Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trendsetter? Ohio city makes Election Day a holiday

While the provision making Election Day a federal holiday is quickly becoming one of the more polarizing parts of the House Democrats' political process overhaul bill, dubbed HR 1, one small city in Ohio has quietly and easily decided to make the move on its own.

Sandusky, a summertime destination on Lake Erie halfway between Toledo and Cleveland (population 26,000), will make the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November a holiday starting this fall – replacing Columbus Day. City commissioners made the move with minimal debate last week, just as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was deriding such an idea as a Democratic "power grab" on the Senate floor.

"What better way to celebrate the value of our employees and citizens than by removing barriers for them to participate in the greatest of American innovations, our democracy," the city government postedon Facebook.


"We are swapping them to prioritize Voting Day as a day off so that our employees can vote," city manager Eric Wobser told the Sandusky Register. "It's also because Columbus Day has become controversial, and many cities have eliminated it as a holiday."

Several other cities have stopped observing Columbus Day or renamed it "Indigenous Peoples' Day," noting the poor treatment of Native Americans by Christopher Columbus and other European explorers. But the House Democratic legislation would retain Columbus Day as a federal holiday and add Election Day.

Election Day is a paid day off for state employees in 13 states. And a survey by the Pew Research Center last fall found 71 percent of Democrats and 59 percent of Republicans in favor of nationalizing the holiday.

Sandusky proper falls in the congressional district held by Democrat Marcy Kaptur, a cosponsor of HR 1, but some of its neighboring towns are represented by Jim Jordan, a Republican who has been one of the most vocal critics of the legislation.


Read More

Baltazar Enríquez: Perspectives from Little Village Community Council President

Baltazar Enriquez stands with "ICE OUT OF CHICAGO" sign in Chicago's Little Village neighborhood

Teresa Ayala Leon

Baltazar Enríquez: Perspectives from Little Village Community Council President

Baltzar Enríquez was born in Michoacán, Mexico, and moved to Chicago at the age of three. Little Village, often called “The Mexico of the Midwest,” became his new home, a community he has grown to love and serve. In 2008, Enríquez joined the Little Village Community Council, a nonprofit organization originally founded in 1957. Upon becoming a member, he noticed the lack of participation and limited community programs available for residents. In 2020, he was named president of the council and began expanding, introducing initiatives such as Equal Education for Latinos, among other resources for the Little Village community. Enríquez reflected on his years of involvement and how he has navigated leading the council amid the current political climate.

Question: What inspired you most to get involved in the council?

Keep ReadingShow less
Freezing Child Care Funding Throws the Baby Out with the Bathwater
boy's writing on book

Freezing Child Care Funding Throws the Baby Out with the Bathwater

In the South, there is an idiom that says, “Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.” It means not discarding something valuable while trying to eliminate something harmful. The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) proposed response to unsubstantiated child care fraud allegations in Minnesota risks doing exactly that.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has frozen child care and family assistance grants in five states, and reports indicate that this action may be extended nationwide. Fraud at any level is wrong and should be thoroughly investigated, and once proven to be true, addressed. However, freezing child care payments and family assistance grants based on the views of a single social media “influencer” is an overcorrection that threatens the stability of child care programs and leaves families without care options through no fault of their own.

Across the nation, Americans rely heavily on child care. According to the Center for American Progress, nearly 70 percent of children under age six had all available parents in the workforce in 2023, underscoring how essential child care is to family and economic stability.

Child care funding, therefore, is not optional. It is a necessity that must remain stable and predictable.

Without consistent funding, child care operations are forced to significantly reduce capacity, and some are forced to close altogether. In 2025, a longtime family child care owner made the difficult decision to close her business after state budget cuts eliminated critical child care funding. While this example reflects a state-level funding failure, the impact is the same. When funding becomes unreliable, as is the case with the current funding freeze, child care business owners, employees, parents, and children all suffer.

The economic consequences extend well beyond families. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, when parents cannot find or afford child care, they are pushed out of the workforce, and businesses lose skilled employees. Child care gaps disrupt staffing across industries and cost states an estimated $1 billion annually in lost economic activity.

Child care is no longer just a family issue. It is an economic issue. It is one of the few sectors that directly affects every other industry. At a time when women are being encouraged to have more children, a strong support system must also exist, and that includes consistent, reliable child care funding.

Misuse of government funds is not a new concept. During the COVID-19 pandemic, more than $200 billion in federal relief funding across programs was reportedly misused. Fraud occurs in every industry, and no system is immune to it.

If allegations of child care fraud are substantiated, safeguards should absolutely be implemented to prevent future misuse; however, freezing child care funding would further delay payments to a sector already plagued by late reimbursements, disrupt services for children and families, and destabilize small businesses that operate on thin margins.

The solution is straightforward. Strengthen oversight to mitigate risk, without punishing the entire field. We must acknowledge that the vast majority of child care programs operate in good faith and in compliance with the law, providing care to millions of children nationwide. According to a 2020 report by the United States Government Accountability Office, only seven states since 2013 have had errors in more than 10 percent of their child care fund payments.

Yes, accountability matters, but solutions must be precise and measured. Sweeping actions based on unsubstantiated claims destabilize the entire child care system. When child care collapses, families lose care, caregivers lose income, small businesses close, and the economy suffers.

We can strengthen safeguards without dismantling the system that families and the economy depend on. We can address misuse if and where it exists. But we cannot afford to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Eboni Delaney is the Director of Policy and Movement Building at the National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC), and a Public Voices Fellow of the OpEd Project in Partnership with the National Black Child Development Institute.

Keep ReadingShow less
It’s The Democracy, Stupid!

Why democracy reform keeps failing—and why the economy suffers as a result. A rethink of representation and political power.

Getty Images, Orbon Alija

It’s The Democracy, Stupid!

The economic pain that now defines everyday life for so many people is often treated as a separate problem, something to be solved with better policy, smarter technocrats, or a new round of targeted fixes. Wages stagnate, housing becomes unreachable, healthcare bankrupts families, monopolies tighten their grip, and public services decay. But these outcomes are not accidents, nor are they the result of abstract market forces acting in isolation. They are the predictable consequence of a democratic order that has come apart at the seams. Our deepest crisis is not economic. It is democratic. The economy is merely where that crisis becomes visible and painful.

When democracy weakens, power concentrates. When power concentrates, it seeks insulation from accountability. Over time, wealth and political authority fuse into a self-reinforcing system that governs in the name of the people while quietly serving private interests. This is how regulatory agencies become captured, how tax codes grow incomprehensible except to those who pay to shape them, how antitrust laws exist on paper but rarely in practice, and how labor protections erode while corporate protections harden. None of this requires overt corruption. It operates legally, procedurally, and efficiently. Influence is purchased not through bribes but through campaign donations, access, revolving doors, and the sheer asymmetry of time, expertise, and money.

Keep ReadingShow less
Washington Loves Blaming Latin America for Drugs — While Ignoring the American Appetite That Fuels the Trade
Screenshot from a video moments before US forces struck a boat in international waters off Venezuela, September 2.
Screenshot from a video moments before US forces struck a boat in international waters off Venezuela, September 2.

Washington Loves Blaming Latin America for Drugs — While Ignoring the American Appetite That Fuels the Trade

For decades, the United States has perfected a familiar political ritual: condemn Latin American governments for the flow of narcotics northward, demand crackdowns, and frame the crisis as something done to America rather than something America helps create. It is a narrative that travels well in press conferences and campaign rallies. It is also a distortion — one that obscures the central truth of the hemispheric drug trade: the U.S. market exists because Americans keep buying.

Yet Washington continues to treat Latin America as the culprit rather than the supplier responding to a demand created on U.S. soil. The result is a policy posture that is both ineffective and deeply hypocritical.

Keep ReadingShow less