

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.
Wowza, rare glimmer of good news. We take a moment to honor the stunning Michigan victory of Abdul El-Sayed, who was outspent 12-1 by his opponent's millions from establishment Dems, Zionist PACS and corporations and still managed to win even though he is a progressive Muslim who calls genocide genocide and wants Medicare for all in a Trump state that isn't communist New York. Ha. What millions in dark money buys you these days: "Sweet fuck all, as it turns out."
El-Sayed's inspiring win came against a candidate, Haley Stevens, who was bankrolled by over $60 million from party leaders and outside money from a murky nesting doll of super-PACS and shell corporations but whose campaign still had the audacity to bill her as “the grassroots choice of Michigan working families.” Total spending on the race in a key swing state was about $80 million, most from fat cats, making it "the fattest cat in the history of primaries." El-Sayed reportedly got about $4.6 million in outside money; Stevens and Netanyahu got about $60 million, the plurality of it from AIPAC's United Democracy Project (sic) super PAC - the most they've dumped into a single race, making it what observers call AIPAC's biggest defeat. From I Fucking Love Australia: AIPAC shoved 30 million dollars up Michigan's arse, and Michigan shat it straight back out."
Born in Detroit in 1984, Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed was raised by his father Mohamed, an Egyptian immigrant, and his stepmother Jackie, whose Michigan roots go back to the 1800s. After graduating from the University of Michigan Phi Beta Kappa, he earned an MD from Columbia and a doctorate in public health from Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, worked as an epidemiologist and became the youngest health official in a major American city when he was appointed Director of Detroit's Health Department, gutted rwhen it was privatized during the city’s bankruptcy, at age 30. Rebuilding it, he went after corporate polluters, stripped lead out of schools, starting offering free glasses to kids in need, expanded Narcan access, and spearheaded a program cancelling up to $700 million in medical debt for 300,000 state residents.
Faced with that resume, AIPAC spent their millions on an ad blitz that managed not to mention any of his policies, or even Israel, though he won the first-ever political endorsement from Jewish Voice For Peace. Instead, they focused on the issues that really matter: They attacked El-Sayed for criticizing the Obamas, allegedly helping Trump win, and sitting for an interview with a streamer they don’t like, Hasan Piker. If he wins the general election against the GOP's carpetbagging empty suit Mike Rogers, he'd become the first Muslim in the Senate. His longtime message to Dems: Stop compromising, ban ICE, end sending arms to Israel, Medicare for All, no more forever wars, get dark money out of politics. On election night, at a podium reading, "MIchigan Is Not For Sale," he celebrated "the movement we were able to inspire," and "the idea that we could take our government back."
El-Sayed's victory, while slimmer than predicted, was seen as pivotal; noted Bernie Sanders, "This is an election between Abdul and the billionaire class.” And the candidate the establishment called "unelectable" won with the endorsement of the United Auto Workers, "the beating heart of Michigan labor." His win was the biggest but not the only news out of Michigan: Sunrise Movement co-founder and data center opponent William Lawrence also took the primary for Michigan’s 7th Congressional district. They join progressive wins elsewhere: Zohran Mamdani in New York. Katie Wilson in Seattle. Three Mamdani-backed candidates in New York primaries, two against longtime incumbents. Melat Kiros in Colorado. Troy Jackson in Maine. It's still a long tough road ahead. But take heart from spineless ghoul Mike Johnson: “The insurgent left is on the rise."
A group of 39 Democratic senators on Thursday told the Trump White House to restore grants for their states that the administration itself admitted were canceled for purely political reasons.
In a court filing earlier this month, attorneys representing the US Department of Energy (DOE) acknowledged that decisions about canceling grants for a series of renewable energy projects were based “solely on the political identity of the grant recipient’s state, i.e., whether the recipient’s location and/or place of performance was in a Blue State or a non-Blue State."
The Democratic senators responded with a letter to US Energy Secretary Chris Wright and White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought demanding that the cancelations be reversed.
"You not only acted outside the bounds of the law," the senators wrote, "but cancelled projects that would have provided jobs, onshored manufacturing, and lowered skyrocketing energy prices. Congress authorized those projects and appropriated funding under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and annual appropriation bills."
Later in the letter, the senators argued that more was at stake beyond grants for green energy.
"Once an administration begins punishing Americans for how they vote, the threat extends far beyond these projects," the Democrats wrote. "No state, community, business, or worker can trust that the federal government will apply the law fairly."
"This is not only an attack on jobs, affordable energy, and America’s economic competitiveness," the Democrats added. "It is an attack on the rule of law and the basic democratic principle that the federal government serves the entire country—not merely those who support the president."
Last year, the DOE recommended canceling more than 600 grants awarded for energy projects under former President Joe Biden’s administration. However, the OMB subsequently intervened and canceled fewer than half of the recommended projects, while keeping grants for projects in states that voted for President Donald Trump.
After a group of California researchers challenged the terminated grants in a lawsuit, the DOE acknowledged that “with one exception, the 284 terminated grants had a recipient location and/or at least one place of performance in a state that awarded its electoral votes to Kamala Harris in the 2024 election and has two Democratic-caucusing senators.”
The DOE also admitted that there was no “programmatic, statutory, cost-reduction, or performance-based factor” to justify the cuts.
"Are you helping the president sell people advance access to market-moving information?"
That's the opening line of a Thursday letter that US House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sent to Kevin McGurn, interim CEO of President Donald Trump's Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG) Corp.
TMTG runs Trump's Truth Social platform and earlier this month announced plans to launch "Truth API" by August 1. API, or application programming interface, lets software applications talk to each other. Critics have warned that the new endeavor will give Wall Street firms faster access to posts by the president and other top accounts.
"Trump Media's target market for buyers of this service is 'high-frequency and algorithmic trading firms,' which would each pay a
handsome $100,000 monthly subscription fee," Raskin wrote. "Nearly half of each fee would go directly into the pocket of Donald Trump, who owns roughly 41% of the company's shares through a trust that he continues to control."
"Put another way, Trump Media will soon be selling early access to President Trump's so-called 'Truth' missives to the most sophisticated investment firms in the world," he stressed. "This insider-information scheme will enable Wall Street to profit from the president's frequent market-moving posts on major businesses and cash in on swings in stock prices caused by the president's buying and selling (or pumping and dumping, if you prefer) of publicly traded stocks to unwitting retail investors."
As Investopedia pointed out Thursday: "In recent months Trump has posted about new developments in the Iran War, which is particularly important for buyers and sellers of futures contracts who are trying to ascertain where oil prices are headed. Over the past year, he has also posted about tariff policy, government investments in publicly traded companies, and other corporate news developments."
Additionally, as Raskin highlighted, "Trump has promoted over 20 companies on his Truth Social account shortly after purchasing the companies’ stocks, including government contractors where the Trump administration exerted substantial ability to move markets in those companies' favor. Donald Trump Jr.'s investment firm, 1789 Capital, has posted a staggering 200% investment return since his father's return to the White House, with the president recently admitting that his oldest sons are coventurers in his corruption."
Once the new service is up and running, "whenever President Trump uses Truth Social to announce that a ceasefire is imminent, or prematurely leaks US jobs data, his customers will now be able to front-run the market using their privileged access to his social media posts, leaving retail investors, pension plans, and retirement accounts irreparably disadvantaged," he warned. "This is precisely the type of harm that federal securities laws are designed to prevent."
Concerns about TMTG's plans led Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Adam Schiff (Calif.) to demand that US Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins launch an investigation. The senators wrote to the Trump-nominated SEC leader on Tuesday that the current administration "is the most corrupt in the nation's history," and the company's "new service threatens to undermine the integrity of capital markets."
In the meantime, Raskin—a constitutional scholar who managed Trump's historic second impeachment—is conducting his own probe of what he called a "reverse Robin Hood scheme," arguing that "this White House-Wall Street-Trump-Business feedback loop represents the depraved essence of insider trading." The congressman is demanding a lengthy list of records from the CEO of Trump's company by August 13.
"The president of the United States should be using the office to 'take care' that laws are enforced and to advance the public interest," he said, nodding to the US Constitution. "Instead, President Trump is, once again, using it to enrich in spectacular fashion himself, his family, and corporate cronies while also destroying the integrity of financial markets in the process."
US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins bragged on Tuesday that the Trump administration has now "moved 5 million people off food stamps," an outcome that she hailed as a significant victory even amid mounting reports of families with children struggling to afford groceries after losing federal assistance.
"For those of us that love work and celebrate work and want people to work and not be on food stamps, it’s a pretty big win," Rollins said during an event in Minnesota, referring to the massive reduction in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) enrollment since passage of the 2025 Republican budget law, which enacted the largest food aid cuts in US history and expanded SNAP work requirements.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), a liberal think tank, has estimated that more than 4.5 million people have lost SNAP benefits since President Donald Trump signed the GOP budget package into law last summer. That total includes at least 1.5 million children.
Rollins: "For those who love work and celebrate work and want people to work and not be on food stamps, it's a pretty big win when we've moved 5 million people off food stamps, y'all." pic.twitter.com/kUrqVrvahI
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 4, 2026
Contrary to Rollins' claim that people are moving off SNAP because they found strong employment, CBPP noted in a recent analysis that "unemployment nationwide has been flat at about 4 percent since July 2025."
"At best, it’s down in 13 states and the District of Columbia by less than 1 percentage point," the think tank observed. "It’s very unlikely that reduced need is driving the decline in SNAP participation."
Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst at CBPP, responded to Rollins' latest boast about large-scale loss of SNAP benefits by pointing to a July New York Times story featuring Dee McDonald, a cancer survivor and caregiver of three kids who recently lost federal assistance.
"The immense hardship these families are now facing is not, in fact, 'a pretty big win,'" Bergh wrote on social media.
As two Republican senators continue to stand with Democrats against the nomination of Todd Blanche as US attorney general over the so-called "Anti-Weaponization Fund," President Donald Trump made clear on Saturday that he's willing to keep his former personal lawyer in the post in an acting capacity while pushing for legislation to allow the widely condemned payout scheme.
Due to the unexpected death of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Republicans need full support on the Senate Judiciary Committee to advance Blanche, but GOP Sens. Thom Tillis (NC) and John Cornyn (Texas) have been blocking him over the $1.776 billion fund—which, in addition to an immunity deal, was part of the settlement for the Trump family's lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. A panel vote is rescheduled for Tuesday, but so far there's no deal.
Since US District Judge Kathleen Williams—appointed in the Southern District of Florida by former President Barack Obama—ruled against the fund last month, Blanche has indicated the US Department of Justice (DOJ) will no longer pursue the creation of the slush fund, and Trump even referred to it as "dead" on Friday. However, the Trump family also appealed to the 11th Circuit on Friday.
Responding to the appeal on Friday, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said that "when I offered my amendment to kill this slush fund, Republicans said we should accept Trump's word that it was dead. We knew they were wrong. This is why. Even in the middle of an illegal war, with prices rising, Trump wants to send your tax dollars to criminals and save his sweetheart tax deal."
The president on Friday also ranted about Cornyn—who lost a May primary to a Trump-backed opponent—on his Truth Social platform, writing that "John Cornyn never had a problem with the so called 'Fund,' which will not benefit me, but rather the great American Patriots who were hunted down like dogs and whose lives were unfairly and illegally destroyed by the Crooked Joe Biden Administration, until after I decided to Endorse and Support his Republican Primary opponent in Texas, who easily won the Nomination for the United States Senate."
Trump did not mention the timeline: The DOJ announced the settlement, including the slush fund, on May 18, and the president endorsed Cornyn's scandal-plagued primary challenger, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, on May 19.
Instead, the president focused on the potential recipients of payouts—including January 6, 2021 insurrectionists previously pardoned by him—claiming that "perhaps there has never been a group of people treated so badly in our Nation’s history. They are suffering still, many ruined, and I felt that they should be given compensation for what has been done to them. I gave up any payments for myself, which would have been substantial, including for the illegal and unprecedented raid on Mar-a-Lago, my home in Florida, even though many legal experts, and others, including John Cornyn, said it was a shocking and disgusting display of 'weaponization' against me."
"Such an event has never happened before, and hopefully will never happen again!" Trump continued. "I will always feel that these victims of government abuse should be paid back for what they were forced to endure, their lives have been ruined! Millions of people agree with me, as was proven in my landslide Presidential win, where this was a major subject of debate, and so did John Cornyn, until he lost his Election to an opponent that I Endorsed. Todd Blanche, a good man, should be immediately approved as US Attorney General."
Tillis responded on the platform X, writing Friday that "the president made it clear today that the so-called Anti Weaponization Fund is still alive, which is exactly why we are attempting to formally end it. While I never disagreed that the Biden administration pursued a number of vindictive prosecutions related to January 6, the criminals who assaulted police officers and defiled our nation's Capitol are not 'great American patriots' who are 'victims of government abuse.' Anyone who attacked law enforcement should still be in prison, not getting a check from the federal government."
"Sen. Cornyn and I have been working with acting AG Todd Blanche to end the Anti-Weaponization Fund, and he has been forthright, thoughtful, and patient," added Tillis, who is retiring after this term. "It's a shame his confirmation has hit a snag only because an incompetent personal adviser to the president refuses to amend the bogus settlement. I will continue working in good faith to put an end [to] this legal and political albatross and prevent any potential misallocation of taxpayer dollars."
Trump then took aim at both of them on Saturday, saying that "if Senators Cornyn and Tillis, both upset because I wouldn’t Endorse them (they lost, and quit, respectively!), aren't going to approve Todd Blanche, one of the most respected professionals, according to everybody, in the Country, to be the United States Attorney General, then I will keep Todd as Acting AG, and push hard to get the Anti-Weaponization Bill, which takes care of those who have been so badly treated by the Crooked Joe Biden (and Obuma!) Administration (I get nothing, although I was treated horribly!), PASSED. Todd Blanche was a voice of reason! It will immediately be back on the table, and I will get it done."
Tillis again replied on X: "Despite comments as late as yesterday that the fund is dead, President Trump clearly intends to resurrect the payout pot for punks either by inappropriately establishing another bogus fund or pushing Congress to vote for a bill that the majority of Republicans in the Senate would be against. It's unfortunate that Todd Blanche, who I consider qualified for the job, will not be confirmed because of this reversal. Hopefully, we can resolve this by Tuesday."
Meanwhile, many elected Democrats and other critics, from advocacy group leaders to survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, don't agree Blanche is qualified, and want his nomination withdrawn. For example, after the committee vote was postponed, MoveOn Political Action chief communications officer Joel Payne said Thursday that "Todd Blanche's nomination is stalled because his record is corrupt and indefensible."
"He has spent his career proving that there is no legal principle he will not bend and no institution he will not compromise in service of Donald Trump," Payne continued. "His blind loyalty, willingness to use the justice system to protect the president, and role in a sweetheart settlement benefiting Trump make him completely unfit to serve as attorney general."
"Senate Republicans may be trying to put some distance between themselves and this toxic nomination, but moving the vote does not change the facts," he added. "Blanche is still Trump's fixer, still disqualified, and still a threat to the rule of law. The Senate should stop dragging this out and kill the nomination."
Outrage over another apparent US war crime against Iranian civilians continued to grow over the weekend following New York Times reporting that the United States appears to have dropped a 2,000-pound bomb on a family home in a densely populated neighborhood of Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz.
The newspaper spoke with weapons experts who analyzed photos, videos, and satellite imagery of the strike—which, according to Iranian officials, killed taxi driver Qeysar Jafari, his wife Zahra Jafari, and their 2-year-old son Sina, and hospitalized their two surviving children, Mohammad Reza and Mehdi.
While a spokesperson for US Central Command told the Times it is "looking into" reports that the family members were killed in the strike overnight Thursday and "the US military never targets civilians," Stanford University law professor Tom Dannenbaum outlined the United States' legal obligations.
"The attacking force must take all feasible precautions to minimize civilian harm, including in its selection of munitions, times of attack and, whenever circumstances allow, by issuing effective advance warnings," he said. Using a Mark-84 bomb in a crowded area "is very difficult to reconcile with" that.
Some readers and critics of the war highlighted Dannenbaum's comments while sharing the report on social media.
Former longtime Human Rights Watch leader Kenneth Roth similarly said: "Why did the US military drop a huge 2,000-pound bomb in a densely populated residential area in Iran? It is very hard to reconcile that use with the legal requirement to avoid disproportionate harm to civilians."
Journalist Rania Khalek denounced the attack as "barbaric savagery by soulless ghouls," while Nader Hashemi, director of the Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, condemned it "a clear WAR CRIME."
Responding to Hashemi, Barbara Slavin, a George Washington University lecturer and Stimson Center distinguished fellow, said that "we are becoming more like Israel every day."
Trita Parsi, co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, explained that "for years, Israel was using [2,000-pound] American bombs to kill Gazan refugees in tents. Both the Biden and Trump administrations permitted it. A precedent was set. Now it appears the US is doing the same in Iran."
"A [2,000-pound] bomb was dropped on a family house in Qeshm, killing a taxi driver (the father), the mother, and a 2-year-old, according to The New York Times," he continued. "Yes, a taxi driver. And a toddler. And his mother. "The Times found no indication of a military site near the family's home or any reports of military casualties from the strike."
Cory Archibald, co-founder of Track AIPAC, which documents spending by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and related groups, stressed to people in the US, "That's what our government spends money on instead of giving you healthcare."
Leftist US political commentator Kyle Kulinski was among those demanding consequences for whoever carried out the deadly attack, declaring: "Pure terrorism. These people need to be in prison for life."
Saikat Chakrabarti, a Democrat who recently ran for Congress in California, agreed, saying that "everyone in the chain of command who authorized this should be charged with murder."
Since President Donald Trump and Israel began bombing Iran in late February, other apparent war crimes have included attacks on civilian infrastructure such as a water desalination plant, strikes that forced children to evacuate a hospital, and the destruction of a school in Minab that killed over 100 people.
Trump claimed late Saturday that he halted planned strikes on Iran due to progress in negotiations to end the illegal conflict. Appearing on CNN after the announcement, Parsi said that "I don't believe there was an imminent attack. We've gone through this several times, in which Trump issues these threats, and then he backs off because the other side calls his bluff."
The US is still the only developed country that doesn't require any paid vacation time by law.
Though they may work in the land of the free, Americans are getting a lot less free time than their counterparts around the world.
The US is the only developed nation that doesn't require employers to grant workers any paid vacation time. And according to a report out Wednesday, the average American is receiving less time off than what many of their peers consider the bare minimum.
Twenty-five countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) require employers to grant at least 20 days of paid time off to their workers.
Workers in the UK are guaranteed at least 28 days of lounging each year by law, while those in Sweden, France, Denmark, and Austria get a minimum of 25 days off.
Americans, meanwhile, are receiving just 10 vacation days per year on average, according to the analysis, titled "No Vacation Nation," by John Schmitt, a fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research.
That is the bare minimum for countries ranking at the bottom of the OECD list, Japan and Canada, which each require full-time workers to get at least 10 days off.
And the Americans getting time off at all are the lucky ones. Around 43% of workers in the bottom quarter of earners don't get any paid vacation time, while just 38% of part-time workers do.
“Every other comparable country in the world guarantees workers a decent minimum amount of paid vacation. In the United States, we don’t require employers to give any,” Schmitt said. “As a result, almost a quarter of our workforce has nothing at all, and the average for those workers who do have paid vacation is near the bottom of the minimum required by law in the rest of the world’s rich countries.”
Vacation days are just one of many areas where American workers are guaranteed less than their counterparts in other wealthy nations. The US is also the only OECD country with no national requirement for paid maternity leave or sick leave.
Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus have pushed for paid time off to be included in its "New Affordability Agenda," a package of bills focused on labor and the cost of living that they hope will pass if Democrats retake Congress this November.
They've included a bill introduced last year by Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) which requires two weeks of paid vacation for full-time workers.
The US military's partnership with Ecuador has already been associated with unexplained drone strikes and torture of people wrongfully accused of drug trafficking.
The US and Ecuadorian joint attacks that occurred in March at a rural dairy farm where officials insisted drug traffickers were operating "could replicate over the rest of 2026" across Latin America, said one expert after the Pentagon announced that its boat bombing campaign would be expanded to "defeat all threats" within countries across the region.
US Southern Command, which has overseen the boat bombings—up to now known as Operation Southern Spear—and the killings of at least 221 people, announced Tuesday that the operation will now be known as Joint Task Force Western Hemisphere, with the US military "taking the fight to the enemy."
The "fight" the military referred to is largely against drug cartels operating in Latin America, with which President Donald Trump has claimed the US is in an "armed conflict."
But the US Congress has not authorized the attacks the US military has carried out as it's claimed to be fighting "narco-terrorists," including at least 66 boat bombings in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean—an operation that has cost $820 million so far.
Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have introduced war powers resolutions aimed at stopping the Trump administration from continuing the boat bombings, but the efforts have failed, even as families have filed legal complaints alleging that their loved ones were wrongfully killed in the attacks.
The Drug Enforcement Agency's own data recently showed that the bombing of boats suspected of carrying drugs has done little-to-nothing to stop illegal substances from entering the US, while international law experts have emphasized that even if the US has been accurately targeting drug traffickers, the killings could constitute war crimes or mass murder.
Now, releasing a promotional video that resembled an action movie trailer, US Southern Command on Tuesday pledged to "synchronize US military operations with allies and partners to counter threats, strengthen regional security, and respond rapidly to crises across the Western Hemisphere."
JTF-WHEM is taking the fight to the enemy.
“Along with our Americas Counter Cartel Coalition partners, we will locate, close with, and destroy the enemies that threaten our hemisphere.” — #SOUTHCOM Commander Gen. Francis L. Donovan@DeptofWar @SecWar @The24MEU @USMC @USNavy… pic.twitter.com/k60WWBWOcf
— U.S. Southern Command (@Southcom) August 4, 2026
"Along with our America's Counter Cartel Coalition partners, we will locate, close with, and destroy the enemies that threaten our hemisphere," said Commander Francis Donovan of US Southern Command.
Donovan noted that 18 countries have backed the United States' stated mission of halting drug trafficking out of Latin America.
As Adam Isacson, the director for defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America, pointed out, leaders in Colombia and Peru have both expressed interest in hosting joint military operations with the US on their own soil.
President-elect Abelardo de la Espriella of Colombia has said he plans to join Trump's Shield of the Americas alliance, a group right-wing government across the hemisphere that have pledged to join in the fight against drug cartels—but which the civil society group Justice for Colombia warned may ultimately "impose US strategic interests on the region and could target left-wing activists and other opponents."
"Colombian communities have long opposed purely military solutions to the existence of armed groups," said the group last month. "Many welcomed peace talks under the [President Gustavo] Petro government, while highlighting that more needed to be done to protect social activists and deal with root causes of conflict. Many now fear that they will be targeted in a renewed emphasis on conflict."
Newly inaugurated Peruvian President Keiko Fujimori has also signaled a willingness to join the alliance after having campaigned on fighting crime rates in the South American country.
The Trump administration has also pushed Guatemalan and Honduran leaders to approve joint strikes against suspected drug gangs inside their borders.
With Joint Task Force dWestern Hemisphere, said New York Times reporter Maria Abi-Habib, the Pentagon is "standing up a task force that will see Latin American countries accept joint US strikes inside their borders. It moves the boat strikes from international waters to sovereign inland territories across the region."
US Southern Command spoke approvingly of a raid Guatemala conducted on an alleged drug lab earlier this year, saying in a social media post that the operation showed a "commitment to take the fight to narco-terrorists in their country."
Two people familiar with the push in Guatemala told the Times that the administration was advocating for joint strikes in the country to ultimately pressure Mexico, where President Claudia Sheinbaum has rejected similar requests.
Ecuador's partnership with Trump has brought allegations of torture, arbitrary detention, and unexplained drone strikes on at least three Ecuadorian fishing boats. In June, the prosecutor investigating the boat attacks was killed in an apparent assassination.
"Ecuador has been the proving ground" for Trump's so-called "Donroe Doctrine," said Drop Site News reporter Camila Lourdes Galarza, adding that the "media silence" regarding the US military's expansion in the region "has severely compromised all analysis."
"Anti-abortion zealots like Todd Blanche would not stop until they could restrict our bodily autonomy to the furthest degree," said one critic.
Reproductive rights groups are sounding the alarm about a recent pledge made by acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche to make every state adhere to anti-abortion laws passed in red states.
In a phone call last week hosted by the White House Faith Office, Blanche told a religious group that he would work would work to ensure the US Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned the constitutional right to an abortion “becomes permanent in every single state.”
During the call, Blanche hinted that the Trump administration would place restrictions on the ability to mail drugs such as mifepristone to states that have outlawed abortion.
"If states have said, ‘We are going to protect the unborn and we’re going to protect every life from the moment of conception,’ we’re putting practices and policies in place so that other states and other organizations can’t attack that,” Blanche said. "They can’t do things like they’re doing with mailing in mail-order drugs."
In an analysis published Wednesday, journalist Jessica Valenti argued that Blanche's pledge would not result in a nationwide ban on abortions, but rather "stopping the shipping of abortion medication under the auspices of adhering to Dobbs."
"If we lost telemedicine abortion, there would be devastating national consequences," Valenti emphasized. "You could even argue—and I have!—that banning the shipping of abortion pills amounts to a backdoor national ban."
In a Tuesday social media post, Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) highlighted Blanche's call and warned that confirming him as AG permanently would be a green light to assault women's rights.
"Todd Blanche made clear in these secret calls with anti-choice activists that he wants to resurrect the Comstock Act—an antiquated anti-vice law from before women had the right to vote—to ban sending medication abortion in the mail," wrote Smith. "Republicans will likely do what they always do and confirm Blanche as attorney general despite all of this, and once again, women across America will pay the price."
Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All, accused Blanche of "making dangerous promises behind closed doors to weaponize the Justice Department to enact a national abortion ban."
"We must believe Blanche when he says he will come for our rights," Timmaraju added. "Republicans are using every lever of government to attack reproductive freedom, and voters will make their voices heard this November to take our Congress back from these extremists."
Nourbese Flint, president of All* Above All, called Blanche's promise "an open declaration of his intention to use the Justice Department to stop the delivery of abortion medication."
"The lie they told us in the aftermath of Dobbs was that it was about sending abortion law back to the states," Flint said, "but we have known all along that anti-abortion zealots like Todd Blanche would not stop until they could restrict our bodily autonomy to the furthest degree."
Rights groups warned that giving Secretary Pete Hegseth near-total control of what is released under the Freedom of Information Act "will naturally favor politicization and avoiding embarrassment over public transparency."
Press freedom organizations are urging Congress to reject a proposal that they warn could allow the Pentagon to withhold massive amounts of unclassified information from the public.
As part of its recent budget package, the Department of Defense submitted a proposal to Congress in late June that would create a new exception to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), allowing the defense secretary to bar certain "controlled unclassified information" (CUI) from public disclosure if the military determines that the national security risk outweighs the public interest.
CUI is a broad category of information that is not classified but that the government considers sensitive enough to be distributed only to specific people. But under current law, the government can only refuse to release information requested through FOIA if it meets certain exemptions, such as properly classified national security material, protected personal information, privileged internal communications, or records whose release could compromise law enforcement.
The new law would change this, allowing the defense secretary to declare almost any unclassified Pentagon record as both CUI and “national security information" to prevent it from being released. This could affect access to countless documents of significant public importance—from reports on investigations into military action, to internal records about the military's rules of engagement, to audit and oversight records.
"The CUI standard is already so broad that were it to be incorporated as a FOIA exemption for the Defense Department, massive amounts of important information would be yanked from the public," wrote Adam A. Marshall, the director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. "That would be disastrous, especially when the Defense Department is at the forefront of so many stories the public needs to know about, from the United States’ war with Iran to the targeted destruction of boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific."
Clayton Weimers, the executive director of Reporters Without Borders North America, argued that the proposed rule change was unnecessary.
"The Pentagon already has extensive authority to protect genuine national security secrets. What it is asking Congress for now is something entirely different: the power to hide unclassified information from the public," he said. "At a time when the Department of Defense controls nearly one trillion dollars in taxpayer funding and makes decisions that can shape war and peace, the public deserves more transparency, not more secrecy."
Under Secretary Pete Hegseth, the Pentagon has attempted to dramatically clamp down on the flow of public information. It has held far fewer press briefings than previous administrations, issued requirements that reporters pledge not to release "unauthorized" information, and booted credentialed press from Pentagon offices in favor of administration-friendly outlets and influencers.
Secrecy has grown amid President Donald Trump's war against Iran, with the Pentagon withholding information about hundreds of US military injuries from the public and altering publicly available death counts to exclude the names of four US personnel recently slain in the region.
Last week, a coalition of more than 40 press freedom, civil rights, and watchdog organizations, led by Reporters Without Borders, sent a letter to members of the House Oversight Committee, arguing that giving the defense secretary final say over what information is made public would be especially dangerous and "will naturally favor politicization and avoiding embarrassment over public transparency."
Under the Trump administration, the Pentagon has already been much less willing to comply with FOIA requests than under the Biden administration. Pentagon data show that it took more than 30% longer, on average, to respond to complex FOIA requests in 2025 than in 2024, and that it granted only 17% of FOIA requests in full.
"The Pentagon is already too secretive, and the last thing it needs is a rubber stamp to hide unclassified records under the guise of national security," said Lauren Harper, the Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. “We don’t need the Pentagon hiding more information from FOIA. We need it to actually respond to public records requests, we need it to stop harassing journalists for doing their job, and we need it to be transparent and accountable to the public, service members, and their families.”
"A plan you will not show the voters before they vote is not reassurance. It is a warning and revealing of Republican priorities.”
In early June, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said the GOP has a "plan" to reform Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—but would not release the details until "next year," after the 2026 midterms.
But a group of Senate Democrats argued in a letter to Republican leaders on Wednesday that "Americans deserve to have full transparency into Republican plans to attack earned benefits like Social Security." The Democrats—led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Ron Wyden of Oregon, and Chuck Schumer of New York—wrote that "it is time for Republicans to put their money where their mouth is" and "release the plan referenced by Speaker Johnson."
The letter was released as the Senate Finance Committee convened a hearing titled "Exploring Process Approaches for Addressing Social Security Solvency," where Wyden and other Democrats blasted proposals to raise the retirement age and cut Social Security benefits through unaccountable commissions.
"Every time Republicans get their hands on these sorts of ideas for Social Security, life gets worse for older people that count on it to get by," said Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. "All we need to do is require billionaires, who have seen their wealth skyrocket to over $9 trillion this year while working people struggle with their grocery bills, to pay their fair share."
According to Social Security's Board of Trustees, the New Deal program's Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund will be unable to pay out full benefits by the end of 2032. Members of the Senate Democratic caucus, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), have introduced legislation that would extend Social Security's ability to pay full benefits for the next 75 years—but neither bill has garnered Republican support.
"We've got a plan. We're not ashamed of our plan," Whitehouse said during Wednesday's hearing. "You actually make people who are making huge amounts of income pay the same Social Security taxes as everybody else, all the way up the rest of their income."
"It's just a question of political will," the senator continued, "and of some people not wanting to own what they want to do to Social Security."
In a radio interview earlier this year, Johnson (R-La) declared that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid must be "adjusted and fixed," but did not offer any specific details or policy prescriptions.
"We have a plan to do that," Johnson said, "next year."
House Republicans have previously floated changes such as raising the full Social Security retirement age, which would cut benefits across the board.
In their Wednesday letter to Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), Senate Democrats wrote that "it is critical that the American people understand where Republicans truly stand regarding our preeminent economic security program."
"For decades, Republicans have attacked and undercut Social Security, aiming to cut benefits or privatize the program," the Democratic lawmakers wrote. "A plan you will not show the voters before they vote is not reassurance. It is a warning and revealing of Republican priorities.”
One group said the people of Detroit "will soon have a representative who prioritizes the people of the district over Israel’s genocide."
Michigan state Rep. Donavan McKinney has defeated incumbent Congressman Shri Thanedar in Tuesday's 13th Congressional District Democratic primary, delivering yet another rebuke to corporate-backed Democrats and their support for Israel as it continues its US-backed genocidal assault on Gaza.
The Associated Press called the race for McKinney (D-11) just before 10:00 am local time on Wednesday, with preliminary results showing the 34-year-old Detroit sonative received 51.9% of the vote, while Thanedar—whose close ties to corporate interests made him a frequent target of progressive criticism—received 48.1%, with 99% of all votes tallied.
McKinney—a 34-year-old organizer backed by social democrats including US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.)—ran a campaign centered on working-class issues like affordable housing, healthcare, labor rights, and environmental justice.
He also sharply criticized US support for Israel's war in Gaza—which a United Nations Commission of Inquiry last year called a genocide—joining a growing number of progressive candidates calling for an end to the billions of dollars in annual armed aid the US provides Israel and a permanent ceasefire. His stance won him widespread support in a district with a significant and growing Arab American and Muslim population.
Congratulations to @donavanmckinney.bsky.social Mi-13 will soon have a representative who prioritizes the people of the district over Israel's genocide.Donavan is a real fighter who doesn't just talk about change, he delivers it!Let’s go!!!
[image or embed]
— PAL PAC (@votepalpac.bsky.social) August 5, 2026 at 7:08 AM
“Detroit, I am honored beyond measure to be your Democratic nominee to represent the Mighty 13th in Congress," McKinney said in a statement published by Michigan Advance. "I am so proud that our community is sending me to Congress to fight for a better future—because that means our movement has shown them a fighter is what they truly deserve in Washington."
“Today, we showed why being always with the people is more than a slogan—it’s a roadmap for the Democratic Party on how to move forward to defeat the fascism and divisiveness harming our country, and to deliver the leadership the Mighty 13th deserves," he added. "Taking back our seat and taking back our power has always been at the core of our movement, and I’m so excited for all that our community will accomplish together.”
Democratic Socialists of America congratulated McKinney—a DSA member—in a Bluesky post touting his progressive platform.
Congratulations to Donavan McKinney on winning his congressional primary, unseating a millionaire AIPAC stooge! Donavan is a former union member fighting to get money out of politics, a green new deal, and union jobs. @donavanmckinney.bsky.social @detroitdsa.bsky.social
[image or embed]
— Democratic Socialists of America (@demsocialists.bsky.social) August 5, 2026 at 7:33 AM
Indivisible, which organizes against what it calls a "fascistic clown show of a regime"—the Trump administration—hailed McKinney's victory as "a huge win for working families."
"In addition to overcoming millions in outside spending, Donavan defeated a multimillionaire incumbent who enriched himself in office and voted to enrich [President Donald Trump]," the group added. "This is how we build a better Democratic Party!"
McKinney's victory came amid a wave of wins for progressives in Michigan and across the country.
Michigan voters also nominated progressive Abdul El-Sayed for the US Senate after he narrowly defeated Congresswoman Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) despite tens of millions of dollars in outside spending, much of it from pro-Israel groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and its United Democracy Project.
Meanwhile, Sunrise Movement co-founder Will Lawrence won the Democratic nomination in Michigan's battleground 7th Congressional District, underscoring what supporters called the strength of climate-focused and working-class organizing.
Progressive candidates also notched victories in several Michigan state legislative contests backed by the DSA, Working Families Party, Our Revolution, and other left-leaning groups.
In metro Detroit, Chris Gilmer-Hill unseated incumbent state Rep. Helena Scott (D-8) after running on a platform centered on labor rights, housing affordability, and universal healthcare. In a closely watched state Senate primary, Abbas Alawieh—a co-founder of Michigan's Uncommitted movement, which emerged in protest of the Biden administration's support for Israel's annihilation of Gaza—handily won the Democratic nomination over state Rep. Erin Byrnes (D-15). Joanna Whaley, a former megachurch pastor, is set to become the first transgender member of the state Legislature after comfortably winning her race against opponents including former state Rep. Frank Liberati (D-13), who tried to disqualify Whaley because she did not run under her deadname.
Reacting to the wins, Our Revolution executive director Joseph Geevarghese said Wednesday that "Michigan voters rejected the idea that elections can simply be bought, and they rejected a politics that asks them to settle for the status quo."
Tuesday's victories in Michigan point to a Democratic electorate that is apparently becoming more willing to reject candidates aligned with corporate donors and AIPAC in favor of unapologetic working-class progressives. While establishment Democrats and outside groups continue to wield enormous financial power—and have scored victories of their own, including incumbent Rep. Wesley Bell's defeat of former Congresswoman Cori Bush in Missouri—Tuesday's wins added to mounting evidence that working-class, pro-Palestine candidates are reshaping the Democratic agenda from coast to coast, including in crucial battleground states.
"Ordinary people understand what's happening in this country. They know the economy is rigged against working families," Geevarghese said. "They know our campaign finance system allows billionaires and special interests to buy power. And they're tired of a political establishment that too often protects that broken system instead of confronting it."
The Michigan Democrat called his Republican opponent "a guy who spent 14 years in Congress with one goal: to figure out how to cash out the day he left," and promised to send him back to Florida in November.
After winning Michigan's Democratic primary contest for US Senate, Abdul El-Sayed wasted no time on Wednesday, challenging the Republican nominee, former Congressman Mike Rogers, to five debates before the November general election.
"Mike," El-Sayed said at a podium while speaking with reporters on Wednesday morning, "I know you're gonna say no 'cause you're a coward: Five debates, all right?"
"If you're willing to stand with me and have a conversation—you and I both know that you will wither in front of your own crimes. But Imma make sure Michiganders know about them," he continued. "By the time we're done, you are not gonna have safe quarter from people holding you accountable to what you've done for them here in Michigan. We will send you back to Florida where you belong."
Ripping Rogers as a "corporate sellout," El-Sayed said that he is "a guy who spent 14 years in Congress with one goal: to figure out how to cash out the day he left. And guess what he did: As soon as he left Congress, after having taken corporate check after corporate check after corporate check, to empower the corporations to pick your pockets, he went and he cashed out."
"Not in Michigan—no, winters are too cold for him," he added, eliciting chuckles from the crowd. "He's got thin skin, after all. He went to Florida. So, Mike, if you wanna be a Florida man, go be a Florida man."
Rogers‚ who was unopposed in Tuesday's GOP primary, worked for the Federal Bureau of Investigation before entering politics, first at the state level and then representing Michigan's 8th District in Congress from 2001-15. In comments to Fox News late Tuesday, the Republican cited his time fighting "terrorism" in the FBI and falsely claimed that El-Sayed believes "America deserved 9/11."
"This is really about the heart and soul of our country," Rogers said of the race just minutes after El-Sayed, a son of Egyptian immigrants, declared victory over Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens. "I have never seen someone so radical, so extreme, get nominated by a political party... The Democrat party is lost to this hardcore socialist attitude."
The Democratic Socialists of America did not endorse El-Sayed, but his victory is part of a wave of recent primary wins by progressive congressional candidates, from New York and Pennsylvania to Colorado. The trend continued in other closely watched Michigan races on Tuesday, with William Lawrence winning in the 7th Congressional District and Donavan McKinney in the 13th District.
Like other victorious progressives, El-Sayed ran on a platform prioritizing working-class people; a former public health official, he especially focused on the fight for Medicare for All. Bridge Michigan reported Wednesday that "El-Sayed has said he doesn't consider himself a democratic socialist and rejects the notion that his views are extreme in today’s political climate."
"In an era where our premiums are quickly pricing people out, I think being for Medicare for All is… the moderate position," El-Sayed previously told the outlet. In an era where President Donald Trump "is weaponizing" US immigration and Customs Enforcement "against the Constitution itself," he added, "I think abolishing ICE is a moderate position."
While key party leaders nationwide have often backed establishment candidates over progressives in recent primaries, including El-Sayed v. Stevens, Democrats in Michigan and across the country are already rallying behind the victor, with even the congresswoman he defeated showing her support on Wednesday.
"Mike Rogers represents everything people hate about politics: He sold Michiganders out to the corporate special interests cutting him checks, abandoned Michigan for a Florida mansion, and got rich advising the industries he regulated in Congress," Michigan Democratic Party spokesperson Joey Hannum said in a statement after the primary election.
"As Trump's approval rating plummets to record lows, Rogers is still pledging to rubber stamp his toxic agenda, mocking Michiganders' concerns about rising costs, and saying he would focus on 'shielding' the Trump administration and billionaires like Elon Musk from accountability, rather than stand up for working families," Hannum said. "Michigan Democrats will hold Rogers accountable for his corruption, expose his price-hiking agenda, and defeat him a second time this November."
"I'm all in for Abdul," said US Sen. Chris Murphy.
Democrats from across the ideological spectrum lined up behind Abdul El-Sayed on Wednesday after he clinched the party's nomination for a US Senate seat in Michigan.
Shortly after The Associated Press projected El-Sayed as the victor in the closely watched primary, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) released a joint statement supporting the newly minted nominee.
"Abdul El-Sayed has run an energetic campaign that inspired thousands of Michiganders across the state, with a clear focus on lowering costs and standing up for working families," they said. "Democrats are united by a common purpose: putting a check on [President] Donald Trump by defeating his Republican enablers and taking back the Senate."
Schumer and Gillibrand also took a shot at El-Sayed's Republican rival, Mike Rogers, whom they described as "a rubber stamp for Donald Trump, backing the same reckless agenda that has driven up costs for working families, imposed chaotic tariffs that have hurt Michigan's auto industry, and put special interests ahead of the people of Michigan."
Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), El-Sayed's top rival for the Democratic nomination, conceded the race on Wednesday morning and offered "my full support as we work to defeat Mike Rogers this November."
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who had endorsed Stevens, also threw her support behind El-Sayed and all other Michigan Democratic candidates.
"They’ve got my support as we fight like hell together to win in November," said Whitmer. "Together, let’s stop MAGA Republicans so we can get to work and deliver results for the people of Michigan."
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said he was "excited" to see El-Sayed win the primary.
"Voters will have a clear choice in Michigan now," said Murphy. "A corporate-owned Trump loyalist or a doctor who will stand up for the little guy and will hold Trump and the corporations to account. I'm all in for Abdul."
Beth Miller, political director at Jewish Voice for Peace Action, hailed El-Sayed's victory as a "political earthquake," given that it came after the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) spent an estimated $30 million trying to defeat him.
"Voters in one of the most consequential states for the 2028 Presidential race have just sent a clear message," said Miller. "They want candidates who will fight for working families at home while unapologetically speaking out for Palestinian freedom. This cycle, AIPAC is being relegated to the dustbin of history."
According to a Wednesday report from Semafor, Michigan Democrats have already begun pivoting toward the general election campaign by planning negative attacks on GOP rival Rogers as a tool of moneyed interests and labeling him "the biggest name in corruption."
During a Wednesday morning victory speech, El-Sayed accused Rogers of spending 14 years in Congress with the sole goal of "figuring out how to cash out the day he left."
El-Sayed: "Mike Rogers is a guy who wants to put a data center in your backyard so he can make himself feel a little more manly by making an AI video ... he's a guy who went back to Florida so he could lick every single boot Donald Trump owns to bet for his endorsement." pic.twitter.com/ZgvfaJ4PEL
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 5, 2026
"Mike Rogers is a guy who wants to put a data center in your backyard so he can make himself feel a little more manly by making an AI video," said El-Sayed. "Mike Rogers is a guy who will do anything Blue Cross Blue Shield wants him to do, including raise your rates... Mike Rogers is a guy who has never shied away from a corporation he could do a favor for."
Lawrence said his win showed that voters "are tired of Silicon Valley billionaires and DC insiders determining the future of our towns and our country."
Dr. Abdul El-Sayed was not the only Michigan progressive to take down a well-funded establishment opponent in a Democratic primary on Tuesday night.
In central Michigan’s 7th Congressional District, Democratic voters picked William Lawrence, a co-founder of the youth-led Sunrise Movement climate activist group, to represent them over two centrist candidates—retired Navy SEAL Matt Maasdam and former ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink—as the party seeks to flip one of the nation’s most vulnerable GOP-controlled seats in November.
Many of the same obstacles El-Sayed faced en route to his party's Senate nomination were also faced by Lawrence, who triumphed over a split opposition with nearly 44% of the vote on Tuesday.
He faced over $4.5 million in outside spending aimed at defeating him and boosting his opponents, according to Federal Election Commission filings, including over $1 million from a pass-through group for Democratic Majority for Israel.
While rejecting corporate PAC money, Lawrence championed Medicare for All, legislation to curb money in politics, and an end to arms sales to Israel.
But he also distinguished himself by harnessing voters’ growing fear and frustration with the expansion of artificial intelligence data centers, framing them as an imposition by unaccountable “tech billionaires” without regard for the public’s concerns about rising energy prices, diminishing water supplies, and pollution.
According to Politico’s E&E News, 12 data centers are already operating or have been proposed in Michigan’s 7th District alone. In contrast with his opponents, Lawrence took the clearest position on the issue, calling for a 12-month federal moratorium on new data-center construction and joining local opposition movements as proposed sites sprang up across his district.
“Tonight the people of Michigan’s 7th District sent a clear message: They are tired of Silicon Valley billionaires and DC insiders determining the future of our towns and our country,” Lawrence said in a statement following his victory. “They want an unbought representative who isn’t afraid to stand up to leaders of both parties and fight for working people.”
Lawrence will seek to knock off first-term Republican Rep. Tom Barrett in November's general election, whom the Cook Political Report describes as one of the most vulnerable GOP incumbents as Democrats seek to flip the House.
While Democratic politicians have been much more vocal opponents of data centers, stopping the expansion of the facilities has proven to be a bipartisan issue among the electorate, including in Michigan.
In an April poll sponsored by the Detroit Regional Chamber, 55% of likely general election voters said they'd oppose a data center within 25 miles of their home, while just 33% said they'd be open to it. While nearly two-thirds of Democrats expressed opposition, so did more than half of Republicans.
It's likely that fierce opposition to data centers will remain central to Lawrence's broader message about fighting a cost-of-living crisis increasingly tied to an unpopular President Donald Trump.
“I think anyone who has concerns should come out and knock on doors,” Lawrence recently told The New York Times when asked about his ability to garner support from swing voters. “What they’ll hear is people are furious about data centers. Trump voters are getting off the Trump train because of Iran. Nobody could afford the essentials. They’re sick of corporate-funded politicians. That’s why we’ve built the momentum.”
Like El-Sayed’s battle with Republican former Rep. Mike Rogers, Lawrence’s bid to oust Barrett, a MAGA hardliner with a deep stable of wealthy backers, will prove yet another front in the ongoing war between the insurgent left wing of the Democratic Party and its establishment over whether tacking to the center is necessary to win competitive races against Republicans.
Lawrence's win is also a victory for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who campaigned with him, El-Sayed, and the progressive Michigan state Rep. Donovan McKinney, who ousted incumbent US Rep. Shri Thanedar on Tuesday in the 13th Congressional district in Detroit.
Lawrence, whose campaign knocked on over 100,000 doors across the district during the primary, said his victory on Tuesday night showed that "only organized people can beat organized money."
Voters also rejected an amendment that would have gradually eliminated the state’s income tax in what one Democratic mayor said would benefit the wealthy "while raising costs on hardworking families."
The Democratic mayor of Kansas City, Missouri was among those celebrating what he called the "TOTAL repudiation by Missouri voter of a core agenda of state GOP leadership" on Tuesday night after the state voted by a 60-point margin against Amendment 4, a measure backed by the Republican governor which would have weakened voters' ability to pass citizen-sponsored ballot initiatives.
"We took over control of the state of Missouri tonight, repudiating absolutely atrocious ideas," Mayor Quinton Lucas said in a video message addressing voters as election results came in. "Against millions of dollars, lots of special interests, Missouri voters are trouncing Amendment 4, which was going to take away our initiative petition rights, eliminate our ability to make sure we can get things done."
The Republican supermajority in the state Legislature and Gov. Mike Kehoe supported Amendment 4, which was spurred by the passage of a ballot initiative in 2024 that had added the right to abortion care to the Missouri Constitution.
The addition of the amendment to the constitution would have required a majority vote in each of the state's eight congressional districts in order to pass any future citizen-sponsored amendments, instead of a simply majority of voters across the state.
With more than 95% of votes counted on Wednesday morning, 80.3% of voters had rejected Amendment 4, while 19.7% had supported it.
The amendment would have created the highest threshold in the country for passing ballot initiatives like others that Missourians have passed in recent years, including ones that have legalized marijuana, raised the minimum wage, and expanding Medicaid coverage.
Opponents warned that under Amendment 4, an initiative could fail to pass even with as many as 95% of voters across the state supporting it.
The St. Louis American reported that the election result could signal voters' coming rejection of Amendment 3 in November, which would ban abortion in Missouri in most cases.
The state GOP suffered a similar defeat for Amendment 5, which would have gradually eliminated the state's income tax and replaced it with expanded sales and use taxes. Opponents warned the new tax scheme would have cost working families and lower-income Missourians more, with the average resident paying $500 more in taxes annually, according to the nonpartisan Missouri Budget Project—as high-income residents would have been required to contribute less to public spending.
“Tonight’s rejection of Amendment 5 is not only an immense failure for statewide leadership, but also a sign to out-of-state billionaire special interests that Missourians and most Americans have no interest in voodoo tax schemes that would spare civic responsibility for a few elites while raising costs on hardworking families in our state and our country,” Lucas said Tuesday night.
Mark Jones of the Missouri National Education Association—part of a broad coalition that opposed the amendment—told the Missouri Independent that "fundamentally, Missourians rejected the idea that they should pay for tax breaks for billionaires and then not be able to change to correct the legislature, not only on this issue but forever."
The Independent reported that Missouri Promise political action committee (PAC), which did not report any contributions from individual donors, raised $17.2 million in favor of Amendment 5. Opponents of Amendment 5 were outspent 4-to-1 on broadcast ads.
Another PAC, Protect Election Integrity, raised $132,100 and spent $28,653 through July 23 in support of Amendment 4. Freedom Principle Missouri/Missouri First PAC, also reported spending $45,551 in support of the measure.
State House Minority Leader Ashley Aune (D-14) said Missouri voters had "made clear they won’t let Republicans rewrite the rules to protect their own power and line the pockets of the ultrawealthy."
Referring to the abortion rights amendment that will be up for a vote in the general election, Aune added, "In November, voters have the chance to send another powerful message to Jefferson City Republicans: If you mess with Missourians’ rights, you will pay the political price.”