SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
It was shocking how quickly the psychopaths in power launched their vicious lies about Renée Good—"violent rioter," "domestic terrorist," "self-defense"—shot in the face for trying to drive away from ICE. It's all bullshit, proven by stunning new video from the killer's own phone. Bafflingly, JD Vance posted it, thinking it proved his smears. How sick is he? Good was "pure sunshine ...kindness radiated out of her," says her wife. "We stopped to support our neighbors. We had whistles. They had guns."
Renée Nicole Macklin Good, a 37-year-old mother of three and widow of a veteran, was dropping off her youngest child, 6, at a Minneapolis school when she encountered an ICE raid at 34th Street and Portland Avenue; it was the second day of a 30-day "surge" of siccing America's Gestapo on the state's Somali-American population. On Instagram, Good described herself as "a poet and writer and wife and mom and shitty guitar strummer from Colorado"; she and her wife Becca had recently moved there, finding what Becca called "a vibrant and welcoming community" with a strong sense of people "looking out for each other."
Horrific, widely viewed footage shows what happened next: The sirens and unmarked cars, masked thugs getting out, Good's car straddling the road, protesters shouting and then, suddenly, screaming as one goon approaches her window, yells "Get out of the fucking car," and fires off three shots through the windshield as Good's car careens wildly off and crashes. Multiple cellphone videos and eyewitness accounts concur: Good was trying to turn around, let one ICE car pass ahead, backed up slightly to turn to the right, pulled forward and around the agent - a few feet away - as he shot her three times in the face.
The horror kept coming. Witnesses said Good slumped in her car onto a blood-soaked air bag for up to 15 minutes with no medical attention as protesters yelled and wept. One man asked agents if he could check her pulse. They said no. "I'm a physician," he pleaded. "I don't care," said the thug, claiming "we have our own medics." "Where the fuck are they?" shrieked a distraught woman. Emergency responders finally arrived without a stretcher; they carried Good away, said one woman, "like a sack of potatoes." Mayor Jacob Frey was livid: "To ICE, get the fuck out of Minneapolis. We do not want you here."
Despite the clear, stark evidence, the fascist propaganda machine shot into high gear. In Texas, ICE Barbie, cosplaying in a ludicrous cowboy hat, proclaimed "an act of domestic terrorism...a woman attacked (ICE) and attempted to run them over." Dead-eyed DHS spokesbot Tricia McLaughlin raved about "a violent rioter” who "weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over law enforcement officers." Vance called Good "a deranged leftist." In an incendiary post, Trump ripped a "disorderly" woman "obstructing and resisting" who "then violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE officer...It is hard to believe he is alive."
More to the point, it is hard to believe how brazenly, brutishly, remorselessly these motherfuckers can spew their fucking lies in the face of demonstrable, overwhelming reality, demanding we not see what we see or hear what we hear. Eventually, even Trump had to back down, slightly, after both the Washington Post and New York Times committed a rare act of journalism - the Times, to his face - and declared the video entirely contradicted his vile fantasy. Then, on Friday, the right-wing, Minnesota-based Alpha News released 47-second footage of the scene from the phone of ICE agent Jonathan Ross, Renée Good's murderer.
An Iraq War veteran, Ross has worked for ICE since 2015 and is also a firearms instructor and SWAT team member; he was injured last summer when he was dragged by the vehicle of a fleeing suspect. The footage shows Ross arriving and walking around Renée Good's red Honda recording with his phone; he circles back to her window as another agent curses and tries to open her door. Sitting behind the wheel, her dog in the back, Good smilingly tells the agent, "It's fine, dude, I'm not mad at you." Seconds later, shots ring out. Ross stands safely away as her car veers off. Audio catches a man muttering, "Fucking bitch."
Inexplicably, both Fox News and J.D. Vance posted the footage. "Watch this, as hard as it is," Vance wrote. "Many of you have been told (Ross) wasn’t hit by a car, wasn’t being harassed, and murdered an innocent woman." The footage, he said, proves Ross "fired in self-defense” when his "life was endangered” by Good. What the ever-loving fuck. Ross, he adds, "deserves a debt (sic) of gratitude. This is a guy who’s actually done a very important job for the United States of America." AOC speaks for us all: "I understand that Vance believes shooting a young mother of three in the face three times is an acceptable America that he wants to live in, and I do not... I do not believe the American people should be assassinated in the street."
Good was ICE's ninth victim. Her murder - a white woman, not brown guy, it must be noted - has prompted nationwide outrage, and a GoFundMe that aimed to raise $50K is now at over a million. “This is an execution plain and simple,” said journalist Krystal Ball. "If your Trump love or immigrant hatred has you justifying murder, please seek help.” "We're a Third World country now," said Jesse Ventura, citing the history of 1930s Germany. "That's what happens in a dictatorship - in comes the military." And on the "giddy sadism" we see daily, "All of us, citizens and immigrants alike, are being ruled by people who think life is a privilege bestowed by authority, and death is a fair penalty for disobedience."
Still, it goes on. They are still assaulting people, usually brown, sometimes citizens. In a clumsy, nasty encounter in North Carolina, they attacked two U.S. citizens in their car and only gave up when both guys kept filming the abuses. The lesson: "Film them. Always." In Minneapolis, they blithely moved on from murdering Renee Good to terrorize workers at a nearby childcare center and students at a high school, tackling people, handcuffing two staff members and firing teargas at bystanders until the schools were forced to shut down. "They're just animals," said one school official. "I've never seen people behave like this."
Meanwhile, Renée Nicole Good is being mourned, in the words of her mother, as "an amazing human being" and "one of the kindest people I’ve ever known.." On Friday, Renée's wife Becca Good released a moving statement thanking all the people who have reached out to support their family: "This kindness of strangers is the most fitting tribute because if you ever encountered my wife, Renée Nicole Macklin Good, you know that above all else, she was kind. In fact, kindness radiated out of her...Renee lived by an overarching belief: there is kindness in the world and we need to do everything we can to find it where it resides and nurture it where it needs to grow."
She described moving to Minnesota, "like people have done across place and time...to make a better life for ourselves. Here, I had finally found peace and safe harbor. That has been taken from me forever... We were raising our son to believe that no matter where you come from or what you look like, all of us deserve compassion and kindness. Renée lived this belief every day... We thank you for ensuring that Renee’s legacy is one of kindness and love. We honor her memory by living her values: rejecting hate and choosing compassion, turning away from fear and pursuing peace, refusing division and knowing we must come together to build a world where we all come home safe to the people we love."
Climate change driven by human burning of fossil fuels helped make 2025 one of the hottest years ever recorded, a scientific report published Monday affirmed, prompting renewed calls for urgent action to combat the worsening planetary emergency.
Researchers at World Weather Attribution (WWA) found that "although 2025 was slightly cooler than 2024 globally, it was still far hotter than almost any other year on record," with only two other recent years recording a higher average worldwide temperature.
For the first time, the three-year running average will end the year above the 1.5°C warming goal, relative to preindustrial levels, established a decade ago under the landmark Paris climate agreement.
"Global temperatures remained very high and significant harm from human-induced climate change is very real," the report continues. "It is not a future threat, but a present-day reality."
"Across the 22 extreme events we analyzed in depth, heatwaves, floods, storms, droughts, and wildfires claimed lives, destroyed communities, and wiped out crops," the researchers wrote. "Together, these events paint a stark picture of the escalating risks we face in a warming world."
The WWA researchers' findings tracked with the findings of United Nations experts and others that 2025 would be the third-hottest year on record.
According to the WWA study:
This year highlighted again, in stark terms, how unfairly the consequences of human-induced climate change are distributed, consistently hitting those who are already marginalized within their societies the hardest. But the inequity goes deeper: The scientific evidence base itself is uneven. Many of our studies in 2025 focused on heavy rainfall events in the Global South, and time and again we found that gaps in observational data and the reliance on climate models developed primarily for the Global North prevented us from drawing confident conclusions. This unequal foundation in climate science mirrors the broader injustices of the climate crisis.
The events of 2025 make it clear that while we urgently need to transition away from fossil fuels, we also must invest in adaptation measures. Many deaths and other impacts could be prevented with timely action. But events like Hurricane Melissa highlight the limits of preparedness and adaptation: When an intense storm strikes small islands such as Jamaica and other Caribbean nations, even relatively high levels of preparedness cannot prevent extreme losses and damage. This underscores that adaptation alone is not enough; rapid emission reductions remain essential to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
“If we don’t stop burning fossil fuels very, very, quickly, very soon, it will be very hard to keep that goal” of 1.5°C, WWA co-founder Friederike Otto—who is also an Imperial College London climate scientist—told the Associated Press. “The science is increasingly clear.”
The WWA study's publication comes a month after this year's United Nations Climate Change Conference—or COP30—ended in Brazil with little meaningful progress toward a transition from fossil fuels.
Responding to the new study, Climate Action Campaign director Margie Alt said in a statement that "2025 was full of stark reminders of the urgent need to cut climate pollution, invest in clean energy, and tackle the climate crisis now."
"Today’s report is a wake-up call," Alt continued. "Unfortunately, [US President Donald] Trump and Republicans controlling Congress spent the past year making climate denial official US policy and undermining progress to stave off the worst of the climate crisis. Their reckless polluters-first agenda rolled back critical climate protections and attacked and undermined the very agencies responsible for helping Americans prepare for and recover from increasingly dangerous disasters."
"Across the country, people are standing up and demanding their leaders do better to protect our families from climate change and extreme weather," Alt added. "It's time those in power started listening.”
The collective wealth of US billionaires surged to $8.1 trillion in 2025 as working-class Americans faced a cost-of-living crisis made worse by President Donald Trump's tariff regime and unprecedented assault on the social safety net.
An analysis released Friday by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) found that the top 15 US billionaires saw the largest wealth gains last year, with their collective fortune growing from $2.4 trillion to $3.2 trillion. That 33% gain was more than double the S&P 500's 16% increase in 2025.
What IPS describes as the "elite group" of US billionaires includes Tesla CEO Elon Musk, the richest man in the world; Google co-founder Larry Page; Amazon founder Jeff Bezos; and Oracle executive chairman Larry Ellison.
IPS emphasized that "these staggering combined billionaire wealth totals come as the Trump-GOP budget bill passed in 2025 defunded health insurance, food stamps, and other vital anti-poverty safety net programs, in order to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy and budget increases for militarism and mass deportations."
"The affordability crisis is hitting ordinary Americans particularly hard as we head into the new year, but not everyone is feeling the pain: Billionaires are raking in staggering profits off the backs of ordinary workers,” Chuck Collins, director of the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at IPS, said in a statement.
“These extreme concentrations of wealth and power," Collins added, "undermine our daily lives and further rig our economy in favor of the ultra-rich and corporations, while ordinary Americans get a raw deal once again.”
IPS released its analysis days after Bloomberg reported, based on its Billionaires Index, that the world's 500 richest people gained a record $2.2 trillion in wealth last year.
Omar Ocampo, an IPS researcher, said that in the US, billionaires are "paying far less in taxes compared to the huge amount of wealth they amass," allowing them to continue accumulating vast fortunes, supercharging inequality, and using their wealth and influence to subvert reform efforts.
“Not only are a small number of Americans holding more wealth than the rest of America, but they’re also not paying their fair share in taxes," said Ocampo.
The new report comes as families across the US struggle to make ends meet amid high and still-rising prices for groceries, housing, and other necessities. A Century Foundation survey released last month found that "roughly three in 10 voters delayed or skipped medical care in the past year due to cost, while nearly two-thirds switched to cheaper groceries or bought less food altogether."
The killing of Renee Good by a federal immigration officer in Minneapolis this week came as Republicans in Congress were planning to bring a homeland security spending bill to the House floor, deciding on whether the agency that's surged thousands of armed agents into communities across the country should have increased funding—and progressive lawmakers are demanding that the Democrats use the upcoming government funding deadline to hopefully reduce the department's ability to wreak further havoc.
"I just don’t understand how we provide votes for a bill that funds the extent of the depravity," Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told CNN Thursday. "I know we can’t fix everything in the appropriations bill but we should be looking at ways we can put some commonsense limitations on their ability to bring violence to our cities."
But the top Democratic leaders, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY) both appeared to have little interest in discussing how their party can use the appropriations process as leverage to rein in US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies that have taken part in President Donald Trump's mass deportation operation.
Both Schumer and Jeffries sharply criticized Wednesday's shooting and the Trump administration's insistence that, contrary to mounting video evidence, the ICE agent who shot Good was acting in self-defense.
But Jeffries said Thursday that he was focused on passing other appropriations bills that were ultimately approved by the House.
“We’ll figure out the accountability mechanisms at the appropriate time," Jeffries told reporters.
With Congress facing a January 30 deadline for approving government spending packages—and with public disapproval of ICE at an all-time high—several lawmakers have said this week that right now is the "appropriate time" to rein in the agency in any way the Democrats can.
"Statements and letters are not enough, and the appropriations process and the [continuing resolution] expiring January 31 is our opportunity," Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) told Axios.
Schumer also refused to say whether the Democrats would use the appropriations process as leverage to cut funding to ICE, whose budget is set to balloon to $170 billion following the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year. Republicans will need Democratic support to pass a spending bill in the Senate, where 60 votes are required.
The Senate leader said only that he has "lots of problems with ICE" when asked whether he would support abolishing the agency—a proposal whose support has gone by 20 percentage points among voters in just one year, according to a recent survey. Both leaders also would not commit to slashing the homeland security budget should the Democrats win back majorities in Congress this year.
"It’s hard to be an opposition party when you refuse to oppose the blatantly illegal and immoral things being done by the opposition," said Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health.
Sharing a clip of Jeffries' remarks to reporters about the agency's funding, historian Moshik Temkin said that "people need to understand that at its core ICE is a bipartisan project, increasingly funded and normalized over multiple Democratic administrations and congressional majorities, and a few of them (not this guy) are starting to realize how foolish, weak, and misguided they were."
Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) are among the progressive lawmakers calling on the Democrats to demand reduced funding for ICE—even if it means another government shutdown months after the longest one in US history late last year, which began when the Democrats refused to join the GOP in passing a spending bill that would have allowed Affordable Care Act tax credits to expire. Ultimately, some Senate Democrats caved, and the subsidies lapsed.
"We can't just keep authorizing money for these illegal killers," Jayapal told Axios. "That's what they are, this rogue force."
Ocasio-Cortez told the Independent that Democrats should "absolutely" push to cut funding.
“This Congress, this Republican Congress, while they cut a trillion dollars to Americans’ healthcare, and they exploded the ICE budget to $170 billion making it one of the largest paramilitary forces in the United States with zero accountability as they shoot US citizens in the head—absolutely,” she said.
On the podcast The Majority Report, Emma Vigeland and Sam Seder called on progressive Democrats to demand Schumer's ouster in light of his refusal to take action to rein in ICE as its violence in American communities escalates.
It's time for Democrats to oust Chuck Schumer from leadership pic.twitter.com/ByWMJ495zb
— Majority Report (@majorityfm) January 9, 2026
"Change the news cycle and show that you'll be an opposition party," said Vigeland. "Call for his ouster."
Seder added that Schumer "has the ability to wage a fight to prevent the funding of DHS. He has the ability to do that and he doesn't want it. He's running away from any leverage he has, deliberately."
Amidst national outrage this week over the killing by Minneapolis resident Renee Nicole Good by a federal agent, members of Minnesota's congressional delegation on Saturday were blocked from full access to a federal immigration detention center in the city—but at least one lawmaker among them warns something much more sinister is now taking place in the state.
"I was just denied access to the ICE processing center at the Whipple Building," Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who represents the state's 5th District. "Members of Congress have a legal right and constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight where people are being detained. The public deserves to know what is taking place in ICE facilities."
Omar shared a video of herself, along with Reps. Angie Craig and Kelly Morrison, outside the facility as large numbers of masked federal agents in protective gear blocked the driveway entrance.
Happening NOW: US Reps Ilhan Omar and Angie Craig are attempting to enter Whipple Fed Building- met with federal agents on other side. @wcco pic.twitter.com/3eIWxiLaW7
— Adam Duxter (@AdamDuxter) January 10, 2026
In a telephone interview with MSNOW, Omar later explained that she and her colleagues arrived at the facility Saturday morning in order to conduct oversight activities. While Omar said they were initially allowed to enter the building, they were shortly after told they "had to wait until higher-ups were able to come speak with us."
It seemed to Omar, she said, that the order to halt their visit "maybe came from Washington to deny us the proper access that we needed to complete those oversight duties that we are obligated as members of Congress."
Calling it a clear violation of their oversight authority, Omar and Craig explained to reporters what happened after they were denied further access to the facility:
"This is beyond the pale." Democratic Congresswomen Rep. Ilhan Omar and Rep. Annie Craig had their access to a federal detention facility revoked while touring the building. pic.twitter.com/KthvotCREX
— USA TODAY (@USATODAY) January 10, 2026
Congresswoman Craig also spoke to MSNOW's Ali Velshi:
Rep. Angie Craig: "We were told because this facility is being funding by the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' not the congressional appropriations act, that we would not be allowed to enter the facility. That's complete nonsense ... I informed them they were violating the law. They said… pic.twitter.com/vCOqgldB2Q
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 10, 2026
Noting the size and scale of the presence of armed federal agents now deployed in her state, Omar suggested in her interview with MSNOW that the recent Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) operations being conducted serve no purpose other than to harass and terrorize local communities. That militarized presence has only grown since Trump ordered more agents to the city following Wednesday's killing of Good and the protests that have erupted as a result.
" Protest is as American as apple pie," said Omar. "People come out to register their opposition to what they do not like or want to accept. It is important for people to be able to do that in a democracy."
"What we are seeing right now, not only from the surge of 2,000 federal agents—now we have another 1,000 apparently coming in—it is essentially trying to create this kind of environment where people feel intimidated, threatened, and terrorized. And I think the ultimate goal of [Homeland Security Security Secretary] Kristi Noem and President Trump is to agitate people enough where they are able to invoke the Insurrection Act to declare martial law."
"There is," she continued, "no other justifiable way to describe what is taking place in Minneapolis at this moment. There is no justifiable reason why this number of agents is here in our state."
Amnesty International Secretary General Agnes Callamard expressed agreement Thursday that the US under President Donald Trump is tearing down world order, while also pointing the finger at other major Western powers for being part of the problem.
In a post on X, Callamard reacted to a warning delivered by German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier that the Trump administration was undermining systems developed decades ago with the help of the US to ensure greater international stability.
Callamard agreed with Steinmeier's basic argument, but added that Germany has not been an innocent bystander.
"The US is destroying world order," wrote the Amnesty International chief. "And so did Israel for the last two years. With Germany support."
She then accused Germany and other US allies of ignoring past US violations of international law and only getting upset now that it's come back to bite them.
"German and other European leaders cannot suddenly discover that the rule-based order is on its knee when they have governed over its demise for the last two years," she wrote. "Complicity, tacit agreement, appeasement, silence: these have a cost. A high cost. And you/we will all end up paying for it."
Steinmeier's remarks came in response to increased US aggression against both Latin America, where Trump ordered the invasion of Venezuela and the abduction of President Nicolás Maduro, and Europe, where Trump has once again stated his desire to seize Greenland from Denmark.
"Then there is the breakdown of values by our most important partner, the USA, which helped build this world order," the German president said. "It is about preventing the world from turning into a den of robbers, where the most unscrupulous take whatever they want, where regions or entire countries are treated as the property of a few great powers."
Truly extraordinary language by German President Steinmeier: pic.twitter.com/povGBrPmr9
He says the US's values are "broken", that they're changing the world "into a den of thieves in which the most unscrupulous take what they want," and treat "whole countries" as their "property".…
— Arnaud Bertrand (@RnaudBertrand) January 9, 2026
Top Trump aide Stephen Miller earlier in the week explicitly advocated returning to an era in which great military powers are free to take whatever they want from weaker powers.
"The United States is using its military to secure our interests unapologetically in our hemisphere,” Miller said during an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper. “We’re a superpower and under President Trump we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower. It is absurd that we would allow a nation in our backyard to become the supplier of resources to our adversaries but not to us.”
"This policy will cause more deaths of vulnerable Americans, like infants and the elderly," said one critic. "Also, it appears to be a violation of the Clean Air Act."
The Trump administration plans to stop calculating the monetary value of the public health benefits from reducing air pollution and instead focus exclusively on the cost to industry when setting pollution limits, the New York Times reported Monday.
Intragency emails and other documents reviewed by the Times revealed that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to stop tallying the financial value of health benefits caused by limiting fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone when regulating polluting industries.
Research published in 2023 showed that PM2.5 pollution from coal-fired power plants alone killed approximately 460,000 people in the US from 1999 to 2020.
"This policy will cause more deaths of vulnerable Americans, like infants and the elderly," American University School of Public Affairs professor Claudia Persico said on X Monday. "Also, it appears to be a violation of the Clean Air Act. This is incredibly foolish."
The EPA proposal would mark a stark reversal of decades of policy under which the agency cited the estimated cost of avoided asthma attacks and premature deaths to support stronger clean air rules. The change is likely to make it easier to roll back limits on PM2.5 and ozone from coal-burning power plants, oil refineries, steel mills, and other polluting facilities.
“The idea that EPA would not consider the public health benefits of its regulations is anathema to the very mission of EPA,” Richard Revesz, faculty director at the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law, told the Times.
“If you’re only considering the costs to industry and you’re ignoring the benefits, then you can’t justify any regulations that protect public health, which is the very reason that EPA was set up,” Revesz added.
The Environmental Protection Network (EPN), an advocacy group, said in a statement Monday that "EPA’s reported decision to ignore prevented deaths is part of a pattern of ignoring or downplaying health effects in the rulemaking process, including in its rulemaking on effluent guidelines for coal-fired power plants and its recent Waters of the United States rulemaking."
Critics of President Donald Trump's policies accuse his administration of repeatedly putting polluters—who contributed hundreds of millions of dollars toward reelecting the president and supporting other Republicans—over people.
"EPA should strengthen how it values human life and health, not pretend it doesn’t matter," Katie Tracy, senior regulatory policy advocate at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said Monday. "By refusing to monetize the benefits of cleaner air, the agency is effectively saying that preventing asthma attacks, heart disease, and early deaths have no dollar value at all."
"This unconscionable decision by the EPA should be called out for what it really is—a favor to corporate interests at the expense of the environment and public health," Tracy added. "EPA’s decision is not only shocking—it’s illegal and violates the Supreme Court’s instruction that the government cannot stack the deck to benefit polluters. Accordingly, if this disturbing policy leads to regulatory repeals or weak standards, it will certainly be challenged in court.”
During Trump's second term, the EPA has moved to repeal or replace the stronger carbon emission limits on fossil-fueled power plants put in place by the Biden administration, rescinded Biden-era fuel efficiency and emissions standards for cars and light trucks, revoked California's ability to enact stricter vehicle emissions rules, and signaled plans to overturn the agency's finding that greenhouse gases are a public health hazard.
The EPA has also weakened water and wetland protections, rolled back regulations limiting so-called "forever chemicals" in drinking water, dramatically cut or eliminated environmental justice programs, reduced enforcement of environmental violations, dismantled long-standing advisory and scientific panels, removed all mentions of human-caused climate change from its website, and more.
According to a 2024 EPN analysis, Trump's rollbacks could cause the deaths of nearly 200,000 people in the United States by 2050.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin—a former Republican congressman from New York with an abysmal 14% lifetime rating from the League of Conservation Voters—has also boasted about canceling around $20 billion worth of Biden-era green grants.
"EPA’s current leadership has abandoned EPA’s mission to protect human health and safety," EPN senior adviser Jeremy Symons said Monday. "Human lives don’t count. Childhood asthma doesn’t count. It is a shameful abdication of EPA’s responsibility to protect Americans from harm. Under this administration, the Environmental Protection Agency is now the Environmental Pollution Agency, helping polluters at the expense of human health."
"Any bill that still allows members of Congress to own and trade stocks falls far short of what the American people want and deserve," said Reps. Pramila Jayapal, Seth Magaziner, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
A trio of Democrats in the US House of Representatives leading the fight for a congressional stock trading ban ripped Republican leadership's proposal as an inadequate replacement in a Monday statement released ahead of a scheduled committee markup.
Politico reported last month that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Administration Committee Chair Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) briefed GOP lawmakers on their plan for a bill that would ban members of Congress from buying new stocks but let them keep what they already have.
Steil introduced the Stop Insider Trading Act on Monday and announced a Wednesday markup. Backed by Johnson and other GOP leaders, the legislation would also apply to lawmakers' spouses and dependent children, and require public notice a week before any of them sell stock.
However, Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Seth Magaziner (D-RI), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) argued in a joint statement that "any bill that still allows members of Congress to own and trade stocks falls far short of what the American people want and deserve."
"We are disappointed that the bill introduced by Republican leadership today fails to deliver the reform that is needed and instead protects the wealthiest members of Congress by allowing them to continue to hold and sell stock," said the original co-sponsors of the bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act.
House Republicans’ new legislation on Congressional stock trading falls far short of what the American people want and deserve. The House must move forward on our bipartisan consensus bill, the Restore Trust in Congress Act.My full statement with @magaziner.house.gov and @ocasio-cortez.house.gov:
[image or embed]
— Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (@jayapal.house.gov) January 12, 2026 at 12:23 PM
The Democrats stressed that "while this bill prohibits members from buying new stocks, it does nothing to remove the conflict of interest that arises from owning or selling existing stocks. Members can still act on legislation, investigations, and briefings that directly influence the value of their stocks for personal benefit."
"The American public deserves to know that members of Congress are making decisions in the public interest, not in the interest of their own pocketbooks. The only way to restore Americans' trust is to ban members of Congress from owning and trading stocks," the trio continued.
"We hope that Speaker Johnson will find the courage to move the Restore Trust in Congress Act, a bipartisan consensus bill that has wide support from members of both parties and will end the practice of members of Congress owning and trading stocks once and for all," they concluded.
The Restore Trust in Congress Act would ban members of Congress, plus spouses and children, from trading individual stocks. It would give them 180 days to sell anything they hold and require divestment before newly elected lawmakers are sworn in.
When that bill was introduced in September, Jamie Neikrie, legislative director at the political reform group Issue One, said that "members of Congress have a responsibility to hold themselves to the highest ethical standards, and passing the Restore Trust in Congress Act is how Congress shows it's serious about restoring trust and integrity in government."
As Politico detailed Monday:
Johnson and GOP leaders have been searching for a legislative compromise to appease Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and other rank-and-file House Republicans, who have for months been threatening to launch a discharge petition effort to circumvent leadership and force a floor vote on a full congressional stock trading ban.
Luna, in a promising sign for Johnson, said in an interview last week she supports the current legislation pending before the House Administration Committee because it would force a "disgorgement" period.
However, even if the new bill is able to get through the Republican-controlled House, it would face a GOP Senate majority so narrow that at least some Democratic support is required to advance most legislation to a final vote.
Last July, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) voted with all Democrats on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to advance another bill that would bar federal politicians from holding or trading stocks. To win over Hawley, Democrats had to agree to a carveout for President Donald Trump. As Business Insider noted Monday, "It has yet to receive a floor vote."
Like the House Democrats, Christina Harvey, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, was critical of the lower chamber's GOP leadership on Monday, saying that "Speaker Johnson is trying to trick the American people into thinking House Republicans are actually doing something to stop corruption in Washington, but this proposal is a congressional stock trading ban in name only."
"If Speaker Johnson really cared about stopping members of Congress from using their offices for financial gain, he would bring the comprehensive, bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act to the floor," Harvey declared. "The American people should have confidence that their leaders are serving the public’s interests in every vote—not their wallets."
Campaign Legal Center vice president, general counsel, and senior director for ethics Kedric Payne similarly said that "any legislation that allows lawmakers to hold onto their existing stocks is too narrow to address Americans' real concern that elected lawmakers may make official decisions to benefit their pocketbooks instead of the public good. A bill that also bans trading by the president and vice president, meanwhile, is too broad because it undermines the chances of passing the reform voters care most about: stock trading by members of Congress."
"Thankfully, there is a proposal on the table that strikes the balance for this moment: the Restore Trust in Congress Act," Payne added. "This consensus legislation was crafted during months of negotiations by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. It has more than enough support to pass, and it would make a significant improvement to our nation’s government ethics laws. Campaign Legal Center calls on Congress to return its focus to this bipartisan bill and set an example for the other branches of our government."
This article was updated with comment from Stand Up America and the Campaign Legal Center.
"If the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer."
The US Department of Justice's decision to open a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell has ignited a major backlash that even has some Republican senators drawing a line in the sand.
Shortly after Powell released a video on Sunday accusing the Department of Justice (DOJ) of waging an "intimidation" campaign against him on behalf of President Donald Trump, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) blasted the administration, accusing them of trying to compromise the independence of America's central bank.
“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none,” said Tillis, who further vowed to "oppose the confirmation of any nominee for the Fed—including the upcoming Fed chair vacancy—until this legal matter is fully resolved."
On Monday, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) backed up Tillis' pledge to oppose any nominees for the Federal Reserve until the criminal probe of Powell, whose term as Fed chair is due to end in May, has been resolved.
Murkowski also revealed that she spoke with Powell and determined that "it’s clear the administration’s investigation is nothing more than an attempt at coercion" aimed at affecting his decisions on US monetary policy.
"The stakes are too high to look the other way," Murkowski emphasized. "If the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer."
Trump can only afford to lose the support of four Republican senators in a vote for a new Fed chair, which means Tillis and Murkowski's vows not to support any nominee until the case against Powell is resolved carry significant weight.
A bipartisan group of economists who have served under US presidents dating back to Ronald Reagan—including former Federal Reserve Chairs Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, and Janet Yellin—released a joint statement on Monday denouncing what they described as an effort to strong-arm the Federal Reserve into doing the president's bidding.
"The reported criminal inquiry into Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell is an unprecedented attempt to use prosecutorial attacks to undermine... independence," they wrote. "This is how monetary policy is made in emerging markets with weak institutions, with highly negative consequences for inflation and the functioning of their economies more broadly. It has no place in the United States, whose greatest strength is the rule of law, which is at the foundation of our economic success."
Trump, who nominated Powell to be Federal Reserve chairman in 2017, has been openly pressuring Powell for months to more aggressively cut interest rates in the face of a faltering jobs market.
Powell, however, has continued to take a more cautious approach, and has cited the price instability caused by Trump's tariffs as a reason to hold off on more aggressive rate cuts.