SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
hakeem jeffries
As GOP Pushes Tax Giveaways for the Rich, Sanders Launches 'National Tour to Fight Oligarchy'
"Today, the oligarchs and the billionaire class are getting richer and richer and have more and more power," the senator said. "This country belongs to all of us, not just the few. We must fight back."
Feb 13, 2025
As Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration scour the federal public services infrastructure looking for cuts to healthcare, food assistance, and consumer protections that could offset the $4.6 trillion deficit hole the GOP is intent on creating by extending tax cuts for the rich, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders is preparing for a "National Tour to Fight Oligarchy."
With Americans inundated with news about Trump's billionaire megadonor, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, ransacking federal agencies through the Department of Government Efficiency—and little to no news about President Donald Trump's supposed plans to reduce the cost of living—Sanders (I-Vt.) is intent on speaking directly to voters during his nationwide town hall tour, titled, "Fighting Oligarchy: Where We Go From Here."
The senator, who garnered support from working-class Americans and young voters during his Democratic presidential runs in 2016 and 2020, will kick off the tour with stops in Omaha, Nebraska on February 21 and Iowa City, Iowa on February 22.
The first stop lies in the House district represented by Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who this week expressed some hesitation about voting for a GOP budget proposal that could include steep spending cuts, including potentially to Medicaid. Bacon's district was carried by former President Joe Biden in 2020 and former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024.
A Sanders aide toldPolitico that the senator aims to influence the Republicans' fight over the budget, which has reportedly made some GOP members of the House, where the party holds a slim majority, uneasy about backlash from voters in upcoming elections in 2026 and 2028.
As Common Dreamsreported on Tuesday, a recent poll by progressive think tank Data for Progress showed voters from across the political spectrum don't want lawmakers to make cuts to federal student loans, Medicare, Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or renewable energy programs—all of which the GOP has eyed as it aims to do the bidding of wealthy donors and extend the 2017 tax cuts which primarily benefited the country's top earners.
In a statement, Sanders on Wednesday said his town hall tour will help Americans make sense of how they "can fight back against President Trump and Elon Musk," who are "quickly moving the country toward authoritarianism, oligarchy, and kleptocracy."
"Today, the oligarchs and the billionaire class are getting richer and richer and have more and more power," Sanders said. "Meanwhile, 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck and most of our people are struggling to pay for healthcare, childcare, and housing. This country belongs to all of us, not just the few. We must fight back."
Allies of the progressive senator said his direct engagement with voters is also likely a response to Democratic leaders' approach to the first weeks of Trump's second term in office. While Democratic lawmakers have spoken out against Musk's attempted takeover of federal agencies and some have pushed for strategic opposition to the Trump agenda, leaders in the party complained in a closed-door meeting this week about progressive advocacy groups that have urged the Democrats to act as a genuine, cohesive opposition party.
In a press conference this week, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) appeared perplexed by the idea that Democrats should try to counter Trump's agenda, saying Republicans control both chambers of Congress and the White House, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the party is "not going to go after every single issue" as it fights the president.
Last week, Jeffries garnered scorn for meeting with more than 150 donors in Silicon Valley in an effort to "mend fences" as numerous high-profile tech executives have aligned themselves with Trump.
The House leader also appeared unmoved by "The Weekly Show" host Jon Stewart's suggestion in an interview this week that the Democrats have "gotten away from New Deal values" and should focus on pushing for policies that help the working class rather than simply improving "messaging."
Anna Bahr, a spokesperson for Sanders, told Politico that "it may be hard to believe, but at least one person in Washington is more interested in talking with working-class people than running for office or fundraising."
"Sen. Sanders is doing what he has always done: meeting people all over the country to discuss our failed healthcare system, housing crisis, and the wealth and income inequality that is only intensifying," said Bahr.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who co-chaired the senator's 2020 presidential campaign, told the outlet that the Democratic Party needs Sanders "in strategic states making the case to define the future of our party for the next 20 years."
"Sen. Sanders has been a prophet for where the Democratic Party needs to go in standing up for working-class Americans," said Khanna, "and opposing the unholy alliance of wealth and power."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Reportedly Angry That Progressives Are Pushing Them to Act Like an Opposition Party
"Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer are architects of the crisis that allowed Trump's fascism to arise and succeed," argued one progressive organizer. "They have zero credibility to be leading the fights we face today."
Feb 12, 2025
House Democratic lawmakers reportedly used a closed-door meeting earlier this week to vent their frustrations with progressive advocacy groups that have been driving constituent calls and pressuring the party to act like a genuine opposition force in the face of the Trump administration's authoritarian assault on federal agencies and key programs.
Citing unnamed sources, including a senior House Democrat, Axiosreported Tuesday that the private meeting "included a gripe-fest" directed at "groups like MoveOn and Indivisible," which have "facilitated thousands of phone calls to members' offices" and pressured the party to use its considerable power to disrupt business as usual in Congress, including by opposing all unanimous consent requests from the Republican majority.
The unnamed senior House Democrat told Axios that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is "very frustrated" with the progressive organizations, which have urged people across the country to contact their Democratic representatives and pressure them to fight harder against the Trump administration and their Republican allies.
Britt Jacovich, a spokesperson for MoveOn, told Axios that "our member energy is high and this won't be the last any office hears from everyday Americans who want us to fight harder to push back."
Let's be clear: We are not going anywhere. We are committed to this fight, come hell or high water.
[image or embed]
— MoveOn (@moveon.org) February 11, 2025 at 4:14 PM
Reports of internal Democratic frustrations with grassroots progressives come days after Jeffries questioned the leverage his caucus has to stop the Trump administration and unelected billionaire Elon Musk from imposing their will on the federal government.
"They control the House, the Senate, and the presidency," Jeffries told reporters late last week. "It's their government."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), meanwhile, has said Democrats are "not going to go after every single issue" in the fight against President Donald Trump.
"We are picking the most important fights and lying down on the train tracks on those fights," Schumer toldThe New York Times earlier this month.
That's not the kind of all-out confrontational approach that rank-and-file Democrats clearly want from their elected representatives. According to a CBS News/YouGov survey released earlier this week, 65% of Democratic voters want the party to "'oppose Trump as much as possible," up from 46% in January.
The poll also found that just 16% of Democratic voters have "a lot" of confidence that congressional Democrats "can oppose Trump effectively."
"Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer are architects of the crisis that allowed Trump's fascism to arise and succeed," progressive organizer Aaron Regunberg wrote Tuesday. "They have zero credibility to be leading the fights we face today—not in their record, their competency, or their recent performance. Quite simply, they have to go."
"Forcing recorded votes is possible. Frequent quorum calls are possible. A wide variety of dilatory motions are possible. In short, harassing the majority is possible. If they think it's a bad idea, say so. If they say it's not possible, they're lying."
Andy Craig, director of election policy at the Rainey Center, urged Americans to keep up the calls to Democratic lawmakers, noting that progressive demands "are 100% doable."
"Objecting to unanimous consents is possible," Craig wrote early Wednesday. "Forcing recorded votes is possible. Frequent quorum calls are possible. A wide variety of dilatory motions are possible. In short, harassing the majority is possible. If they think it's a bad idea, say so. If they say it's not possible, they're lying."
Times editorial board member Mara Gay noted in a column earlier this week that both Schumer and Jeffries "have struggled to shed the familiar rhythms of business as usual" even amid Trump's lawless onslaught, which experts say has sparked a full-blown constitutional crisis.
On Tuesday, Senate Democrats did not object to a GOP unanimous consent request to advance the confirmation process for Tulsi Gabbard, Trump's pick to serve as Director of National Intelligence.
"Holy shit. Schumer and the Senate Democrats couldn't object to a basic UC (unanimous consent) time agreement to slow down a nominee like Gabbard?" progressive strategist Murshed Zaheed asked late Tuesday. "Disgraceful and humiliating surrender from these Democrats as they continue to hit your inboxes and messages begging (spamming) for money."
Keep ReadingShow Less
What Can Be Done About the Left’s Diminished DNC Presence?
The recent race for DNC chair raises questions about how the progressive wing of the party can and should move forward toward 2028.
Feb 09, 2025
Just before starting to write my lament about what a dramatic step backward the recent campaign for Democratic National Committee chair had been, I opened an Our Revolution email that told me, “We beat back the party establishment at the DNC.”
Now Our Revolution being a direct organizational descendent of the 2020 Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, and me having been a 2016 Sanders convention delegate, I feel pretty confident that our ideas of who “we” means are pretty much the same. So what accounts for the widely divergent takes?
For those who haven’t been following this, Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party Chair Ken Martin was just elected to lead the DNC for the next four years, defeating Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler by a 246.5–134.5 vote margin. There was no contested election four years ago, because by tradition a just-elected president selects the new chair; contested elections generally follow defeats. In the last one, in 2017, former Obama administration Secretary of Labor Tom Perez won the job, beating Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison in a second round of voting, 235--200.
At the moment there is no one obviously positioned to take up the Sanders’ mantle in the 2028 presidential campaign.
Ellison’s candidacy came in the wake of his having been just the second member of Congress to support Sanders in the prior year’s presidential primaries, and the fact that Sanders people harbored serious grievances with the DNC over its perceived favoritism for the ultimate nominee, Hillary Clinton, lent a distinct edge to the election, bringing it considerably more buzz than the one that just occurred. At the time, former Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, a vociferous opponent of Sanders’ run—who had once declared, “The most effective thing liberals and progressives can do to advance our public policy goals... is to help Clinton win our nomination early in the year”—now thought there was “a great deal to be said for putting an active Sanders supporter in there,” so as to clear the air “of suspicions and paranoia.” But Clinton and Barack Obama apparently didn’t think so, and Clinton’s past Obama cabinet colleague, Perez, took up the torch in a race that produced a level of grassroots involvement seldom if ever before seen in this contest.
Although the office is traditionally considered organizational rather than ideological and the 2017 candidates did run on those issues, the underlying political differences were obvious to all. This time around, the race was generally understood to involve little if any political disagreement on the issues. By way of explaining its support for new party chair Martin, Our Revolution characterized runner-up Wikler, as “an establishment candidate backed by Nancy Pelosi, Hakeem Jeffries, and Chuck Schumer, and bankrolled by the billionaire class.” We understand that election campaigns are about sharpening the perception of differences between the candidates, but still this seems a rather thin, flimsy basis for hailing the vote as an anti-establishment triumph, given that Martin has publicly stated that he doesn’t want the party to take money from "those bad billionaires" only from "good billionaires;”and one of the two billionaires who gave a quarter million dollars to Wikler’s campaign was George Soros—probably the DNC’s model “good billionaire.” Besides Musk/Bezos/Zuckerberg probably aren’t thinking of donating anyhow. Oh, and Chuck Schumer actually supported Ellison eight years ago.
Actually, “we” did have a horse in the race—2020 Sanders campaign manager Faiz Shakir. Shakir, who has been running a nonprofit news organization called More Perfect Union, dedicated to “building power for the working class,” argued that Democrats needed a pitch for building a pro-worker economy to go with their criticism of U.S. President Donald Trump’s policy proposals. His viewpoint presented a serious alternative to that of Martin, who told a candidates forum that “we’ve got the right message... What we need to do is connect it back with the voters,”—seemingly a tough position to maintain following an election in which NBC’s 20-state exit polling showed the majority of voters with annual household incomes under $100,000 voting Republican, while the majority of those from over-$100,000 households voted Democrat. But even though Shakir was a DNC member and thereby able to get the 40 signatures of committee members needed to run, he entered the race far too late to be taken for a serious contender and ultimately received but two votes.
Mind you, none of this critique comes as a criticism of the work of the two state party chairs who were the principal contenders. Martin touts the fact that Democrats have won every statewide election in Minnesota in the 14 years that he has chaired the party, and anyone who understands the effort that goes into political campaign work can only admire that achievement. Nor is Our Revolution to be criticized for taking the time to discern what they thought would be the best possible option in a not terribly exciting race that was nevertheless of some importance.
At the same time it’s hard not to regret the diminished DNC presence of the “we” that Our Revolution spoke of, after “we” legitimately contended for power in the last contested election. Certainly this lack of interest was in no small part a consequence of the extraordinary circumstances that produced a presidential nominee who had not gone before the voters in a single primary—for the first time since Hubert Humphrey in 1968.
More importantly, it raises a serious question for those of us who believe that the structure and history of the American political system require the left’s engagement in the Democratic Party—uncomfortable and unpleasant as that may be at times. As the social scientists like to say, politics abhors a vacuum, and absent a national Democratic Party presence for the perspective that motivated the Sanders campaigns, people seeking action on the big questions on the big stage may start to look elsewhere. And elsewhere always looms the possibility of the cul-de-sac of yet of another third party candidacy that holds interesting conventions and debates, but ultimately receives only a small share of the vote, but a large share of the blame for the election of a Republican president.
At the moment there is no one obviously positioned to take up the Sanders’ mantle in the 2028 presidential campaign. But we may have to make it our business to find one.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular