Rather than the relatively regulation-free marketplace that’s made up the Internet Service Provider network to this point, the online world will now be treated like the rest of the heavily regulated telecommunications world, which has a number of restrictions aimed at protecting consumers and preventing corporations from unfair pricing.

“Today’s vote is the fruition of a decade-long fight by those of us who believe in preserving the Internet as a level playing field,” Adam Green, Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder, said in a statement sent to Mic. “Protecting Net Neutrality through reclassification is the kind of big, bold idea that is hugely popular with Americans of all political stripes.”

In the lead-up to the vote, public sentiment was generally in favor of free and open Internet. A recent national poll of 1,500 likely 2016 voters conducted by the Progressive Change Institute and GBA Strategies found that 61% of all voters supported net neutrality, with only 26% opposing.

Another progressive campaign group is looking to defeat Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel (D) as he heads for a runoff.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee sent out an email to its supporters Wednesday asking them to donate to the former White House chief of staff’s opponent, Cook County Commissioner Jesus “Chuy” Garcia.

“Garcia has the momentum — let’s show him some love,” the email said. “Chip in $6 to help him defeat one of the worst corporate Democrats in America.”

The president was a huge feature of the mayor’s campaign — not just with his picture and quotes all over Emanuel’s campaign material, but with a radio ad, closing television commercial, and set of appearances in Chicago last Thursday.

Obama’s known for his loyalty to his allies and continues to have an active interest in hometown politics. So of course he’d back Emanuel, progressives say, but he can’t claim to be doing so out of principle.

The Working Families Party cheered García’s victory as Chicago “showing signs of the progressive wave that has washed over cities across America.” The Progressive Change Campaign Committee sent out its own celebratory email to members.

Asked Wednesday whether the president believes Emanuel’s a true progressive, White House spokesman Eric Schultz ducked the question. “The president is supportive and will do what we can to help,” was all he would say.

In forcing the runoff, Garcia has attracted an outpouring of interest in his campaign.

Left-leaning organizations, such as U.S. PIRG and MoveOn.org, cast Tuesday’s results as a vociferous rejection by Chicagoans of big money in politics. On Wednesday, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee e-mailed a plea to its 1 million members asking them to “show him some love” by donating $6 to help Garcia defeat “one of the worst corporate Democrats in America.” Garcia was out-spent 12-to-1 by Emanuel in the primary.

Elizabeth Warren has made it very clear that she’s not planning to run for president in 2016. “I am not running for President,” she repeatedly told NPR in an interview in December. “You want me to put an exclamation point at the end?”

These consistent denials contrast with the enthusiasm of her supporters who continue to trumpet the Massachusetts senator’s message of reversing growing income inequality even as Warren remains on the sidelines. Although it’s unclear whether or not their advocacy has done anything to move the needle on Warren’s thinking, pro-Warren groups are still having a major impact on the 2016 debate.

“There are a lot of people who didn’t vote in 2014 because Democrats weren’t talking about big, bold ideas,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), which led a Draft Warren for Senate effort in 2011. “Republicans, Democrats and Independent voters are crying out for someone to fight for the little guy against the big guy … The midterms were one of the lowest turnout elections and that’s because people don’t even understand what the point is anymore,” he added.

Clinton and Warren, who has has focused on the issue of income equality, held a private, one-on-one meeting at Clinton’s Washington home, the New York Times reported. The meeting came at Clinton’s invitation.

“It is positive news that Hillary Clinton is meeting with Elizabeth Warren and other progressives — and it will be even more positive news if economic populist thinkers are appointed to her inner circle,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “The way for Democrats to win the general election in 2016 is by actively campaigning on an Elizabeth Warren-style economic message — big ideas like expanding Social Security benefits, a national goal of debt-free college, and stopping Wall Street banks from wrecking our economy again.

The PCCC met with Clinton aides in December.

“It is positive news that Hillary Clinton is meeting with Elizabeth Warren and other progressives – and it will be even more positive news if economic populist thinkers are appointed to her inner circle,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.

The Times reported on Tuesday that Mrs. Clinton held a private, one-on-one meeting with Ms. Warren in December and sought the senator’s policy ideas.

Mr. Green said in a statement that Democrats would be better positioned to win the general election in 2016 if they campaigned on Ms. Warren’s economic message of expanding Social Security benefits and reigning in big banks.

Hillary Clinton allies say the former secretary of State and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) have everything to gain and nothing to lose from their secret meeting in December.

Progressives who have criticized Clinton and clamored for Warren to enter the race embraced the meeting, calling it “positive news.”

“And it will be even more positive news if economic populist thinkers are appointed to her inner circle,” said Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) in a statement on Tuesday. “The way for Democrats to win the general election in 2016 is by actively campaigning on an Elizabeth Warren-style economic message — big ideas like expanding Social Security benefits, a national goal of debt-free college and stopping Wall Street banks from wrecking our economy again.”

“Last Week Tonight” is one of HBO’s most talked about and acclaimed shows. Renewing the series and tying down Oliver recently picked up a degree of urgency after the British host was being rumored as a possible replacement for the departing Jon Stewart of “The Daily Show.”

Stewart announced last week that he was signing off as host on “The Daily Show” later this year.

One poll by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee showed that 44% of its members wanted Oliver to take his spot.

Without a candidate to get behind, some liberal and labor groups are focusing instead on changing the complexion of the electorate, hoping that Clinton can be pulled to the left by forces on the ground. After a summit on the issue of raising wages (headlined, it should be noted, by Elizabeth Warren) the AFL-CIO announced that they would barnstorm the first four primary states to rally voters around the issue.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, meanwhile, is trying to persuade progressive leaders in Iowa and New Hampshire to hold off announcing that they are ready for Hillary until she publicly announces where she stands on key liberal issues such as expanding Social Security and breaking up big banks.

“We really have a one of a kind role at this point, which is being a grassroots force that is working to incentivize all of the Democratic presidential candidates to sound more like Elizabeth Warren,” said Adam Green, the group’s co-founder. “It’s a different strategy, but we want Warren’s positions to be the mainstream Democratic position.”

Although PCCC did not sign on to the Draft Warren effort, Green said that the organizing around it is helping to pull Clinton to the left even without Warren.

“In many ways the prospect of Elizabeth Warren running might be more powerful than the actual candidacy of Elizabeth Warren,” Green added. “If she makes no comment about running for president for the next six months there is every incentive in the world for Hillary Clinton to co-opt her message so that Warren doesn’t jump in. If Hillary said, ‘We should cut Social Security, we don’t need to regulate the banks,’ I think you would see not just Warren but a lot of people jump in.”

Barack Obama’s nominee for attorney general, Loretta Lynch, has warned thatHSBC could be prosecuted over tax evasion connected to its Swiss subsidiary, despite the controversial agreement she negotiated with the bank two years ago.

In her first remarks since the Guardian and other media obtained a huge cache of leaked data from HSBC Switzerland, Lynch said the Department of Justice would not be constrained from bringing tax evasion charges against the bank if there were sufficient evidence.

[…] One of the most outspoken critics of the deal at the time, Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren, returned to the fray on Tuesday, saying prosecutors must “come down hard” on HSBC if the bank is found to have colluded with US tax dodgers.

“The government comes down hard on individuals who break the law time after time, and it should do the same for large financial institutions,” the Massachusetts senator said in a statement to the Guardian.

“The new allegations that HSBC colluded to help wealthy people and rich corporations hide money and avoid taxes are very serious, and, if true, the Department of Justice should reconsider the earlier deferred prosecution agreement it entered into with HSBC and prosecute the new violations to the full extent of the law.”

Stephanie Taylor, the co-founder of Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a national grassroots organisation and leading voice on Wall Street reform, said: “These revelations put Elizabeth Warren’s question about HSBC back on the table for Congress, regulators, and Loretta Lynch: what illegal activity does it take to shut a bank down? The public wants accountability for corporate crime.”

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission is proposing unprecedented rules to regulate Internet service providers — including mobile broadband — like a public utility, in a far-reaching move that could be one of the most divisive plans to emerge from the agency in years.

In an op-ed in Wired magazine posted online, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said his plan would regulate Internet service much like phone service or any other public utility by applying Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.

[…] “Reclassifying the Internet as a utility — equally accessible to all — is hugely popular with voters of all political stripes, who don’t want old corporations writing the rules,” Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder Adam Green said in a statement praising Wheeler’s plan.

Roundup: This morning, FCC chair Tom Wheeler outlined his plans for strong net neutrality rules and hence the regulation of internet access.

The issue has long been a source of argument and wrangling, and the responses to the news have demonstrated what we already knew: there is seemingly no middle ground on the issue.

[…] And, lastly, from the man who helped start the whole net neutrality public outcry, Adam Green of Progressive Change Campaign Committee:

“If Chairman Wheeler protects Net Neutrality through reclassification, that’s the kind of big, bold idea that Americans are crying out for… It will be the fruition of a decade-long fight by grassroots activists on the left and right against old, entrenched corporations that want to stifle free speech and innovation online in order to enrich themselves.

“Reclassifying the Internet as a utility – equally accessible to all – is hugely popular with voters of all political stripes, who don’t want old corporations writing the rules.”

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Commerce subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, spoke about Net Neutrality at the ai???Protecting the Internet and Consumers Through Legislative Actionai??? hearing on Jan. 21, 2015.

Sen. Schatz said there are four key elements necessary for the FCC to protect an open Internet and Net Neutrality: 1) prohibit fast lanes, 2) do not block lawful content, 3) prohibit throttling, and 4) increase transparency.

The FCC will meet on Feb. 26 to decideAi??how it will rule on Net Neutrality.

Read Sen. Schatz’s full remarks below:

Mr. Chairman. I am looking forward to working with you, Ranking Member Nelson, and my Subcommittee Chair, Senator Wicker. We all agree that an open Internet has become crucial for everyone to function in todayai??i??s society. That is why it is important for us to work together to consider the best path forward to protect Net Neutrality.

As we consider our options, we must aim to accomplish and balance three objectives:

– Ai?? provide maximum protection to consumers,
– Ai?? provide maximum flexibility to promote innovation and the Internet economy while also
– Ai?? enabling continued investment in a state of the art broadband infrastructure.

Most importantly, Net Neutrality protections must ensure that the FCC has the ongoing authority to protect consumers. To be effective, these rules must contain at least four essential elements:

– Ai?? they must prohibit fast lanes,
– Ai??Ai??they must not block lawful content,
– Ai??Ai??they must prohibit throttling while allowing for reasonable network management,
– Ai??Ai??they must increase transparency.

So, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on the Chairmanai??i??s draft legislation and on the FCCai??i??s ongoing rulemaking and the best way to achieve each of these objectives.

Congress always has the prerogative to legislate, but we also must recognize the advantages of …