SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
One columnist said Gov. GregAbbott's defiance was the "greatest threat to federal authority since the South's 'massive resistance' in the 1950s and '60s" to the high court ruling that mandated school integration.
Twenty-five Republican governors have lent their support to GOP Gov. Greg Abbott as he doubles down on his defiance of a U.S. Supreme Court order to allow the federal government to remove the razor wire that the state had put up along a stretch of the United States-Mexico border with Mexico at Eagle Pass.
Abbott first posted on social media on Tuesday that the Texas National Guard would "continue to hold the line" at Eagle Pass. Then, in a statement released Wednesday, Abbott claimed that the Biden administration had "broken the compact" between the states and federal government by, in Abbott's view, failing to enforce immigration laws. He has won the support of at least 25 governors for declaring immigration an "invasion" and invoking "Texas' constitutional authority to defend and protect itself."
In a column published in The Philadelphia Inquirer on Thursday, Will Bunch observed that some online commenters had likened the potential standoff at Eagle Pass to the one at Fort Sumter, North Carolina, that triggered the Civil War. However, he thought another historical comparison had merit.
"Abbott's reckless, cruelty-is-the-point policies and his defiant stand are also posing the greatest threat to federal authority since the South's 'massive resistance' in the 1950s and '60s to the Supreme Court's landmark Brown v. Board of Ed ruling that mandated school integration," Bunch wrote.
"If Biden is the one who backs down at Eagle Pass, then—at the risk of paraphrasing Trump—we won't have a country anymore."
In his statement, Abbott referenced founding fathers James Madison and Alexander Hamilton and based his argument on the U.S. Constitution. He pointed to Article IV, Section 4, which promises federal protection against "invasion" and Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3, which acknowledges a state's "sovereign interest" in protecting its borders. He wrote:
The failure of the Biden administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4 has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this state the right of self-defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas' constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary. The Texas National Guard, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and other Texas personnel are acting on that authority, as well as state law, to secure the Texas border.
After Abbott posted his statement on social media, several GOP governors reshared it with messages of support.
"Virginia stands with Texas," wrote Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin on Wednesday, arguing that "t he Biden administration has turned every state into a border state."
This was a sentiment echoed by Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon on Thursday.
"Wyoming stands in solidarity with Gov. Abbott and the state of Texas in utilizing every tool and strategy to secure the border and protect American citizens," Gordon said. "We are all border states now."
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem wrote on Wednesday that Abbott was "exactly right to invoke Texas' constitutional authority to defend itself." In a later post published Thursday, she affirmed her support for Abbott and called the border a "war zone."
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote on Thursday that if President Joe Biden "won't defend us, states will have to defend themselves. Arkansas stands with Texas."
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds said that Iowa had sent National Guard members to the Texas border in the past.
"When the federal government fails, states step in," Reynolds said, echoing Abbott's argument.
Abbott also garnered support statements from West Virginia's Jim Justice, Tennessee's Bill Lee, South Carolina's Henry McMaster, Oklahoma's Kevin Stitt, and North Dakota's Doug Burgum, among others.
Reynolds and 24 other GOP governors—every Republican except Vermont's Phil Scott—also released a formal statement Thursday backing Abbott's constitutional argument.
"Because the Biden administration has abdicated its constitutional compact duties to the states, Texas has every legal justification to protect the sovereignty of our states and our nation," the governors wrote.
In his column, Bunch pointed out what is at stake in this disagreement, arguing that the comparison to Fort Sumter might be "a little unfair":
No one was actually killed during the bombardment of the federal fort off of Charleston by rebel forces of the newly formed Confederacy. But four migrants trying to reach U.S. soil at or near the disputed park in Eagle Pass, Texas, have drowned under circumstances that are arguably linked to the dispute between the militaristic approach of the Texas National Guard and the comparatively humane, locked-out agents of President Joe Biden's administration.
Bunch wrote that Biden could either back down or follow the example of former President Dwight Eisenhower, who federalized the Arkansas National Guard in order to end a standoff over the integration of Little Rock Central High School. He continued:
It won't be an easy decision. The possibility for a Fort Sumter-style gunpowder spark exists in this crazy, mixed-up nation. If Biden does successfully reassert control of Eagle Pass, the same brand of yahoo who screamed "states' rights" in the 1950s and '60s to justify Jim Crow racial apartheid will yell that the American dictator is Biden, not [former President Donald] Trump. And if the 45th president does return as 47th, he would cite Biden's justified actions as an excuse for wildly unconstitutional uses of the Insurrection Act to crush political dissent with tanks and occupy cities run by Democrats.
If Biden is the one who backs down at Eagle Pass, then—at the risk of paraphrasing Trump—we won't have a country anymore.
Democratic Texas Congressmen Greg Casar and Joaquin Castro have called for Biden to take federal control of the Texas National Guard.
"We can create an immigration system that is safe, orderly, and humane," Casar posted on social media. "It's Democrats' job to push back on razor wire, inhumane cages, and broken policies of the past."
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
Twenty-five Republican governors have lent their support to GOP Gov. Greg Abbott as he doubles down on his defiance of a U.S. Supreme Court order to allow the federal government to remove the razor wire that the state had put up along a stretch of the United States-Mexico border with Mexico at Eagle Pass.
Abbott first posted on social media on Tuesday that the Texas National Guard would "continue to hold the line" at Eagle Pass. Then, in a statement released Wednesday, Abbott claimed that the Biden administration had "broken the compact" between the states and federal government by, in Abbott's view, failing to enforce immigration laws. He has won the support of at least 25 governors for declaring immigration an "invasion" and invoking "Texas' constitutional authority to defend and protect itself."
In a column published in The Philadelphia Inquirer on Thursday, Will Bunch observed that some online commenters had likened the potential standoff at Eagle Pass to the one at Fort Sumter, North Carolina, that triggered the Civil War. However, he thought another historical comparison had merit.
"Abbott's reckless, cruelty-is-the-point policies and his defiant stand are also posing the greatest threat to federal authority since the South's 'massive resistance' in the 1950s and '60s to the Supreme Court's landmark Brown v. Board of Ed ruling that mandated school integration," Bunch wrote.
"If Biden is the one who backs down at Eagle Pass, then—at the risk of paraphrasing Trump—we won't have a country anymore."
In his statement, Abbott referenced founding fathers James Madison and Alexander Hamilton and based his argument on the U.S. Constitution. He pointed to Article IV, Section 4, which promises federal protection against "invasion" and Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3, which acknowledges a state's "sovereign interest" in protecting its borders. He wrote:
The failure of the Biden administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4 has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this state the right of self-defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas' constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary. The Texas National Guard, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and other Texas personnel are acting on that authority, as well as state law, to secure the Texas border.
After Abbott posted his statement on social media, several GOP governors reshared it with messages of support.
"Virginia stands with Texas," wrote Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin on Wednesday, arguing that "t he Biden administration has turned every state into a border state."
This was a sentiment echoed by Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon on Thursday.
"Wyoming stands in solidarity with Gov. Abbott and the state of Texas in utilizing every tool and strategy to secure the border and protect American citizens," Gordon said. "We are all border states now."
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem wrote on Wednesday that Abbott was "exactly right to invoke Texas' constitutional authority to defend itself." In a later post published Thursday, she affirmed her support for Abbott and called the border a "war zone."
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote on Thursday that if President Joe Biden "won't defend us, states will have to defend themselves. Arkansas stands with Texas."
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds said that Iowa had sent National Guard members to the Texas border in the past.
"When the federal government fails, states step in," Reynolds said, echoing Abbott's argument.
Abbott also garnered support statements from West Virginia's Jim Justice, Tennessee's Bill Lee, South Carolina's Henry McMaster, Oklahoma's Kevin Stitt, and North Dakota's Doug Burgum, among others.
Reynolds and 24 other GOP governors—every Republican except Vermont's Phil Scott—also released a formal statement Thursday backing Abbott's constitutional argument.
"Because the Biden administration has abdicated its constitutional compact duties to the states, Texas has every legal justification to protect the sovereignty of our states and our nation," the governors wrote.
In his column, Bunch pointed out what is at stake in this disagreement, arguing that the comparison to Fort Sumter might be "a little unfair":
No one was actually killed during the bombardment of the federal fort off of Charleston by rebel forces of the newly formed Confederacy. But four migrants trying to reach U.S. soil at or near the disputed park in Eagle Pass, Texas, have drowned under circumstances that are arguably linked to the dispute between the militaristic approach of the Texas National Guard and the comparatively humane, locked-out agents of President Joe Biden's administration.
Bunch wrote that Biden could either back down or follow the example of former President Dwight Eisenhower, who federalized the Arkansas National Guard in order to end a standoff over the integration of Little Rock Central High School. He continued:
It won't be an easy decision. The possibility for a Fort Sumter-style gunpowder spark exists in this crazy, mixed-up nation. If Biden does successfully reassert control of Eagle Pass, the same brand of yahoo who screamed "states' rights" in the 1950s and '60s to justify Jim Crow racial apartheid will yell that the American dictator is Biden, not [former President Donald] Trump. And if the 45th president does return as 47th, he would cite Biden's justified actions as an excuse for wildly unconstitutional uses of the Insurrection Act to crush political dissent with tanks and occupy cities run by Democrats.
If Biden is the one who backs down at Eagle Pass, then—at the risk of paraphrasing Trump—we won't have a country anymore.
Democratic Texas Congressmen Greg Casar and Joaquin Castro have called for Biden to take federal control of the Texas National Guard.
"We can create an immigration system that is safe, orderly, and humane," Casar posted on social media. "It's Democrats' job to push back on razor wire, inhumane cages, and broken policies of the past."
Twenty-five Republican governors have lent their support to GOP Gov. Greg Abbott as he doubles down on his defiance of a U.S. Supreme Court order to allow the federal government to remove the razor wire that the state had put up along a stretch of the United States-Mexico border with Mexico at Eagle Pass.
Abbott first posted on social media on Tuesday that the Texas National Guard would "continue to hold the line" at Eagle Pass. Then, in a statement released Wednesday, Abbott claimed that the Biden administration had "broken the compact" between the states and federal government by, in Abbott's view, failing to enforce immigration laws. He has won the support of at least 25 governors for declaring immigration an "invasion" and invoking "Texas' constitutional authority to defend and protect itself."
In a column published in The Philadelphia Inquirer on Thursday, Will Bunch observed that some online commenters had likened the potential standoff at Eagle Pass to the one at Fort Sumter, North Carolina, that triggered the Civil War. However, he thought another historical comparison had merit.
"Abbott's reckless, cruelty-is-the-point policies and his defiant stand are also posing the greatest threat to federal authority since the South's 'massive resistance' in the 1950s and '60s to the Supreme Court's landmark Brown v. Board of Ed ruling that mandated school integration," Bunch wrote.
"If Biden is the one who backs down at Eagle Pass, then—at the risk of paraphrasing Trump—we won't have a country anymore."
In his statement, Abbott referenced founding fathers James Madison and Alexander Hamilton and based his argument on the U.S. Constitution. He pointed to Article IV, Section 4, which promises federal protection against "invasion" and Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3, which acknowledges a state's "sovereign interest" in protecting its borders. He wrote:
The failure of the Biden administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4 has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this state the right of self-defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas' constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary. The Texas National Guard, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and other Texas personnel are acting on that authority, as well as state law, to secure the Texas border.
After Abbott posted his statement on social media, several GOP governors reshared it with messages of support.
"Virginia stands with Texas," wrote Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin on Wednesday, arguing that "t he Biden administration has turned every state into a border state."
This was a sentiment echoed by Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon on Thursday.
"Wyoming stands in solidarity with Gov. Abbott and the state of Texas in utilizing every tool and strategy to secure the border and protect American citizens," Gordon said. "We are all border states now."
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem wrote on Wednesday that Abbott was "exactly right to invoke Texas' constitutional authority to defend itself." In a later post published Thursday, she affirmed her support for Abbott and called the border a "war zone."
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote on Thursday that if President Joe Biden "won't defend us, states will have to defend themselves. Arkansas stands with Texas."
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds said that Iowa had sent National Guard members to the Texas border in the past.
"When the federal government fails, states step in," Reynolds said, echoing Abbott's argument.
Abbott also garnered support statements from West Virginia's Jim Justice, Tennessee's Bill Lee, South Carolina's Henry McMaster, Oklahoma's Kevin Stitt, and North Dakota's Doug Burgum, among others.
Reynolds and 24 other GOP governors—every Republican except Vermont's Phil Scott—also released a formal statement Thursday backing Abbott's constitutional argument.
"Because the Biden administration has abdicated its constitutional compact duties to the states, Texas has every legal justification to protect the sovereignty of our states and our nation," the governors wrote.
In his column, Bunch pointed out what is at stake in this disagreement, arguing that the comparison to Fort Sumter might be "a little unfair":
No one was actually killed during the bombardment of the federal fort off of Charleston by rebel forces of the newly formed Confederacy. But four migrants trying to reach U.S. soil at or near the disputed park in Eagle Pass, Texas, have drowned under circumstances that are arguably linked to the dispute between the militaristic approach of the Texas National Guard and the comparatively humane, locked-out agents of President Joe Biden's administration.
Bunch wrote that Biden could either back down or follow the example of former President Dwight Eisenhower, who federalized the Arkansas National Guard in order to end a standoff over the integration of Little Rock Central High School. He continued:
It won't be an easy decision. The possibility for a Fort Sumter-style gunpowder spark exists in this crazy, mixed-up nation. If Biden does successfully reassert control of Eagle Pass, the same brand of yahoo who screamed "states' rights" in the 1950s and '60s to justify Jim Crow racial apartheid will yell that the American dictator is Biden, not [former President Donald] Trump. And if the 45th president does return as 47th, he would cite Biden's justified actions as an excuse for wildly unconstitutional uses of the Insurrection Act to crush political dissent with tanks and occupy cities run by Democrats.
If Biden is the one who backs down at Eagle Pass, then—at the risk of paraphrasing Trump—we won't have a country anymore.
Democratic Texas Congressmen Greg Casar and Joaquin Castro have called for Biden to take federal control of the Texas National Guard.
"We can create an immigration system that is safe, orderly, and humane," Casar posted on social media. "It's Democrats' job to push back on razor wire, inhumane cages, and broken policies of the past."
The new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator joins "a team of snake oil salesmen and anti-science flunkies that have already shown disdain for the American people and their health," said one critic.
Echoing a party-line vote by the U.S. Senate Finance Committee last week, the chamber's Republicans on Thursday confirmed President Donald Trump's nominee to head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, former televison host Dr. Mehmet Oz.
Since Trump nominated Oz—who previously ran as a Republican for a U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania—a wide range of critics have argued that the celebrity cardiothoracic surgeon "is profoundly unqualified to lead any part of our healthcare system, let alone an agency as important as CMS," in the words of Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen.
After Thursday's 53-45 vote to confirm Oz, Weissman declared that "Republicans in the Senate continued to just be a rubber stamp for a dangerous agenda that threatens to turn back the clock on healthcare in America."
Weissman warned that "in addition to having significant conflicts of interest, Oz is now poised to help enact the Trump administration's dangerous agenda, which seeks to strip crucial healthcare services through Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act from hundreds of millions of Americans and to use that money to give tax breaks to billionaires."
"As he showed in his confirmation hearing, Oz will also seek to further privatize Medicare, increasing the risk that seniors will receive inferior care and further threatening the long-term health of the Medicare program. We already know that privatized Medicare costs taxpayers nearly $100 billion annually in excess costs," he continued, referring to Medicare Advantage plans.
CMS is part of the Department of Health and Human Services, now led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—who, like Oz, came under fire for his record of dubious claims during the confirmation process. Weissman said that "Dr. Oz is joining a team of snake oil salesmen and anti-science flunkies that have already shown disdain for the American people and their health. This is yet another dark day for healthcare in America under Trump."
In the middle of Trump's tariff disaster, the Senate is voting to confirm quack grifter Dr. Oz to lead the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services.
[image or embed]
— Jen Bendery (@jbendery.bsky.social) April 3, 2025 at 12:29 PM
Oz's confirmation came a day after Trump announced globally disruptive tariffs and Senate Republicans unveiled a budget plan that would give the wealthy trillions of dollars in tax cuts at the expense of federal food assistance and healthcare programs.
"While Dr. Oz would rather play coy, this is no hypothetical. Harmful cuts to Medicaid or Medicare are unavoidable in the Trump-Republican budget plan that prioritizes another giant tax break for the president's billionaire and corporate donors," Tony Carrk, executive director of the watchdog group Accountable.US, said ahead of the vote.
"None of Dr. Oz's 'miracle' cures that he's peddled over the years will help seniors when their fundamental health security is ripped away to make the rich richer," Carrk continued. "And while privatizing Medicare may enrich Dr. Oz's family and big insurance friends, it will cost taxpayers far more and leave millions of patients vulnerable to denials of care and higher out-of-pocket costs."
Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), was similarly critical, saying after the vote that "at a time when our population is growing older and the need for access to home care, nursing homes, affordable prescription drugs, and quality medical care has never been greater, Americans deserve better than a snake oil salesman leading the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services."
"Dr. Mehmet Oz has been shilling pseudoscience to line his own pockets. He can't be trusted to defend Medicare and Medicaid from billionaires who want to dismantle and privatize the foundation of affordable healthcare in this country," the union leader added. "AFSCME members—including nurses, home care and childcare providers, social workers and more—will be watching and fighting back against any effort to weaken Medicare and Medicaid. The 147 million seniors, children, Americans with disabilities, and low-income workers who rely on these programs for affordable access to healthcare deserve nothing less."
"While your kids are getting ready for school, kids in Gaza were once against just massacred in one," said one observer.
Israeli airstrikes targeted at least three more school shelters in the Gaza Strip on Thursday, killing dozens of Palestinians and wounding scores of others on a day when local officials said that more than 100 people were slain by occupation forces.
Gaza's Government Media Office said that at least 29 people—including 14 children and five women—were killed and over 100 others were wounded when at least four missiles struck the Dar al-Arqam school complex in the Tuffah neighborhood of eastern Gaza City, where hundreds of Palestinians were sheltering after being forcibly displaced from other parts of the embattled coastal enclave by Israel's 535-day assault.
Al Jazeera reported that "when terrified men, women, and children fled from one school building to another, the bombs followed them," and "when bystanders rushed to help, they too became victims."
Warning: Video contains graphic images of death.
A first responder from the Palestine Red Crescent Society—which is reeling from this week's discovery of a mass grave containing the bodies of eight of its members, some of whom had allegedly been bound and executed by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops—told Al Jazeera that "we were absolutely shocked by the scale of this massacre," whose victims were "mostly women and children."
An official from Gaza's Civil Defense, five of whose members were also found in the mass grave on Sunday, said: "What's going on here is a wake-up call to the entire world. This war and these massacres against women and children must stop immediately. The children are being killed in cold blood here in Gaza. Our teams cannot perform their duties properly.
Gaza Health Ministry spokesperson Zaher al-Wahidi said that the death toll was likely to rise, as some survivors were critically injured.
Dozens of victims were reportedly trapped beneath rubble of Thursday's airstrikes, but they could not cbe rescued due to a lack of equipment.
The IDF claimed that "key Hamas terrorists" were targeted in a strike on what it called a "command center." Israeli officials routinely claim—often with little or no evidence—that Palestinian civilians it kills are members of Hamas or other militant resistance groups.
Israel also bombed the nearby al-Sabah school, killing four people, as well as the Fahd School in Gaza City, with three reported fatalities.
Some of the deadliest bombings in the war have been carried out against refugees sheltering in schools, many of them run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)—at least 280 of whose staff members have been killed by Israeli forces during the war.
The United Nations Children's Fund has called Gaza "the world's most dangerous place to be a child." Last year, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres for the first time added Israel to his so-called "List of Shame" of countries that kill and injure children during wars and other armed conflicts. More than 17,500 Palestinian children have been killed in Gaza since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.
Thursday's school bombings sparked worldwide outrage and calls to hold Israel accountable.
"While your kids are getting ready for school, kids in Gaza were once against just massacred in one," Australian journalist, activist, and progressive politician Sophie McNeill wrote on social media. "We must sanction Israel now!"
There were other IDF massacres on Thursday, with local officials reporting that more than 100 people were killed in Israeli attacks since dawn. Al-Wahidi said more than 30 people were killed in strikes on homes in Gaza City's Shejaya neighborhood, citing records at al-Ahli Arab Baptist Hospital in Gaza.
Al Jazeera reported that al-Ahli's emergency room "is overwhelmed with casualties and, as is so often the case over the past 18 months, the victims are Gaza's youngest."
Thursday's intensified airstrikes came as Israeli forces pushed into the ruins of the southern city of Rafah. Local and international media reported that hundreds of thousands of Palestinian families fled from the area, which Israel said it will seize as part of a new "security zone."
Human rights defenders around the world condemned U.S.-backed killing and mass displacement, with U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—whose bid to block some sAmerican arms sales to Israel was rejected by the Senate on Thursday—saying: "There is a name and a term for forcibly expelling people from where they live. It is called ethnic cleansing. It is illegal. It is a war crime."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, are fugitives from the International Criminal Court, which last year issued arrest warrants for the pair over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. Israel is also facing a genocide case at the International Court of Justice.
According to Gaza officials, Israeli forces have killed or wounded at least 175,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including upward of 14,000 people who are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath rubble. Almost everyone in Gaza has been forcibly displaced at least once, and the "complete siege" imposed by Israel has fueled widespread and sometimes deadly starvation and disease.
"Working-class candidate v. billionaire political race. I'm here for it," wrote one longtime progressive strategist.
Dan Osborn, an Independent U.S. Senate candidate who struck a chord with working-class voters in Nebraska and came within striking distance of unseating his Republican opponent last year, announced Thursday that he's considering another run, this time challenging GOP Sen. Pete GOP Ricketts, who is up for election in 2026.
"We could replace a billionaire with a mechanic," Osborn wrote in a thread on X on Thursday. "I'll run against Pete Ricketts—if the support is there." Osborn said that he's launching an exploratory committee and would run as Independent, as he did in 2024.
Ricketts has served as a senator since 2023, and prior to that was the governor of Nebraska from 2015-2023. By one estimate, Ricketts has a net worth of over $165 million—though the wealth of his father, brokerage founder Joe Ricketts, and family is estimated to be worth $4.1 billion, according to Forbes.
A mechanic and unionist who helped lead a strike against Kellogg's cereal company, Osborn lost to Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) by less than 7 points in November 2024 in what became an unexpectedly close race.
Although he didn't win, he overperformed the national Democratic ticket by a higher percentage than other candidates running against Republicans in competitive Senate races, according to The Nation.
"Billionaires have bought up the country and are carving it up day by day," said Osborn Thursday. "The economy they've built is good for them, bad for us. Good for huge multinationals and multibillionaires. Bad for workers. Bad for small businesses, bad for family farmers. Bad for anyone who wants Social Security to survive. Bad for your PAYCHECK."
Osborn cast the potential race as between "someone who's spent his life working for a living and will never take an order from a corporation or a party boss" and "someone who's never worked a day in his life and is entirely beholden to corporations and party."
"We could take on this illness, the billionaire class, directly," he said.
Osborn, who campaigned on issues like Right to Repair and lowering taxes on overtime payments, earned praise from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who told The Nation in late November that Osborn's bid should be viewed as a "model for the future."
Osborn "took on both political parties. He took on the corporate world. He ran as a strong trade unionist. Without party support, getting heavily outspent, he got through to working-class people all over Nebraska. It was an extraordinary campaign," Sanders said.
In reaction to the news that Osborn is exploring a second run, a former Sanders campaign manager and longtime progressive Democratic strategist Faiz Shakir, wrote: "working-class candidate v. billionaire political race. I'm here for it."