They also urged philanthropy, the private sector, medical groups, and physicians to boost investments, "continue to stand up for science and truth," and support patients "with sound guidance and empathy."
Doctors, researchers, journalists, and others called their "must-read" piece "extraordinary" and "important."
"Just an astonishing, powerful op-ed that drives home what we are losing and what's already been lost," said University of Michigan Law School professor Leah Litman. "We are so incredibly fortunate to live with the advances [of] modern medicine and health science. Destroying and stymying it is just unforgivable."
"This is a government that is by, and for, the CEOs and billionaires," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler.
Although US President Donald Trump's administration likes to boast that he puts "American workers first," several news reports published on Monday document the president's attacks on the rights of working people and labor unions.
As longtime labor reporter Steven Greenhouse explained in The Guardian, Trump throughout his second term has "taken dozens of actions that hurt workers, often by cutting their pay or making their jobs more dangerous."
Among other things, Greenhouse cited Trump's decision to halt a regulation intended to protect coal miners from lung disease, as well as his decision to strip a million federal workers of their collective bargaining rights.
Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, told Greenhouse that Trump's actions amount to a "big betrayal" of his promises to look out for US workers during the 2024 presidential campaign.
"His attacks on unions are coming fast and furious," she said. "He talks a good game of being for working people, but he's doing the absolute opposite. This is a government that is by, and for, the CEOs and billionaires."
Heidi Shierholz, president of the Economic Policy Institute, similarly told Greenhouse that Trump has been "absolutely, brazenly anti-worker," and she cited him ripping away an increase in the minimum wage for federal contractors that had been enacted by former President Joe Biden as a prime example.
"The minimum wage is incredibly popular," she said. "He just took away the minimum wage from hundreds of thousands of workers. That blew my mind."
NPR published its own Labor Day report that zeroed in on how the president is "decimating" federal employee unions by issuing March and August executive orders stripping them of the power to collectively bargain for better working conditions.
So far, nine federal agencies have canceled their union contracts as a result of the orders, which are based on a provision in federal law that gives the president the power to terminate collective bargaining at agencies that are primarily involved with national security.
The Trump administration has embraced a maximalist interpretation of this power and has demanded the end of collective bargaining at departments that aren't primarily known as national security agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Weather Service.
However, Trump's attacks on organized labor haven't completely intimidated government workers from joining unions. As the Los Angeles Times reported, the Trump administration's cuts to the National Park Service earlier this year inspired hundreds of workers at the California-based Yosemite, Sequoia, and Kings Canyon national parks to unionize.
Although labor organizers had been trying unsuccessfully for years to get park workers to sign on, that changed when the Trump administration took a hatchet to parks' budgets and enacted mass layoffs.
"More than 97% of employees at Yosemite and Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks who cast ballots voted to unionize, with results certified last week," wrote the Los Angeles Times. "More than 600 staffers—including interpretive park rangers, biologists, firefighters, and fee collectors—are now represented by the National Federation of Federal Employees."
Even so, many workers who succeed in forming unions may no longer get their grievances heard given the state of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
As documented by Timothy Noah in The New Republic, the NLRB is now "hanging by a thread" in the wake of a court ruling that declared the board's structure to be unconstitutional because it barred the president from being able to fire NLRB administrative judges at will.
"The ruling doesn't shut down the NLRB entirely because it applies only to cases in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, where the 5th Circuit has jurisdiction," Noah explained. "But Jennifer Abruzzo, who was President Joe Biden's NLRB general counsel, told me that the decision will 'open the floodgates for employers to forum-shop and seek to get injunctions' in those three states."
Noah noted that this lawsuit was brought in part by SpaceX owner and one-time Trump ally Elon Musk, and he accused the Trump NLRB of waging a "half-hearted" fight against Musk's attack on workers' rights.
Thanks to Trump and Musk's actions, Noah concluded, American oligarchs "can toast the NLRB's imminent destruction."
"The Constitution gives this authority to the states and Congress, not you!" said the head of Democracy Defenders Fund, threatening a lawsuit.
US President Donald Trump continued his "authoritarian takeover of our election system" over the weekend, threatening an executive order requiring every voter to present identification, which experts swiftly denounced as clearly "unconstitutional."
"Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS!" Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform late Saturday. "I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!! Also, No Mail-In Voting, Except For Those That Are Very Ill, And The Far Away Military. USE PAPER BALLOTS ONLY!!!"
Less than two weeks ago, Trump declared on the platform that "I am going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we're at it, Highly 'Inaccurate,' Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES." He claimed, without evidence, that voting by mail leads to "MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD," and promised to take executive action ahead of the 2026 midterms.
Those posts came as battles over his March executive order (EO), "Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections," are playing out in federal court. The measure was largely blocked by multiple district judges, but the president is appealing.
Trump's voter ID post provoked a new threat of legal action to stop his unconstitutional attacks on the nation's election system.
"Go ahead, make my day Mr. Trump," said Norm Eisen, who co-founded Democracy Defenders Fund and served as White House special counsel for ethics and government reform during the Obama administration.
"We at Democracy Defenders Fund immediately sued you and got an injunction on your first voting EO," he noted. "We will do the same here if you try it again. The Constitution gives this authority to the states and Congress, not you!"
In addition to pointing out that Trump is "an absentee voter himself," Democracy Docket explained Sunday that "the US Constitution gives the states the primary authority to regulate elections, while empowering Congress to 'at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.' The Framers never considered authorizing the president to oversee elections."
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures: "Thirty-six states have laws requesting or requiring voters to show some form of identification at the polls. The remaining 14 states and Washington, DC use other methods to verify the identity of voters."
Those laws already prevent Americans from participating in elections, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.
"Overly burdensome photo ID requirements block millions of eligible American citizens from voting," the center's voter ID webpage says. "As many as 11% of eligible voters do not have the kind of ID that is required by states with strict ID requirements, and that percentage is even higher among seniors, minorities, people with disabilities, low-income voters, and students."