

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.
"Wittman is just an embarrassment to Virginians everywhere," said one Democratic campaigner. "This phone call was about as serious as he takes the needs of his constituents."
A vulnerable House Republican went to comedic lengths on Tuesday to avoid answering questions about Speaker Mike Johnson's plans for possible Social Security cuts.
The Republican Speaker was recorded earlier this week saying that under a GOP plan to be released next year, popular programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security needed to be “adjusted and fixed"—comments that were widely interpreted as a signal that cuts to crucial benefits were in the works.
On Tuesday, as a reporter from Meidas Touch approached him to ask about Johnson's "secret plan to cut Social Security," Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) suddenly whipped out his cell phone and began speaking into it, apparently to avoid the difficult question.
Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA) faked a phone call for roughly 90 seconds after being asked about Speaker Mike Johnson’s comments regarding potential Social Security cuts.
The phone's screen remained visible, with his cheek inadvertently tapping different parts of the display. pic.twitter.com/y3ST5AX651
— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) June 10, 2026
A video posted by the outlet shows Wittman walking and speaking into the phone while the screen was still visible, seeming to indicate that no phone call was actually taking place.
As Meidas described: “The phone’s screen remained visible, with his cheek inadvertently tapping" the phone and changing parts of the display, which does not occur when an actual phone call is happening.
Wittman's conversation, which went on for about 70 seconds, was vague and nonsensical: "Hey, how you doing? I’m good. I’m good with that. I’ll be there in just a few minutes," he said. "I've got some more efforts that I want to talk to you about. There are actually more things that we have to be working on."
Just before Wittman put his phone away, the reporter, who’d continued walking next to him, asked again: “Congressman, what is Mike Johnson’s secret plan to cut Social Security?” Wittman continued to walk, refusing to acknowledge the reporter, before speeding away.
According to Drop Site News reporter Julian Andreone, it’s not the first time Wittman has pulled such a stunt. He posted video of Wittman taking another conveniently-timed phone call last week, right as the journalist approached to ask about a proposal in the next military spending bill to integrate the US and Israeli militaries.
Oh hey! He did this to me & @DropSiteNews last week! https://t.co/lR40fjKNw1 pic.twitter.com/kGs69cL9Ec
— Julian Andreone (@JulianAndreone) June 10, 2026
This interaction came a day after Johnson complained on a radio show on Monday about the large amount of spending on “entitlement programs,” as Republican lawmakers have long called earned benefits, and suggested unspecified changes.
“The reason we’re in trouble is because over 74% of federal spending is on autopilot, mandatory spending. That’s your entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and things like Social Security,” Johnson said. “They have to be adjusted and fixed. We have a plan to do that next year.”
The next day, a report from the Social Security Board of Trustees showed that the popular retirement program would be unable to pay out full benefits by 2032, a quarter earlier than projected last year.
Nancy Altman, the president of Social Security Works, said that the shortfall has been exacerbated by Trump policies that have slashed revenue going toward the program, including a tax bill that overwhelmingly benefited the wealthy, tariffs that have slowed economic growth, the war with Iran, and policies targeting immigrants.
It is perhaps understandable why Wittman might want to avoid giving more details on Johnson's plan. Voters overwhelmingly oppose efforts to raise the retirement age, cut benefits, or raise workers' payroll taxes, all of which have roughly three-quarters disapproval or more, according to a late-May survey by the Ronald Reagan Institute.
Amid high inflation and soaring gas prices, a YouGov/Economist poll on Tuesday showed that approval of Trump's handling of the economy has hit a new low point of just 29%, compared to 63% disapproval. That disgruntlement has filtered down ballot to the point where Republicans' longstanding advantage over Democrats on the economy has evaporated, which puts candidates in competitive districts like Wittman in jeopardy this November.
Democrats are already incorporating Johnson's comments into their midterm messaging. A release on Tuesday from the Democratic National Committee War Room noted that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed by Republicans and signed by Trump last year is projected to add potentially as much as $5 trillion to the national debt over ten years, largely to pay for tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans while cutting safety net programs like Medicaid.
It also highlighted comments by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent last year describing the "Trump accounts" enacted as part of the megabill as a "backdoor for privatizing Social Security."
"Donald Trump and his loyal foot soldiers in Congress aren’t even trying to hide their plans to gut programs that hardworking Americans rely on," said DNC Rapid Response Director Kendall Witmer. "Trump and Republicans already made the largest cut to Medicaid in history, and now they are taking every opportunity to sell out working families and rip away retirement benefits, healthcare, and food assistance.”
Attorney Salaam Bhatti, one of several Democrats running in a crowded primary to challenge Wittman, used the embarrassing clip of him as a springboard.
"I'm running for Congress against him," he said of Wittman. "My platform: Don't ignore people, Medicare for All, tax billionaires, campaign finance reform."
Matt Royer, a digital strategist for Democrats in Virginia, said: “Wittman is just an embarrassment to Virginians everywhere. This phone call was about as serious as he takes the needs of his constituents in VA-1. Is it any wonder this race is now a tossup?”
It's the latest of several national strikes over the past year and a half against policies that one union leader said will heighten "inequality" and "poverty."
Much of Belgium ground to a halt on Tuesday as tens of thousands of workers flooded the streets of Brussels as part of a general strike against government austerity measures.
Schools closed, public transit operated with reduced service, and flights out of major airports were grounded as workers walked off the job. Instead, they marched through the capital clad in red and green, the colors of Belgium's major labor unions, with some carrying signs that read, "Hands off our pensions" and "We will not pay the price of their wars."
According to Morning Star, as many as 100,000 people took part in the strike, which was called by the nation's three biggest trade unions in protest of measures by Prime Minister Bart De Wever's government that the unions say slash pensions, reduce wages, and attack collective bargaining.
The marchers called on the government to roll back plans to raise Belgium's retirement age to 67 and have called for an end to what the unions have dubbed a “pension penalty” that would cut benefits for those who retire early.
Amid rising costs caused by the US-Israeli war against Iran, the unions are also outraged by a proposed temporary cap on wage indexation, which requires wages to rise in tandem with inflation.
It's part of a broader trend of the government loosening labor rules for employers, which unions say has led to longer, more irregular hours and diminished employees' work-life balance.
"People will have less money left over and will still have to work more flexibly and longer," said Ann Vermorgen, the chair of the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions. "Even the Planning Bureau says that the reform will promote inequality and that poverty will emerge.”
Tuesday's general strike was just the latest over the past year and a half, as the unions have refused to let up on their push to reverse De Wever's agenda.
Gert Truyens, the chair of the General Confederation of Liberal Trade Unions of Belgium (ACLVB), said that with the pension penalty and the other labor proposals, the government was displaying “total disregard” for social dialogue by “unilaterally imposing things without discussing them with the trade unions and employers.”
Just look at all of the ways the Trump administration has been slowly killing the federal relief agency in practice.
President Donald Trump’s Federal Emergency Management Agency Review Council was scheduled to vote Thursday on a report containing several recommended changes to FEMA. This was supposed to happen during a meeting from 1:00 to 3:00 pm ET. However, I and many others who registered to attend virtually never received links for a meeting that was eventually canceled with no notice or explanation.
CNN reported Wednesday that the review council was planning “to recommend dramatic downsizing and overhaul—but not elimination—of the agency.” Too much is being made of the council’s decision to back away from the earlier demands of Trump and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem for the outright abolition of FEMA. Abolition would require an act of Congress, an institution that (contra Trump and, often, John Roberts) actually does still exist. And besides, the Trump administration doesn’t need to formally eradicate FEMA to destroy it; just look at all of the ways they’ve been slowly killing the agency in practice.
Here’s a fresh stunning example: Starting on December 15, FEMA’s Office of Response and Recovery is set to be led by Gregg Phillips, an election-denying conspiracy theorist with no relevant experience. That’s how you effectively demolish an agency without congressional approval. The QAnon-supporting Phillips is one of many examples of profoundly unqualified personnel now calling the shots at FEMA after experienced leaders, along with thousands of rank-and-file staff, were pushed out.
How else? Require every grant over $100,000 to be personally approved by Noem. That’s most grants, to be clear, as the Central Texas flooding disaster revealed in tragic fashion. Much of the Trump administration’s deadly assault on FEMA reflects ideas found in Project 2025, whose main architect is Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought. That right-wing policy road map calls for foisting ever more responsibility for emergency preparedness and response onto states and localities despite the fact that only the federal government has the personnel and financial wherewithal to manage major disasters.
That Trump and his allies, many of whom are openly authoritarian, don’t seem worried about a negative political fallout is ominous.
Making matters worse, Trump is telling governors to step up while Noem and Vought are restricting relevant funding. The Trump administration continues to deprive communities of funding for hazard mitigation and infrastructural resilience even though every $1 invested in risk reduction saves an estimated $6 to $13, not to mention countless lives. As usual, Vought’s obsession with “fiscal responsibility” is a rhetorical ploy to justify slashing programs he doesn’t like.
We won’t know for sure until the final report is voted on, but according to CNN, the FEMA Review Council is expected to promote more of the same old austerity. A draft viewed by the outlet reportedly calls for cutting FEMA’s workforce “in half” and making it harder for states to qualify for federal disaster assistance. A longer draft was produced collectively by the council, but Noem, in her capacity as council co-chair, reportedly took a hacksaw to it, altering it in regressive ways. The forthcoming Noem-authored report should be interpreted as a continuation of the Trump administration’s lethal dismantling of FEMA. So too should the move to put Phillips in charge of the agency’s lifesaving disaster response and recovery work.
Phillips’ appointment comes at a time when the Trump administration is already delaying and denying disaster aid. There’s an apparent pattern of political retribution that warrants congressional investigation. Trump seems to relish opportunities to publicly praise “loyal” states when (partially) approving disaster assistance while punishing perceived enemies (e.g., rejecting requests from Illinois despite record-breaking damage).
That said, Trump’s abuse of the disaster declaration process—one component of Vought’s broader war on the federal government’s pro-social capacities—is harming working people everywhere. Republican-led states (e.g., Arkansas), swing states (e.g. Michigan and North Carolina), and pro-Trump counties in Democratic-led states (e.g., western Maryland) are not immune from the White House’s attacks on FEMA.
It remains to be seen whether Democrats will make Trump and his fellow Republicans pay a political price for abdicating the federal government’s responsibility to care for disaster victims. Ultimately, ignoring people in their moment of greatest need is bad politics. That Trump and his allies, many of whom are openly authoritarian, don’t seem worried about a negative political fallout is ominous; it suggests they don’t think they’ll have to face a fair news environment (hence the fixation on Trump-friendly oligarchs running elite media companies) or a fair election ever again.