01/22/2014 08:46 am ET Updated Mar 24, 2014

Why Not a Progressive Response' to the State of the Union?

Both the Republican Party and the Tea Party Caucus will be afforded the opportunity to deliver a response to the president's speech.

Why not a response from the Progressive Caucus? Because it does not have "party" in its name? GMAFB. Who has been elected on the Tea Party line on a ballot?

A progressive response need not strike a critical tone of the president's speech. Rather, it could amplify the president's focus on inequality, highlighting key economic realities, and suggest to the American people to consider how likely it is that a group of billionaires really has their interests at heart.

The speech might suggest to voters that the U.S. was doing very well before the rich set out to destroy unions, cut taxes for the wealthy and then claim the country was broke and could not afford even the most basic investments in its roads, bridges, airports, basic research, unemployment insurance, and so forth.

And, the minimum wage.

Who should give this address? Is that really a question?

Who else, but Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).