Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Biden touts ‘unity agenda,’ touches on voting rights in State of the Union

Joe Biden 2022 State of the Union address

Republican lawmakers applaud during President Biden's State of the Union address.

Win McNamee/Getty Images

President Biden gave Ukraine top billing and said fighting inflation is the “top priority” during his State of the Union address Tuesday. But he also spoke at length about building a unity agenda and — very briefly — called for passage of election reform legislation.

Three years ago, House Democrats first introduced the For the People Act, giving the sweeping election overhaul legislation the symbolic designation “HR 1” — the first bill offered by the newly empowered Democratic majority. Three years and multiple versions later, the legislation remains mired in a partisan dispute, with Republicans in near unanimous opposition to one of the Democrats’ lead issues.

Biden called for passage of the latest version of the bill, as well as other election reforms, during his speech, but spent just 35 seconds discussing those priorities.


“The most fundamental right in America is the right to vote — and to have it counted. And, look, it’s under assault,” he said, about 45 minutes into his hour-long address. “In state after state, new laws have been passed, not only to suppress the vote — we’ve been there before — but to subvert the entire election. We cannot let this happen.”

“Tonight I call on the Senate to pass the Freedom to Vote Act, pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. And while you’re at it, pass the Disclose Act so Americans know who is funding our elections.”

The Freedom to Vote Act is the successor to the For the People Act. It was negotiated by Sen. Joe Manchin, a moderate Democrat from West Virginia, in hopes of winning enough Republican backers to overcome a filibuster. But that bill and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which would restore elements of the Voting Rights Act struck down by the Supreme Court, remain blocked.

The other bill Biden mentioned is a favorite of those who want more transparency in campaign financing. If enacted, it would require groups like super PACs and “ dark money ” organizations to disclose many of their donors.

Biden spent far more time talking about opportunities for bipartisanship. (The words “bipartisan” and “unity” appear a combined seven times in the official transcript.)

Shortly after concluding his section on Ukraine and fighting authoritarianism, Biden thanked members of both parties for their work to pass the massive bipartisan infrastructure bill last year, and asked Congress to follow it up by enacting what he called the Bipartisan Innovation Act. He was likely referring to the America COMPETES Act, a measure designed to make the United States more competitive with China. While 19 Republicans voted for the Senate version of the bill, only one backed the House version. Lawmakers must work out differences between the chambers.

The president returned to the theme later, noting he signed 80 bipartisan bills into law in 2021 and calling for “a unity agenda for the nation” with four primary themes:

  • Ending the opioid epidemic.
  • Tackling mental health, particularly among children.
  • Supporting veterans.
  • Bringing an end to cancer.

At one point, while speaking about the Covid-19 pandemic, Biden noted that Americans have been deeply divided on the issue, generally along party lines, and called for a moment “to reset.”

“Let’s stop looking at Covid-19 as a partisan dividing line and see it for what it is: a God-awful disease. Let’s stop seeing each other as enemies, and start seeing each other for who we really are: fellow Americans,” he said. “We can’t change how divided we’ve been. But we can change how we move forward — on Covid-19 and other issues we must face together.”

There were even moments when Biden appeared to be directly appealing to Republicans and moderate Democrats at the expense of his party’s base, such as when he spoke against progressives’ “defund the police” movement.

"We should all agree: The answer is not to defund the police. The answer is to fund the police,” he said. “Fund them with the resources and training they need to protect our communities."

Throughout the speech, Republicans seemed willing to join Biden’s call for unity. Traditionally, there’s a clear line between the parties, as the president’s party stands and applauds throughout while the opposing party sits on their collective hands. But this year, both parties appeared to offer enthusiastic support far more than in the recent past.

As he neared the final lines of his first State of the Union address, Biden spoke optimistically of Americans’ ability to defend the nation’s shared values:

“We will meet the test. To protect freedom and liberty, to expand fairness and opportunity. We will save democracy.”

Read More

After the Ceasefire, the Violence Continues – and Cries for New Words

An Israeli army vehicle moves on the Israeli side, near the border with the Gaza Strip on November 18, 2025 in Southern Israel, Israel.

(Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)

After the Ceasefire, the Violence Continues – and Cries for New Words

Since October 10, 2025, the day when the US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was announced, Israel has killed at least 401 civilians, including at least 148 children. This has led Palestinian scholar Saree Makdisi to decry a “continuing genocide, albeit one that has shifted gears and has—for now—moved into the slow lane. Rather than hundreds at a time, it is killing by twos and threes” or by twenties and thirties as on November 19 and November 23 – “an obscenity that has coalesced into a new normal.” The Guardian columnist Nesrine Malik describes the post-ceasefire period as nothing more than a “reducefire,” quoting the warning issued by Amnesty International’s secretary general Agnès Callamard that the ”world must not be fooled” into believing that Israel’s genocide is over.

A visual analysis of satellite images conducted by the BBC has established that since the declared ceasefire, “the destruction of buildings in Gaza by the Israeli military has been continuing on a huge scale,” entire neighborhoods “levelled” through “demolitions,” including large swaths of farmland and orchards. The Guardian reported already in March of 2024, that satellite imagery proved the “destruction of about 38-48% of tree cover and farmland” and 23% of Gaza’s greenhouses “completely destroyed.” Writing about the “colossal violence” Israel has wrought on Gaza, Palestinian legal scholar Rabea Eghbariah lists “several variations” on the term “genocide” which researchers found the need to introduce, such as “urbicide” (the systematic destruction of cities), “domicide” (systematic destruction of housing), “sociocide,” “politicide,” and “memoricide.” Others have added the concepts “ecocide,” “scholasticide” (the systematic destruction of Gaza’s schools, universities, libraries), and “medicide” (the deliberate attacks on all aspects of Gaza’s healthcare with the intent to “wipe out” all medical care). It is only the combination of all these “-cides,” all amounting to massive war crimes, that adequately manages to describe the Palestinian condition. Constantine Zurayk introduced the term “Nakba” (“catastrophe” in Arabic) in 1948 to name the unparalleled “magnitude and ramifications of the Zionist conquest of Palestine” and its historical “rupture.” When Eghbariah argues for “Nakba” as a “new legal concept,” he underlines, however, that to understand its magnitude, one needs to go back to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which the British colonial power promised “a national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, even though just 6 % of its population were Jewish. From Nakba as the “constitutive violence of 1948,” we need today to conceptualize “Nakba as a structure,” an “overarching frame.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards
a hand holding a deck of cards in front of a christmas tree
Photo by Luca Volpe on Unsplash

Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards

Donald Trump has repeatedly used the phrase “holding the cards” during his tenure as President to signal that he, or sometimes an opponent, has the upper hand. The metaphor projects bravado, leverage, and the inevitability of success or failure, depending on who claims control.

Unfortunately, Trump’s repeated invocation of “holding the cards” embodies a worldview where leverage, bluff, and dominance matter more than duty, morality, or responsibility. In contrast, leadership grounded in duty emphasizes ethical obligations to allies, citizens, and democratic principles—elements strikingly absent from this metaphor.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability
campbells chicken noodle soup can

Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability

Most customers carry a particular image of Campbell's Soup: the red-and-white label stacked on a pantry shelf, a touch of nostalgia, and the promise of a dependable bargain. It's food for snow days, tight budgets, and the middle of the week. For generations, the brand has positioned itself as a companion to working families, offering "good food" for everyday people. The company cultivated that trust so thoroughly that it became almost cliché.

Campbell's episode, now the subject of national headlines and an ongoing high-profile legal complaint, is troubling not only for its blunt language but for what it reveals about the hidden injuries that erode the social contract linking institutions to citizens, workers to workplaces, and brands to buyers. If the response ends with the usual PR maneuvers—rapid firings and the well-rehearsed "this does not reflect our values" statement. Then both the lesson and the opportunity for genuine reform by a company or individual are lost. To grasp what this controversy means for the broader corporate landscape, we first have to examine how leadership reveals its actual beliefs.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

When ego replaces accountability in the presidency, democracy weakens. An analysis of how unchecked leadership erodes trust, institutions, and the rule of law.

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

When Leaders Put Ego Above Accountability—Democracy At Risk

What has become of America’s presidency? Once a symbol of dignity and public service, the office now appears chaotic, ego‑driven, and consumed by spectacle over substance. When personal ambition replaces accountability, the consequences extend far beyond politics — they erode trust, weaken institutions, and threaten democracy itself.

When leaders place ego above accountability, democracy falters. Weak leaders seek to appear powerful. Strong leaders accept responsibility.

Keep ReadingShow less