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
working families party
Why We Need a Progressive Shadow Cabinet to Counter Trump
A shadow cabinet would show us what it would mean to have a government of public servants who put the well being of American families ahead of the further enrichment of billionaires.
Mar 13, 2025
The rapid fire destruction initiated by President Trump, Elon Musk, and MAGA Republicans has overwhelmed Americans, with many scrambling to respond to one shock after another. Which was, of course, the point. The “flood the zone” strategy worked, for a while, leaving us alternating between fear and exhaustion.
But waiting for the lawsuits to stop the worst illegal moves or for disasters to expand to the point of collapse are losing strategies. Likewise, focusing exclusively on the failures of Trump administration policies leaves us feeling powerless and isolated.
What we need is a path forward.
Here’s one idea, discussed by North Carolina Democrat Rep. Wiley Nickel and historian and author Timothy Snyder: a shadow cabinet. The idea comes from other parliamentary democracies especially in Europe. In these systems, the opposition party establishes an alternative cabinet with specific portfolios that mirror those of the ruling government. These shadow ministers serve two crucial functions: they critique current policies while offering constructive alternatives.
Imagine having a shadow Attorney General who could provide journalists with informed counterpoints to administration claims while also creating a secure channel for alarmed federal employees to share concerns and leaks. Imagine a Secretary of Interior who could speak to the enduring value of American forests and parklands and why they should be protected.
What we need is to restore our sense of collective agency — to set a people’s agenda for the future and choose our own leaders.
A shadow cabinet would show us what it would mean to have a government of public servants who put the well being of American families ahead of the further enrichment of billionaires. During this time of overwhelm, when our physiological resources are limited by the impulse to “fight or flight,” this process could refocus us on our rights as citizens of this nation to have a government that works for us.
I propose one crucial variation on the approach proposed by Nickel and Snyder. The cabinet should not be appointed by the Democratic Party establishment — instead, we should embrace a truly democratic (small d) selection process. The Democratic Party establishment has failed to rise to the challenges of the times on many fronts, and many have felt alienated or left out.
Moreover, we need to recover our voices after the failed primary season of 2024 in which the nominations of Pres. Joe Biden followed by Vice President Kamala Harris were forgone conclusions. If Party leaders once again tell us who our leaders should be, alienation and cynicism would grow instead of engagement.
What we need is to restore our sense of collective agency — to set a people’s agenda for the future and choose our own leaders. So let’s create a grassroots process to debate priorities, hear from potential shadow cabinet candidates, and make selections collectively. We could consider a few key cabinet posts at a time. Caucuses at the local level could elect representatives to take community priorities and nominations for shadow secretaries to a national gathering for final selection.
This approach would be newsworthy, energizing, and shift our focus from mere opposition to creative problem-solving, visionary imagination, power-building, and community empowerment.
We could do this in locations across the country led by non-MAGA organizations that have large memberships and local chapters, for example The Working Families Party, Indivisible, the Women's March, Black Lives Matter, and Democratic Socialists of America come to mind, alongside local Democratic Party districts.
Americans are seeking genuine solutions to their everyday challenges, not ideological litmus tests. The questions we should be asking center on values and on practical approaches to improving the lives of current and future generations.
Our shadow cabinet members would serve as forward-looking spokespersons with the legitimacy of having been chosen through an inclusive process. They could effectively articulate alternative visions while also forming a deep bench of potential candidates for future elections.
Importantly, the democratic process itself would be enlivening. It would shift us away from the stale red-vs blue argument that too often miss the point. Is advocating for healthy lifestyles inherently conservative now that RFK Jr. is in office? Is supporting peace in Ukraine a right-wing position? Are immigration enforcement policies exclusively Republican when Democratic administrations have also implemented deportations?
Americans are seeking genuine solutions to their everyday challenges, not ideological litmus tests. The questions we should be asking center on values and on practical approaches to improving the lives of current and future generations.
This caucus process would provide valuable practice in democratic deliberation about real issues that are affecting our lives in local communities throughout the country. And it would expand our political imagination beyond the limitations imposed by establishment thinking, potentially embracing such popular proposals as Medicare for All.
No one is better equipped to define our national priorities and develop solutions than the American people themselves, engaged in pragmatic local conversations focused on constructive action. A democratic shadow cabinet offers a way to channel our energy toward building the future we want. By reclaiming our democratic voice through this process, we can begin building our vision and our power, re-engaging in our communities, and doing the essential work of renewal.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Outright Betrayal of Veterans': Fury Over Trump-Musk Plan to Fire 83,000 VA Workers
A House Democrat warned the move "will cripple the very system that millions of veterans rely on, denying them access to lifesaving healthcare, claims processing, and education benefits they've earned."
Mar 05, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk's sweeping effort to gut the federal government includes cutting up to 83,000 jobs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, according to a leaked memo that sparked a furious response on Wednesday.
VA Chief of Staff Christopher Syrek's memo to top staff was first reported by Government Executive late Tuesday.
As the outlet detailed: "The forthcoming cuts will be sweeping and spare no part of the department, Syrek said. He set an initial target of VA's staffing level in fiscal 2019, or 399,000 workers. VA currently employs 482,000 staff—and 459,000 full-time workers—meaning VA plans to slash its workforce by upwards of 83,000 individuals." Over a quarter of department employees are veterans.
"Trump and Musk want to take away veterans' healthcare to pay for massive tax breaks for billionaires. It's a morally bankrupt plan that will prevent those who served our country from getting the care they need."
U.S. House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Chair Mike Bost (R-Ill.) said in a statement that "I have questions about the impact these reductions and discussions could have on the delivery of services," and "I have been in contact with" Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins since the memo leaked. The panel's ranking member, Mark Takano (D-Calif.), was far more critical.
"This deliberate dismantling of VA's workforce by firing an additional 80,000 employees isn't just dangerous—it's an outright betrayal of veterans," said Takano. He warned that a return to the staffing level before the Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act, 2022 legislation to help those exposed to burn pits, "will cripple the very system that millions of veterans rely on, denying them access to lifesaving healthcare, claims processing, and education benefits they've earned."
Takano called on Bost to "immediately hold a hearing to get answers—because what's happening here isn't just a bureaucratic decision, it's a crisis in the making." He also demanded that Collins "explain how this reckless attack on VA won't have catastrophic consequences for veterans' access to care, benefits, and education."
Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) similarly said that "Congress worked in a bipartisan manner to pass the PACT Act and equip VA with the tools and resources needed to serve more veterans than ever. Since January 20, this administration has launched an all-out assault undermining that progress and attacking the VA workforce and the veterans it serves."
"This memo makes their goal crystal clear: They want to roll back the PACT Act by cutting 80,000 jobs—including 20,000 veterans—while starving VA's ability to meet increased demand in order to justify privatizing VA," Blumenthal continued. "Their plan prioritizes private sector profits over veterans' care, balancing the budget on the backs of those who served. It's a shameful betrayal, and veterans will pay the price for their unforgivable corruption, incompetence, and immorality."
Congressman Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), an Iraq War veteran, declared on the Musk-owned platform X that "they are trying to destroy the VA. Miss me with your flag waving GOP ads wrapping yourself in my fellow veterans. We're up for this fight."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) hosted a Wednesday press conference about GOP attacks on veterans. He said that "thousands of veterans across the country have been hurt by the extreme reactions of Donald Trump, the Trump administration, Elon Musk, and MAGA Republicans. It's unacceptable. It's unconscionable. It's un-American."
"And there are several veterans here today to tell their stories to the American people about what is happening and the fact that veterans all across this great country are being harmed," Jeffries explained. "Our promise to veterans and this country is that we will always stand with you."
The Associated Press on Wednesday obtained the memo and spoke with Michael Missal, one of several inspectors general suing over Trump's recent dismissal of the watchdogs. He told the AP that the VA is already suffering from a lack of "expertise" at the top of the agency.
"What's going to happen is VA's not going to perform as well for veterans, and veterans are going to get harmed," warned Missal, who was Blumenthal's guest for Trump's Tuesday address to Congress. The ousted inspector general described the VA as "a really complicated, hard to manage organization," like a big corporation, and defended his work there.
Outrage over the VA's plan to work with the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to "resize and tailor the workforce to the mission and revised structure," as Syrek put it, reached far beyond members of government.
"Trump and Musk want to take away veterans' healthcare to pay for massive tax breaks for billionaires. It's a morally bankrupt plan that will prevent those who served our country from getting the care they need," said Maurice Mitchell, national director of the Working Families Party. "Every House Republican should be point-blank whether they stand by Trump and Musk’s plan to cut healthcare for our veterans."
The watchdog Accountable.US called the reporting on the memo "damning," while American Federation of Government Employees national president Everett Kelley, stressed that the layoffs "will destroy the VA's ability fulfill the PACT Act's promises to veterans who either died or became ill as a result of exposure to burn pits, Agent Orange, and other toxic substances."
"The VA has been severely understaffed for many years, resulting in longer wait times for veterans in need," the union leader said. "The DOGE plunder of career VA employees, adding to the illegal mass firings of thousands of probationary employees, can only make matters worse. Veterans and their families will suffer unnecessarily, and the will of Congress will be ignored."
On behalf of the 311,000 VA employees his union represents, Kelley urged Congress "to intervene in these un-American tactics and put a stop to Elon Musk's DOGE rampage through America's most cherished agencies in a blatant attempt to justify privatizing government services."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Republicans Told to 'Stop Cowering' From Voters as They Back Unpopular Medicaid Cuts
"We expect every Republican who voted for the budget resolution to hold a town hall during recess on what parts of Medicaid and SNAP they want to cut," said the national director of the Working Families Party.
Feb 26, 2025
In the wake of their passage late Tuesday of a budget resolution that sets the stage for massive cuts to Medicaid and other key programs, House Republicans who supported the measure with near unanimity faced calls to explain their vote to constituents who will be directly harmed if the proposed cuts become law.
"We expect every Republican who voted for the budget resolution to hold a town hall during recess on what parts of Medicaid and SNAP they want to cut," Maurice Mitchell, national director of the Working Families Party, said in a statement following Tuesday's vote.
"If you stand behind this plan," Mitchell added, "stop cowering from your constituents."
In recent days, GOP lawmakers have faced angry audiences at town halls in their home districts as voters—including Republican constituents—express outrage over President Donald Trump and Elon Musk's lawless assault on federal agencies and the party's broader legislative agenda, which includes destructive attacks on key programs to help finance trillions of dollars in tax breaks largely for the rich.
"Every single swing district Republican voted to cut Medicaid so they can shovel cash to their billionaire backers."
The intensifying constituent wrath has left Republicans "weary and wary of in-person town hall meetings," NBC Newsreported Tuesday.
Citing an unnamed GOP aide, the outlet reported that "House Republican leaders are urging lawmakers to stop engaging in" town halls altogether.
In response to NBC's story, Indivisible co-executive director Ezra Levin noted that "there were like eight GOP town halls last week in the entire country."
"Ninety-five percent of GOP members were already hiding from constituents," Levin wrote on social media. "The fact that they think EIGHT is too many is a real sign of how scared they are of constituents and owning this agenda."
Last night, every single swing district Republican voted to cut Medicaid so they can shovel cash to their billionaire backers. If you’ve got an R representative, call now to let them know you’re furious: indivisible.org/resource/cal...
[image or embed]
— Leah Greenberg (@leahgreenberg.bsky.social) February 26, 2025 at 7:41 AM
Survey data indicates that the deep spending cuts congressional Republicans are pursuing are extremely unpopular, including with their own base. One poll released earlier this week found that 71% of Trump voters oppose Medicaid cuts and 60% oppose cuts to federal nutrition assistance.
Under the budget resolution that House Republicans passed late Tuesday, the committees that oversee Medicaid and SNAP are instructed to find over $1 trillion in combined cuts—a clear indication that the two programs are in the party's crosshairs, despite GOP leaders' claims to the contrary.
"This bill doesn't even mention the word Medicaid a single time," House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told reporters Tuesday.
But as The New York Timesobserved, the resolution's instructions to the House Energy and Commerce Committee—which has jurisdiction over Medicaid—to slash $880 billion in spending over the next decade leaves Republicans with few options other than large cuts to the program that provides healthcare to more than 70 million low-income Americans, including children.
"If Republicans want to avoid major cuts to Medicaid, the largest pot of available money is in the other big government health insurance program: Medicare," the Times observed.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) claimed Tuesday that Republicans are only targeting "fraud, waste, and abuse" in Medicaid—a statement that one expert called "a smokescreen for the tired, harmful playbook to gut the Medicaid program that was tried and failed in 2017 as part of the highly unpopular effort to repeal" the Affordable Care Act.
"House Republican leaders have not really moved on," Edwin Park, a research professor at the Georgetown University McCourt School of Public Policy's Center for Children and Families, wrote earlier this week. "Today, they are still pursuing the same kind of draconian Medicaid cuts that would take away coverage and access from tens of millions of low-income children, parents, pregnant women, people with disabilities, seniors, and other adults."
Shortly after Tuesday's vote, Protect Our Care announced a new flurry of ads targeting Republicans in competitive districts who backed the budget resolution, which still must be approved by the GOP-controlled U.S. Senate before the party can begin crafting its filibuster-proof reconciliation package.
The first round of ads, according to Protect Our Care, is aimed at Reps. David Valadao (R-Calif.), Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), Young Kim (R-Calif.), Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.), and Scott Perry (R-Pa.).
"Instead of standing up for their constituents' health, Republicans fell in line to vote in favor of ripping away healthcare from millions of Americans—all so they can give a tax break to billionaires and big corporations," said Leslie Dach, the chair of Protect Our Care. "Medicaid is popular across the board with voters, no matter where they live or who they voted for."
"By ignoring the impact of these cuts on their constituents, every House Republican who voted for this horrific budget is playing a dangerous game," Dach added. "If Republicans proceed with these cuts, we will hold them accountable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular