Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Presidential contenders take symbolic stand against corporate PACs

Spurning donations from corporate political action committees is one of the few items of early agreement for virtually every announced Democratic presidential candidate. But the impact of this move on the candidates' campaign finances is far more symbolic than substantive.

That's because corporate PACs "aren't big players in the campaign finance world for presidential elections, so most candidates aren't really giving up that much money," Mother Jones notes in a story about the vow taken so far by four of the senators in the race – Kamala Harris of California, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kirstin Gillibrand of New York – along with Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii and former San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro.


Less than 1 percent of all contributions to the major party nominees came from PACs in the last four presidential elections, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. The organizations can give just $10,000 to a 2020 candidate, a tiny sum in the age of super PACs that get to spend without limit on messaging and advertisements. "And corporate PACs tend to not be especially ideological, mainly supporting incumbents from both parties or donating to both candidates in the same races to benefit themselves regardless of who wins," Mother Jones notes.

Read More

A stethoscope, calculator, pills, and cash.

America’s healthcare debate misses the real crisis: soaring care costs. Discover how inattentional blindness hides the $5.6T gorilla reshaping policy, work, and rural communities.

Getty Images, athima tongloom

America’s $5.6 Trillion Healthcare Gorilla: Why We’re Blind to the Real Crisis

In the late 1990s, two Harvard psychologists ran a now-famous experiment. In it, students watched a short video of six people passing basketballs. They were told to count the number of passes made by the three players in white shirts.

Halfway through the film, a person in a gorilla suit walks into the frame, beats its chest, and exits. Amazingly, half of viewers — both then and in later versions of the study — never notice the gorilla. They’re so focused on counting passes that they miss the obvious event happening right in front of them.

Keep ReadingShow less
A stethoscope, calculator, pills, and cash.

America’s healthcare debate misses the real crisis: soaring care costs. Discover how inattentional blindness hides the $5.6T gorilla reshaping policy, work, and rural communities.

Getty Images, athima tongloom

America’s $5.6 Trillion Healthcare Gorilla: Why We’re Blind to the Real Crisis

In the late 1990s, two Harvard psychologists ran a now-famous experiment. In it, students watched a short video of six people passing basketballs. They were told to count the number of passes made by the three players in white shirts.

Halfway through the film, a person in a gorilla suit walks into the frame, beats its chest, and exits. Amazingly, half of viewers — both then and in later versions of the study — never notice the gorilla. They’re so focused on counting passes that they miss the obvious event happening right in front of them.

Keep ReadingShow less
Rethinking the Church’s Calling in a Time of Crisis
person's hand
Photo by Billy Pasco on Unsplash

Rethinking the Church’s Calling in a Time of Crisis

There is a significant distinction between charity and justice. Charity responds to visible wounds in the community and rushes to bandage them as necessary. Justice, rooted in biblical conviction and prophetic courage, goes further. It questions the sources of suffering: Why are people bleeding in the first place? This tension between crisis response and deeper transformation is at the core of a courageous step recently taken by Atlanta's New Birth Missionary Baptist Church.

As the nation grapples with democratic strain and institutional fatigue, New Birth's decision to suspend the collection of tithes and offerings during a government shutdown and amid the threatened rollback of social supports is a daring example of moral clarity. It is more than an act of relief; it is a refusal to proceed with business as usual when the most economically vulnerable are again being asked to bear the highest costs. The pause is not merely financial; I believe it is prophetic. An assertion that the church's highest duty is to its people, not its ledger.

Keep ReadingShow less