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
house republicans
Hey GOP! No One Voted to Cut Social Security
Let there be no doubt: Trump and the Republicans will try to cut our earned benefits. But just as a grassroots movement around the country succeeded in saving the Affordable Care Act during Trump’s first term, we can save Social Security and Medicare.
Nov 13, 2024
No one voted to cut Social Security. No one voted to cut Medicare. And no one voted for higher drug prices.
Donald Trump ran on a promise to protect Social Security and Medicare. Based on Trump’s long record of working to cut and undermine our earned benefits, we don’t trust that promise for one second. But we plan to make him keep it.
There’s a good reason Trump didn’t campaign on cutting Social Security: Ninety-two percent of Americans think that’s a terrible idea.
What will Trump do once he’s actually in the White House? During his first term, he tried to cut Social Security every single year. He appointed an unqualified crony, Andrew Saul, to head the Social Security Administration. And he surrounded himself with advisors who had long records of working to cut and privatize Social Security.
Now, Trump has a new advisor, Elon Musk. He just put Musk in charge of a commission to slash $2 trillion of federal spending. That is essentially impossible without cutting Social Security, Medicare, and/or Medicaid. Indeed, incoming Vice President JD Vance has specifically said that Musk will target Social Security.
We are never going to stop fighting to protect and expand Social Security.
Musk is the wealthiest man in the world. It’s no surprise that Musk and his fellow billionaires want to cut our earned benefits rather than pay their fair share in taxes.
Trump’s top priority is to extend the tax cuts he gave the ultra-wealthy in his first term. Then, Republicans will turn around and claim that we “can’t afford” Social Security and Medicare.
Republicans in Congress have already telegraphed what those cuts could look like. The Republican Study Committee (RSC), a caucus that counts over 80 percent of House Republicans as members, released a budget proposal earlier this year that makes massive cuts to Social Security. That includes raising the retirement age to 69, and decimating benefits for the middle class.
The RSC budget would also repeal Medicare’s power to negotiate lower drug prices. That means seniors and people with disabilities would have to turn over more of their hard-earned Social Security checks to Big Pharma.
In case anyone doubted that Republicans are serious about passing these cuts into law, House Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington (who angrily chased me down the street last year after I confronted him about his support for Social Security cuts) just pledged to cut health care benefits through reconciliation—meaning that Republicans would only need 50 votes in the Senate.
Trump and Republicans will try to cut our earned benefits. But just as a grassroots movement of Americans around the country succeeded in saving the Affordable Care Act during Trump’s first term, we can save Social Security and Medicare.
Musk is the wealthiest man in the world. It’s no surprise that Musk and his fellow billionaires want to cut our earned benefits rather than pay their fair share in taxes.
Here’s how:
- Hold Every Republican Accountable: Republicans will have only a slim majority in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives. Every member of the House, and one-third of the Senate, is on the ballot in 2026. We will target every Republican in a competitive district with protests and billboards saying: Hands off our Social Security and Medicare!
- Keep Democrats Unified: There’s nothing Republicans want more than bipartisan cover for benefit cuts. Democrats must stand united and refuse to give it to them. We are calling on every Democrat in Congress to stand strong against even one penny of cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
- Refuse To Go Behind Closed Doors: Republicans want to create a closed-door, fast-track commission to cut benefits without political accountability. We’ve beaten back this type of commission before, and we’re prepared to do so again. Any changes to Social Security must happen through regular Congressional order, in the light of day.
We are never going to stop fighting to protect and expand Social Security. Social Security has stood strong for nearly a century. It has survived wars, depressions, and pandemics. And with your help, it will survive Donald Trump.
Keep ReadingShow Less
AFL-CIO Warns House GOP Not to Interfere With Longshoremen's Labor Battle
"Instead of calling for government intervention, a far more productive tact would be to press the companies to meet the workers' very reasonable demands," the AFL-CIO president said.
Sep 27, 2024
The president of the AFL-CIO sent a letter to House Republicans on Thursday asking them not to intervene in contract negotiations between the International Longshoremen's Association and the U.S. Maritime Alliance, which could lead to the first East Coast port strike since 1977 if a deal is not struck by October 1.
The letter came in response to another letter sent by Republican lawmakers to U.S. President Joe Biden on September 19, urging him to "find a reasonable resolution to these contract disputes" and to "utilize every authority at its disposal to ensure the continuing flow of goods" if a strike does occur.
"Averting a strike is the responsibility of the employers who refuse to offer ILA members a contract that reflects the dignity and value of their labor," AFL-CIO president Elizabeth H. Shuler wrote in response to the GOP representatives. "The fight for a fair contract for longshoremen is the entire labor movement's fight."
"The public strongly supports these front-line workers and their just demand for economic security."
A potential strike would see between 25,000 and 50,000 workers walk off the job on Tuesday at 36 locations along 14 East and Gulf Coast port authorities, including 10 of the busiest in North America.
The union wants substantial raises to cover the cost of inflation. While West Coast port workers make a base wage of $54.85, their East and Gulf Coast counterparts make only $39.
The ILA is also demanding better healthcare, and a promise not to install automated or semi-automated terminals at the ports. However, negotiations between the union and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX) broke down in June when the ILA said that USMX had begun using an automated gate to allow trucks into ports, in violation of the current contract.
The union has since contacted USMX to discuss wage increases, but the company has not upped its offer.
"My ILA members are not going to accept these insulting offers that are a joke considering the work my ILA longshore workers perform, and the billion-dollar profits the companies make off the backs of their labor," ILA president and lead negotiator Harold J. Daggett said in a statement on Monday.
"The blame for a coast wide strike in a week that will shut down all ports on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts falls squarely on the shoulders of USMX," Daggett continued.
In their letter, the Republican representatives warned about how the strike "would result in delays and dire impacts to our supply chains, our economy, and the American consumer." They evoked the "supply-chain crisis" during the Covid-19 pandemic that was a major driver of inflation, saying that a one-week strike would cause a one-and-a-half month backlog.
However, Shuler said that the GOP letter made a strike—and its economic consequences—more likely, not less. That's because the leaning on Biden to use his authority to "ensure the continuing flow of goods," suggested Shuler, could reasonably be interpreted as a request for him to file a judicial injunction under the Taft-Hartely Act to stop a strike from taking place.
"History tells us that when companies can count on an injunction against a strike, they do not negotiate in good faith to reach an agreement. By even suggesting a possible injunction, your letter makes a deal less likely and a strike all the more likely," Shuler said.
This is especially the case because the Biden administration toldReuters earlier this month that it had "never invoked Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering doing so now."
"Yet," Shuler told the representatives, "your letter tries to suggest otherwise, giving the companies reason to dig in their heels. Instead of calling for government intervention, a far more productive tact would be to press the companies to meet the workers' very reasonable demands."
Shuler defended the workers' rights to wages that keep pace with living costs as well as job security in a changing technological landscape.
"Like workers in many other industries—from hospitality to healthcare to film and television—they need fair contract provisions that protect their jobs from being eliminated by automation," Shuler said.
She also noted that the port workers had made significant sacrifices to keep the ports moving during the early years of Covid-19.
"Throughout the pandemic, longshore workers never took a day off, risking their health and lives to make sure shelves were stocked and the supply chain remained strong," Shuler wrote. "The public strongly supports these front-line workers and their just demand for economic security."
She continued: "It adds insult to injury to encourage USMX to provoke a strike rather than agree to a fair contract for the workers who kept food on the table and our economy running through the darkest days of the Covid-19 crisis."
The Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the AFL-CIO also spoke out against government intervention in the negotiations.
"Relying on Taft-Hartley is not a winning strategy and should not be USMX's expected path to resolution," TTD president and scretary Greg Regan and Shari Semelsberger said in a statement. "The Biden-Harris administration has already stated, in their own words, 'We've never invoked Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering doing so now.'"
Regan and Semelsberg added that USMX was to blame for the risk of a strike.
"Let us be clear: The employers, not the workers, have shirked their responsibility and punted labor negotiations to the 11th hour, when the damage to the public and the national supply chain would be most detrimental," they said. "While USMX seeks to cast blame on the frontline workers who move our supply chain, they are at fault."
"Remember this as they seek shelter from the disaster that they created," Regan and Semelsberg concluded.
This piece has been updated with a statement from the Transportation Trades Department of the AFL-CIO.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Shutdown Looms as House Rejects GOP Attempt to Impose 'Trump's Dangerous Agenda'
"As long as House Republicans continue pushing Project 2025 funding bills, they will continue pushing our nation towards a government shutdown," said Democratic Rep. Brendan Boyle.
Sep 19, 2024
The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday rejected a GOP resolution that would have punted a fight over government funding until after the next president takes office and pushed through a noxious voter suppression measure backed by Republican nominee Donald Trump.
The final vote was 202-220, with 14 Republicans joining nearly every member of the House Democratic caucus in voting against the legislation. GOP opponents of the bill included far-right lawmakers who want to slash spending.
Reps. Jared Golden (D-Maine), Don Davis (D-N.C.), and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) broke with their party and backed the Republican continuing resolution, which would have largely extended government funding at current levels into March.
With Trump's backing, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) agreed to attach to the continuing resolution the SAVE Act, legislation purportedly aimed at preventing noncitizens from voting—which is already illegal. Voting rights advocates have condemned the SAVE Act as an "unnecessary and dangerous" bill that would "make it harder for voters of color and naturalized citizens to register to vote."
"Instead of working with Democrats to fund the government, House Republicans tied themselves into knots trying to give Trump what he wants."
House Democrats said Wednesday that the failure of the GOP continuing resolution was an inevitable consequence of the party's decision to push extremist spending bills instead of working on a bipartisan solution to government funding.
The government will shut down on October 1 unless Congress acts. Johnson said leading up to Wednesday's vote that there is "no Plan B."
"Once again, the House Republican majority has failed at its most basic tasks while trying to force Trump's extreme and unpopular Project 2025 agenda on the American people," said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee. "Everyone in Washington, Democrats and Republicans, knew this ill-conceived continuing resolution was destined to fail. Why we spent a week and a half considering a partisan bill, just days from a government shutdown, is beyond comprehension."
"We have seven legislative days to keep the government open," she continued. "The time to begin negotiations on a continuing resolution that can gain the support of Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate was last week—but right now will suffice, if Republicans are willing to meet us at the table and actually govern."
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said late Wednesday that "as long as House Republicans continue pushing Project 2025 funding bills, they will continue pushing our nation towards a government shutdown."
"Trump said he'd 'shut down the government in a heartbeat' to push his Project 2025 agenda—and instead of working with Democrats to fund the government, House Republicans tied themselves into knots trying to give Trump what he wants," said Boyle. "Just as they've done for the last two years, House Republicans have proven they're more interested in imposing Trump's dangerous agenda than lifting a finger to help middle-class families and keep our government open. American families deserve better than this extreme bill and they deserve better than House Republicans."
Democratic lawmakers are reportedly expected to propose a clean three-month extension of government funding to avert a shutdown and buy time to negotiate a longer-term deal on government spending.
Ahead of Wednesday's vote, DeLauro warned that House Republicans believe delaying the government funding fight until March 2025 would give them "more leverage to force their unpopular cuts to services that American families depend on to make ends meet."
"This bill is an admission that a House Republican majority cannot govern," said DeLauro. "They would rather gamble on an intervening election than attempt to complete their work on time."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular