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
new york
'Families Shouldn’t Pay the Price' for Monopolies: Mamdani Pushes Regulators to Reject Western Union Merger
The proposed deal "would represent a direct wealth transfer—one that would further strain the already challenging economic circumstances facing New York City’s immigrant communities," said the city's mayor.
May 14, 2026
With the Trump administration refusing to take substantive antitrust action—reaching a recent deal with a meat company accused of price fixing and settling a Biden-era lawsuit that accused Live Nation of monopolizing live entertainment—New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is using his influential position to urge the blocking of a corporate merger that he says would harm working families across the city.
Mamdani wrote to the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) late last month, outlets are reporting this week, urging the state financial regulator to block Western Union's $500 million merger with International Money Express, or Intermex.
With 4.5 million users, Intermex has a small fraction of Western Union's customer base of 150 million people who use wire transfer services. But Mamdani wrote that over the past decade the smaller company has "nearly tripled its share of remittances sent from the United States"—transfers of money that immigrants send back to their families in their home countries.
"In the US-to-Ecuador and US-to-Nicaragua corridors, Intermex’s market shares are 34% and 36%, respectively," wrote the mayor, showing that it is "winning customers away from Western Union, the historic market leader."
With immigrants increasingly using remittances to secure financial stability in case they are swept up in the Trump administration's mass deportation operation, "remittances are a crucial lifeline for New Yorkers and their communities abroad," wrote Mamdani.
On social media Thursday, Mamdani added that "families shouldn’t pay the price for corporate monopolies."
He told DFS that maintaining competition between providers of the service keeps prices for families "more competitive, encourages compliance with relevant consumer protection and disclosure requirements, and incentivizes reliability."
"The proposed merger would change that. By eliminating competition between Western Union and Intermex, the deal could lead to
higher fees (including those the businesses may fail to disclose), disadvantageous rates, worse terms, poorer service, and other impacts to these communities," wrote Mamdani, who has centered his agenda as mayor on making New York City more affordable for working families. "In short, it would represent a direct wealth transfer—one that would further strain the already challenging economic circumstances facing New York City’s immigrant communities."
The mayor noted that immigrants' access to affordable remittance services are already under threat, after the Republican Party's One Big Beautiful Bill Act imposed a 1% excise tax on cash remittance transactions.
"Now, this merger threatens to impose a new private tax on these same remittances, in the form of higher, supracompetitive prices that will flow directly to Western Union’s corporate coffers," said Mamdani.
Responding to the mayor's call for the merger to be blocked, Western Union claimed in a statement to DFS this week that the companies, should they be permitted to merge, would still provide "accessible and affordable" remittance services.
The mayor cited several US Supreme Court rulings that have found corporate mergers that would substantially lessen competition to be illegal and said that despite legal precedent, "the Trump administration has declined to challenge the merger on antitrust grounds."
"But that is not where the story ends," wrote Mamdani. "Instead, the deal still requires a series of money transmitter license approvals, including from the New York State Department of Financial Services."
"The conditions for disapproval are clearly met here," the mayor continued. "The transaction is manifestly against the public
interest, as it would lead to higher fees and worse rates for hard-working, disproportionately immigrant families, across New York City and the state—all to inflate Western Union’s balance sheet."
Semafor and The New York Times suggested that the influence of former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan may have pushed the mayor to lobby DFS to reject the merger. Khan is an outside adviser to Mamdani and served as co-chair of his transition team.
While working in the Biden administration, Khan blocked and challenged major corporate mergers including Kroger's attempt to acquire Albertsons, Meta's bid to buy virtual reality app company Within, and JetBlue's proposed merger with Spirit Airlines.
Daniel Hanley, a senior legal analyst at the anti-monopoly group Open Markets Institute applauded Mamdani's decision to wade into the debate over Western Union's proposed merger.
"State and local officials can supplement law enforcement," said Hanley, "while the federal government abdicates its fiduciary responsibilities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Gov. Hochul Must Stop Weakening New York's Landmark Climate Law
Gov. Hochul must reverse course and demonstrate that New York is serious about implementing the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, and that it is committed to building a future powered by renewable energy.
May 08, 2026
Growing up, my family was nothing if not outdoorsy: summers spent swimming in lakes, winters spent walking on frozen streams. My grandmother taught me to swim before I could walk. But as I reflect on those cherished memories, it’s hard to ignore the disconnect between the natural world as it was then and the reality of it today. All around me, I see the relentless impact of climate change: from more frequent hurricanes to smokey air and extreme heat.
That's why it’s galling to see how New York Gov. Kathy Hochul gutted New York’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). Despite the clear-and-present danger of climate change, Gov. Hochul watered down the CLCPA by pushing back important emissions deadlines and changing the way we calculate methane. She moved us from a 20-year accounting framework to a 100-year framework. That matters because methane is extremely potent in the short term, so using a 100-year timeline makes fossil fuel emission appear less severe.
When the CLCPA was signed into law in 2019, it represented a high point in New York State’s fight against climate change. For the first time, it introduced emissions targets that the state was legally-mandated to achieve. If actualized, the CLCPA promised to meaningfully reduce our state’s climate emissions—bringing cleaner air to our communities and a better shot at a more livable future for us all.
But Gov. Hochul seems to have abandoned those goals. Instead, her ongoing effort to defer the CLCPA is moving us in the wrong direction; it’s locking New York into a fossil fuel-based energy infrastructure. She has also delayed the ban on oil and gas in new buildings, halted the cap and invest program that would fund the energy transition, and cut successful solar initiatives. While the governor claims these decisions are motivated by an “all of the above” approach to rising energy costs, the reality is that she has largely neglected investing in renewable energy. And that’s despite the fact that renewables are, increasingly, the most affordable source of new electricity.
Gov. Hochul must follow through on the vision the state has already set—and stop trying to delay and dilute the CLCPA.
Moreover, Gov. Hochul’s behavior is also taking place amid relentless misinformation campaigns about renewable energy. President Donald Trump regularly parrots falsehoods—and outright lies—about solar and wind energy. The fossil fuel industry is also waging a public relations campaign of its own against a rapid transition to renewable energy. All of this is stymieing the types of policy initiatives, and clean energy investment, that are absolutely indispensable in this moment.
But here’s the reality we’re facing: Electricity demand is projected to grow significantly in the US. That’s a product of electrification campaigns—buildings, vehicles, and the like—alongside the phenomenal growth in data center construction that’s happening right now across the country. By refusing to invest in renewables, our elected officials are functionally selecting for rising fossil fuel use at precisely the moment when we must be doing the opposite. That will only deepen the climate crisis and expose consumers to higher and more volatile costs in the process.
Meeting this demand with renewable energy, by contrast, offers a path to stable, affordable, and sustainable growth. For businesses considering investments in renewable energy or clean-technology manufacturing, policy matters. To that end, Gov. Hochul must demonstrate that New York is serious about implementing the CLCPA, and that it is committed to building a future powered by renewable energy.
I volunteer with Dayenu, a movement of American Jews confronting the climate crisis with spiritual audacity and bold political action. When I think about my own motivation for taking action, I think about a teaching from the Midrash Ecclesiastes Rabbah, a Jewish commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes. The midrash warns us: “Take care not to spoil or destroy My world, for if you do, there will be no one to repair it after you.” This ancient insight could not be more relevant today. Climate change is already shaping our lives through extreme weather, rising costs, and worsening pollution. The responsibility to act falls squarely on us.
The CLCPA recognizes our responsibility and points clearly toward renewable energy as the path forward. It even embedded climate justice into the energy transition by requiring investments in disadvantaged communities.
As faith communities, we understand the importance of long-term responsibility. Jewish tradition teaches that we are not merely consumers of the world, but also stewards of it. The decisions we make today echo across generations. Choosing renewable energy is one of the clearest ways we can fulfill that responsibility. Gov. Hochul must follow through on the vision the state has already set—and stop trying to delay and dilute the CLCPA. New York helped lead the nation once before. With determination and courage, we can do so again.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Extreme Weather Is Sending Home Insurance Rates Through the Roof; Big Oil Should Pay
We and a growing number of lawmakers are proposing legislation to ensure that the companies that helped drive the climate crisis help pay their fair share of the ensuing damage.
Apr 18, 2026
It's not just your rising bills for groceries and healthcare. For many Americans, the affordability crisis is now showing up in skyrocketing costs to keep their homes insured, as communities are battered by worsening weather disasters fueled by climate change.
Our states and our constituents are feeling this directly. Hawai’i is picking up the pieces after several weeks of historic flooding, which caused more than $1 billion in damage and led to widespread evacuations. These costs are sure to increase home insurance rates that have already spiked by as much as 50% since August 2023, when out of control wildfires—worsened by climate change-driven drought conditions—devastated Maui.
In California, communities are still trying to recover from wildfires that tore through Los Angeles in January 2025. These fires stand as the most expensive wildfires in world history—causing more than $65 billion in damage, much of which is being passed onto the public through rising insurance premiums.
Although New York’s insurance market is not yet seeing the levels of climate-driven distress seen in other parts of the country, the average homeowner is paying $1,000 more for coverage in the years since Hurricane Ida—supercharged by warming oceans—caused over $9 billion in flooding damage. And the frequency of highly destructive storms is growing fast.
If a power company is responsible for the spark that ignites a fire, why not the fossil fuel giants that are turning much of the country into a tinderbox?
The average American homeowner isn’t responsible for this climate chaos; why are they the ones picking up the tab for the billions of dollars of damage it leaves in its wake? We and a growing number of lawmakers are proposing a better model: ensuring that the companies that helped drive this crisis help pay their fair share of the ensuing damage.
Large multinational oil and gas giants knew as far back as the 1970s that their dirty fossil fuel products would make weather disasters more destructive, but spent the ensuing decades lying to the public about their contribution to the problem. The real world harms of their deception is becoming increasingly clear, but they’re paying nearly none of the financial consequences.
That’s why we’re working to build a fairer system in our states—one that could be a model for the rest of the country. One that protects people from perpetually rising home insurance premiums by holding Big Oil accountable for their contribution to weather disasters that are a core driver of the affordability crisis in this country.
Our legislation would empower state attorneys general to bring civil actions against the largest oil and gas companies after major climate-driven disasters. Revenue recovered through legal action would be used to reimburse people dealing with higher rates, stabilize “insurer of last resort” programs, and reimburse homeowners facing rising premiums. At a time when housing affordability is already under strain, the growing instability in home insurance markets is making it even harder for families to buy, keep, and protect their homes.
The stakes couldn’t be higher—for individuals, not to mention the broader American housing market. Uninsurable properties are often unsellable properties, as mortgage lenders generally require that home buyers secure insurance.
Last year, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell told the US Senate Banking Committee that in “10 or 15 years there are going to be regions of the country where you can’t get a mortgage” due to climate change. That ominous prediction seems overly conservative given that realtors in California and Colorado are already reporting pending home sales falling through due to climate risk.
Even as extreme weather becomes more common, more and more Americans are risking financial ruin and going without a safety net altogether. A recent poll in California found that a shocking 1 in 5 California homeowners don’t have insurance, with rising costs the most often cited reason.
Holding polluters accountable for their contribution to a weather disaster isn’t a radical idea. Insurance companies already routinely take utilities to court—and win large settlements—when unmaintained power lines ignite wildfires. If a power company is responsible for the spark that ignites a fire, why not the fossil fuel giants that are turning much of the country into a tinderbox?
The status quo of worsening disasters, perpetual insurance premium increases, and more uninsured families is clearly untenable. But it’s likely to persist until Big Oil companies pay their fair share for the weather chaos they knowingly brought about. It’s time for the fossil fuel giants driving the home insurance crisis to shoulder the growing financial burden, not everyday Americans.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular