Business
Auto strike poses key test for pro-labor Biden on September 17, 2023 at 12:00 pm Business News | The Hill

The United Auto Workers (UAW) strike could have major political implications for Joe Biden, who has repeatedly framed himself as the most pro-labor president in history.
Biden, who is running for reelection with a dismal approval rating, has worked to secure political support from blue-collar workers. But his pro-union bona fides and claims of U.S. manufacturing success are at stake with strike, which his administration tried and failed to prevent.
It was a blow to Biden when a deal wasn’t made after months of negotiations between the UAW and Ford, Stellantis and General Motors. Much of the economic gains during his presidency, for which he has already struggled to get credit, could be threatened.
Negotiations have been focused on pay increases, pensions, career security and workers concerns over electric vehicles (EVs). Biden, an unapologetic “car guy,” leaned into his support for the auto workers on Friday, saying that record corporate profits “should be shared by record contracts for the UAW.”
Biden said he is dispatching acting Labor Secretary Julie Su and director of the National Economic Council Gene Sterling to Detroit to talk to both sides. But looming over such moves is the fact that the UAW has not yet endorsed Biden for 2024, despite most major unions announcing their backing of him months ago.
The UAW said, however, that it wouldn’t endorse former President Trump, and union President Shawn Fain went so far earlier this month as to say that Trump is “not a person I want as my president.”
Democrats lost many union workers in 2020 in states such as Ohio to Trump, whose anti-free trade message and other rhetoric resonated with the labor vote. That came after union households had already somewhat shifted blue-to-red in 2016.
“Why did Democrats lose the Midwest? Why did the blue wall crumble? It’s because they allowed good union jobs in the auto industry to be offshore,” said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution. “This strike is an opportunity for the president to … say to the Big Three, ‘You’re incredibly profitable, we’re going to invest in you, but the return in investment we need to see is for working class Americans.’”
“Failure to do so, I think, will mean he risks losing working class voters. They either sit it out or they vote for a Donald Trump-like figure who won his election by promising to champion the deindustrialized Midwest,” Geevarghese added.
Biden’s campaign has an enthusiasm problem, with voters often citing his age as a major issue and his approval rating lingering just below 40 percent. The lack of excitement from some progressives such as college students and climate activists threatens a low voter turnout but not necessarily a vote for Trump or some other GOP nominee.
Union workers, however, could be a group that votes for a Republican, something that already occurred in 2016, instead of just not showing up for Biden.
When asked about pressure on Biden considering that Michigan, which he won in 2020, is an essential state in 2024 and workers are an essential demographic to win, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “there are always unique sets of circumstances when we’re talking about collective bargaining with unions.”
Biden has made a major push for a transition towards electric cars, and when the UAW said it would withhold its endorsement for Biden, it cited concerns over the White House’s focus on EVs.
Trump on Wednesday urged the UAW to make repealing Biden’s push for EVs its “top, non-negotiable demand in any strike,” warning that if the policy stands, “all your jobs will be sent to China” because “there’s no such thing as a ‘fair transition.’”
Biden’s reelection campaign in response argued Trump will say anything to distract from his own record and said that Trump suggested in 2015 moving some car production from Michigan.
“Under Trump, autoworkers shuttered their doors and sent American jobs overseas. Under Trump, auto companies would have likely gone bankrupt, devastating the industry and upending millions of lives,” said Ammar Moussa, a Biden-Harris spokesperson.
When asked if the strike is a result of the president’s push towards the EV transition, Jean-Pierre on Friday said, “No, we don’t believe that to be.” She added that EV sales are hitting record highs and prices for the vehicles are coming down.
While the White House has maintained it won’t intervene in the negotiations, Sterling and Su are being deployed as coordinators between the two sides.
But Biden’s Friday comments came across as a firm endorsement of the workers.
He said UAW members have “extraordinary skill and sacrifices” and that the UAW is “at the heart of our economy.”
“This is a question of whether cars are going to be made here at home or in China and overseas. Joe Biden is not going to turn his back on American manufacturing. He’s been clear he’s supporting workers during this process,” a Biden adviser told The Hill.
Michael Starr Hopkins, a Democratic strategist, argued that Biden personally fights for working Americans and his vision has always been to support not just the wealthy.
“The name Biden is synonymous with working Americans. That’s why Americans overwhelmingly believe that Joe Biden wakes up every day fighting for their futures. The president knows what it’s like to live in a home that’s paycheck to paycheck. It’s personal to him,” Hopkins said.
Biden maintains strong support other labor groups, and his reelection was endorsed in June by AFL-CIO head Liz Schuler, AFCME President Lee Saunders and others.
Unions cite his gains for workers, including investments in infrastructure, manufacturing and clean energy jobs through legislation including the Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPs and Science Act and Infrastructure Law.
Jean-Pierre on Friday did stop short of saying Biden supports UAW’s demand for a 40 percent increase and she wouldn’t confirm any upcoming conversations between Biden and Fain.
“This is a which side are you on moment going into a presidential election season. Is he really on the side of workers? If so, he should stand with the UAW and put pressure on the Big Three,” Geevarghese said.
On the other side, the business community is taking note that the president appears to be leanings away from support for the auto giants during this strike.
“The UAW strike and indeed the ‘summer of strikes’ is the natural result of the Biden administration’s ‘whole of government’ approach to promoting unionization at all costs,” Chamber of Commerce President Suzanne Clark said in a statement.
Hollywood writers and actors have been striking for weeks over fair pay and benefits, and major strikes were only barely averted for UPS staffers and West Coast dockworkers.
The Teamsters, ahead of its deal with UPS, had asked the White House not to intervene if workers’ strike.
The administration did intervene last fall to avoid a nationwide railroad strike. Biden called into talks between negotiators, led by former Labor Secretary Marty Walsh, and made clear a shutdown of railways was unacceptable. Then, following 20 hours of negotiations, a deal appeared to avoid a strike that could have crippled the U.S. supply chain.
At the time, the president hailed the tentative agreement to avoid a nationwide railroad strike as proof that unions and management can work together.
Months later, Biden chose to make remarks in front of a room full of union workers for his first speech since announcing his reelection bid in April.
“I make no apologies for being the most pro-union president. And I’m proud of it,” Biden said at a North America’s Building Trades Union conference. “We — you and I together — we’re turning things around and we’re doing it in a big way.”
Administration, Business, Campaign The United Auto Workers (UAW) strike could have major political implications for Joe Biden, who has repeatedly framed himself as the most pro-labor president in history. Biden, who is running for reelection with a dismal approval rating, has worked to secure political support from blue-collar workers. But his pro-union bona fides and claims of U.S….
Business
Pros and Cons of the Big Beautiful Bill

The “Big Beautiful Bill” (officially the One Big Beautiful Bill Act) is a sweeping tax and spending package passed in July 2025. It makes permanent many Trump-era tax cuts, introduces new tax breaks for working Americans, and enacts deep cuts to federal safety-net programs. The bill also increases spending on border security and defense, while rolling back clean energy incentives and tightening requirements for social programs.

Pros
1. Tax Relief for Middle and Working-Class Families
- Makes the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, preventing a scheduled tax hike for many Americans.
- Introduces new tax breaks: no federal income tax on tips and overtime pay (for incomes under $150,000, with limits).
- Doubles the Child Tax Credit to $2,500 per child through 2028.
- Temporarily raises the SALT (state and local tax) deduction cap to $40,000.
- Creates “Trump Accounts”: tax-exempt savings accounts for newborns.
2. Support for Small Businesses and Economic Growth
- Makes the small business deduction permanent, supporting Main Street businesses.
- Expands expensing for investment in short-lived assets and domestic R&D, which is considered pro-growth.
3. Increased Spending on Security and Infrastructure
- Allocates $175 billion for border security and $160 billion for defense, the highest peacetime military budget in U.S. history.
- Provides $12.5 billion for air traffic control modernization.
4. Simplification and Fairness in the Tax Code
- Expands the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and raises marginal rates on individuals earning over $400,000.
- Closes various deductions and loopholes, especially those benefiting private equity and multinational corporations.

Cons
1. Deep Cuts to Social Safety Net Programs
- Cuts Medicaid by approximately $930 billion and imposes new work requirements, which could leave millions without health insurance.
- Tightens eligibility and work requirements for SNAP (food assistance), potentially removing benefits from many low-income families.
- Rolls back student loan forgiveness and repeals Biden-era subsidies.
2. Increases the Federal Deficit
- The bill is projected to add $3.3–4 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years.
- Critics argue that the combination of tax cuts and increased spending is fiscally irresponsible.
3. Benefits Skewed Toward the Wealthy
- The largest income gains go to affluent Americans, with top earners seeing significant after-tax increases.
- Critics describe the bill as the largest upward transfer of wealth in recent U.S. history.
4. Rollback of Clean Energy and Climate Incentives
- Eliminates tax credits for electric vehicles and solar energy by the end of 2025.
- Imposes stricter requirements for renewable energy developers, which could lead to job losses and higher electricity costs.

5. Potential Harm to Healthcare and Rural Hospitals
- Reduces funding for hospitals serving Medicaid recipients, increasing uncompensated care costs and threatening rural healthcare access.
- Tightens verification for federal premium subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, risking coverage for some middle-income Americans.
6. Public and Political Backlash
- The bill is unpopular in public polls and is seen as a political risk for its supporters.
- Critics warn it will widen the gap between rich and poor and reverse progress on alternative energy and healthcare.
Summary Table
Pros | Cons |
---|---|
Permanent middle-class tax cuts | Deep Medicaid and SNAP cuts |
No tax on tips/overtime for most workers | Millions may lose health insurance |
Doubled Child Tax Credit | Adds $3.3–4T to deficit |
Small business support | Benefits skewed to wealthy |
Increased border/defense spending | Clean energy incentives eliminated |
Simplifies some tax provisions | Threatens rural hospitals |
Public backlash, political risk |
In summary:
The Big Beautiful Bill delivers significant tax relief and new benefits for many working and middle-class Americans, but it does so at the cost of deep cuts to social programs, a higher federal deficit, and reduced support for clean energy and healthcare. The bill is highly polarizing, with supporters touting its pro-growth and pro-family provisions, while critics warn of increased inequality and harm to vulnerable populations.
Business
Trump Threatens to ‘Take a Look’ at Deporting Elon Musk Amid Explosive Feud

The escalating conflict between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk reached a new peak this week, as Trump publicly suggested he would consider deporting the billionaire entrepreneur in response to Musk’s fierce criticism of the president’s signature tax and spending bill.

“I don’t know, we’ll have to take a look,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday when asked directly if he would deport Musk, who was born in South Africa but has been a U.S. citizen since 2002.
This threat followed a late-night post on Trump’s Truth Social platform, where he accused Musk of being the largest recipient of government subsidies in U.S. history. Trump claimed that without these supports, Musk “would likely have to shut down operations and return to South Africa,” and that ending such subsidies would mean “no more rocket launches, satellites, or electric vehicle production, and our nation would save a FORTUNE”.
Trump also invoked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—a federal agency Musk previously led—as a potential tool to scrutinize Musk’s companies. “We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? The DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon,” Trump remarked, further intensifying the feud.

Background to the Feud
The rupture comes after Musk’s repeated attacks on Trump’s so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill,” a comprehensive spending and tax reform proposal that Musk has labeled a “disgusting abomination” and a threat to the nation’s fiscal health. Musk, once a Trump ally who contributed heavily to his election campaign and served as a government advisor, has called for the formation of a new political party, claiming the bill exposes the need for an alternative to the current two-party system.
In response, Trump’s allies have amplified questions about Musk’s citizenship and immigration history, with some suggesting an investigation into his naturalization process. However, legal experts note that deporting a naturalized U.S. citizen like Musk would be extremely difficult. The only path would involve denaturalization—a rare and complex legal process requiring proof of intentional fraud during the citizenship application, a standard typically reserved for the most egregious cases.
Political Fallout
Musk’s criticism has rattled some Republican lawmakers, who fear the feud could undermine their party’s unity ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Meanwhile, Musk has doubled down on his opposition, warning he will support primary challengers against Republicans who back Trump’s bill.
Key Points:
- Trump has publicly threatened to “take a look” at deporting Elon Musk in retaliation for Musk’s opposition to his legislative agenda.
- Legal experts say actual deportation is highly unlikely due to the stringent requirements for denaturalizing a U.S. citizen.
- The feud marks a dramatic reversal from the pair’s earlier alliance, with both men now trading barbs over social media and in public statements.
As the dispute continues, it has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over government spending, corporate subsidies, and political loyalty at the highest levels of American power.
Business
Diddy Faces Life Sentence as Jury Deliberates

Sean “Diddy” Combs, the influential music mogul and entrepreneur, is facing the possibility of spending the rest of his life behind bars as a New York federal jury continues deliberations in his high-profile sex trafficking and racketeering trial.

After more than five hours of deliberation on Monday, the 12-member jury—composed of eight men and four women—had not reached a verdict and is set to resume discussions today. The panel is tasked with deciding whether prosecutors have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Combs orchestrated a criminal enterprise that trafficked women for sex and engaged in other serious crimes over a period spanning nearly two decades.
Prosecutors allege that Combs, 55, used his wealth, celebrity, and network of employees to coerce and intimidate two former romantic partners—singer Cassie Ventura and another woman identified as “Jane”—into participating in what were described as drug-fueled “freak offs,” involving commercial sex acts with male escorts while Combs watched or filmed. They further claim he maintained control through threats of violence, kidnapping, and arson, and that he used his business empire as a front for these illicit activities.
Combs has pleaded not guilty to all charges, which include:
- One count of racketeering conspiracy
- Two counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud, or coercion
- Two counts of transportation for the purpose of prostitution

If convicted of the most serious charges, Combs faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years and a maximum of life in prison. The racketeering charge alone could result in a life sentence if the jury finds he committed at least two of the eight underlying crimes alleged by prosecutors, including sex trafficking, kidnapping, bribery, and narcotics distribution.
The defense argues that the government is unfairly criminalizing Combs’ private sexual conduct, characterizing the events as consensual and part of a swinger lifestyle rather than criminal acts. Combs chose not to testify in his own defense, with his legal team focusing on cross-examining dozens of prosecution witnesses, including former employees who testified under immunity.
Deliberations have not been without drama. The jury sent a note to Judge Arun Subramanian expressing concern that one juror was struggling to follow instructions, prompting the judge to remind all members of their duty to deliberate fairly and according to the law. The panel also sought clarification on the legal standards surrounding narcotics distribution, a key element in the racketeering charge, which the judge is expected to address today.
As the world watches, Combs’ fate now rests in the hands of the jury. There is no set timeline for a verdict, and the deliberations could continue for several days. If acquitted, Combs would be released immediately; if convicted, he could face a life sentence, marking a dramatic fall for one of hip-hop’s most prominent figures.
- Advice2 weeks ago
What SXSW 2025 Filmmakers Want Every New Director to Know
- Film Industry2 weeks ago
Filming Yourself and Look Cinematic
- Politics3 weeks ago
Bolanle Newsroom Brief: Israel Strikes Iran’s Nuclear Sites — What It Means for the World
- News6 days ago
Father Leaps Overboard to Save Daughter on Disney Dream Cruise
- Advice1 week ago
Why 20% of Us Are Always Late
- Health5 days ago
McCullough Alleges Government Hid COVID Vaccine Side Effects
- Entertainment3 weeks ago
The Hidden Reality Behind Victoria’s Secret
- Advice1 week ago
How to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker