“As an adjudicated insurrectionist, Trump is an illegitimate president according to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, and therefore every official act as president will be illegitimate.”
–Mike Zonta, co-editor of OccupySF.net
The 14th Amendment states: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
Call your Congressperson and your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121
In 2008, a Wall Street crash gutted millions of lives. It took until 2011 for the Left to answer — a call to protest went out, thousands came, and they tried to build an anti-capitalist village in a small Manhattan park.
Told through the voices of activists who camped in Zuccotti Park for almost two months, Occupy! An Unfinished Uprising gets inside a movement that grew fast, felt transcendent and chaotic at once, and then violently flamed out. The press called it a failure. It changed the national conversation about capitalism, gave us the language of the 99%, and trained a generation of organizers.
As Occupy’s 15th anniversary arrives this September, it’s a reminder that collective action can still reshape what looks impossible.
Bilal Mahmood and Rafael Mandelman. Photos by Abigail Van Neely.
San Francisco Board President Rafael Mandelman removed Supervisor Bilal Mahmood from a city housing committee on Friday, a move Mahmood alleged was because of his plans to counter historic preservation legislation championed by Mandelman.
Mahmood claimed Mandelman’s decision to remove him from the Board of Supervisors Land Use Committee, which oversees housing and zoning, was over Mahmood’s opposition to Mandelman legislation to undertake a study and expand the list of registered city landmarks.
Mahmood has been critical of the move, and says expanding historic preservation will hamper housing production. His proposed amendments would mandate that any loss in potential housing production would be remediated by increasing building height limits on other parcels to make up the difference.
Without a seat on the Land Use Committee, Mahmood will no longer be able to introduce those amendments himself. “I could find someone to introduce the amendments,” he said. “But there’s no guarantee of that.”
But the conflict between the two legislators also comes amid speculation that they will face off in a California State Assembly race in less than two years’ time.
Mandelman has already launched a campaign for the seat; Mahmood has said he is not currently considering a run, and that doing so would be “premature.”
Still, political observers believe he may yet throw his hat in the ring, and Mandelman said, “I believe he is considering it.” Mandelman denied, however, that this factored into his decision to push Mahmood off the Land Use Committee.
Mahmood ran unsuccessfully for assembly in 2022. The assembly seat will either open in 2027 or 2028, depending on whether Sen. Scott Wiener is elected to Congress. Haney, the seat’s current occupant, has signaled intentions to run for Wiener’s seat.
You follow City Hall. So do we.Mission Local DailyGovernmentMore newsletters▾Sign up free
Mandelman, for his part, defended his actions and said that his goal is to “put together committees that are true to the mood of the full board.” He said he replaced Mahmood with Supervisor Matt Dorsey to ensure a continued YIMBY presence on the housing committee.
Mahmood was the only supervisor to be involuntarily taken off a committee. Supervisor Connie Chan was replaced as budget chair, but she had announced in December that she planned to step down.
Mandelman declined to comment on Mahmood’s claims that his removal was related to the historic streamlining legislation.
“But I will say that his approach to my historic preservation legislation has been quite aggressive,” he said.
Mahmood’s amendments would “gut the legislation,” Mandelman said, adding that the “more collegial move” would have been for Mahmood to ask Mandelman whether he accepted the amendments. If Mandelman did not, Mahmood could have simply voted no on the legislation, Mandelman said.
“Supervisor Mahmood clearly chose a different course, and that is his right, but I don’t really think that’s the way to keep the era of good feeling going at the Board of Supervisors,” Mandelman said, referring to the fact that, for the most part, there has been little conflict between supervisors this term.
Mahmood has been sharply critical of other city politicians recently, too, including a few weeks ago, when he accused Mayor Daniel Lurie and Supervisor Connie Chan of conspiring to block a tax measure he had proposed.
Mandelman took note. “I do think there’s a shift happening in how Supervisor Mahmood is approaching his job and I did consider that as I was making those assignments,” he said.
Mahmood disagreed. “I think to say someone is being aggressive because they’re engaging in the democratic process is pretty misleading,” he said. “I think it is more so a pattern of the president seeming to engage in shuffling the cards to avoid difficult votes.”
Mahmood has little recourse about his committee assignment. Mandelman is board president and has unilateral authority over committee appointments.
We won’t ignore your neighborhood
When a San Francisco neighborhood has a Mission Local reporter, it means someone is there. We’re following new housing projects proposed on your block, keeping tabs on what your district supervisor is up to at City Hall, and letting you know when longtime businesses close (and new ones open). When big news breaks, we already know the context.
Most neighborhoods don’t have that. Yours could.
That’s what Mission Local is building. Our reporters don’t parachute in — they write consistently on San Francisco, so you’re never reading about your neighborhood from someone who just looked it up.
So far we are in five of San Francisco’s neighborhoods. But we know all San Franciscans deserve our kind of coverage. Will you join us?
Io is a staff reporter at Mission Local covering city hall and S.F. politics. She is a part of Report for America, which supports journalists in local newsrooms.
Io was born and raised in San Francisco and previously reported on the city while working for her high school newspaper, The Lowell. She studied the history of science at Harvard and wrote for The Harvard Crimson.
President Donald J. Trump speaks to the press before boarding Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC, on May 12, 2026. Photo credit: The White House / Flickr (PD)
A lot has changed since the golden age of journalism.
In the mid-1970s, not long after a couple of reporters broke the story that ended up bringing down a crooked, lying president, an overwhelming majority of Americans trusted the news media.
A lot has changed since then, and most of it was bad for journalism.
The public’s faith in the media has completely reversed in the intervening 50 years — from a high of 72 percent in 1976 to a mere 28 percent now. That is less than the 34 percent who say they have no trust at all.
Perhaps without meaning to, Vice President JD Vance recently summed it up perfectly.
“If Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12-hour news story,” he said. “The idea that it would have taken down a presidency is crazy.”
We don’t know whether this was a rare honest assessment of the crookedness of his boss, a testament to the ideological entrenchment of GOP voters, or a comment on the waning influence of journalists. In any of those cases, it is a scary thought.
What is even more frightening, however, is that Vance is totally right.
On the journalism side of things, the issue isn’t that reporters aren’t uncovering major stories anymore. They do, including some that dwarf the revelation that Richard Nixon helped cover up his campaign’s involvement in trying to bug the opposing party’s headquarters.
So, what has changed?
What sounds like a simple question is actually very complicated, and it seems quite obvious the big news organizations don’t have an answer — at least not those that are still interested in providing a public service (of which there aren’t all that many anymore).
That last bit is part of the answer. The role of journalism and journalists has changed. But so have Americans… and so has the world.
The news media hasn’t done a very good job adjusting to these changes, and that’s a big part of the problem.
What Has Changed? Everything.
While journalism has always been a business, reputable media outlets were much more than just that during those heydays.
Correspondents all over the world kept Americans informed about what was going on in faraway places like Vietnam, and local newspapers told them where the next farmer’s market was going to be, how the high school football team was faring, who had been born, and who had died.
In other words, they were an integral part of the fabric of the country, and often the only source of reliable information outside of that provided by the government.
That’s simply no longer the case.
First, let’s look at how news organizations have changed since then.
Over the past few decades, journalism has unquestioningly become less serious. That began in the early ’80s with the emergence of CNN and USA Today, which turned news into a consumable.
But that wasn’t the end of it.
The internet accelerated that trend, and before you knew it, audiences were turning to the trough of BuzzFeed and its listicles.
In addition, while it was now possible to get the news to people more quickly, this also meant that many journalists and their outlets began valuing speed over accuracy and putting news events into context.
Finally, there was the challenge of monetizing this online content. Some media organizations opted for paywalls while others turned to “clickbait” to generate revenue with ads.
And then things got much, much worse with the advent of social media companies like Facebook and Twitter because, all of a sudden, news outlets no longer controlled and hosted their own content.
That wasn’t the only problem. In the past, “the news” was generated by trained journalists and (generally) presented in a fairly objective manner with safeguards against misinformation.
That’s not what happened on social media platforms, where any yokel with an opinion (or, for that matter, a Russian troll farm) could present “the news.” This usually doesn’t involve any original reporting but rather the regurgitation of the work of the aforementioned journalists. Or, of course, just misinformation and disinformation.
And because the tech companies were not worried about providing a service for the public good but rather just wanted to make a lot of money, they tweaked their algorithms to maximize engagement and push content that stirred emotions, very often rage and grievance, in their users.
A byproduct of all of this was that journalists themselves changed.
While the anchors of network news shows had always been celebrities in their own right (just more along the lines of a trusted family member), the past few decades have also seen the emergence of brand-conscious celebrity journalists.
That began with Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the two Washington Post reporters who broke the Watergate story, and continued on, for example, with CNN covering Desert Storm.
Once again, the internet and social media made things worse as journalists sought to amass their own personal following.
Back in that golden age in the 1970s, nobody went into the news business to get rich or famous. There wasn’t even a mechanism to do so. Nowadays, however, there are plenty of journalists who seem to view their day jobs as a springboard to internet fame, cable news stardom, or getting that book contract for which they would reserve their juiciest scoops.
That last part is especially maddening because it shows that excellent, Watergate-level investigative journalism is still being done.
And then there are the news outlets themselves.
Many of the biggest ones are now owned and run by billionaires who want to shape the world to their liking. While Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch is the most egregious example, there are now many more.
Obviously, journalism didn’t change in a vacuum.
The news media was forced to react to massive societal changes, such as the emergence of the internet and social media, how Americans consume news, and the arrival of an authoritarian political force that tried to undermine journalism as a potential source for truth.
In every one of these cases, that response has been disastrous.
That is not always the media’s fault, and we are not saying there are easy answers. In some cases, there aren’t any.
For example, there is nothing the horse & buggy operators at the turn of the last century could have done to stay in business, just like it was always clear that the existence of the internet would disrupt journalism.
But news outlets didn’t sufficiently meet the moment.
They never figured out how to use the internet to their advantage instead of being taken advantage of by Facebook and other social media platforms that pilfered their content.
They never made the case to consumers that producing quality journalism comes at a cost.
And too many of them participated in the race to the bottom for clicks.
To be fair, the American people didn’t help. Their appetite for investigative journalism or wonky political coverage has waned. Instead, they are hungry for the kind of slop that propaganda outlets and influencers are dressing up as news.
In other areas, however, the blame squarely falls on the shoulders of the major news outlets.
They failed to address Donald Trump’s endless lies and to unequivocally call out his anti-democratic views and his corruption. Most importantly, they kept giving him a platform because it was good for ratings.
The media’s insistence on treating Trump with kid gloves has done incalculable damage to the country (and to journalism itself).
There are not two sides to every story, and calling out immoral and criminal behavior as such is objectivity.
This is something that the same reporters Trump refers to as “the enemy of the people” still don’t get. They are hanging on to a nostalgic notion of journalism that existed when people were mostly telling the truth and largely acting in good faith, and when the unmasking of a corrupt president could still end a presidency.
But that’s not the time we are living in, and, in order to survive and to continue being one of the few remaining institutions that can hold another crooked president to account, the news media has to find ways to be relevant and trusted again… before every important outlet gets gobbled up by another billionaire who wants to control the news instead of reporting it.
Klaus Marre Klaus Marre, a former congressional reporter, is a senior editor for US politics at WhoWhatWhy. He writes regularly here, and you can also follow him on Bluesky and Substack.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio makes opening statement during an event at the US Department of State on July 16, 2026, in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)
“When you are shameless, contemptuous of international law, and morally bankrupt, you boast of disgrace as though it were an achievement,” said one critic.
In announcing the sanctions, Rubio described the ICC as “a corrupt and fatally politicized” institution that has supposedly “abused its authority and exceeded its mandate.”
Rubio said the ICC “has repeatedly attempt to assert authority over… the United States and other countries that have not consented to its jurisdiction,” which he said “sets a dangerous precedent for all nations.”
In addition to sanctioning Akane, Rubio said the US would also be sanctioning ICC senior trial lawyer Abdoulaye Saye.
While Rubio did not mention what specific actions the ICC has taken to warrant such sanctions, a Tuesday report in The Guardian noted that Saye was charged with investigating war crimes allegedly committed by Israel during its years-long assault on Gaza.
The Trump administration had previouslysanctioned then-ICC prosecutor Karim Khan—who obtained arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant—and an additional eight ICC officials.
The social media account of Drop Site News accused Rubio of attacking the court solely to protect Netanyahu from war crimes prosecution, pointing out that “there is currently not a single American citizen under indictment, investigation, or facing an arrest warrant” from the ICC.
The sanctions earned the praise of the Israeli American Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which accused the ICC of conducting “politically motivated investigations and prosecutions targeting America and Israel.”
Rutgers Law School professor Adil Haque said the ICC sanctions showed the US was acting like a “rogue government” and engaged in “deranged behavior.”
Michael Karanicolas, law professor at Dalhousie University, didn’t just point fingers at the US over the sanctions, but at US allies who have sat back as international institutions have come under assault.
“I’m no longer surprised by the Trump administration’s efforts to destroy the ICC,” wrote Karanicolas. “What I keep waiting for is any response from Canada or the European governments who ostensibly still believe in international law to defend these institutions.”
War correspondent and international political analyst Elijah Magnier delivered a withering rebuke of Rubio’s announcement.
“When you are shameless, contemptuous of international law, and morally bankrupt,” wrote Magnier, “you boast of disgrace as though it were an achievement.”
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Maj. Jason Watson, a US airman who was arrested in Washington, DC in July for participating in a protest against President Donald Trump’s war in Iran, talked about his decision to speak out on CNN on August 17, 2026.
(Photo: CNN/screenshot)
“Not only is he a failure as president, he is flagrantly violating the Constitution, breaking the law, engaged in rampant corruption, and is killing Americans, and that is unacceptable to me,” said Maj. Jason Watson.
Maj. Jason Watson’s participation in a protest organized last month by the Removal Coalition, a group that calls for President Donald Trump’s impeachment, wasn’t his first foray into speaking out against the commander-in-chief.
He spent 22 days last year on a hunger strike, staying anonymous by wearing a white mask and white jumpsuit on the US Capitol grounds, next to a sign that read: “Impeach. Convict. Remove.”
But the US airman spoke Monday about what pushed him last month to go public with his protest against Trump’s unprovoked war on Iran, displaying the same sign at a news conference organized by Removal Coalition, where he wore his Air Force uniform and was identified by name.
“If I don’t put myself out there in a big way, it’s just noise,” Watson told CNN anchor Erin Burnett. “We can change what is happening in our country if we’re just willing to pay a price for it.”
Air Force Maj. Jason Watson tells @ErinBurnett he is speaking out against Trump knowing the potential consequences and laws governing the US military: “Nothing that is worth doing, is something that you can do for free… we can change what is happening in our country if we’re… pic.twitter.com/UtBuBM6gOA
His public dissent against the broadly unpopular war could violate Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which mandates punishment against “any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words” against the president, military leaders, or US government officials, or Article 134, which prohibits statements “made with the intent to promote disloyalty or disaffection toward the United States.”
Air Force Secretary Troy Meink has said the military is investigating the protest. Watson could face dishonorable discharge, a loss of military pay, and months in prison for violating the Uniform Code.
When considering his public protest, Watson said he asked himself, “What’s the highest price that I’m willing to pay, and this is what I ultimately came up with.”
He said he was “absolutely motivated” by his oath to the US Constitution and his concern for the future of the country as Trump and continues to threaten Iran and other countries in the Middle East, nearly six months after the president joined Israel in waging war on Iran.
“Any American can say, this government is intolerable and I want a better future for my children, and I want to hand them a better country than I inherited,” said Watson.
After he joined the news conference on the Capitol steps last month, Watson was arrested by the US Capitol police. He was held in jail overnight and transferred to the DC Superior Court before the DC attorney general dropped the charge, but Air Force police officers then took him into custody and held him at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling.
Air Force Major Jason Watson calls for the immediate removal of President Donald Trump and VP JD Vance from office at a press conference in front of Congress Wednesday afternoon.
He cites the numerous Constitutional violations undertaken by the Trump administration, from his… pic.twitter.com/YePHlxpLtn
Jessica Denson, founder of the Removal Coalition, told The Washington Post last month that Watson was “prepared for the worst-of-the-worst outcome” of his protest.
Watson said after his arrest that during his previous anonymous protest, he had been overly concerned with being identified, considering the Uniform Code.
“There wasnobody paying attention because it’s just easy to ignore a lone actor, especially dressed the way that I was,” he said on Denson’s podcast, “Lights On.”
He told Burnett Monday: “Nothing that is worth doing is something that you can do for free. Everything that is worthwhile is going to cost something.”
“It’s going to be hard, it’s going to require sacrifice, and we are in an incredibly challenging time, and in order for us to get out of this situation we all have to have courage,” he said.
On CNN, Watson doubled down on speaking out against Trump’s war in Iran, which has killed more than 3,400 Iranians, including hundreds or children and women, as well as thousands of people across the Middle East as the conflict has widened, and at least 17 US service members.
The war has also worsened the affordability crisis in the US as oil and gas prices have soared, and led to a standoff over control of the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran effectively closed in retaliation for the US-Israeli assault.
“What is happening with the Iran War is very predictable strategically, and a lot of much smarter people than me knew that it would have gone pretty poorly,” said Watson. “And he chose to do it anyway.”
Air Force Maj. Jason Watson, who was arrested at the US Capitol after calling for Trump’s impeachment and removal from office, says the Iran war motivated him to speak out: “What he did was unconstitutional. It was an aggressive war of choice.” pic.twitter.com/wk9n0F6G7J
“At the end of the day, it’s also more important to remember that what he did was unconstitutional,” said Watson. “It was an aggressive war of choice that, if we saw another country do that, we would probably look to our allies and say, ‘What are we gonna do about this?’”
He compared the US war on Iran with Russia’s incursion in Ukraine—another “aggressive war of choice.”
“He has failed us,” Watson said of Trump. “Not only is he a failure as president, he is flagrantly violating the Constitution, breaking the law, engaged in rampant corruption, and is killing Americans, and that is unacceptable to me.”
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin speaks during a Labor Council meeting as part of the DNC Summer Meeting, Thursday, Aug. 13, 2026, in Austin, Texas. AP Photo/Joel Angel Juarez
Iowa and New Hampshire are out, though they may not go down without a fight. South Carolina and Nevada are in.
The Democratic National Committee formally approved sweeping changes to the party’s 2028 presidential primary calendar Saturday, putting states that are more racially diverse at the front of the line.
The order in which states vote typically plays a significant role in shaping the presidential primary — influencing both what issues are discussed and who ultimately emerges.
Party officials set South Carolina first on Jan. 22, 2028, followed by Nevada (Feb. 1), New Hampshire (Feb. 8), New Mexico (Feb. 15), Michigan (Feb. 22) and Virginia on (Feb. 29).
The new calendar represents a sea change from past competitive primaries. For decades, Iowa and New Hampshire, two states with largely white populations, had started the process. Now, two southern states and two Western states will be among the earliest contests, which is likely to expand the influence of Black and Latino voters. “Six states, different regions, different communities, different experiences but together as one our road map to the White House,” Ken Martin, the DNC party chair, said in a speech to the party on Saturday.
The earliest states will play an outsize role in winnowing what is expected to be an expansive field of candidates. The order was officially set by a vote of the DNC membership at a meeting in Austin, Texas, on Saturday.
After those first six states vote, each on their own day, a range of states will vote on Super Tuesday in early March.
The party’s new rules include stiff penalties for states that hold primaries in violation of the calendar, and for any candidates who might campaign in those states. But some uncertainty remains, especially in New Hampshire, where a state law requires its primary be the first in the nation. The DNC allows the state to hold a party-organized primary on Feb. 8.
Democrats in the state so far have resisted being relegated to third in line.
The party had tried to put South Carolina first in 2024, as well, but New Hampshire jumped the line. Former President Joe Biden declined to appear on the New Hampshire ballot, so his supporters instead organized a write-in campaign, and the party eventually rescinded its penalties and seated the state’s delegates at the convention.
San Francisco Historium Spotlight will explore The City’s development with shows, cuisine, tours and more
It is unclear when Iowa will hold a primary or caucus in 2028. The state has complained about the DNC’s new calendar, and some politicians in the state have threatened to hold an early event anyway, citing their own state law, which calls for Iowa to caucus at least eight days before any other presidential nominating contest.
On Saturday, Rita Hart, chair of the Iowa Democratic Party, said the new calendar “excludes huge swaths of the country and the voters Democrats need.”
And she warned that it was still possible the process could be “thrown into chaos” and an “unwelcome distraction” for Iowa Democrats trying to win this year.
Jamie Harrison, the former DNC chair and a former chair of the Democratic Party in South Carolina, made the case that, “We’re not erasing tradition. We’re building on it.”
Even with that uncertainty, potential 2028 candidates are already flooding into these early states. Pete Buttigieg, the former transportation secretary who now lives in Michigan, is headed to South Carolina for a political event next week. Gov. Gavin Newsom of California campaigned with Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the progressive Democratic candidate running for Senate, this past weekend, after he won the nomination in Michigan. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York had campaigned for El-Sayed ahead of the primary, and she also appeared in a campaign commercial for him.
Some leaders in South Carolina are eager for all the attention the state — and the issues that its voters care about — is now about to get. Iowa’s premier place for years had meant candidates would talk about agricultural issues and ethanol, for instance.
Black voters generally have been a moderating force in Democratic politics, so the early position of South Carolina could lead the state to have a similar effect. In the past, South Carolina played the pivotal role of anointing the candidate with the most momentum headed into Super Tuesday. Now Michigan and Virginia — which are bigger and more expensive to campaign in — are set to hold that power.
Political strategists in both the moderate and progressive wings of the party have pored over how the new calendar might play out. Buttigieg, for instance, carried Iowa in 2020, but now that state has fallen out of the early slate. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a leading progressive, carried New Hampshire in both his presidential runs, but there is a debate over whether that was just ideological alignment or how much his decades representing nearby Vermont may have given him a boost.
Biden had placed South Carolina first in the calendar in 2024, elevating the state that delivered him the nomination in 2020 after bruising defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire. But it was far from certain that the state would keep that slot headed into 2028.
South Carolina had a fierce fight for the leadoff spot with Nevada, an important general election battleground.
The final order — which also includes New Mexico and its large Latino population — has received mostly positive reviews from Democrats as fair and geographically balanced. The biggest complaints have come from the Midwest, which now has only one state among the first six, Michigan, and it is only fifth.
Democratic House Majority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told viewers of NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he no longer supports Medicare for All on Sunday, August 16, 2026.
(Photo: Screengrab/via NBC News)
“Does Jeffries even pay attention to the overwhelming support of the Democratic Party base?” asked one labor movement veteran, citing a new poll showing 90% of the party want lawmakers to focus on passing universal healthcare.
Democratic House Majority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York sparked fresh outrage Sunday by saying he does not currently support Medicare for All legislation in Congress, a damning admission at a time when party voters—clamoring for bolder positions from leadership and a willingness to fight for the working class—are overwhelming in favor of proposals that would provide universal healthcare coverage for every person in the United States at a lower cost than the current system.
Appearing on Sunday’s “Meet the Press,” Jeffries was asked by host Kristen Welker—who noted his previous backing of such proposals from 2013 to 2021—if he would put Medicare for All legislation in the House up for a vote if Democrat’s win back the majority in November, Jeffries first tried to dodge the question by putting his focus on the shortcomings of the Republicans, who gutted have Medicaid and attacked Affordable Healthcare Act subsidies during President Donald Trump’s second term.
But pressed by Welker if he “personally” supports Medicare for All at this time, Jeffries said, “No,” explaining that “it’s not legislation that I currently am co-sponsoring or that I support.”
WELKER: As Democratic leader in the House, would you vote for or against Medicare for All?
JEFFRIES: It's not legislation that I currently am co-sponsoring or that I support, but I support the notion we've got to find a path forward to fix our broken healthcare system pic.twitter.com/U8UZ4TqSZQ
The remarks were hardly surprising, but landed hard for critics, who quickly pointed out that a new CBS/YouGov poll released Sunday showed—as survey after survey has also documented—that hunger for Medicare for All among Democratic voters is remarkably high.
As Common Dreams reported last week, a recent Yale University study found that Medicare for All, as drafted in a bill by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), would save over 114,000 lives annually and $1 trillion per year in US healthcare spending.
In the poll, conducted between Aug. 12-14, a full 90% of Democratic voters said they would “like to see the Democratic Party focus on plans for passing Medicare for All,” compared to just 10% who said it should not be a focus.
“A reminder that the vast majority of Democrats across the country support Medicare for All,” said progressive journalist Mehdi Hasan in response to Jeffries’ answer on the question. “This man is so out of touch with his party. How is he their leader?”
The Lever’s David Sirota also issued a rebuke, explaining that Jeffries’ comments, juxtaposed with the CBS/YouGov poll, show exactly “why Democratic voters are so enraged.”
Also notable from the poll were responses to two questions that preceded the question about the specific policies Democrats should focus on.
Asked if it was more important for the Democratic Party to “show they are fighting for people” or that “they have detailed policies,” 83% said it was more important for Democrats to show they are fighting, while just 17% said detailed policies were more important. Similarly, when it came to economic issues, voters—by a 68% to 29% margin—said they’d prefer “big or fundamental changes in policies and approach, even if they are harder to do” compared to those who wanted “smaller or incremental changes to policies and approach, that might be easier to do.”
Appearing after Jeffries on “Meet the Press,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a top ally of Sanders and a current co-sponsor of the Medicare for All Bill introduced earlier this year in the House, disagreed with the Minority Leader’s position.
“Medicare for All is arguably the most important priority,” Khanna said. “It would save money, and it would save lives. Look, there was just a Yale study that came out. It would save $1 trillion in terms of costs, in terms of health care.”
Asked by Welker if he was “disappointed” in Jeffries’ remarks, Khanna said that while “I respect the difference” of opinion, “I will say this: it needs to have a vote on the House floor.”
“The majority of the House Democrats are going to support it,” he continued. “It is one of the most important policies if you actually believe in saving lives and in helping increase wages for working-class Americans. You talk to folks, and they’ll say, ‘The biggest thing that pushes me into bankruptcy is if someone gets cancer. And I can’t afford the bills.’ And even people who have insurance, look at how many premiums have been increasing. This would save money for ordinary Americans. And it would increase their wages. It’s the single biggest roadblock in our economic system hurting working families.”
In a social media post on Sunday, Sanders—while not mentioning the latest comments by Jeffries—said, “Our current healthcare system is broken. Progressives understand healthcare must be a human right, guaranteed to all, not a source of billions in profits for insurance and drug companies.
Our current healthcare system is broken.
Progressives understand healthcare must be a human right, guaranteed to all, not a source of billions in profits for insurance and drug companies.
A recent poll showed 64% of Americans want Medicare for All. They’re right. Let’s do it. pic.twitter.com/NFwOUk0QKB
WEDNESDAY (8pm ET/5pm PT): Join our first national Hands Off Our Vote election protection training to learn how YOU can help protect democratic elections from sabotage by the Trump regime. Protecting the midterms will require a trained, informed citizenry dedicated to defending our sacred right to vote and mobilizing to ensure that every vote is counted. If you’re ready to step up, join our first training this Wednesday where we’ll cover specific things you can do RIGHT NOW to help ensure all eligible voters can cast their ballots. We know this fight isn’t one-size-fits-all, so we’ll provide ways you can shape those actions to your local needs and capacity — whether you’re an individual, a group member, or a group leader, you’ll leave the training with action items to start making an impact right away.
Delete the DoorDash App until they stop fighting to give Trump more control over the District of Columbia. DoorDash has stood silently by while ICE detains and murders their delivery drivers. They said nothing when Trump flooded DC streets with the National Guard. But now, DoorDash has voiced their support for HR 9720, a bill that would give Trump more authority over DC and its residents, all so they can kill a 20-cent tax on delivery orders they don’t like (and which actually supports food stability programs). No matter where you live, you can have an impact by deleting your account until they meet the conditions laid out below.
WASHINGTON—Assuring the American people he would not let the legal system sway his judgment in any decision he makes, recently sworn-in Attorney General Todd Blanche vowed at a press conference Monday to remain fully independent of the law. “The autonomy of the Office of the Attorney General is paramount, and I will defend it against any act, statute, ordinance, or even basic common-law principle,” said Blanche, emphasizing that no federal law or constitutional restriction would have any influence whatsoever upon his investigations, prosecutions, or other official actions. “For far too long, the Department of Justice has displayed a prominent pro-law bias, but under my tenure that will be rectified immediately. As of this morning, I have shelved all cases against those accused of crimes and launched inquiries into several people toward whom the president has expressed a slight personal distaste.” Blanche added that he would wholeheartedly defend President Donald Trump from any attempt to restrain his actions using the U.S. Constitution.
This is your sign to take action for the midterm election. Common Power mobilizes volunteers to get out the vote across the country because we believe the most common power we should all have, is the power of our vote. By moving our volunteers towards political action through community, education, and investment in next-generation leadership, we work to sustain our fight for a democracy that serves us all.
GET MIDTERMS READY:
WE’RE DOORKNOCKING IN 20+ STATES AND 50+ ELECTIONS
Common Power is hitting the ground to talk to voters and get out the vote. We’re mobilizing on two critical fronts: fighting for candidates who can win seats in Congress now and leaders who can reshape the Democratic Party in the future.
We’re reaching voters across the country thanks to our state teams. You can join a team today to stay updated on travel information and connect with volunteers.
ALL OF OUR DOORKNOCKING OPPORTUNITIES IN ONE PLACE:
Ready to volunteer for the Midterms? Download the Common Power Action App to sign up for a trip. We’ve streamlined all our work for our volunteers and Team Leads in one place to make coordinating a breeze.
Consider helping CoPo bring another doorknocker instead! Sponsorships go towards transportation, lodging, and meals on the grounds for sponsored volunteers. We primarily sponsor Action Academy students and Institute Educators, our younger and more diverse pathways into the CoPo community.
THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2023 AT 2 AM – 4 AM PDT How to create trust in a group? Details Event by Extinction Rebellion Empathy Circles online EMPATHY CAFE Duration: 2 hr Public · Anyone on or off Facebook How to create trust in a group? This is the question that arose in our... Continue reading →
Trump Regime Takedown: Every Saturday Saturday, March 7, 2026 12:00 PM 2:00 PM Tesla San Francisco999 Van Ness AvenueSan Francisco, CA, 94109United States (map) Google Calendar ICS Keep democracy alive every Saturday by showing up, taking a stand, and sticking together for the long haul. Standing together is better than standing alone. Let’s get together... Continue reading →
HBD Marsha- An All-Trans Drag Show Celebrating Marsha P. Johnson’s Birthday and Trans History Month Date: Saturday, August 22 Time: 4PM Location: Jane Warner Plaza, F-Line Castro Stop Come through to Jane Warner Plaza this Saturday at 4 PM for an All-Trans Drag Extravaganza hosted by Lady Adjacent. Featuring the best talent in the... Continue reading →
Meeting Agenda August 22, 2026 The San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee’s Endorsements Committee and Issues and Resolutions Committee will hold a joint meeting on August 22nd, 2026 at 4:00 pm via Zoom to interview candidates for local elected office and ballot measure proponents and opponents for the November 3,... Continue reading →
This Sunday’s Town Hall: Announcing This Week’s Progressive Town Hall: Every Sunday at 4pm ET/1pm PT RSVP HERE Join PDA activists online from across the country to discuss the importance of progressives reclaiming the American story from the MAGA right, an issue of heightened importance as we’re now within one... Continue reading →
Who’s ready for another election? Read on to find out how to get involved with the League of Pissed Off Voters. Save the Date: August 23rd Endorsement Meeting OMFG this ballot is so long (25 propositions!). We will host our endorsement meeting on Sunday, August 23rd, and we’d love for... Continue reading →
We protest Heritage Foundation EVERY MONDAY (Join us!!!!) By admin | September 2, 2025 | Uncategorized Cliff Cash Comedy Premiered Jul 26, 2025 Every Monday at The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Ave. Washington D.C. 4pm protest 6pm pizza Every Friday at Fox News D.C. 400 N. Capitol St. Washington D.C. 4pm protest 6pm pizza We are... Continue reading →
Milk Club Trans Caucus Meeting Date: Tuesday, August 25 Time: 5-7 PM Join: Meeting info available to members of the Milk Club Trans Caucus. Please reach out to trans@milkclub.org if you would like to join the Milk Club Trans Caucus.
Milk Club AAPI Caucus Meeting Date: Tuesday, August 25 Time: 6-7PM Video Join Link: Click here We’re here to recruit you! https://tinyurl.com/milkclubaapi
by 
