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
u.s. house
Tim Walz Offers to Meet With Voters Whose GOP Reps Refuse to Hold Town Halls
"Canceling town halls to avoid voter backlash is the thing you do, right before you lose the majority," said one Democratic strategist.
Mar 04, 2025
Voters in Republican districts may see considerably less of their members of Congress in the coming months following a directive from the chair of the U.S. House GOP's campaign arm on Tuesday, but Democratic leaders including Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz offered to fill in for lawmakers who don't want to face constituents who have questions about the Trump-Republican agenda.
"If your Republican representative won't meet with you because their agenda is so unpopular, maybe a Democrat will," said Walz, who was former Vice President Kamala Harris' running mate in the 2024 election. "Hell, maybe I will."
Walz's offer followed reports that Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), who chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), said in a private meeting that members of the right-wing caucus should no longer meet in person with constituents at town halls to avoid the outcry that has garnered media attention at many recent meetings.
As the party has pushed for $880 billion in cuts to Medicaid and federal food assistance in the budget proposal that the House passed last month—to help fund a tax cut for the richest Americans—and as President Donald Trump's billionaire ally, Elon Musk, has spearheaded massive cuts to federal agencies, Republicans at town halls have faced angry voters from across the political spectrum.
In Kansas on Saturday, Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) stood up and left his own town hall after a voter asked how the GOP can support mass firings that have impacted thousands of veterans.
Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) was booed last month at a town hall as voters denounced the Republican Party's support for cuts to federal health agencies, and lawmakers in Alaska, Wisconsin, and Oregon faced similar reactions.
Right-wing commentators quickly dismissed the outcry about cuts to crucial public services as the result of Democrats mobilizing their voters—in apparent disbelief that constituents, without being prompted, would express anger about cuts to a healthcare program that serves nearly 80 million people.
On Monday, Trump dismissed people who have spoken out at town halls as paid "troublemakers," and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Tuesday that those who have demanded answers from lawmakers about Musk's activities and the budget proposal are "Democrat activists who don't live in the district."
"They're professional protesters," he told reporters. "So why would we give them a forum to do that right now?"
Republicans have not presented any evidence that people speaking out about Musk's Department of Government Efficiency( DOGE) and the party's economic agenda are being paid to do so.
U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) went as far as to compare people who object to public spending cuts to Neo-Nazis and threatening to arrest people who are "disruptive" at town halls and charge them with a misdemeanor.
"I'm not going to put up with these agitators," said Van Orden. "We're not doing it. Republicans are too nice."
Dan Pfeiffer, co-host of the podcast "Pod Save America" and a former Obama administration official, said that "canceling town halls to avoid voter backlash is the thing you do, right before you lose the majority."
At the GOP meeting, Hudson reportedly told lawmakers that "the paid resistance people are out there like in 2017," leading Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) to ask whether the Republican Party also blames the "paid resistance" for their loss of more than 40 House seats in the 2018 elections, which followed the party's attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act and its passage of the 2017 tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefited the wealthy.
Walz suggested Republicans' refusal to engage with their constituents could present an opportunity for Democrats to win more support in GOP districts.
"If your congressman refuses to meet, I'll come host an event in their district to help local Democrats beat 'em," said the governor.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) wrote in a column at The American Prospect Tuesday that he already has plans to meet with voters in Republican voters, just as GOP lawmakers retreat.
"Starting March 24th, I will be going to three red districts in California to speak out against DOGE's mass firings and the Republicans' Medicaid cuts. This is a moment for progressives to speak directly to people across the country, especially in places that have been hollowed out by the offshoring of jobs and failed policies that have put billionaires over the working class," wrote Khanna, noting that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) spoke in Nebraska and Iowa districts last month where GOP members face competitive elections in 2026.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) added that she hosts "a town hall every single month because it gives me an opportunity to hear from my constituents and not hide from them."
"But I am not surprised Republicans are cowards," she said, "and will now be hiding from their constituents."
Keep ReadingShow Less
15 Democrats Join House GOP to Pass 'MAGA Assault' on Nonprofits
"This bill is a five-alarm fire for anyone who seeks to protect free speech, civil society, and democracy," said one rights advocate.
Nov 21, 2024
After widespread condemnation of 52 U.S. House Democrats who joined the GOP last week in backing a bill that would threaten nonprofit groups, there was significantly less support among Democratic members for the legislation on Thursday—but civil society groups denounced those who persisted in supporting what one critic called a "MAGA assault" on fundamental rights.
The so-called "Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act" (H.R. 9495) passed in the House by a vote of 219-184, with 15 Democrats joining all but one Republican in supporting the bill.
The 15 Democrats who supported the legislation in Thursday's vote include Reps. Jared Golden (Maine), Colin Allred (Texas), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), and Henry Cuellar (Texas).
If ultimately signed into law, the bill would allow the U.S. Treasury Department to revoke tax-exempt status from nonprofits that it deems "terrorist supporting organizations."
Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich urged the Senate, which is led by the Democrats until January, not to allow the "attack on free speech [to] come up for a vote during the lame-duck."
"If it does, they must vote NO," he said.
But with Republicans set to take control of both chambers of Congress as well as the White House after the New Year, advocates are warning that it will ultimately give the Trump administration "unprecedented and unchecked power" to take action against groups whose mission and work President-elect Donald Trump opposes, particularly those fighting for Palestinian rights.
"This bill is a five-alarm fire for anyone who seeks to protect free speech, civil society, and democracy. This bill is part of a broader MAGA assault on the fundamental right to public protest that begins with attacks on Palestinian rights groups and is aimed at outlawing all social justice movements fighting for progressive change," said Beth Miller, political director for Jewish Voice for Peace. "It is shameful that the House of Representatives passed a bill that is straight out of the well-worn authoritarian playbook. The Senate must ensure that this bill to dismantle fundamental freedoms does not move forward or become law."
JVP noted that H.R. 9495 has its roots in the right-wing policy agenda Project 2025 and the Heritage Foundation's Christian nationalist initiative Project Esther, which claims to combat antisemitism but is aimed at denying resources to groups that support the human rights of Palestinian people.
Advocacy groups including JVP credited civil society groups that mobilized in recent days to demand that Democrats oppose H.R. 9495, as Republicans prepared to bring the bill up again for a simple-majority floor vote. The legislation was blocked in the previous vote, despite the support of 52 Democrats, because it required a two-thirds majority to pass under a procedural rule.
JVP Action said it "drove over 35,000 letters to Congressional offices in one week opposing this legislation," while groups including Fight for the Future, Muslims for Progressive Values, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations also joined the effort.
Chip Gibbons, policy director for Defending Rights & Dissent, a group dedicated to protecting the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights, condemned the lawmakers who were unmoved by "overwhelming civil society opposition."
"Two hundred and four Republicans and 15 Democrats in the House voted in favor of a bill that will be used to strip organizations of their nonprofit status in a politically motivated fashion and without proper due process," said Gibbons. "The bill is driven by the current McCarthyite attacks on Palestine solidarity activism, but it empowers the executive branch to crackdown on charities broadly. It is intolerable for any administration to have these powers, but it is reckless for anyone who claims Trump poses a threat to democracy to hand his administration yet another weapon to use against their opponents."
Under the legislation, the federal government would not be required to disclose evidence of its allegations that nonprofits are "terrorist supporting organizations."
"In the absence of meaningful due process, any nonprofit—from humanitarian organizations to independent newsrooms—could risk losing tax-exempt status," said Defending Rights & Dissent. "The bill has further implications for civil society. The mere threat of being tied up in litigation, facing the reputational harm that such a designation would bring, and loss of donors, would chill speech and stifle dissent."
Online news outlet Mondoweiss said that if signed by Trump after he takes office, the measure "could become a powerful tool to crack down on groups that advocate for justice in Palestine."
"If H.R. 9495 becomes law, we'll be entering a dangerous era where nonprofits can be shut down with little evidence and no accountability," said Mondoweiss. "Today it's pro-Palestinian groups—tomorrow it could be any organization critical of government policy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Unveils Stopgap Funding Plan Pushing 'Manufactured' Issue of Non-Citizen Voter Fraud
“If Speaker Johnson drives House Republicans down this highly partisan path," said Democratic leaders, "the odds of a shutdown go way up."
Sep 07, 2024
Leading U.S. Senate Democrats on Friday accused House Republicans of "wasting precious time catering to the hard MAGA right" as House Speaker Mike Johnson unveiled a stopgap funding bill tied to a proposal that would require proof of citizenship in order to vote in federal elections.
The proposal—the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act—has been pushed by Republican presidential nominee and former President Donald Trump and was passed by the House in July, with five Democrats joining the GOP in supporting the bill.
Non-citizens are already barred from voting in federal elections. With about 21.3 million eligible voters reporting in a recent survey that they would not be able to quickly access their birth certificate, passport, naturalization certificate, or certificate of citizenship in order to prove their status, critics say the proposal is a clear attempt to stop people of color and young Americans from taking part in elections.
Johnson proposed including the legislation in a stopgap bill, or a continuing resolution, that would keep the government running roughly at current spending levels through March 28—a move that would postpone major spending negotiations until after the next president takes office.
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said that "avoiding a government shutdown requires bipartisanship, not a bill drawn up by one party," and alluded to former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) attempt last September to ram a spending bill through with immigration and border policy changes in order to avert a government shutdown.
"Speaker Johnson is making the same mistake as former Speaker McCarthy did a year ago," said Schumer and Murray in a statement. "The House Republican funding proposal is an ominous case of déjà vu."
“If Speaker Johnson drives House Republicans down this highly partisan path," they added, "the odds of a shutdown go way up, and Americans will know that the responsibility of a shutdown will be on the House Republicans' hands."
Johnson is expected to bring the bill to the House floor on Wednesday after lawmakers return from summer recess. Congress has a September 30 deadline to make changes to the spending bill in order to avoid a partial government shutdown on October 1.
The House speaker called the proposal "a critically important step" toward funding the government and ensuring "that only American citizens can decide American elections"—prompting one critic to accuse Johnson of pushing a "manufactured" issue.
"Anyone who reads the SAVE Act understands it is a bad bill," said attorney Heath Hixson, "a poorly worded unfunded mandate that'll lead to voter suppression and racist outcomes."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular