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.
New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy delivers a victory speech to supporters at Grand Arcade at the Pavilion on November 3, 2021 in Asbury Park, New Jersey. (Photo: Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Getty Images)
Over 800 days ago, Gov. Phil Murphy issued Executive Order 91 authorizing the creation of a public bank implementation board. At his press conference in Newark on Nov. 12, 2019, he said, "With the creation of this implementation board, I am proud to take the first step toward ensuring that our taxpayer dollars are invested here in New Jersey."
The common denominator is simple--the vast majority of board members do not want a public bank of any kind that upsets the status quo that is based entirely on borrowing money through private banks.
Sadly, today we are further away from implementing such a bank than when he made that pledge.
The board has been captured by bureaucratic and private banking interests that do not want our tax dollars invested there. Except for two brave souls, his implementation board is wedded to the status quo, which relies on private banking to fulfill New Jersey's financial needs.
As a former banker, the governor knows that more than $13.2 billion of our tax money is being loaned by the state of New Jersey Cash Management Fund to big banks and corporations, who in turn profit by moving our money all over the world.
At the same time, our local, county and state government agencies currently borrow billions from private banks and through municipal bonds arranged by Wall Street firms, who profit yet again from us.
To short-circuit this perverse cycle, the governor has proposed lending our tax dollars directly to our own state and local agencies via a public bank. In addition, as in the Public Bank of North Dakota, it also could partner with local private banks to make badly needed loans for small businesses, affordable housing as well as provide a pool of capital for low-interest student loans.
But from the very beginning, the governor's own implementation board has nixed the North Dakota model where tax dollars go directly into the public bank, which can direct them to important public policy goals. Other more modest "starter" public bank models were proposed and then dismissed along with a plan to purchase a small private bank to obtain its charter and then convert it to a public bank. The common denominator is simple--the vast majority of board members do not want a public bank of any kind that upsets the status quo that is based entirely on borrowing money through private banks.
But the implementation board must do something, doesn't it? Well, it's about to put out a $250,000 request for a proposal to create a business plan--one which, barring massive public pressure, will avoid any and all efforts to ensure "that our tax dollars are invested here in New Jersey." Instead, it will call for a revolving fund supported by donations and/or low-interest loans from private philanthropic organizations that then will be loaned at low rates to support affordable housing and the like.
One could easily imagine that large private banks through their charitable arms also could pony up for this non-threatening program. Certainly, the good work of such a fund could seamlessly become an additional program within a real public bank, but a public bank it is not and never will be.
The governor now has two options: 1. He can pretend this philanthropic option somehow marks the first step toward a public bank, and then call it a day. This might slip by given how little access the public currently has to the board's deliberations. Or 2. He can give the job of creating a real public bank plan to those who actually believe in it.
We have no shortage of public banking expertise or useful models. But what is lacking is the will to create the Public Bank of New Jersey. What is lacking is the will to challenge the governor's own bureaucracies. And what is lacking, most of all is the will to challenge the total domination of New Jersey finance by Wall Street and the private banking establishment.
Many of us still cling to the belief that Governor Murphy wants a real public bank. If so, he has the power, right now, to formulate a business plan to make it a reality. But does he have the will?
After 800 days, New Jersey taxpayers deserve an answer.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
Les Leopold is the executive director of the Labor Institute and author of the new book, “Wall Street’s War on Workers: How Mass Layoffs and Greed Are Destroying the Working Class and What to Do About It." (2024). Read more of his work on his substack here.
Over 800 days ago, Gov. Phil Murphy issued Executive Order 91 authorizing the creation of a public bank implementation board. At his press conference in Newark on Nov. 12, 2019, he said, "With the creation of this implementation board, I am proud to take the first step toward ensuring that our taxpayer dollars are invested here in New Jersey."
The common denominator is simple--the vast majority of board members do not want a public bank of any kind that upsets the status quo that is based entirely on borrowing money through private banks.
Sadly, today we are further away from implementing such a bank than when he made that pledge.
The board has been captured by bureaucratic and private banking interests that do not want our tax dollars invested there. Except for two brave souls, his implementation board is wedded to the status quo, which relies on private banking to fulfill New Jersey's financial needs.
As a former banker, the governor knows that more than $13.2 billion of our tax money is being loaned by the state of New Jersey Cash Management Fund to big banks and corporations, who in turn profit by moving our money all over the world.
At the same time, our local, county and state government agencies currently borrow billions from private banks and through municipal bonds arranged by Wall Street firms, who profit yet again from us.
To short-circuit this perverse cycle, the governor has proposed lending our tax dollars directly to our own state and local agencies via a public bank. In addition, as in the Public Bank of North Dakota, it also could partner with local private banks to make badly needed loans for small businesses, affordable housing as well as provide a pool of capital for low-interest student loans.
But from the very beginning, the governor's own implementation board has nixed the North Dakota model where tax dollars go directly into the public bank, which can direct them to important public policy goals. Other more modest "starter" public bank models were proposed and then dismissed along with a plan to purchase a small private bank to obtain its charter and then convert it to a public bank. The common denominator is simple--the vast majority of board members do not want a public bank of any kind that upsets the status quo that is based entirely on borrowing money through private banks.
But the implementation board must do something, doesn't it? Well, it's about to put out a $250,000 request for a proposal to create a business plan--one which, barring massive public pressure, will avoid any and all efforts to ensure "that our tax dollars are invested here in New Jersey." Instead, it will call for a revolving fund supported by donations and/or low-interest loans from private philanthropic organizations that then will be loaned at low rates to support affordable housing and the like.
One could easily imagine that large private banks through their charitable arms also could pony up for this non-threatening program. Certainly, the good work of such a fund could seamlessly become an additional program within a real public bank, but a public bank it is not and never will be.
The governor now has two options: 1. He can pretend this philanthropic option somehow marks the first step toward a public bank, and then call it a day. This might slip by given how little access the public currently has to the board's deliberations. Or 2. He can give the job of creating a real public bank plan to those who actually believe in it.
We have no shortage of public banking expertise or useful models. But what is lacking is the will to create the Public Bank of New Jersey. What is lacking is the will to challenge the governor's own bureaucracies. And what is lacking, most of all is the will to challenge the total domination of New Jersey finance by Wall Street and the private banking establishment.
Many of us still cling to the belief that Governor Murphy wants a real public bank. If so, he has the power, right now, to formulate a business plan to make it a reality. But does he have the will?
After 800 days, New Jersey taxpayers deserve an answer.
Les Leopold is the executive director of the Labor Institute and author of the new book, “Wall Street’s War on Workers: How Mass Layoffs and Greed Are Destroying the Working Class and What to Do About It." (2024). Read more of his work on his substack here.
Over 800 days ago, Gov. Phil Murphy issued Executive Order 91 authorizing the creation of a public bank implementation board. At his press conference in Newark on Nov. 12, 2019, he said, "With the creation of this implementation board, I am proud to take the first step toward ensuring that our taxpayer dollars are invested here in New Jersey."
The common denominator is simple--the vast majority of board members do not want a public bank of any kind that upsets the status quo that is based entirely on borrowing money through private banks.
Sadly, today we are further away from implementing such a bank than when he made that pledge.
The board has been captured by bureaucratic and private banking interests that do not want our tax dollars invested there. Except for two brave souls, his implementation board is wedded to the status quo, which relies on private banking to fulfill New Jersey's financial needs.
As a former banker, the governor knows that more than $13.2 billion of our tax money is being loaned by the state of New Jersey Cash Management Fund to big banks and corporations, who in turn profit by moving our money all over the world.
At the same time, our local, county and state government agencies currently borrow billions from private banks and through municipal bonds arranged by Wall Street firms, who profit yet again from us.
To short-circuit this perverse cycle, the governor has proposed lending our tax dollars directly to our own state and local agencies via a public bank. In addition, as in the Public Bank of North Dakota, it also could partner with local private banks to make badly needed loans for small businesses, affordable housing as well as provide a pool of capital for low-interest student loans.
But from the very beginning, the governor's own implementation board has nixed the North Dakota model where tax dollars go directly into the public bank, which can direct them to important public policy goals. Other more modest "starter" public bank models were proposed and then dismissed along with a plan to purchase a small private bank to obtain its charter and then convert it to a public bank. The common denominator is simple--the vast majority of board members do not want a public bank of any kind that upsets the status quo that is based entirely on borrowing money through private banks.
But the implementation board must do something, doesn't it? Well, it's about to put out a $250,000 request for a proposal to create a business plan--one which, barring massive public pressure, will avoid any and all efforts to ensure "that our tax dollars are invested here in New Jersey." Instead, it will call for a revolving fund supported by donations and/or low-interest loans from private philanthropic organizations that then will be loaned at low rates to support affordable housing and the like.
One could easily imagine that large private banks through their charitable arms also could pony up for this non-threatening program. Certainly, the good work of such a fund could seamlessly become an additional program within a real public bank, but a public bank it is not and never will be.
The governor now has two options: 1. He can pretend this philanthropic option somehow marks the first step toward a public bank, and then call it a day. This might slip by given how little access the public currently has to the board's deliberations. Or 2. He can give the job of creating a real public bank plan to those who actually believe in it.
We have no shortage of public banking expertise or useful models. But what is lacking is the will to create the Public Bank of New Jersey. What is lacking is the will to challenge the governor's own bureaucracies. And what is lacking, most of all is the will to challenge the total domination of New Jersey finance by Wall Street and the private banking establishment.
Many of us still cling to the belief that Governor Murphy wants a real public bank. If so, he has the power, right now, to formulate a business plan to make it a reality. But does he have the will?
After 800 days, New Jersey taxpayers deserve an answer.
The impacted students and graduates are accused of participating in the occupation of a university building that protesters renamed in honor of a child killed by Israeli forces in Gaza.
As the Trump administration's effort to deport Mahmoud Khalil sparks legal battles and demonstrations, Columbia University announced Thursday that it has revoked degrees from some other pro-Palestinian campus protesters.
A campuswide email reported by The Associated Press and shared on social media by Drop Site News says that "the Columbia University Judicial Board determined findings and issued sanctions to students ranging from multiyear suspensions, temporary degree revocations, and expulsions related to the occupation of Hamilton Hall last spring."
According to both news outlets, the university's email did not say how many students and graduates were impacted by each action.
As part of nationwide protests over the U.S. government and educational institutions' complicity in Israel's assault on the Gaza Strip, Columbia students took over the building last April and renamed it Hind's Hall, in honor of a young Palestinian girl killed by Israeli forces. With support from the university's leadership, New York Police Department officers stormed the campus.
Columbia's new sanctions against protesters were widely condemned on social media. Iowa-based writer Gavin Aronsen quipped, "This is a great PR strategy, come to Columbia where you'll get a solid education as long as you never speak your mind."
News of the university's latest action on Thursday came after over 100 people were arrested outside Trump Tower in New York City during a Jewish-led protest over the government's attempt to deport Khalil, a green-card holder who finished his studies at Columbia in December.
"The Trump administration's outrageous detention of Mahmoud Khalil is designed to sow terror and stop people of conscience from calling for Palestinian freedom," said Ros Petchesky, an 82-year-old MacArthur fellow and Columbia alumna. "We are Jewish New Yorkers and we remain steadfast in our commitment to Palestinian freedom, to protecting free speech and the right to protest, and to defending immigrants and all under attack by the Trump regime."
Meanwhile, during a Thursday interview with NPR about Khalil's detention, Troy Edgar, deputy homeland security secretary, equated protesting and terrorism.
"It is a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that's a lie."
A U.S. judge on Thursday ruled that the Trump administration must reinstate thousands of government workers fired from half a dozen federal agencies based on the "lie" that their performance warranted termination.
U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of California William Alsup—an appointee of former President Bill Clinton—granted a preliminary injunction supporting a temporary restraining order against the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and acting Director Charles Ezell on the grounds that the mass firing of probationary federal employees is "unlawful" because the agency lacked the authority for the move.
Alsup—who last month also found the OPM firings illegal—ordered the Trump administration to immediately reinstate all probationary employees terminated from the departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs.
"The reason that OPM wanted to put this based on performance was at least in part in my judgment a gimmick to avoid the Reductions in Force (RIF) Act, because the law always allows you to fire somebody for performance," Alsup said, referring the process used by federal agencies reduce the size of their workforce during reorganizations or budget cuts.
Last month, Trump signed an executive order directing Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency to institute RIFs across federal agencies as part of a so-called "workforce optimization initiative."
"It is a sad day when our government would fire some good employee and say it was based on performance when they know good and well that's a lie," Alsup wrote. "That should not have been done in our country. It was a sham in order to try to avoid statutory requirements."
While the White House blasted Alsup's ruling as "absurd and unconstitutional" and lodged an appeal, advocates for government workers cheered the decision.
Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), said in a statement that the union "is pleased with Judge Alsup's order to immediately reinstate tens of thousands of probationary federal employees who were illegally fired from their jobs by an administration hellbent on crippling federal agencies and their work on behalf of the American public."
"We are grateful for these employees and the critical work they do, and AFGE will keep fighting until all federal employees who were unjustly and illegally fired are given their jobs back," Kelley added.
Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), said: "Public service workers are the backbone of our communities in every way. Today, we are proud to celebrate the court's decision which orders that fired federal employees must be reinstated and reinforces they cannot be fired without reason."
"This is a big win for all workers, especially AFSCME members of the United Nurses Associations of California and Council 20, who will be able to continue their essential work at the Department of Agriculture, Veterans Affairs Department, and other agencies," Saunders added.
Violet Wulf-Saena, founder and executive director of Climate Resilient Communities—a California-based nonprofit that "brings people together to create local solutions for a healthy planet"—also welcomed Thursday's ruling.
"The mass firing of public service employees is a direct assault on the environmental justice movement and will harm people living in heavily polluted communities," she said. "Today's decision represents a key win for our movement because our lifesaving work cannot proceed without the vital infrastructure and support of our federal employees."
"Rep. Grijalva fought a long and brave battle," his staff said. "He passed away this morning due to complications of his cancer treatments."
Condolences and remembrances swiftly mounted on Thursday after the staff of U.S. Congressman Raúl Grijalva announced that the Arizona Democrat died at the age of 77, following a fight with lung cancer.
"Rep. Grijalva fought a long and brave battle. He passed away this morning due to complications of his cancer treatments," according to the office of the late congressman, who announced his diagnosis last April.
Grijalva, who represented Arizona's 7th District, was first elected to Congress in 2002. While on Capitol Hill, he rose to leadership roles, including co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and chair of the House Natural Resources Committee.
"From permanently protecting the Grand Canyon for future generations to strengthening the Affordable Care Act, his proudest moments in Congress have always been guided by community voices," Grijalva's staff said. "He led the charge for historic investments in climate action, port of entry modernization, permanent funding for land and water conservation programs, access to healthcare for tribal communities and the uninsured, fairness for immigrant families and Dreamers, student loan forgiveness, stronger protections for farmers and workers exposed to extreme heat, early childhood education expansion, higher standards for tribal consultation, and so much more."
"From Tucson to Nogales and beyond, he worked tirelessly for transformational improvements. Rep. Grijalva pushed for new public parks, childcare centers, healthcare clinics, local businesses, and affordable housing [that] breathed new life into neighborhoods across Southern Arizona. Improvements to our roads, bridges, and streetcar system have improved our daily lives and attracted new businesses and industries to the area," the office added. "Rep. Grijalva's passion was not only for his community, but for preservation of the planet."
Grijalva's colleagues also highlighted key parts of his legacy. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), a former House member, said that "I am heartbroken by the news of Congressman Raúl Grijalva's passing. For climate justice, economic justice, health justice—Raúl fought fearlessly for change. We served a decade together on the Natural Resources Committee, and I will forever be grateful for his leadership and partnership."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who also previously served in the lower chamber, said that "I mourn the death of Rep. Raúl Grijalva, a former colleague of mine and one of the most progressive members of the U.S. House. Raúl was a fighter for working families throughout his entire life. He will be sorely missed."
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) called his death "a genuinely devastating loss," adding: "Raúl Grijalva stood as one of the biggest champions for working people in all of Congress. His leadership was singular. He mentored generously and was an incredible friend. I will always be grateful for his lifelong courage and commitment."
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) said that "today we lost a dedicated progressive leader in Raúl Grijalva. The son of a bracero, Rep. Grijalva's 12-term commitment to our environment, to immigrant communities, and to his constituents in Tucson enriched this country. His passing is a monumental loss for our caucus and communities."
Congressman Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) wrote: "Wow. This is such a loss for Arizona and our country. Chair Raúl Grijalva has been a champion for progressive change his entire life. From the school board to Congress, his leadership and voice inspired so many. Myself included. Rest in power, Chairman Grijalva."
Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), elected to Congress in November, said that "I'm devastated to hear of the passing of my colleague Raúl Grijalva. He was a fighter for Arizonans and a champion for Indigenous communities and our planet. We will all miss him dearly. My thoughts are with his family, friends, loved ones, and constituents."
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who switched chambers after the last election, said that "Congressman Grijalva was not just my colleague, but my friend. As another Latino working in public service, I can say from experience that he served as a role model to many young people across the Grand Canyon State. He spent his life as a voice for equality."
"In Congress, I was proud to see firsthand his leadership as chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee as he stood up for Arizona's water rights, natural beauty, and tribes," Gallego added. "I am praying for his family during this time of grief, and I hope that they find comfort knowing his legacy is one that will stand tall for generations."
Advocacy group leaders also weighed in, with Kierán Suckling, executive director and founder of the Center for Biological Diversity, calling his death "a heartbreaking, devastating loss for the people of Southern Arizona and everyone around this nation who loves the natural world."
"Raúl was a great friend and partner in our fight for clean air and water, our beautiful public lands, and wildlife great and small," Suckling said. "We can all look to him as the model of what every member of Congress and every person of dignity and hope should aspire to be."
"From Mexican wolves to spotted owls to the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse, every creature in this country had a friend in Raúl," Suckling added. "He was as fierce as a jaguar, and that's why we called him our Macho G. I'll miss him dearly."
According to KVOA, the NBC affiliate in Tucson, Grijalva's office "will continue providing constituent services during the special election" to fill his seat.
Grijalva's death follows that of Congressman Sylvester Turner (D-Texas), who died on March 5. His seat will also need to be filled by a special election.