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 critic argued Harris would risk alienating "precisely the people she needs to ensure her victory over Trump" if she picks Pennsylvania's governor as her running mate.
Reports that presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris is leaning toward selecting Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as her running mate have sparked warnings from progressives who say his record and policy positions on key issues—from Palestine to public schools to climate—are cause for serious alarm and should be disqualifying.
Earlier this week, dozens of progressive leaders from across the United States wrote in a letter to Harris that Shapiro's "support for school vouchers is in direct conflict with our teachers union allies and the Democratic Party Platform, threatening to undermine labor support" in a general election matchup with Republican nominee Donald Trump.
The letter's signatories recommended Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear as possible alternatives to Shapiro, who last year relented to pressure and vetoed a school voucher program that he previously supported.
The Philadelphia Inquirerreported last month that Shapiro "says school vouchers are still a priority for him."
"Democrats need a credible and respected voice that has a track record of winning over and exciting an electorate, especially the ability to turn out young voters, immigrants, and independents in swing states," reads the progressives' letter, signed by the chair of the California Democratic Party's Progressive Caucus, the head of the Nevada Democratic Party, the executive director of Progressive Democrats of America, a member of the Ohio Democratic Party's executive committee, and others.
"Shapiro has... done far more than most Democrats to attack pro-Palestine antiwar demonstrators, in ways that call into question his basic commitment to First Amendment rights."
Shapiro's attacks on pro-Palestine demonstrators and uncritical support for Israel—as well as his support for Pennsylvania's anti-boycott, divestment, and sanctions law—have also drawn progressive ire.
"Shapiro has... done far more than most Democrats to attack pro-Palestine antiwar demonstrators, in ways that call into question his basic commitment to First Amendment rights," writer David Klion argued in The New Republic last week, noting that the Pennsylvania governor compared protesters rallying against Israel's genocide in Gaza to the Ku Klux Klan.
"Then, in an executive order, Shapiro updated his administration's code of conduct to forbid state employees from engaging in 'scandalous or disgraceful' behavior, a vaguely worded instruction that civil libertarians immediately interpreted as threatening pro-Palestine speech," added Klion, who warned Harris that picking Shapiro could "discourage precisely the people she needs to ensure her victory over Trump."
A coalition of pro-Palestine groups has launched a website dubbing Shapiro "Genocide Josh" and warning Harris against picking him as her running mate.
"The left must unite over the next four weeks to ensure that America doesn't fall down the path of fascism, authoritarianism, and runaway corporatism," the website states. "It is in Harris' and the Democrats' best interests to listen to their base and ensure that both their new VP pick and their platform support the majority of Democrats and Americans who want social and economic justice for workers and an immediate cease-fire in Palestine."
Progressive organizers Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon, co-founders of the advocacy group RootsAction, warned in aCommon Dreams op-ed Monday that if Harris "chooses a running mate who intensely connects her to Biden's policies on the Gaza war that are so unpopular with much of the Democratic base, party unity—and the chances of defeating Trump—would be undermined."
On top of his attacks on pro-Palestinian demonstrators and promotion of school vouchers, Shapiro has also faced criticism for supporting corporate tax cuts.
The American Prospect's David Dayen wrote Thursday that Shapiro is currently "trying to accelerate an already scheduled cut" to Pennsylvania's corporate tax rate "from 9.9% to 4.9%" as Democrats at the national level push for a repeal of Trump's massive tax cuts for big business and the rich.
Harris herself attacked Trump during an Atlanta rally earlier this week for wanting to "give tax breaks to billionaires and big corporations."
Harris is expected to announce her vice presidential pick ahead of a scheduled rally Tuesday in Philadelphia, part of a broader campaign swing through pivotal battleground states. According toPolitico, a Harris aide "cautioned against reading too much into the first city chosen for the tour," pushing back on speculation that the event's location confirms Shapiro will be Harris' running mate.
A survey released earlier this week showed that Trump is narrowly leading Harris in Pennsylvania, and it's far from clear that picking Shapiro as her running mate would help her win the state.
"Other names in the mix include Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg," Politico reported earlier this week. "Shapiro said on Tuesday that he had not spoken to Harris since July 21, the day that Biden dropped out."
Will Bunch argued in a column for The Philadelphia Inquirer "that it's no wonder that progressives seem to be lining up in the VP contest behind Minnesota's Walz, who like Shapiro has some policy wins on cherished liberal issues like expanding free school lunches but isn't lugging around political baggage like the Pennsylvania governor."
"Whether Harris, said to have close ties to Shapiro, sees it the same way will tell us a lot about her White House bid," Bunch added.
"Let's see which politicians are for unions and which ones are all talk," said the Texas Democrat.
As former U.S. President Donald Trump's new running mate and a union leader's speech spark discussions about the Republican Party and organized labor, one Democratic congressman on Tuesday suggested a test to see who is actually pro-worker.
Rep. Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat with a history of
advocating for workers, called for holding a vote on the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act when his colleagues in Congress return to Capitol Hill next week.
"If Republicans wanna talk like they're pro-worker, then let's have a vote on the PRO Act next week," Casar said on social media. "Let's see which politicians are for unions and which ones are all talk. Dems are ready to vote, how about you guys?"
Introduced by Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the PRO Act "expands various labor protections related to employees' rights to organize and collectively bargain in the workplace." The vast majority of its co-sponsors are Democrats.
"Dems are ready to vote, how about you guys?"
Casar specifically called out House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who on Tuesday wrote for Compact Magazine about International Brotherhood of Teamsters general president Sean O'Brien's Monday night speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC), acknowledging that it "came as something of a shock."
Hawley called the speech "a watershed moment" and said that "Republicans have a chance to turn the corner on labor." He also took the opportunity to highlight some of his own positions, such as more sick days for rail workers. The senator left out that he has backed "right-to-work" laws that ban union security clauses in collective bargaining agreements and opposed the PRO Act.
O'Brien—who responded by saying that Hawley "is 100% on point"—had, as The Washington Post's Lauren Kaori Gurley put it, "showered praise" on the senator during his speech. The Teamsters leader also stressed the need for pro-worker reforms.
"Labor law must be reformed," O'Brien said. "Americans vote for a union but can never get a union contract. Companies fire workers who try to join unions and hide behind toothless laws that are meant to protect working people but are manipulated to benefit corporations. This is economic terrorism at its best. An individual cannot withstand such an assault. A fired worker cannot afford corporate delays and these greedy employers know it. There are no consequences for the company, only the worker."
He declared that "we need corporate welfare reform. Under our current system, massive companies like Amazon, Uber, Lyft, and Walmart take zero responsibilities for the workers they employ. These companies offer no real health insurance, no retirement benefits, no paid leave, relying on underfunded public assistance. And who foots the bill? The individual taxpayer. The biggest recipients of welfare in this country are corporations, and this is real corruption. We must put workers first."
O'Brien was invited to speak at the RNC by Trump, who on Monday secured enough delegates to become the Republican nominee and announced U.S. Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate—creating a ticket that Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, called "a corporate CEO's dream and a worker's nightmare."
Teamsters spokesperson Kara Deniz told the Post that the union leader requested to speak at the Democratic National Convention next month but has not yet received an invitation.
Unlike the Teamsters, several major labor groups endorsed Biden for reelection over a year ago. The Democrat describes himself as "the most pro-union President leading the most pro-union administration in American history"—and he has mostly avoided angering organized labor, other than working with Congress to block a national rail strike in December 2022.
Biden became the first sitting president in history to walk a picket line when he rallied with United Auto Workers members in September. The UAW endorsed him in January, when the group's president, Shawn Fain, sharply criticized Trump and warned that "rarely as a union do you get so clear of a choice between two candidates."
O'Brien struck a much different tone on Monday, praising the ex-president and "characterizing both parties as ambivalent about unions with room to improve," as Post reporter Jeff Stein pointed out on social media. In addition to Sanders, Stein highlighted, "there are 48 Senate sponsors of the PRO Act. They all caucus with the Democratic Party. Zero are Republicans."
Only Sens. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.)—who ditched the Democratic Party shortly after the 2022 election—have joined with the chamber's Republicans to oppose the PRO Act. In the GOP-controlled House, the bill is backed by every Democrat but just three Republicans: Reps. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (Ore.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), and Christopher Smith (N.J.).
"On June 21, 2023, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions chaired by Sen. Bernie Sanders passed the PRO Act 11-10," Warren Gunnels, the panel's majority staff director, noted Tuesday. "Every Democrat on the committee voted yes. Every Republican on the committee voted no."
Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.) said, "To the Republicans at the RNC who want to appear to support American labor, here's an idea: Come join us to pass the PRO Act."
One campaigner from the green group decried the "dangerous attempt to roll back progress on climate, clean air, and cleaner cars" by some lawmakers skeptical of the new EPA rules.
The Sierra Club on Wednesday launched a multistate digital ad campaign aimed at persuading seven U.S. senators—six of them Democrats—to back the Biden administration's already weakened tailpipe pollution standards for passenger cars and light-duty trucks.
The new campaign targets Sens. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Az.), Jon Tester (D-Mt.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.), who have been critical of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) recently finalized federal clean vehicle standards.
"The Sierra Club urges all senators to protect their constituents from toxic vehicle pollution and support these clean car standards that will save families money and give car buyers more choice," Will Anderson, the green group's deputy legislative director, said in a statement.
"The popular clean car standards are the latest commonsense action by the Environmental Protection Agency to tackle our nation's most polluting sector—transportation—and they work," Anderson added. "Trying to undo them is a dangerous attempt to roll back progress on climate, clean air, and cleaner cars that will benefit communities across the country."
Some of the ads are custom-tailored to individual lawmakers. Responding to Fetterman's recent criticism of the new EPA rules, one of the videos argues that "repealing this standard would harm Pennsylvania's growing clean energy economy, undermine efforts to clean up our air, and hurt children and seniors with asthma and other respiratory problems."
"We urge Sen. Fetterman to protect Pennsylvania families who will benefit from this lifesaving standard that will create jobs and give car buyers more options—not Big Polluters and their Republican allies who want to roll back climate progress," the video adds.
The EPA estimates that the new standards will prevent 1 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions and provide $13 billion in annualized net benefits for consumers and the climate. While some environmentalists have hailed the new rules as the strongest ever of their kind, others argue they don't go far enough.
Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Safe Climate Transport Campaign, last month claimed that "the EPA caved to pressure from Big Auto, Big Oil, and car dealers and riddled the plan with loopholes big enough to drive a Ford F-150 through."
The new Sierra Club campaign launched the day after a federal appellate panel upheld the Biden administration's 2022 decision to preserve California's strict vehicle emission standards, which have been adopted by 17 states and the District of Columbia. California's mandate is more stringent than the new EPA standards, which set no quotas for zero-emission vehicle sales.