Featured Stories
Protect Borrowers Issues Commentary: What in the Giggle are We Doing?
WASHINGTON, June 27 -- Protect Borrowers (formerly Student Borrower Protection Center) issued the following commentary on June 25, 2026, by senior policy advisor Chris Hicks:
* * *
What in the Giggle are We Doing?
With Gig Worker Cash Advance Our Broken Labor Market Brings Desperation Finance to Work
-
As tens of millions of American households grapple with the rising cost of everything, more and more are falling into debt just to make ends meet. That's not by accident. As we discussed last week, firms from Wall Street to Silicon Valley are increasingly--and aggressively--preying on Americans'
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, June 27 -- Protect Borrowers (formerly Student Borrower Protection Center) issued the following commentary on June 25, 2026, by senior policy advisor Chris Hicks:
* * *
What in the Giggle are We Doing?
With Gig Worker Cash Advance Our Broken Labor Market Brings Desperation Finance to Work
-
As tens of millions of American households grapple with the rising cost of everything, more and more are falling into debt just to make ends meet. That's not by accident. As we discussed last week, firms from Wall Street to Silicon Valley are increasingly--and aggressively--preying on Americans'desperation by popping up on our phones to offer us quick cash now.
Desperation finance targets the gig economy head-on, offering a new set of high-cost financial products that exploit gig workers' supposed legal status as independent contractors. "Gig Worker Cash Advance"--an umbrella term for the shady credit pushed on gig workers-- relies on jargon and endless tricks to hook gig workers into loans with rates that pencil out to more than 2,000 percent APR. It's just new packaging for an old business model--loan sharking to exploit workers desperate for a little more cash just to get by.
Desperation and the Gig Economy
The tech platforms powering the gig economy--including DoorDash, GrubHub, Instacart, Lyft, Rover, Shipt, TaskRabbit, and Uber--emerged in the early 2010s in Silicon Valley. These corporations built apps to connect customers and workers in real time, facilitating transportation, food delivery, home rentals, and more. The use of these platforms exploded in the US, starting as small test pilots in a few cities and leading tens of millions of Americans to regularly use them within just a few years. By the end of the first decade of their existence, a number of these companies went public, raising hundreds of billions of dollars from retail investors.
These companies really want you to believe that this new technology isn't just good for their customers, but that it facilitates "flexible" work that is good for gig workers too. Just read this New York Times op-ed from Uber's CEO:
"[T]his is because [gig workers] understand the trade-offs between traditional employment and app work. Unlike traditional jobs, drivers have total freedom to choose when and how they drive, so they can fit their work around their life, not the other way around."
As of early 2026, an estimated 57 to 70 million Americans participate in the gig economy, representing roughly 36 percent of the U.S. workforce. For too many of these workers, promises of flexibility and freedom proved too good to be true. Many earn less than minimum wage. Poverty-level incomes mean that their financial lives are incredibly precarious; they live paycheck to paycheck, one accident or illness away from financial disaster. When a financial disaster arrives--when life happens--there is no safety net in place to catch them.
Ed. note: workers, unions, and advocates have fought for years to make the case that these workers are not independent at all and are, in fact, misclassified as "contractors" to the benefit of these platforms and in violation of federal, state, and local labor laws. For more on the fight to win workplace justice for gig workers, see worker organizations like Los Deliveristas Unidos and Rideshare Drivers United, and National Employment Law Center's "Fighting the 'Gigification' of Work."
Why Loan Sharks Love Commercial Lending
At the same time as the gig economy was taking off, Wall Street was emerging from its darkest days in nearly a century. Historic financial institutions had been wiped out, the stock market had cratered, and credit had dried up. As a result of the 2008 financial crisis, traditional banks severely tightened their lending standards and stopped offering small-dollar business loans. This created a void that left many small businesses desperate for short-term capital in search of a financial lifeline, and they found it in a largely unregulated corner of the financial world: Merchant Cash Advance (MCA).
Beginning in the early 2010s, this industry experienced rapid growth. And this rapid growth mostly went unchecked and unregulated. This was the MCA industry pitch: we do not need to follow the law because we are not making loans. Instead, firms describe these financial products as revenue-based financing or selling you your future income today. They claim that if your business earns more, you'll repay more. If you earn less, you'll repay less. But in most instances we've uncovered, that is pretty far from what most borrowers experience. Most come with a fixed payment schedule and a fixed payment amount. In other words, an MCA is functionally just a loan.
These lenders have also tried to use fine print and exotic terms to obscure these financial products' status as something other than loans. For example, these firms charge so-called "factor rates" rather than interest rates. But these word games do not hold up upon closer scrutiny. Here is how a factor rate works: Total Repayment = Advance Amount x Factor Rate. For example, if a small business borrows $10,000 with a factor rate of 1.6, they will have a total repayment of $16,000 ($10,000 x 1.6 = $16,000). You don't have to look very hard to find many calculators that can convert "factor rates" into their equivalent APR or interest rates. But what a "factor rate" does accomplish: hiding the outrageous cost of borrowing money.
Little is known about this market because the industry effectively exploits gaps in oversight--lenders are nonbanks and they purport to engage only in business lending, not consumer lending--a weak spot for state and federal financial regulators. Some analysts estimate the US market size of MCAs to be around $20 billion, and expect it to eclipse $30 billion by 2031 (for comparison, the payday loan market was $37.28 billion in 2025).
These firms offer products with a toxic mix of traits--exotic terms that mirror the worst of Wall Street, paired with mafia-style debt collection tactics and usurious interest rates.
Earlier this month, More Perfect Union talked to New York Attorney General Tish James about the squeeze these firms put on the smallest businesses.
Doubling Down on Exploitation
This is where our two stories meet. And once again where gig workers get screwed.
At least according to the platforms that dole out gig work to tens of millions of Americans, gig workers are legally independent contractors--each gig worker is effectively classified as a small business. When gig workers face financial disaster due to an illness or accident, there is no social safety net to catch them and banks often won't lend to them because they lack W-2s to prove their credit history and worthiness.
That is where MCA lenders come in. There are a growing number of these firms eager to offer gig workers tied to the biggest platforms--Uber, Lyft, Instacart, GrubHub, DoorDash, and many more--a cash advance, even going as far as targeting a line of these products specifically to gig workers: Gig Worker Cash Advance.
Loan sharks are targeting gig workers with a simple message: you need money in order to make money, and we are the ones here to help you. It's not quite the same pitch as so-called "Earned Wage Access" or "Earned Wage Advance," and it's not quite a payday loan. It has all the worst features of both and more. To understand just how bad this is, and what these workers are experiencing, I want to walk you through these products that are actively being sold to gig workers struggling to make ends meet today.
Common features of Gig Worker Cash Advances include:
* Eye-popping Interest: KoinsYa is a merchant cash advance lender that targets gig workers and their website provides a helpful view into this market. While the "Rates" section on their website is laid out in increments of $50, we are able to see how their math works: If you borrow $380, you have a standard daily payment of $38, an origination fee of $38, a factor rate of 1.4, and you pay that daily over 15 days. Now if you plug those numbers into NerdWallet's Merchant Cash Advance Calculator, you will find that KoinsYa is offering gig workers a whopping 2,381% APR interest rate. It will cost you $190 in finance charges to borrow $380 for 15 days.
* Unrelenting Collections: The vast majority of these gig worker cash advance companies require gig workers to connect their bank accounts with the cash advance lenders via ACH--which allows these lenders to automatically withdraw funds from workers' bank accounts. Cash advance lenders do this to skip the line and ensure they collect as much cash as possible in the event that a gig worker or business declares bankruptcy. One cash advance company called Giggle Finance (yes, this is their name) has faced numerous complaints from borrowers about withdrawing funds immediately when banks open, sometimes pushing gig workers to overdraft on their accounts, and performing multiple withdrawals in a single day--sometimes as many as 10 attempts in a day. This practice also makes matters worse by pushing workers into stacking cash advances to pay off previous loans borrowed, throwing gig workers into a spiral that can be impossible to escape.
* Abusing Liens to Force Repayment: One of the common complaints by gig workers about one MCA lender called Fundo is their heavy reliance on a debt collection tactic called a "UCC lien" that prevents workers from accessing their own money. A "UCC lien" is a lien filed with a state government where a creditor can prohibit a business from accessing an asset or property until a debt is repaid--in these cases the "business" is a gig worker and the "business asset" is a bank account or digital wallet where the gig worker gets paid. In our initial investigation into both Fundo and Giggle Finance, we found thousands of examples just from Colorado, Ohio, and Pennsylvania of these two companies filing UCC liens against gig workers' bank accounts, CashApp accounts, and accounts they are paid into by the gig platforms themselves. These UCC liens can last for years, and some gig workers report the only way to have the MCA lender remove the lien and regain access to their own money is to pay an inflated paperwork filing fee that can cost hundreds of dollars.
* Harvesting Junk Fees: There are numerous complaints against the largest gig worker cash advance companies for applying processing fees, expedited transfer fees, fees for turning off automatic ACH withdrawals, fees for filing paperwork to stop UCC liens against banking accounts, and subscription fees. These junk fees can lead to gig workers in desperate need of financial assistance worse off than if they had never taken out these loans to begin with.
This is the experience gig workers face when they turn to a Gig Worker Cash Advance in a moment of desperation. These Gig Worker Cash Advances are marketed as "not a loan" but they are among the most shocking examples of predatory lending across the American economy.
We Have the Tools to Begin to Rein in This Harmful Industry
A number of states already have the tools at their disposal to begin to treat these merchant cash advances and gig worker cash advances for what they are: loans.
That should include:
* Require merchant cash advance and gig worker cash advance lenders to become licensed and registered to operate, bringing them under the supervision of state regulatory agencies.
* Apply relevant financial protection to these loans, including usury limits, consumer fraud and fair debt collection practices, truth in lending acts, and rules against unfair or deceptive acts and practices.
These steps are urgent and necessary but not sufficient to deal with the threats gig worker cash advances pose to workers themselves and to the broader economy. Across the country, predatory lenders exploit the perception that business lending offers a free pass to evade basic rules that protect individual borrowers. If a financial product hides its true costs, harvests junk fees from desperate customers, and tricks users into paying more than they owe, then law enforcement officials and financial regulators should immediately and aggressively act to protect borrowers. If they determine they lack the legal tools to do so, state and federal lawmakers need to change the law. A fair economy should encourage consumers, workers, and small businesses to access credit and flourish, free from deception and abuse.
* * *
Chris Hicks is a senior policy advisor at Protect Borrowers. This blog was also published on In Debt, a Protect Borrowers Substack.
* * *
Original text here: https://protectborrowers.org/what-in-the-giggle-are-we-doing/
[Category: Financial Services]
National Center on Sexual Exploitation: Lawsuit Against Snapchat Shows Children are at Risk
WASHINGTON, June 27 -- The National Center on Sexual Exploitation issued the following news:
* * *
New Lawsuit Against Snapchat Shows Children are at Risk
The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) called on Snap to make urgent changes to ensure predators cannot contact or sexually abuse children, considering a new lawsuit against the platform that alleges Snap facilitated a Missouri girl's rape when she was 12. "Snapchat features such as Quick Add and Snap Map enabled assailant Gabriel Joel Valentin-Rios to connect with and groom the girl, referred to as J.F., the complaint alleges,"
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, June 27 -- The National Center on Sexual Exploitation issued the following news:
* * *
New Lawsuit Against Snapchat Shows Children are at Risk
The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) called on Snap to make urgent changes to ensure predators cannot contact or sexually abuse children, considering a new lawsuit against the platform that alleges Snap facilitated a Missouri girl's rape when she was 12. "Snapchat features such as Quick Add and Snap Map enabled assailant Gabriel Joel Valentin-Rios to connect with and groom the girl, referred to as J.F., the complaint alleges,"according to CNN.
"The new child sexual abuse lawsuit against Snapchat highlights the horrific fact that the platform continues to be a tool for child abusers and predators - this should be a catalyst for Snapchat to make urgent changes," said Haley McNamara, Executive Director and Chief Strategy Officer, National Center on Sexual Exploitation.
"Snapchat - which earned it a spot on our 2026 Dirty Dozen List of mainstream contributors to sexual exploitation - has the ability to stop the creation and sharing of self-generated child sexual abuse material and adult image-based sexual abuse on its platform. But it chooses not to. This is a design choice that is facilitating the sexual abuse and sextortion of untold numbers of youth and adults alike. Snapchat should immediately reverse course and use existing technologies to block explicit content creation and sharing, cutting off the tools predators rely on, along with radically reducing minors' access to friend-finding mechanics which allegedly led to J.F.'s abuse in this lawsuit.
"According to this lawsuit, internal documents and whistleblower accounts reveal that reports of abuse have often gone ignored by Snapchat. It is time for Snapchat to enact strong safety protections for children in order to prevent future tragedies. We are grateful to the Social Media Victims Law Center for filing this lawsuit. Survivors of child sexual abuse deserve justice," McNamara said.
NCOSE holds that Snapchat is too dangerous for children and believes the minimum age for users should be at least 16, if not older.
* * *
About National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE)
Founded in 1962, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) is the leading national non-profit organization exposing the links between all forms of sexual exploitation such as child sexual abuse, prostitution, sex trafficking and the public health harms of pornography.
* * *
Original text here: https://endsexualexploitation.org/articles/new-lawsuit-against-snapchat-shows-children-are-at-risk/
[Category: Sociological]
NRDC: California's Coastal Management Authority Is Under Attack
NEW YORK, June 27 -- The Natural Resources Defense Council issued the following news release:
* * *
NRDC: California's Coastal Management Authority Is Under Attack
Federal review of California's coastal management program could clear the way for offshore oil drilling
-
The Trump administration has formally initiated a federal review of California's Coastal Management Program under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). It is holding public meetings to specifically solicit comments on the state's oversight of offshore oil production, spaceport infrastructure, pipelines, desalination projects,
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, June 27 -- The Natural Resources Defense Council issued the following news release:
* * *
NRDC: California's Coastal Management Authority Is Under Attack
Federal review of California's coastal management program could clear the way for offshore oil drilling
-
The Trump administration has formally initiated a federal review of California's Coastal Management Program under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). It is holding public meetings to specifically solicit comments on the state's oversight of offshore oil production, spaceport infrastructure, pipelines, desalination projects,and undersea cables.
This comes as the administration advances a five-year oil and gas leasing program under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OSCLA) that would open California's coasts to oil and gas drilling over the state's objections. At risk is California's coastal permitting authority, the state's ability to protect its coastal resources, and millions in annual federal funding.
The following is a statement from Taryn Kiekow Heimer, Ocean Energy Director at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council):
"This is a blatant attack on California's right to protect its coastline. In seeking to undermine the state, the Trump administration is trying to bulldoze a path for offshore oil and gas drilling in California, which Californians have repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected.
"California's waters should not be sacrificed to the fossil fuel industry. Our coastline belongs to the public, and we will oppose any effort to dismantle the protections that keep it healthy and vibrant."
* * *
NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 3 million members and online activists. Established in 1970, NRDC uses science, policy, law and people power to confront the climate crisis, protect public health and safeguard nature. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Beijing and Delhi (an office of NRDC India Pvt. Ltd).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.nrdc.org/press-releases/nrdc-californias-coastal-management-authority-under-attack
[Category: Environment]
Letter Urges Reconsideration of Proposed Data Center Near Nashville Zoo
WASHINGTON, June 27 [Category: Biology] -- The Center for Biological Diversity posted the following news release on June 26, 2026:
* * *
Letter Urges Reconsideration of Proposed Data Center Near Nashville Zoo
*
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - The Center for Biological Diversity and the Southern Environmental Law Center submitted a letter to the city of Nashville and developer DC BLOX today detailing concerns about a proposed data center adjacent to the Nashville Zoo. The massive facility would encompass almost 70,000 square feet and use up to 50 megawatts of power.
"Nashville doesn't want to risk people
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, June 27 [Category: Biology] -- The Center for Biological Diversity posted the following news release on June 26, 2026:
* * *
Letter Urges Reconsideration of Proposed Data Center Near Nashville Zoo
*
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - The Center for Biological Diversity and the Southern Environmental Law Center submitted a letter to the city of Nashville and developer DC BLOX today detailing concerns about a proposed data center adjacent to the Nashville Zoo. The massive facility would encompass almost 70,000 square feet and use up to 50 megawatts of power.
"Nashville doesn't want to risk peopleor wildlife being placed in harm's way for this data center," said Laurel Jobe, an attorney at the Center and a Nashville native. "The people have spoken, and they've chosen to protect their neighbors, humans and animals alike. Now it's time for the city and DC BLOX to listen, step up and do the right thing."
From clouded leopards to the native Nashville crayfish, sensitive species lie just a few hundred feet from the proposed data center's footprint.
Today's letter raises concerns about the endangered Nashville crayfish and potential habitat degradation from stormwater runoff into Mill Creek tributaries. Noise and light disturbances from the site could alter breeding patterns and other behaviors as well as heighten animals' stress responses.
This kind of potential harm to federally protected species would be illegal under the Endangered Species Act. The Act prohibits harassing, harming or significantly disrupting the behavior of a protected species, and violations carry substantial civil and criminal penalties.
Public opposition to the data center has surged in recent weeks, with the Nashville Zoo's Change.org petition now surpassing 500,000 signatures and thousands of comments from concerned citizens.
Earlier this month, the Metro Nashville Council introduced a bill that would place a temporary moratorium on data centers in Davidson County. The measure must pass three readings before taking effect. However, under a new state law, the DC BLOX data center would be exempt from the moratorium if its building permit application is submitted before the moratorium takes effect.
Regardless of the outcome of the local moratorium, Endangered Species Act obligations are federal requirements. The Center will continue to monitor the project and is prepared to take legal action.
The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.8 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.
* * *
INFODOC: https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/docs/regions/Southeast/2026-06-25-Endangered-Species-Act-Letter-Re-Grassmere-Data-Center.pdf?_gl=1*47vuix*_gcl_au*OTYyNzMwMDgwLjE3ODI1NDUwMTA.
***
Original text here: https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/letter-urges-reconsideration-of-proposed-data-center-near-nashville-zoo-2026-06-25/
Human Rights Watch: Tunisia - Rights Defender Given 25-Year Sentence
NEW YORK, June 27 [Category: International] -- Human Rights Watch posted the following news:
* * *
Tunisia: Rights Defender Given 25-Year Sentence
*
(Beirut) - A Tunis court on June 26, 2026, sentenced Sihem Bensedrine, 75, a prominent human rights defender and former president of the Truth and Dignity Commission, to a total of 25 years in prison and a heavy fine, apparently in retaliation for her work. Her sentencing is the latest in the ongoing yearslong crackdown by President Kais Saeid's government on civic space and dissent in Tunisia.
The following quote can be attributed to Bassam
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, June 27 [Category: International] -- Human Rights Watch posted the following news:
* * *
Tunisia: Rights Defender Given 25-Year Sentence
*
(Beirut) - A Tunis court on June 26, 2026, sentenced Sihem Bensedrine, 75, a prominent human rights defender and former president of the Truth and Dignity Commission, to a total of 25 years in prison and a heavy fine, apparently in retaliation for her work. Her sentencing is the latest in the ongoing yearslong crackdown by President Kais Saeid's government on civic space and dissent in Tunisia.
The following quote can be attributed to BassamKhawaja, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch:
"The abusive conviction and sentencing of Sihem Bensedrine to 25 years behind bars reflects the cruelty of President Kais Saied's government, which has sought to strangle human rights and social justice in Tunisia. Bensedrine has for decades been harassed, jailed, and pushed into exile for her human rights work. Her sentence would keep her in prison until she's 100 years old. The Tunisian authorities should immediately overturn her conviction and drop these abusive prosecutions."
***
Original text here: https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/06/26/tunisia-rights-defender-given-25-year-sentence
Human Rights Watch Issues Commentary: Dangerous EU Momentum Towards Offshore Deportation Centers
NEW YORK, June 27 [Category: International] -- Human Rights Watch posted the following commentary by Judith Sunderland, senior advisor in the Refugee and Migrant Rights Division:
* * *
Dangerous EU Momentum Towards Offshore Deportation Centers
Plans for 'Return Hubs' in Africa, Central Asia
-
The European Union is forging ahead on its quest to increase deportations regardless of the consequences for people's rights. On June 17, the European Parliament approved a Return Regulation that portends increased detention, forced removals, and externalization. Two days later, 19 EU states signed an
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, June 27 [Category: International] -- Human Rights Watch posted the following commentary by Judith Sunderland, senior advisor in the Refugee and Migrant Rights Division:
* * *
Dangerous EU Momentum Towards Offshore Deportation Centers
Plans for 'Return Hubs' in Africa, Central Asia
-
The European Union is forging ahead on its quest to increase deportations regardless of the consequences for people's rights. On June 17, the European Parliament approved a Return Regulation that portends increased detention, forced removals, and externalization. Two days later, 19 EU states signed anopen letter encouraging "full use of the new possibilities" of "return hubs."
The idea is to send people, including families with children, to somewhere outside the EU if they cannot be deported directly to their country of origin. It is unclear whether people will be detained wherever they go and for how long, whether they will be deported onward to their country of origin despite threats to their rights, or if they will have opportunities to rebuild their lives in a country to which they have no connection. Potential access to justice and redress people would have for rights violations is anyone's guess.
Five countries- Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, and The Netherlands -have made no secret of their interest in setting up what could be a joint return hub. Destinations reportedly under consideration include countries with terrible human rights records, including Rwanda, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mauritania, and Kazakhstan. The EU has failed to address grave human rights concerns in its engagement with their governments. How any of them would meet the Return Regulation's requirement to respect international human rights standards is difficult to see.
Human Rights Watch has consistently found that deportations to third countries exposes people to arbitrary detention, ill-treatment, destitution, and chain refoulement-that is return to places of danger. United States deportations of third-country nationals to Mexico, El Salvador, Cameroon, Rwanda, Eswatini, Ghana, and South Sudan have subjected people to harm and undermine good faith implementation of international human rights law.
EU countries should drop plans for return hubs. EU leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez who have criticized return hubs should insist on iron-clad safeguards if discussions go forward and before any EU money is spent. These include at a minimum a prior human rights assessment, individualized assessments before any transfers, clear conditions on treatment and reception, effective remedies, and fully transparent and independent monitoring. None of the countries being considered, with Rwanda and Uzbekistan reportedly at the top of the list, would pass a serious rights review.
***
Original text here: https://www.hrw.org/news/2026/06/26/dangerous-eu-momentum-towards-offshore-deportation-centers
A Better Wisconsin Together: Reminder - Tom Tiffany Voted Against Protecting Marriage Equality
MONONA, Wisconsin, June 27 -- A Better Wisconsin Together, a state-based research and communications hub for progressives, posted the following news release on June 26, 2026:
* * *
Reminder: Tom Tiffany Voted Against Protecting Marriage Equality
Some Wisconsin Republicans voted in support of the bill, but not Tom Tiffany
-
MADISON, Wis. - 11 years ago today, the United States Supreme Court released the landmark ruling that officially legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. But as marriage equality faces new attacks, Republican Congressman and candidate for Wisconsin governor Tom Tiffany voted
... Show Full Article
MONONA, Wisconsin, June 27 -- A Better Wisconsin Together, a state-based research and communications hub for progressives, posted the following news release on June 26, 2026:
* * *
Reminder: Tom Tiffany Voted Against Protecting Marriage Equality
Some Wisconsin Republicans voted in support of the bill, but not Tom Tiffany
-
MADISON, Wis. - 11 years ago today, the United States Supreme Court released the landmark ruling that officially legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. But as marriage equality faces new attacks, Republican Congressman and candidate for Wisconsin governor Tom Tiffany voted"No" on a bipartisan bill that would help protect marriage equality from being the next freedom taken away by Trump's MAGA justices.
"In addition to our private medical decisions and the books we read, Wisconsinites can also add marriage to the list of personal life decisions that Tom Tiffany wants politicians like himself in charge of," said A Better Wisconsin Together Communications Director, Lucy Ripp.
When MAGA Supreme Court justices overturned our constitutional right to abortion in 2022 and threatened that marriage equality could be next on the chopping block, Wisconsin Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin introduced the bipartisan Respect for Marriage Act, a bill to help ensure the right to same-sex and inter-racial marriage is protected no matter a person's zip code.
In a show of true bipartisanship, some Wisconsin Republicans voted in support of the bill - but not Tom Tiffany.
According to Ripp, Tiffany's "No" vote on the Respect for Marriage Act despite the bill's overwhelming bipartisan support among constituents and politicians alike raises serious questions about who Tiffany is really looking out for.
"Clearly Tiffany won't lift a finger to protect our freedoms and constitutional rights," said Ripp. "Yet he'll gamble our healthcare and other benefits away to line the pockets of his billionaire backers in a heart beat."
* * *
A Better Wisconsin Together is a state-based research and communications hub for progressives and is an affiliate of ProgressNow.
* * *
Original text here: https://abetterwisconsin.org/reminder-tom-tiffany-voted-against-protecting-marriage-equality/
[Category: Economics]
