Brinks joins board of Democratic state legislature campaign arm
Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks is joining the board of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, which aims to elect Democrats to state legislatures across the country.
Brinks said in a statement that the DLCC's work was instrumental to Michigan Democrats winning their first legislative trifecta in 40 years during the 2022 midterms.
'As the first Democrat to serve as majority leader in my chamber since the 1980s, I know firsthand what Democratic majorities can achieve here in Michigan and across the country as we continue to advocate on behalf of working families,' Brinks said.
Democrats lost their trifecta when Republicans took back the majority in the Michigan House last November. Brinks has since been in a legal battle with House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richmond Township), who has refused to pass along nine bills passed during the lame duck session but not transmitted to Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer for her signature.
Brinks said electing Democrats to state legislatures is important to stand up to the administration of President Donald Trump, vowing to 'maintain a blue firewall in the states that will stand against this extremism.'
Brinks is one of seven Democratic state legislators added to the board Monday. Joining her are California Speaker Robert Rivas, Colorado Senate President James Coleman, Illinois Speaker Pro Tempore Kambium Buckner, Oregon Speaker Julie Fahey, Virginia Speaker Don Scott and Wisconsin Minority Leader Greta Neubauer.
DLCC Chair Andrea Stewart-Cousins, the majority leader and president pro tempore of the New York Senate, said in a statement that Brinks 'embodies the diverse expertise needed to drive and elevate our strategy to build durable state power through the end of the decade,' calling her 'battle-tested.'
'The stakes couldn't be higher, but we have the team in place to meet this moment,' Stewart-Cousins said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
39 minutes ago
- Newsweek
School Funding Map Shows States Most Impacted by Trump Freeze
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. States across the country are missing more than $6 billion in federal funding grants that have not been released by the Trump administration. Why It Matters The freeze leaves states and schools in limbo as they budget for programs for this summer and the upcoming school year, introducing new uncertainty about when—or if—they will receive the money. Without the funding, schools say they won't be able to provide free or affordable after-school care for low-income kids while their parents work, and they may not be able to hire staff to teach children who are learning English. Classes or camps underway this summer could also be in jeopardy. It also sets the stage for a clash with Democrats, who say the administration is flouting the law by holding back money Congress has appropriated. What To Know The Trump administration has withheld federal grants for after-school and summer programs, English language instruction, adult literacy and more as part of a review to ensure they align with President Donald Trump's priorities. Programs that rely on the money were expecting it to be distributed July 1, but the Department of Education said in a last-minute notice that the money would not be released while the programs are under review, according to the School Superintendents Association. The notice said that "decisions have not yet been made" on grants for the upcoming school year. The Department of Education declined to comment and referred Newsweek to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). An OMB spokesperson told Newsweek that the review is "ongoing" and "no decisions have been made yet." An estimated $6.2 billion in Congressionally appropriated funds across five programs are being withheld, according to the Learning Policy Institute, an education research and policy advocacy group. They include programs that support the educational needs of migrant children, provide before and after-school programs through the 21st Century Community Learning Centers and help English language learners. Every state is impacted, with funds across the five programs amounting to at least 10 percent of each state's overall federal K-12 funding. For 14 states and the District of Columbia, the withheld funding amounts to at least 15 percent of overall federal K-12 funding. In California, an estimated $180 million is being withheld, amounting to about 16.5 percent of the state's federal education funding. In Texas, more than $660 million is being withheld—more than 16.1 percent of the state's total federal K–12 funding. The map below shows how much is being withheld from each state and the District of Columbia and how much of that withheld funding amounts is as a percentage of the state's total K-12 funding. What People Are Saying The OMB spokesperson told Newsweek: "This is an ongoing programmatic review of education funding." The spokesperson said initial findings of the review show that "many of these grant programs have been grossly misused to subsidize a radical leftwing agenda. In one case, NY public schools used English Language Acquisition funds to promote illegal immigrant advocacy organizations. In another, Washington state used funds to direct illegal immigrants towards scholarships intended for American students." The spokesperson added: "As stated before, this is an ongoing programmatic review and no decisions have been made yet." Jim Clark, president and CEO of the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, said in a statement: "Just like any organization, Boys & Girls Clubs depend on financial commitments to operate—to recruit talent, deliver services, and meet the needs of families they serve daily. If these funds are blocked, the fallout will be swift and devastating." Clark said that as many as 926 Boys and Girls Clubs could close, affecting more than 220,000 kids. Jodi Grant, executive director of the Afterschool Alliance, said the Trump administration's decision to withhold the money was "a stunning betrayal." Grant said: "Congress appropriated and all 50 states and D.C. have already committed these funds to individual afterschool and summer learning programs, most of which are expecting their grants now. Withholding these funds will cause lasting harm to students and families, and to our education system, our future workforce, and our economy. "If these funds are not released very soon, we will quickly see more children and youth unsupervised and at risk, more academic failures, more hungry kids, more chronic absenteeism, higher dropout rates, more parents forced out of their jobs, and a less STEM-ready and successful workforce as our child care crisis worsens dramatically." Senator Patty Murray, a Democrat, said in a statement that Trump and OMB director Russ Vought "need to stop sabotaging our students' futures and get these resources out the door. Local school districts can't afford to wait out lengthy court proceedings to get the federal funding they're owed—nor can they make up the shortfall, especially not at the drop of a pin." Murray added: "Every day that this funding is held up is a day that school districts are forced to worry about whether they'll have to cut back on afterschool programs or lay off teachers instead of worrying about how to make sure our kids can succeed." What's Next It is not clear when the Trump administration will complete its review and whether the funding will be released. If Congress does not approve a rescission request within 45 days, the law requires the administration to distribute the funds as originally planned. Some states have signaled readiness to take court action if necessary. Murray also noted that the administration has proposed to eliminate each of the five programs in its budget request for the 2026 fiscal year.
Newsweek
39 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Elon Musk's America Party Is Dead on Arrival
Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Billionaire Elon Musk's announcement of the America Party following his split with President Donald Trump over the fiscally ruinous One Big Beautiful Bill reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of American political mechanics. While Musk's frustration with Republican fiscal hypocrisy is entirely justified—the legislation adds over $3 trillion to the national debt while gutting programs working families depend on—his proposed solution ignores both the structural realities governing our electoral system and the unprecedented opportunity currently before him. Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump listen to a question from reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump listen to a question from reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025, in Washington, problem with Musk's third-party approach lies in what political scientist call Duverger's Law, which tells us why some countries, like America, only have two political parties. Devastating to Musk's plans is the fact that this isn't a matter of voter preference or campaign financing—it's a mathematical inevitability built into our electoral system's structure. When electoral districts only have one seat for the taking and it goes to the candidate with a plurality of votes, a stable two-party system is all but guaranteed. More fundamentally, American political parties are remarkably durable institutions precisely because they serve essential functions within our electoral system. The Democratic and Republican parties have weathered civil wars, depressions, world wars, and countless scandals not through accident but because they provide organizational infrastructure, fundraising networks, and voter identification systems that third parties cannot replicate. Attempting to replace these institutional frameworks represents a decades-long project with vanishingly small chances of success no matter how much money is thrown at it. Yet Musk's frustration reflects a real crisis within the Republican Party that creates extraordinary opportunities for internal disruption. The passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill represents a systematic betrayal of the working-class coalition that brought Republicans to power. The legislation strips health care from millions through Medicaid cuts while providing massive tax breaks to the wealthy, forcing working families to fund benefits they'll never see. This makes traditional Republican incumbents uniquely vulnerable to primary challenges from candidates offering authentic economic populism. The timing for a hostile takeover of the GOP couldn't be better. Trump's constitutional inability to seek another presidential term creates an impending leadership vacuum within the party just as his signature legislation begins harming many of its most loyal voters. Without Trump's unique personal loyalty among working-class supporters, other Republicans will struggle to maintain a coalition built on contradictions between populist messaging and plutocratic governance. History demonstrates that successful party transformation occurs through internal disruption, not external competition. The Tea Party movement proved that well-funded primary challenges could reshape party priorities within a single election cycle. Trump himself provided the ultimate template by seizing control of the Republican Party from within, completely remaking it around his vision and priorities. This approach succeeds because primary elections operate under different dynamics than general elections. Lower turnout means motivated activists can have outsized influence. Incumbent advantages are also weaker there. Moreover, voters willing to participate in primaries are often more ideologically committed than general election voters. A well-funded operation targeting Republican incumbents who supported fiscal irresponsibility could achieve dramatic results with relatively modest investments. Musk's business background should make this approach intuitive. The corporate world offers countless examples of activist investors who acquired relatively small stakes in companies and used them to force dramatic changes in strategy and leadership. Republican primaries represent the political equivalent—low-cost, high-impact opportunities to reshape institutional priorities through targeted intervention. The alternative—attempting to build a third party from scratch—reflects the same kind of political naïveté Musk has displayed throughout his brief involvement in government. His belief that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) could cut a trillion dollars in federal spending demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of budget realities, just as his third-party proposal reveals ignorance of electoral mechanics. Instead of wasting resources on a venture doomed by structural realities, Musk should pursue a strategy that actually works in American politics: identifying vulnerable Republican incumbents who voted for fiscal irresponsibility and funding primary challengers committed to genuine conservatism. This approach offers immediate impact, requires far less capital than third-party construction, and takes advantage of a party that is headed for significant disarray. Nicholas Creel is an associate professor of business law at Georgia College & State University. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Newsweek
39 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Mike Rogers' Chances of Beating Democrats To Flip Michigan Senate Seat—Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A new poll of Michigan's 2026 Senate race pointed to a close race between Democrats and Republicans in the battleground state, viewed as Republicans as one of the best flip opportunities of the midterms. Why It Matters Democratic Senator Gary Peters' retirement in Michigan left an open Senate seat. It will likely become one of the most competitive—and expensive—races of the midterms, as the Great Lakes State has emerged as one of the closest battlegrounds over the past decade. Democrats are increasingly optimistic about a favorable national environment, particularly after the passage of President Donald Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" last week, and the party in the White House historically loses seats in the midterms. But Republicans are eyeing Michigan's Senate seat as a potential flip opportunity next year, as Trump narrowly carried the state last November. Former Representative Mike Rogers, a Republican, speaks during an election watch party on November 5, 2024, in Novi, Michigan. Former Representative Mike Rogers, a Republican, speaks during an election watch party on November 5, 2024, in Novi, To Know The poll, conducted by Normington Petts and first reported by Politico, measured support for former GOP Representative Mike Rogers against two Democratic candidates, Representative Haley Stevens and state Senator Mallory McMorrow. Both matchups were close. Rogers led McMorrow on a uninformed ballot by about 4 percentage points (48 percent to 44 percent), but when voters were told more information about each candidate, McMorrow led by 4 points (51 percent to 47 percent). On the other hand, Stevens led Rogers by about 2 points (47 percent to 45 percent), but by only a single point on the informed ballot (49 percent to 48 percent), according to the poll. Ahead of the Democratic primary next year, Stevens benefits from having higher name recognition than McMorrow. While 34 percent of respondents said they have heard of Stevens, only 22 percent have heard of McMorrow, according to the survey. It noted the most effective attack against Stevens was that she voted with former President Joe Biden more than 90 percent of the time in Congress, and that would be an "an inevitable line of attack from Rogers and his allies." It noted that McMorrow, as a state lawmaker, does not have that vulnerability, though she did support the former administration and spoke at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in support of former Vice President Kamala Harris. The poll surveyed 700 likely voters from June 12-16 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points. Reeves Oyster, a spokesperson for the Stevens campaign, responded to the poll in a statement to Newsweek. "This is the latest poll that shows Haley Stevens is the candidate who will win in November because she has spent her life fighting and winning for the people of Michigan," Oyster said. The poll did not ask about Abdul El-Sayed, who is also running on the Democratic side. A survey conducted by the Glengariff Group and the Detroit Regional Chamber similarly pointed to a close race. It found Stevens leading Rogers by about 6 points (48.8 percent to 42.8 percent), while McMorrow led Rogers by fewer than 2 points (45.5 percent to 44.1 percent). That poll surveyed 600 registered voters from May 5-8 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 points. Rogers ran for U.S. Senate against Democrat Elissa Slotkin in November but lost despite Trump carrying the state. Stevens was first elected to a Detroit swing district in the 2018 midterms, while McMorrow rose to national prominence in 2022 after a speech she made defending the LGBTQ+ community went viral. What People Are Saying Democratic consultant group Normington Petts, in the poll report: "Any arguments alleging that Mallory McMorrow is somehow a poor general election candidate or that Haley Stevens is a superior general election candidate are equally refuted by these data. In fact, these data suggest that McMorrow has higher upside potential and that Stevens brings a vulnerability to the table that McMorrow does not possess." Senate candidate Mallory McMorrow told Newsweek in February: "We have to be willing to not be afraid of stepping into any conversation and not being so polished all the time. People will trust you more if you don't sound like a sound bite all the time." Senate candidate Haley Stevens told Newsweek in May: "As a native Michigander, who grew up as the daughter of small business owners in Southeast Michigan, my parents actually had a landscaping business. It was a ton of hard work, a lot of grease, grime, dirt. My dad picking me up, oftentimes covered in dirt, you know, and I'd say, 'Dad, why are you so dirty?' Well, it's because he was working hard. And it is that value of hard Michigan work that has motivated me my entire career." What Happens Next Michigan's primary will be held in August 2026, so candidates have more than a year to make their case to voters. The Cook Political Report currently classifies the race as a pure toss-up.
