Weekly Education and Analysis on Current Events

Zinnia

Zinnia

Tag: News

  • Massachusetts Trash Collectors Fighting for Better Pay, Employers allow Strike to Continue for 7th Day

    Republic Services Workers represented by Teamsters Local 25 have entered their seventh day of strikes across Massachusetts. According to their union, trash collectors across the state are demanding higher wages, better health coverage, and stronger labor protections.

    Teamsters Local 25 has made it clear that they are seeking the same wages as other trash collection services in the region, ensuring that employers properly compensate their employees. The Union has also stated that they are committed to negotiating in good faith and that they are demanding fair wages and benefits for the workers.

    The power to end the strike rests upon the employers and it is their duty to ensure that their workers are compensated fairly for the work they do. The buildup of trash in local communities is on the fault of management and their inability to pay their hardworking employees their fair share for the work they do each and every day.

    Strikes are never the first action that a union takes when negotiating for dignified wages and benefits. They are the culmination of months, or even years long efforts to stall negotiations on behalf of the employers. Unions regularly engage in good faith negotiations while workers fulfill their daily obligations, and in fact, many union contracts are won without the need for a strike when employers respectfully meet the demands of their own workforce. Ultimately, if a strike is deemed necessary by the workers and their union, it is often because the employers have failed to engage in good faith negotiations and have demonstrated no desire to listen to workers’ demands. For many of these hardworking employees, there may be no other option left if management has repeatedly demonstrated an unwillingness to negotiate.

    Each strike demonstrates that it is the workers who keep society running. The fact that trash is beginning to build up just days after workers called a strike goes to show the amount of work that these employees put in each and every single day. It is only when the employers fail on their part to ensure that their workers are properly compensated that trash begins to buildup.

  • Public Healthcare Serves the American People, not the Private Option

    The defunding of Medicaid as a result of the Trump Administration’s Big Beautiful Bill puts at risk the healthcare coverage of about 17 million Americans in addition to necessary funding for rural hospitals and the majority of nursing home patients.

    While many will be left without an option, the alternative should not be a reliance on the privatized healthcare model, the very system that often denies Americans the coverage they need or leaves many individuals with crippling debt. The issue is that the private model is structured like a business with the primary intention of generating profit for shareholders. It operates as a for-profit industry, and the best way to generate those profits is to up-charge, under provide, and deny claims. It’s a business, a commodity, an investment opportunity.

    How Private Healthcare is modeled

    A universal option is not out of reach for Americans. The U.S. is the only OECD nation without universal healthcare, a structure which in many other countries provides citizens with better healthcare outcomes at a much lower cost. A universal system would be significantly cheaper than the common employer provided private option by almost half a trillion dollars.

    Americans currently spend roughly 4.5 trillion for healthcare every year, while a universal solution would drop it to just over 4 trillion. That means the average cost that each person pays would drop by approximately $1,500 every year while also providing better outcomes. This universalized system would cut out administrative costs, bureaucracy and paperwork, cut the cost of medicine and care, and would be far more accessible for every American. No premiums, co-pays, or deductibles. Additionally, It would not be able to deny lifesaving or preventative care and would give Americans direct access to services that are often denied under the current model.

    While some may fear that universalizing healthcare would overburden the system, this is a fear that is already being realized under the current structure. Due to medicaid cuts as a result of the Trump Administration’s Big Beautiful Bill, hospitals face funding shortages which will impact staffing, access to resources, and overall performance. A Hospital in rural Nebraska has already announced its imminent closure due to a foreseeable lack in funding from the passage of this bill. This will push more demand to hospitals in more dense regions who likewise, will face similar funding cuts. Hospitals across the country will face even more strain on an already failing system. On the other hand, the establishment of a universal option would ensure a well funded healthcare system and would ensure access to a hospital within reach for every American.

    Americans can either continue paying large sums to private corporations and still get denied claims, over priced drugs, and obnoxious paperwork, or pay far less for a service that is practically free at the point of use. This system would treat healthcare as a human right, not an investment opportunity. It would provide reliable access to a wide variety of health services ranging from preventative care, to personalized health consultations with trained professionals, to cheaper and readily accessible medication and treatments, to a lack of denials for any healthcare need.

    Rather, our government is choosing to provide tax cuts to the richest billionaires instead of using that money to provide Americans with a system that would guarantee cheap and effective Medicare for all.

  • Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill is Disastrous for Working Americans

    After receiving majority vote in both the House and the Senate, Donald Trump is set to sign the Big Beautiful Bill into law on Friday, July 4, 2025.

    The consequences of this bill, once in effect, will be absolutely disastrous for working Americans, cutting social spending by over $1 Trillion, including over $900 billion in cuts to medicaid and almost $300 Billion in cuts to food assistance programs. It will also extend trillions in Tax cuts which will disproportionately benefit the wealthy at the cost of the now gutted social programs that benefitted working Americans.

    It is estimated that about 17 million Americans will lose access to medicaid coverage, threatening long term health and in many cases, their lives. Many rural hospitals also receive funding and reimbursements through medicaid. Lack of stable funding poses a serious threat to their ability to stay operational. A Hospital in rural Nebraska has already announced its imminent closure due to a foreseeable lack in funding from the passage of this bill. This will push more demand to hospitals in more dense regions who likewise, will face similar funding cuts. Hospitals across the country will face even more strain on an already failing system.

    Medicaid also covers 60% of patients in nursing homes, threatening access to care to a majority of our nations elderly who receive care, increasing the cost of family care that many Americans rely on.

    The bill also includes an additional $175 billion in funding for “border security” operations, bringing the operational budget for entities like ICE at levels which surpass almost every single standing Army in the world, excluding the U.S. and China. This budget will be used to expand the capacity of detention facilities and to hire more personnel. Keep this additional $175 Billion budget in mind as the administration ramps up what it has stated to be the largest deportation operation in U.S. history.

    Increasingly dehumanizing rhetoric and an additional 175 Billion Dollars.

    Additionally, the bill will allot an extra $150 billion to the defense budget, bringing military spending just shy of about $1 Trillion. Regardless of what the money is spent on, it will go to benefit arms and defense sales for weapons manufacturers, deepening the entrenchment of the Military Industrial Complex while leaving behind the sick and hungry in the very same bill.

    The new budget also incorporates plentiful small text provisions that haven’t made much noise but still none the less chew away at everyday working Americans. A few of these additional provisions include a restructuring of student loan repayment plans, increasing monthly payments on those who sought personal advancement, eligibility for private space projects to receive public funds and tax free investments, $45 billion in extra funding for private prisons for ice detention centers, eligibility for private corporations to write of additional capital investments at the cost of public tax dollars, the rolling back of clean energy investments, and so on.

    While proponents have claimed that the bill is a pro-American, pro-working class budget, the amount saved in taxes will be nowhere near what has been taken away from health insurance, hospital funding, elder care, food assistance programs, etc. Working Americans will bear the full weight of this bill while the wealthiest in the nation enjoy permanent, trillion dollar tax cuts.

    Keep in mind what this money can be used for instead of lining the pockets of the already ultra-wealthy. The Recent Democratic Mayoral nominee in New York City, Zohran Mamdani, has shown that a single city alone can provide universal childcare, free busses, and affordable housing projects all by increasing the corporate tax rate by a few percentage points. Americans can enjoy stable housing, fast and free transportation, undeniable healthcare, childcare to relieve stress on new parents, food assistance programs, elder care, a hospital within reach for every American, quality education for every student, and so much more. But instead, our politicians chose to prioritize the greed of those who can afford all of the aforementioned dignities without making a dent on their personal fortunes.

  • Supreme Court unshackles Executive Power While Ruling on Birthright Citizenship, Limiting Nationwide Injunctions

    On June 27, while addressing Trump’s January executive order on birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court ruled that federal judges lack authority to impose nationwide injunctions, a tool that has historically been used to prevent controlling parties, both Democrat and Republican alike, from enacting key agenda goals.

    This ruling deliberately gives the Executive and the ruling party in congress exceptional power to enact their agenda and sets an incredibly dangerous precedent towards authoritarian control by this administration.

    What is a Nationwide Injunction?

    Put simply, an injunction is an order or demand by a judge. When applied Nationwide, it is often used to set back agenda goals by either party. For example, Biden era policies attempting to enact student loan forgiveness were stopped by judges in red states imposing nationwide injunctions. Likewise, Trump’s agenda is often stopped by judges in blue states via the same methods.

    What are the Greater Implications?

    The new court ruling now prohibits federal judges from imposing nationwide injunctions, meaning federal judges will now be unable to stop unconstitutional actions at the national level. Federal judges may still impose statewide injunctions but it would cause a legal mess between the states, leaving certain actions or policies legal in some states, and illegal in others.

    The consequences reach far beyond the issue of birthright citizenship, opening the door for the Trump administration to push through the republican agenda leaving few with the power to push back against the administration. While a California judge may be able to prevent the administration from carrying out it’s agenda in California, they will be completely powerless to stop it at a national scale.

    As for this legal Balkanization, it would create a huge mess concerning policies like birthright citizenship. If for example, the Trump administration were successful in repealing birthright citizenship, a California judge may be able to impose an injunction preventing the enactment of the policy while other states like Texas remain complicit. This would leave gaping legal questions about whether certain individuals would be citizens in California but not Texas, and likewise with every other state that either chooses to impose an injunction or remain complicit. This type of fragmentation would exist for any other federal policy pushed by either the Executive or Legislative branches.

    What we are left with is an administration that is now free to push through it’s agenda nationally, only being stopped in individual states with judges willing to impose statewide injunctions. Keeping in mind the greater objectives of this administration and their desire to proceed with mass deportations, while children born to migrant parents in California may receive greater protections compared to those born in states complicit with this administration, this type of fragmentation leaves behind migrant communities in other states who will lack any legal protections to keep them safe.

  • The Trump Administration Escalates Violence on Protesters in Los Angeles

    The Trump Administration Escalates Violence on Protesters in Los Angeles

    “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”

    – Martin Luther King Jr.

    Los Angeles CA: Police activity escalated against protestors as ICE began unjustifiable raids on immigrant communities and workplaces. This comes as the Trump administration proceeds in it’s deportation campaign which aims to embody Operation Wetback, President Eisenhower’s mass deportation operation which infamously removed one million people from the country, at times deporting US citizens as well.

    The National Guard has been deployed by the administration in order to confront peaceful protests which seek to defend community members from their unjust removal from the country. This has demonstrated a clear escalation on behalf of our leaders against communities which are exercising their right to organize a protest and to engage in free speech.

    The Trump administration repeatedly claimed during it’s presidential bid that their mass deportation campaign would target criminals, however, it’s been clear that ICE agents have been targeting workers, mothers, and community members while threatening deportations and separations of families. It is also worth noting that Immigrants commit less crime per capita than US born citizens, highlighting how the administration attempts to procure consent for an unjust deportation campaign by stroking unfounded fears of “increased crime”.

    The administration has shown repeatedly that it will not uphold our constitutional right to free speech or protest. If individuals cannot protest on public land like universities, city halls, or city streets without facing violent escalation, nor have the ability to protest on private lands, then movements have nowhere to protest at all.

    Here are recent developments demonstrating Police escalations against protestors:

    SEIU California President David Huerta arrested while advocating for Immigrant communities

    It is also worthy of note that Law enforcement and ICE, in addition to other government agencies, recieve training by Israel’s IOF in corralling, surveillance, protest suppression, and detention tactics which are often employed against US citizens and residents. Additionally, these agencies and their personnel are trained on the usage of tech and equipment to further brutalize all of our communities.

    The suppression, brutalization, and suffering of the Palestinians serves as a testing ground for the brutalization of protestors and immigrants in our communities across the country.

  • Update: Majority of Gaza Under “No-Go” Zones as Israel Continues to Block Entry of Humanitarian Supplies

    Update: Majority of Gaza Under “No-Go” Zones as Israel Continues to Block Entry of Humanitarian Supplies

    Between March 18 to April 14, the Israeli military issued 20 displacement orders, forcibly relocating and displacing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to ever decreasing zones within the Gaza strip. Over two thirds of the Gaza strip are now under these “No-Go” zones, cutting off connections within the strip and with Egypt as well, which has historically been the only crossing in and out of the Gaza strip not controlled by Israel, and a crucial crossing point for humanitarian aid.

    The displacement zones also disconnect cities such as Rafah, Khan Younis, and Gaza city from each other within the stip. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz has stated that Israeli military forces will remain in the designated security zones that it has established within the Gaza strip through seizure of Palestinian land. These zones will serve as corridors for the Israeli Military to occupy the Gaza Strip and will allow the military to further monitor and control the movement of Palestinians.

    Additionally, Katz has declared that “all of Rafah will be evacuated and there will be a security zone”. This is especially concerning as Rafah has served as a shelter for Palestinian refugees fleeing Israeli-caused destruction elsewhere in the Gaza strip, also serving as a reception point for humanitarian aid, and as a connection to the Egyptian border for those seeking emigration.

    Defense Minister Israel Katz has also stated: “Gaza will become smaller and more isolated, and more and more of its residents will be forced to evacuate from the fighting zones.”

    In conjunction with the implementation of these displacement zones, Israel has been blocking the entry of any humanitarian aid into Gaza. The UN has shared that the Palestinian Refugee Agency (UNRWA) has humanitarian supplies stockpiled outside of the Gaza strip. The only barrier to delivery is the refusal by the Israeli government to allow that aid to enter. The UNRWA has has warned that “supplies inside Gaza are nearly all gone, with food stocks running dangerously low and only 250 food parcels left”. Israel has blocked the entry of any food, medicine, and other humanitarian aid since March 2.

    U.S. foreign policy has played a crucial role in the development of this conflict and can play a crucial role in pressuring a ceasefire. U.S. arms manufacturers and foreign policy diplomats provide Israel with a majority of its military and economic support, allowing the Israeli military to conduct its actions on the scale that it currently operates. As many have pointed out, the administration in power in the U.S. can pressure ceasefire negotiations by withholding said military and economic aid. However, this is a power not exercised by U.S. administrations.

  • U.S. Senator Van Hollen Shows Power that the Democratic Party Should Use More Often

    U.S. Senator Van Hollen Shows Power that the Democratic Party Should Use More Often

    On April 18, 2025, Senator Chris Van Hollen pressured the Salvadorian government to allow him to meet with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident who the Trump administration admitted to wrongfully and illegally deporting.

    Van Hollen elaborated in a press conference on how he obtained a meeting with Abrego, stating that he requested visitations and calls with Abrego, petitioning as well for the Salvadorian government to allow him some contact with his lawyers or family as well.

    After repeated no’s from Salvadorian Officials, Van Hollen drove to CECOT, where he was stopped by soldiers and was told that he could not proceed. Upon preparing to leave the country, Van Hollen stated that he received word that he would be allowed to meet with Abrego.

    El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele shared photos on X of the meeting, stating that they had allegedly been drinking margaritas. It’s clear that Bukele gave in to the pressure that a U.S. Senator can procure.

    The lesson to be learned here is that party officials, including Senators, do indeed have lots of power to demand attention to an issue, to pressure action and response from government officials, and to push back against misinformation and injustice.

    The sad reality is that this is a power that is all too often forgotten by Democratic Party leaders. By making the issue unavoidable to the press, party officials can garner the media attention required to push back on harmful and false narratives, can lead the way for positive policy development.

    It can be extremely effective in combatting misinformation about migrant crime (when in reality migrants in the U.S. commit less crimes per capita than U.S. born citizens), or in combatting narratives about student protests “supporting terrorists”, or to bring attention to conflicts or ongoing genocide, etc.

    Rather, there are numerous instances where party officials capitulated to the right on their narratives and their framing, from a supposed immigration crisis, to supporting genocide, to outright agreeing with the Trump administration on the suppression of free speech, among various other cases.

    Chris Van Hollen’s actions showed the power that a single U.S. senator can have in shifting the narrative about an issue, simultaneously combatting misinformation and raising awareness, which can ultimately have effects on policy or even elections. By making a situation unavoidable to the press, elected party officials can procure the means to shift the narrative about import issues in society, and can use their power to advocate for just policy and positive change.

  • Timeline of Kilmar Abrego’s Case and Bukele’s refusal to send him back.

    Timeline of Kilmar Abrego’s Case and Bukele’s refusal to send him back.

    Updated April 14, 2025

    On April 10, 2025, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of a lower court ordering the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. This comes after Abrego’s deportation to the Salvadorian prison known as CECOT and what the administration admitted to be an “administrative error”.

    Let’s take a quick look at the timeline of events leading up to the Supreme court order.

    Timeline of Events

    On March 12, 2025, Abrego was stopped by ICE agents in his car with his 5 year old son. ICE agents contacted the child’s mother, telling her “she had ten minutes to pick up her son before he was turned over to child protective services.”

    At the time, Abrego had a work permit in the U.S. and was still granted a withholding of removal, which forbade his removal to El Salvador.

    On March 15, 2025, the Trump administration sent three planes with the deportees to El Salvador. This was done without a trial or hearing to determine the validity of a deportation or the validity of the claims to having MS-13 gang ties, violating the Fifth Amendment of the constitution which ensures that the federal government cannot deprive one of “life, liberty or property without due process of law.” This applies to non-citizens as well.

    The plane holding Abrego was ordered to turn around by Judge Boesberg stating “You shall inform your clients of [the Order] immediately, and that any plane containing [members of the class] that is going to take off or is in the air needs to be returned to the United States”

    Despite this order, the plane proceeded to land in El Salvador, leaving Abrego in the Salvadorian prison known as CECOT, while having never been convicted of any wrongdoing. The Trump administration admitted to his wrongful deportation, claiming it to be an “administrative error”.

    On April 4, 2025, The United States District Court for the District of Maryland ordered the facilitation of his return and on April 10, 2025, the Supreme court unanimously upheld the lower courts decision.

    On April 14, 2025, Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele visted Trump in Washington, stating that the question to return Kilmar Abrego was “preposterous”. Bukele also stated that he does not have the power to send Abrego back nor the interest to do so. The U.S. and Salvadoran government have an extradition treaty which allows either government to send detainees to either country, as well as historical precedent of the Salvadoran government extraditing Salvadoran citizens to the U.S.