Credit: Pexels / Edmond Dantes
A $20 million plan to mobilize voters
As Black voters stand to lose representation, one of the oldest civil rights organizations in the U.S. is leaning on a playbook that allowed it to radically increase Black political participation at the height of Jim Crow.
Thirty-three congressional districts.
Twenty-thousand volunteers.
A $20 million investment.
Those are some of the details behind what the NAACP says is its largest get-out-the-vote campaign for a midterm election in the organization’s 117-year history. Announced this week following the country’s 250th anniversary, the effort aims to build a massive ground operation in the months leading up to November.
Trump’s World Cup irony problem
Trump wants a Supreme Court do-over after losing his birthright citizenship fight, something that hasn't happened since 1965. But his own World Cup drama undercuts the argument. He personally called FIFA to save a player who only qualifies for Team USA because of birthright citizenship, the very right he's trying to kill. Team USA lost anyway. The contradiction says more than either headline alone.
Shah launches Maine Senate bid
A new challenger just entered Maine's Senate race, and he's not holding back. Dr. Nirav Shah is launching a town hall tour with one goal, ending Susan Collins' three decade run in Washington. He's backing Medicare for All, taxing billionaires, and reining in ICE, while calling out Collins' vote for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The new front line for voters
After the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, Black organizers didn't wait around. In Georgia, public pressure just forced Republicans to scrap a redistricting plan days before it was set to pass. Now states are racing to pass their own Voting Rights Acts, athletes are getting pulled into the fight, and grassroots groups are working overtime to protect ballots. This is what resistance looks like when the federal safety net disappears.
A VIEW FROM THE GROUND
Perspectives and opinions from voices closest to the issues shaping our communities
Credit: Pexels / Greta Hoffman
Op-ed: Single moms deserve better than this
The head of household filing status is popularly understood as a tax break for single mothers, a modest acknowledgment that raising children alone costs more than doing it with a partner. That image is not wrong exactly. Roughly 79 percent of head of household filers are women, and the status was created in 1951 specifically to ease the tax burden on unmarried taxpayers supporting dependents. Roughly 21 million tax returns claim the status, about 1 in every 7 filed. But the way head of household is designed contradicts the way it is perceived. Rather than targeting need, it distributes its largest benefits to the filers who need it least. And the mismatch is no longer academic, because the status itself is now a target.
Consider income. Drawing on IRS Statistics of Income microdata, researchers found that in 2011 a taxpayer at the 25th percentile of the income distribution filing as head of household saved about 23 dollars a year, while a taxpayer at the 75th percentile saved 1,573 dollars, a 68-fold gap. The mechanism is structural rather than incidental. Head of household status works by raising the income thresholds at which higher tax brackets apply, so the benefit accrues only after a filer’s income has climbed above them. Low earners have crossed few or none. The Tax Policy Center estimates that only about 8 percent of the lowest-income families with children benefit from the status at all, since many owe no federal income tax to offset in the first place.
Copyright (C) 2026 URL Media. All rights reserved.unsubscribe