Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro is reportedly at the top of the list of potential running mates for Vice President Kamala Harris in her bid for the White House. But many progressives have raised alarm about Shapiro’s record, including his support for corporate tax breaks and school vouchers, his relationship with oil and gas companies, and his demonization of pro-Palestinian protesters. “He’s been actively and vocally supportive of Israel’s war on Gaza since October 7 and prior,” says journalist Marc Lamont Hill in Philadelphia. “In every conceivable way, Josh Shapiro is not a progressive candidate.” He adds that while Shapiro’s choice as running mate would be “very frustrating,” it would also clarify the choices in the election and prevent people from projecting false hope onto Harris as many did with Barack Obama. “She very clearly is a liberal, but certainly not a progressive or a radical.”
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: So, you mentioned pro-Palestinian protests. Kamala Harris is expected to announce her choice for running mate any day now, by Tuesday, it’s said. Potential candidates include Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro is reportedly at the top of her list. Many progressives are raising alarm about Shapiro’s record on, oh, promoting corporate tax breaks and school vouchers, raising issues about accelerating climate change, and demonizing pro-Palestinian protests. Earlier this year, Governor Shapiro called on the University of Pennsylvania to disband a Gaza solidarity encampment. He also supported the dismissal of the University of Pennsylvania’s president, Elizabeth Magill, amidst that firestorm fueled by right-wing politicians and media over free speech and support for Palestinian rights on campus. This is Governor Shapiro speaking in May.
GOV. JOSH SHAPIRO: By their own admission, the leaders at the University of Pennsylvania have made clear that those protesters, those who are living in these so-called encampments, are violating the rules of the university and, in some cases, the laws of the city of Philadelphia. It has — the university has tried to negotiate and discuss the matter with those protesters. That has proven to not be effective. Over the last 24 hours at the University of Pennsylvania, the situation has gotten even more unstable and out of control. More rules have been violated. More laws have been broken. That is absolutely unacceptable.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro speaking in the rain in May. Marc Lamont Hill, you’re joining us from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. You’re co-author of Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics. You’ve covered these protests extensively, as well as the Middle East, as a host on Al Jazeera. Your response?
MARC LAMONT HILL: There are so many things here. There’s a really good chance that Kamala Harris is going to choose Josh Shapiro to be her running mate. In some ways — in the most obvious way, I oppose that. Josh Shapiro challenges democratic practices. He doesn’t believe in free speech. He has warned, you know, state employees here in Pennsylvania about how they respond to the genocide in Gaza, questioning their behavior, policing their behavior. He very clearly supports Zionism. He very — political Zionism. He very clearly supports the genocidal war in Gaza. He’s been actively and vocally supportive of Israel’s war on Gaza since October 7th and prior. We can also get into school vouchers. We can get into climate justice. In every conceivable way, Josh Shapiro is not a progressive candidate. And it would be very frustrating to see her make that choice.
But in some ways, it would make our political reality much more clear. People right now are trying to project a green screen onto Kamala Harris, the same way they did to Barack Obama, meaning they want to project their radical ideologies and their progressive ideologies and imagination onto her. That’s not who she is. She very clearly supports AIPAC. She very clearly is a liberal, but certainly not a progressive or a radical. So, what Josh Shapiro as a choice would do is it will remind us of what we’re dealing with. If you’re voting for Kamala Harris, it’s not because you’re getting a radical or even a progressive. You’re voting for her because you want to keep Trump out of the White House. You can make your own political decisions about what that means, but we need to be very clear about what we’re getting and about what we’re not getting. But if you were somebody who was not voting for Biden because of him underwriting this vicious war in Gaza, then there’s absolutely no way you could justify voting for Kamala Harris if she chooses Josh Shapiro. And the two of them — it’s not just Shapiro — the two of them are just as supportive of this war machine as every other mainstream corporate Democrat.
AMY GOODMAN: And to those who say to your response that you can vote for Kamala Harris if you want to keep Trump out of the White House, that Governor Shapiro, you know, presides over a state that is a key battleground state that she would need to win?
MARC LAMONT HILL: Well, that’s the argument — right? — is that it’s — but it’s also — it’s Trump’s argument for choosing JD Vance, which he probably regrets at this point. If you want to keep Trump out of the White House, Josh Shapiro does help. I mean, that’s a great point.
But the question is: When you win the White House, what do you get? Right? There has to be a way to keep Trump away, to keep Trump out of D.C., which I support, but still not compromise all possibility of actually meeting our collective needs. Again, I’m not talking about pie in the sky. I’m not talking about an imagined future a hundred years from now. I’m saying right now we have to challenge Kamala Harris to be better. We have to challenge Kamala Harris to meet our needs. And if we don’t even hold her accountable for the vice-presidential choices she makes right now — and there are clearly more progressive options on the table — then we’ve forfeited our own kind of agency here. Let’s do both. Let’s keep Trump out of the White House, but let’s also apply some pressure. That’s all I’ve got to say.
AMY GOODMAN: Marc Lamont Hill, I want to thank you very much for being with us, member of the National Association of Black Journalists, host of UpFront on Al Jazeera English and a nightly YouTube show called Night School, also professor of anthropology and urban education at the City University of New York Graduate Center, speaking to us from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Next up, an historic prisoner swap. We’ll look at the negotiations that led to the freeing of Americans, Russian human rights activists and others jailed in Russia. We’ll speak with Katrina vanden Heuvel, Russia expert and publisher of The Nation magazine. Back in 30 seconds.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy