Honor Life of Gloria Steinem ‘By Organizing’ for Rights, Equality, and Freedom

“Thank you, Gloria, for showing the world what it means to speak up for women’s equality.”

Jon Queally for Common Dreams

Progressive advocates, lawmakers, veteran journalists, labor leaders, and champions of feminism on Thursday are mourning the death of trailblazing women’s rights activist and author Gloria Steinem, who has passed away at the age of 92.

Steinem, regarded as an icon of the second-wave feminism that emerged in the 1960s and 70s and co-founder of Ms. Magazine, was known for decades as a leading voice on reproductive rights, women’s equality at work, and gender equity across society.

According to her representatives, Steinem died Wednesday at her home in New York City, surrounded by loved ones. An exact cause of death was not given.

“Gloria’s near-century on earth was years well-lived, and she continued working for equality until the very end,” read a message posted to her Instagram account.

“Gloria’s greatest gift was her ability to listen to others, to make others feel seen and heard,” the message continued. “Her words, actions, and example gave people permission to be their truest selves. Gloria lived true to her independent spirit, always with curiosity and a great sense of humor.”

A life well lived

AG DINO candidate aligns with League of RI Businesses shabby electoral practices

Joseph Solomon Jr. is asking Republicans to disaffiliate and vote for him in the Democratic Primary for Attorney General

Steve Ahlquist

Here's how Charlestown DINO and sex crimes
defense lawyer Leah Boisclair hopes
to win the Sept 9 Democratic Primary: Get Republicans
to change party registration so they can sneak her in.
Incidentally, if you drive down Route 2, most
Boisclair signs now have Joe Solomon signs
right next to them.  - Will Collette

State Representative Joseph Solomon Jr. is one of the four people running in the Democratic Primary to be the next Rhode Island Attorney General. [The other candidates in the race are Kimberly Ahern, Keith Hoffmann, and Jason Knight.] 

Solomon is a conservative Democrat who voted against the codification of Roe v. Wade into Rhode Island State Law and against the assault weapons ban that went into effect on July 1. 

At the Southside Justice and Policy Debate, Representative Solomon took some hits from other candidates:

Jason Knight: I voted to put Roe v Wade into state law so that Rhode Island women were protected when the Dobbs decision came down and stripped that right away from everyone else in the rest of the country if the state hadn’t covered abortion services. Joe Solomon voted against that bill. That’s a lukewarm response from one of the candidates up here on an issue that is so critical to all of us in Rhode Island, certainly all the people that I care about.

Joseph Solomon Jr.: Let’s get this straight: I am committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose. You hear me say it now, and you’re going to hear me say it forever. I voted for the SHIELD Act, which would protect women and their doctors from out-of-state enforcement. I voted for the Equity in Abortion Coverage Act, which would provide Medicaid coverage for those who couldn’t afford it. And I’m committed to fighting the Trump Administration to protect a woman’s right to choose. My vote from years ago [2019] was before the Dobbs decision.

Once the Dobbs decision came down, it changed the entire landscape. And now I am committed. Hear me now, hear me later: I’m committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose.

Later:

Keith Hoffmann: I support a high-capacity magazine ban and an assault weapons ban because I have two children and I worry about their safety every single day, and so do you. Everybody in this community deserves to be safe from illegal firearms that should not be on our streets. Those laws need to be aggressively enforced by the next attorney general and me, and that is a difference between Mr. Solomon and me as well.

Joseph Solomon Jr.: As a bail commissioner, I need to go after the illegal guns all the time. Over and over, I see the same repeat offenders with stolen guns and with guns with serial numbers shaved off. We need to go after those violent offenders, the ones causing the crimes. We need to be careful not to go after the person who might be a lawful gun owner, because sometimes the laws that are passed, even though they have fancy names and whatnot, if you look at the details, they encompass people just like you and me, who may potentially be committing a crime because of how it was written. It is so important that we look at the details. [italics added]

It should be noted that Representative Jason Knight championed the Assault Weapons Ban bill in the House.

I thought Representative Solomon’s statements about the assault weapons ban were interesting, so I watched his appearance on the July 27, 2026 episode of the Cumberland Unfiltered podcast, hosted by Caleb Minson, Brad Dean, Jason Dean, and Andrew Bacon. Jason Dean and Andrew Bacon are members of the Cumberland School Committee. 

The guests on the show are extremely conservative. They’ve featured Mike Stenhouse, founder and CEO of the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a right-wing public policy think tank; Moms for Liberty; and anti-trans Christian Nationalist Robert Chiaradio.

Here’s the video with Joseph Solomon Jr. and a transcript edited for clarity: Joe Solomon - Rhode Island Attorney General Candidate

Public opinion on abortion has shifted 4 years after Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade

We're more polarized than ever

Laurel Elder, Hartwick College; Mary-Kate Lizotte, Augusta University, and Steven Greene, North Carolina State University

It’s been four years since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade, ending the federal constitutional right to abortion.

In the immediate aftermath of the decision, national attention centered on implementation of state bans and a rapidly shifting legal landscape.

But four years later, one of the most impactful developments has been less visible: a significant, sustained and politically consequential shift in public opinion. In the wake of Dobbs, the debate over abortion rights did not simply return to the states. It fundamentally altered how many Americans think about the issue and how they vote.

No, your drinking water isn’t contaminated by abortion pills

Viagra, maybe? Condoms, definitely.

Jenae Barnes, Climate Reporter

This story was originally reported by Jenae Barnes, Climate Reporter of The 19th. Meet Jenae and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

Anti-abortion advocates, including Republican lawmakers and state officials, want the EPA to review mifepristone as a water contaminant. Scientists say there’s no evidence it harms the environment or people.

While there is no scientific evidence that abortion medication is contaminating Americans' water supply, it has nonetheless become a central claim by the anti-abortion movement. Activists, Instagram influencers and Republican Party officials — including state and federal lawmakers — are doubling down on what experts describe as a disinformation campaign that mixes environmental policy and reproductive rights, and risks exploiting legitimate concerns about clean water.

“What if I were to tell you that every time you fill up a glass of water at your kitchen sink from the tap, you were actually *drinking* someone else’s abortion,” influencer Isabel Brown wrote in an Instagram post in May. In the accompanying video, the Gen Z conservative content creator, who has more than 1 million followers on her platform, talks to Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America, a national anti-abortion organization, and contends that anti-abortion medication is “poisoning” the water.

The claim isn’t new. For decades, anti-abortion advocates have argued that abortion medications, primarily mifepristone, pollute the environment and put pregnant people’s health at risk. But the argument has now become part of a widespread and often coordinated effort to create federal and state policy that further suppresses abortion access. 

Guess you still have the right to choose

Attention, Karma fans

McKee nomination of McCaffrey for judgeship opposed based on his record on women’s rights

Also seeks slate of bills to protect women's rights

Womxn Project in SteveAhlquist.news

The rule of law at the state level is the essential defense against the erosion of civil protections, unlawful paramilitary tactics, and escalating attacks on bodily autonomy targeting women, minorities, LGBTQ+ people, and immigrant communities, said The Womxn Project. In recent years, the organization, in coalition with partners, helped secure the right to choose in Rhode Island law so that abortion access would be protected even after the fall of Roe v. Wade.

This year, The Womxn Project will support legislation to codify core protections of the 1965 Voting Rights Act into Rhode Island law, ensuring that ongoing federal rollbacks do not weaken voting rights for any class of Rhode Islanders. State-level voting rights protections create a critical legal basis to resist efforts to curtail participation, especially in communities of color and other historically disenfranchised groups.

The Quiet Collapse of America’s Reproductive Health Safety Net

Next comes a big uptick in unplanned pregnancies, miscarriages and sexually transmitted diseases as Trump and Bobby Jr. de-fund reproductive health

Céline Gounder 

In late October, Maine Family Planning announced three rural clinics in northern Maine would close by month’s end. These primary care and reproductive health clinics served about 800 patients, many uninsured or on Medicaid.

“People don’t realize how much these clinics hold together the local health system until they’re gone,” said George Hill, the group’s president and CEO. “For thousands of patients, that was their doctor, their lab, and their lifeline.”

Maine Family Planning’s closures are among the first visible signs of what health leaders call the biggest setback to reproductive care in half a century. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Population Affairs, which administers the Title X family planning program, has been effectively shut down. 

At the same time, Medicaid cuts, the potential lapse of Affordable Care Act subsidies, as well as cuts across programs in the Health Resources and Services Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are eroding the broader safety net.

“When you cut OPA, HRSA, and Medicaid together, you’re removing every backup we have,” said Clare Coleman, president of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association. “It’s like taking EMTs off the road while closing the emergency rooms.”

Asked about the cutbacks, HHS press secretary Emily G. Hilliard said, “HHS will continue to carry out all of OPA’s statutory functions.”

Tough it out, says Donny Bonespurs

Health leaders, medical groups: CDC leader exodus puts nation's health at risk

Americans will die due to Bobby Junior's destruction of the agency

Lisa Schnirring

As news broke lof the ouster of newly confirmed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Susan Monarez, PhD, and the resignations of some of the agency's top scientists, reactions came fast and furious from public health leaders, professional groups, and lawmakers.

The upheaval at the CDC comes just weeks after a gunman attacked the campus, reportedly fueled by grievances about the COVID vaccine. 

The CDC has also been rocked by watered-down COVID vaccine recommendations that came from Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his surrogates who have announced new reviews of autism causes and COVID vaccines, both hot-button issues of Kennedy and other vaccine critics.

Michael Osterholm, PhD, MPH, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota, publisher of CIDRAP News, said the loss of top CDC staff is the result of failed leadership of extremists at HHS, which oversees the CDC. "These departures are a serious loss for America. They make our country less safe and less prepared for public health emergencies." 

Sexual abuse of children is built in to the Republican brand

Behind MAGA's noise over the "Epstein List" is a history of support for laws and policies that protect child abusers and punish children

Jesse Mackinnon for Common Dreams

EDITOR'S NOTE: This is a long article, far longer than the usual we run. However, it is well worth reading. MacKinnon offers an extraordinary historical picture of laws and practices promoted by Republican politicians that essentially legalize child rape, force raped children to carry babies to term, protects child abusers and guts support systems for rape victims. In gripping fashion, MacKinnon puts the Epstein list into a context that, in my opinion, warrants your attention.   - Will Collette

By the time the U.S. Justice Department released its memo in July 2025, the faithful were already starting to turn. There was no “client list,” no smoking gun, no perverted cabal of global elites laid bare for public vengeance.

What they got instead was a cold government document and a half-mumbled shrug from Donald Trump, who barely remembered the man everyone else had turned into a folk demon. “Are people still talking about this guy, this creep?” he asked, blinking like he’d just wandered out of a golf simulator.

The betrayal was almost elegant. For years, Trump’s people had promised the black book. Attorney General Pam Bondi said it was on her desk. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel practically branded his political future with it. Counselor to the President of the United Staes Alina Habba promised flight logs and names.

And then the punchline: nothing. Or rather, a truckload of documents scrubbed clean and a memo telling the public to move on. The frenzy turned inward. MAGA loyalists melted down on camera. Laura Loomer called for a special counsel. Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino stopped showing up for work. Right-wing media turned on itself like rats in a pressure cooker.

But the Epstein file was never the point. The real story was not buried in a locked safe or hidden by the FBI. It was out in the open. It is still out in the open. The political movement that once pledged to drain the swamp has spent its second tour of duty building a legal and bureaucratic fortress around some of the oldest crimes in the book. Modern conservatism has come to rely not just on outrage but on inertia, and nowhere is that more visible than in its handling of child sexual abuse.

We are not talking about a secret ring or coded pizza menus. We are talking about a system that tolerates child marriage in over half the states. A system that forces raped minors to carry pregnancies to term. A system that slashes funding for shelters and trauma counseling. A system that lets rape kits pile up in warehouse back rooms while politicians pose in front of billboards about protecting kids.

This is not a moral failure or a bureaucratic oversight. It is an architecture. It is built from votes, funded by budgets, signed into law by men who say they fear God but fear losing donors more. The Epstein affair may have collapsed in a cloud of whimpering and spin, but what it revealed is far more corrosive than any one man’s crimes. The question is not why they hid the list. The question is why they need it at all when the ledger is already written in their laws.

Legalized Child Marriage as Institutional Abuse

As of mid-2025, child marriage remains legal in 37 U.S. states. In most of these jurisdictions, statutory exceptions allow minors to marry with parental consent or judicial approval. Some states permit marriage for individuals as young as 15. Others lack any explicit minimum age when certain conditions are met. These legal frameworks persist despite growing evidence of their links to coercion, abuse, and lifelong harm.

Missouri serves as a prominent example. Until recently, it permitted minors aged 15 to marry with parental consent. Testimony from survivors has revealed how this legal permission facilitated predatory relationships cloaked in legitimacy. In one case, a girl was married off to a man nearly a decade older, and the marriage became a vehicle for sustained sexual and psychological abuse. Former child brides in Missouri have since called for a statutory minimum age of 18 with no exceptions. Legislative efforts to enact such reforms have repeatedly stalled.

Tennessee offers a more recent and pointed illustration. In 2022, Republican lawmakers introduced legislation that would have created a new category of marriage not subject to age restrictions. The bill failed under public pressure, but it signaled a continued willingness by some conservative legislators to bypass modern child protection norms. Even when confronted with documentation of exploitation, physical violence, and long-term trauma, these lawmakers often frame the issue around religious liberty and parental authority.

The prevailing rhetoric in these debates centers on traditional family values. Proponents argue that restricting child marriage infringes on the rights of families to make decisions without state interference. 

In some cases, advocates for maintaining the status quo invoke Christian theological justifications or present marriage as a preferable alternative to state custody. These arguments shift the legal focus away from the vulnerability of the minor and toward the autonomy of adults, particularly parents and religious leaders.

This legal tolerance undermines the enforcement of statutory rape laws. When marriage can be used as a legal shield, older adults who would otherwise face criminal prosecution gain immunity by securing parental consent or exploiting permissive judicial channels.

In practice, the marriage license functions as retroactive permission for sexual contact with a minor. Law enforcement agencies are often reluctant to investigate allegations within a legally recognized marriage, even when age discrepancies raise clear concerns.

The persistence of child marriage statutes in conservative-controlled states is not simply a relic of outdated law. It reflects a policy choice. The choice is to preserve adult control over minors, particularly in contexts that reinforce patriarchal and religious hierarchies.

In doing so, the state becomes an active participant in the erasure of consent. Legal recognition of these unions confers legitimacy on relationships that, in other contexts, would be subject to prosecution. The result is a bifurcated legal system where a child’s age and rights are contingent on the adult interests surrounding her.

10 nasty little surprises in Trump's Big Beautiful Boondoggle

Zeros out Planned Parenthood, boosts Medicaid AND Medicare costs, squeezes student loan holders, gives venture capitalists a new tax break and more

By Colin Seeberger, Andrea Ducas and Natasha Murphy

Congressional Republicans passed a radical budget and tax bill—the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—on a party-line vote. Many of the plan’s key elements will increase families’ costs for health care, food, and utilities—such as historic cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as well as terminating tax credits to produce more American-made energy—and are deeply unpopular according to recent survey data. Several provisions, however, remain less understood because they’ve received less media attention or were added during rushed negotiations that took place overnight and behind closed doors.

This article details several lesser-known provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) that will increase costs and limit Americans’ ability to meet their basic needs; create a slush fund for Trump administration overreach; and waste taxpayer money.

Defunding Planned Parenthood clinics

The OBBBA includes a provision that would effectively defund Planned Parenthood clinics for one year. The bill would do this by prohibiting any health clinic that provides abortion care (even if that care is paid for privately) from accepting Medicaid funds for any other service they provide.

The Hyde Amendment already prohibits federal funds—including Medicaid dollars—from being used to cover abortion. This bill would go even further and prevent women on Medicaid from accessing any Planned Parenthood services, including sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening, Pap smears, breast cancer screenings, and prenatal care. 

This would be exceptionally harmful to Medicaid enrollees, as the majority of people with Medicaid receive contraceptives (85 percent) and STI services (57 percent) from Planned Parenthood clinics. Losing Medicaid funding would put 1 in 3 Planned Parenthood centers at risk of closure and would take away a vital source of health care for more than 1 million people.

Increasing health care costs for more than a million Medicare enrollees

While President Donald Trump has repeatedly promised not to cut Medicare benefits, the OBBBA blocks implementation of an existing regulation that makes it easier for eligible low-income Medicare beneficiaries to enroll in Medicare Savings Programs (MSPs) that lower Medicare premiums and out-of-pocket costs. 

MSPs make health care accessible for Medicare enrollees, who often live on very limited incomes and few assets. Without enrolling in the programs, even modest medical bills can be unaffordable and basic access to care can slip out of reach. Blocking the regulation would prevent states from streamlining and automating enrollment into MSPs.

As a result, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the earlier House-passed bill (with similar provisions also in the Senate-passed bill) would cause 1.3 million Medicare enrollees eligible for these programs to lose or forgo their Medicaid coverage and, therefore, be unable to access the assistance. 

The Center for American Progress previously estimated that Medicare enrollees eligible for two MSP programs—the Qualified Medicare Beneficiary (QMB) Program and the Specified Low-Income Medicare Beneficiary (SLMB) Program—would be hit especially hard. These programs benefit Medicare enrollees living at or just above the federal poverty level (FPL). 

A couple on Medicare who are eligible for but no longer able to enroll in the QMB, making a combined $21,000 per year, could see their out of pocket costs skyrocket by $8,340. A single Medicare enrollee making only $19,000 per year and eligible for SLMB could see their out of pocket costs jump by $3,300 per year if they are unable to enroll in the program as a result of the bill.

Senate President Dominick Ruggerio has died

Trade union leader, longest serving legislator

By Nancy Lavin, Rhode Island Current

Photo by Michael Salerno/Rhode Island Current

Senate President Dominick Ruggerio, the State House’s longest-serving member, died early Monday morning following a battle with cancer, according to a statement from his office. He was 76.

“It is with deepest sorrow that we announce the passing of Senate President Dominick J. Ruggerio earlier this morning,” the statement said. “We are so grateful for the love and support of his friends and colleagues. Throughout his illness, Donny fought valiantly, just as he always had for his constituents and the residents of Rhode Island.”

The North Providence Democrat was hospitalized at Our Lady of Fatima Hospital last week for a bad reaction to his treatment — returning less than five weeks after he was released from the same hospital and rehabilitation center for pneumonia. 

House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi said he was “heartbroken,” referring to Ruggerio as his “dear friend” in a statement Monday morning.

“I had enormous respect and admiration for his dedication and leadership,” Shekarchi said.  “Even through his illness, we communicated on nearly a daily basis about the important issues facing our state. Donny devoted his life to the people of Rhode Island, which will always be his legacy. This is the end of an era at the State House, where Donny was a true giant for well over four decades, beginning his career in the House in 1981 before moving to the Senate four years later.  On behalf of the House of Representatives, we extend our deepest sympathies to his family and his Senate colleagues, and we will miss him greatly.”

Reproductive health care faces legal and surveillance challenges post-Roe

Greater threats to women's privacy

Nora McDonald, George Mason University

Long before Roe v. Wade was overturned, reproductive justice advocates had been sounding the alarm about the increasing number of women subjected to criminal investigation for suspected abortion, stillbirth or miscarriage. These cases were often initiated by health care providers and bolstered by state laws used to prosecute women for having abortions.

Newer laws, however, incentivize people outside of health care, including friends and family members, to report someone they suspect of having an abortion or helping someone else with an abortion. Coupled with the unprecedented access that authorities now have to digital information, these laws create new avenues for prosecution.

In the post-Roe era, people capable of pregnancy face growing threats. Health care providers, family, friends, information on personal devices and virtually any activity that can be observed or recorded pose privacy risks that can lead to prosecution. I study online privacy. This vast scope for potential surveillance and privacy intrusion is a key focus of the research my colleagues and I conduct.

In a recent paper, we surveyed reproductive health care providers about their privacy and security practices. We used the results to map the path of a hypothetical “Jane” to illustrate how people can identify privacy risks in their own situations. This choose-your-adventure approach helps readers navigate the potential legal, digital and personal challenges involved in accessing reproductive health care – and reveals the grim stakes.

Cecile Richards, Reproductive Rights Champion Who Led Planned Parenthood, Dies at 67

"A light, a champion, a force for good" 

Julia Conley for Common Dreams

Cecile Richards, the former president of Planned Parenthood and longtime champion of women's rights and other progressive causes, died on Monday at the age of 67. The cause was an aggressive brain cancer that had been diagnosed in 2023.

Richards' husband and three children confirmed her death in a statement posted on social media.

Richards, the daughter of former Democratic Texas Gov. Ann Richards, had an early introduction to progressive politics. 

At 16 she worked on a campaign to elect Sarah Waddington, the lawyer who argued in favor of abortion rights before the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, and in college she helped push Brown University to divest from companies that supported apartheid in South Africa.

After years of labor organizing work, Richards became the president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. She sat at the helm of the organization for 12 years, leading it as it became more vocal in electoral politics and fought state-level battles against abortion restrictions.

She was the national face of the organization and spoke frequently on its behalf at political events and galas, but also stood shoulder-to-shoulder with abortion rights supporters at pivotal moments in the fight against right-wing efforts to attack reproductive justice.

The Adventures of Bad Fetus

Question 1 could open door in R.I. that should stay closed

Why give far-right activists another platform to attack civil rights?

By Mary-Murphy Walsh, Rhode Island Current

“You can pry this wedding ring from my cold, dead, gay hands.” That was Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s defiant message to Donald Trump at the Democratic National Convention, confronting his threats to LGBTQ+ rights. 

Democrats in Rhode Island might believe our state constitution shields us from such assaults on our freedoms. However, Question 1 on the Nov. 5 ballot poses a direct threat to our rights here at home. Alarmingly, most voters are unaware that the critical issue the first ballot question involves is even on the table.

Question 1 asks whether Rhode Island should hold a constitutional convention — a gathering of 75 elected delegates empowered to propose amendments to our state constitution. While this might initially seem like an opportunity for positive change, it is fraught with peril. Such a convention opens the door for sweeping alterations to our fundamental rights. Delegates could be anyone, potentially influenced by unlimited spending from out-of-state special interest groups with extreme agendas. Once elected, these delegates aren’t held accountable and can pursue their own objectives without the usual checks and balances that govern our legislative process.

History warns us of the dangers. In the 1986 constitutional convention, amendments were proposed to restrict a woman’s right to choose and to disenfranchise voters. But pro-life advocates weren’t satisfied with stopping there; their goal was — and continues to be — to erode the rights of women, workers, immigrants, LGBTQ+ individuals, and people of color. The convention led to costly chaos and setbacks on several constitutional protections. We cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of the past.

No on state Question 1

Point, counter-point