

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.

Common Cause, one of the nation's largest citizen action organizations, is calling on Congress and the Obama Administration to join in making eight changes that will "utterly change the pay-to-play nature of how business gets done in Washington," said Arn Pearson, vice president for programs at Common Cause. "The country needs to have its faith restored in our campaigns and elected officials as we rely on them for big decisions that will affect our lives for years."
Common Cause released its agenda for change in a new document, "Campaign Finance Reform: A New Era," [PDF] and laid out eight specific action steps that would eliminate the dominant role of large contributors in campaigns, increase transparency in the way campaigns are funded, and "at long last, give the us the teeth to enforce the rules, which today does not happen at all," Pearson said.
The reform package urges adoption of these measures:
1. Creation of a Congressional campaign financing system that allows qualified candidates to blend unlimited small donations with substantial public funding, cutting out the role of large donors who today dominate fundraising. This would take advantage of the increased potential of candidates to raise small donations from many individuals, mostly online, Pearson noted, and through public grants allow serious candidates to wage effective campaigns and get their message out to constituents at election time.
2. An overhaul of the three-decade old public financing system for Presidential candidates, which is now so outdated that last year's leading candidate, Barack Obama, opted out of the system entirely. 'Everyone acknowledges that the presidential system is out of date," Pearson said, "and the only action that makes any sense is to update it by empowering small donors to play a bigger role and increase the public funding to qualified candidates. Otherwise, we face a grim future where every major candidate - even those with a wide base of supporters - will continue to rely heavily on a handful of wealthy interests for campaign funds. By using public financing to amplify the voice of small donors, we can reduce the power of special interests and put campaigns back in the hands of the average citizen."
3. Congressional leaders of both parties must bring an end to their internal system of party fundraising quotas for sitting members of Congress. "An insidious system of fundraising quotas has grown over the past several years, requiring members of Congress who want good committee assignments, for example, to 'pony up' by getting lobbyists and other well-connected individuals and PACs to contribute heavily. Many members now tell us they spend upwards of a third of their time just raising money for campaigns - and not only for their own," Pearson said.
4. Federal candidates should be prohibited from forming so-called joint fundraising committees with party organizations. Campaign contributions to candidates are capped at a lower level than contributions to political parties, but presidential candidates and the parties have found a loophole through joint committees where even a candidate who accepts public financing can still solicit and benefit from large contributions to the party organization, which then uses the money to help the candidate's campaign.
5. Congress should ban unlimited contributions from corporations and unions to each party's nominating convention. Under the McCain-Feingold bill of 2002, unlimited "soft money" donations to national parties were banned, but the Federal Election Commission created a loophole for the party conventions. "This is another backdoor method of finding special favor with candidates and the political establishment," Pearson said.
6. Congress must increase transparency in their reporting of bundling of contributions. Often, lobbyists and other political activists will gather as many individual contributions as they can and present them as a "bundle" to a campaign, ingratiating themselves to the candidates and assuring special access in the future. Common Cause urged Congress to enact tighter disclosure requirements on bundling.
7. The Senate must at long last join the 21st century and file its campaign finance reports electronically. "This may seem like a small step, which is all the more reason it should have happened long ago. The current filing system means that the public often cannot find out who funded a Senatorial campaign until weeks after the election is over," Pearson said. Common Cause points out that there is no reason the data cannot be processed electronically and made available quickly, since campaigns track donations electronically in the first place and House and Presidential campaigns have filed electronically for years.
8. Congress must get rid of the Federal Election Commission, "which has done almost nothing good in recent years," in Pearson's words, "and establish a new independent agency that is not subject to partisan gridlock." Under the current system, the FEC has three Republican and three Democratic appointments, almost assuring deadlock on many cases - and thus little enforcement of the law. The agency is further hamstrung by a lengthy enforcement process. The new agency would have single commissioner directing a professional staff, with a specific term of office to help assure independence and the ability to act quickly if a campaign or organization violates the law.
"Some people may see these eight recommendations as 'process' issues only, but they would be missing the big picture - when government fails to address the issues that people worry about every day, you can often trace it directly back to how we elect our leaders and how our system forces many of them to act," Pearson said.
"Only when Congress and the Administration really get down to business - and that means taking apart the money trail and letting the sunlight in on the ways decisions get made - can the nation move forward. With our country beset by a huge economic crisis and ongoing wars, we must take bold steps to renew the average citizen's belief that yes, in the end, the government is here for them and that their voices will be heard - and gone are the days of catering to Wall Street, oil companies, and other wealthy interests with plenty of money to spend in Washington."
Click here to read and download the report. [PDF]
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200"Oil company executives seem to know more about Trump's secret plan to 'run' Venezuela than the American people," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren. "We need public Senate hearings NOW."
Democrats in the US Senate on Wednesday launched a formal investigation into possible dealings between the Trump administration and oil company executives related to Saturday's military assault on Venezuela, the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro, and the effort now underway to seize and control the Latin American nation's vast oil reserves.
Led by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)—ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW)—the Democratic lawmakers, including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and others, want to know more about "communications between major U.S. oil and oilfield services companies and the Trump Administration surrounding last week’s military action in Venezuela and efforts to exploit Venezuelan oil resources."
Following Saturday's strikes on Venezuela and the kidnapping of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores—which international law experts have said were clear breaches of both international law and US constitutional law–Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday that he had spoken to oil executives both "before and after" the covert military actions.
While other White House officials walked back Trump's statements, the senators behind the investigation say they want to know more about what was discussed, with whom, and when.
According to a statement, the lawmakers are "requesting documents and information regarding the companies’ knowledge of the strikes, discussions with Trump Administration officials before and since the operation, and plans to invest in Venezuela from the CEOs of BP America Inc., Baker Hughes, Chevron, Citgo Petroleum Corporation, ConocoPhillips, Continental Resources, ExxonMobil, Halliburton, SLB, Shell USA, Inc., and Weatherford International."
In a series of letters to the heads of those oil giants, the senators said, “President Trump’s own statements justifying the operation in terms of access to foreign energy resources and benefits to the US oil industry, reported repeated engagement between industry and government, and the suggestion that taxpayers could pay the cost of rebuilding Venezuela’s oil infrastructure raise serious concerns about how the Trump Administration engaged with the oil companies prior to his decision to use military force in Venezuela."
“We would like to know," the letters continue, "the extent to which US oil and gas companies such as yours had either advance knowledge of or the ability to shape American foreign policy decisions—especially given that Congress was kept in the dark concerning the use of force until after the strikes occurred.”
The lawmakers noted that Trump has also suggested that US taxpayer funds would be used to "help companies cover their costs to rebuild Venezuelan oil infrastructure," spend they warned could "cost American taxpayers billions more in the form of subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, which already benefits from over $700 billion annually in subsidies," citing analysis by the International Monetary Fund.
A trio of ex-officials filed a formal complaint demanding an investigation into the Justice Department lawyers who authored the legal rationale justifying the US abduction of Venezuela's president.
A group of former US ethics officials filed a complaint Wednesday demanding an investigation into the Justice Department lawyers who crafted the legal rationale justifying the Trump administration's patently unlawful assault on Venezuela and ongoing effort to plunder the country's natural resources.
The trio of ex-officials, who worked under both Republican and Democratic presidents, specifically called for an immediate ethics probe into whether attorneys at the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) "violated their professional legal responsibilities in providing guidance justifying the recent invasion of Venezuela and abduction of its president, Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, as well as legal advice that has apparently been given by the Department to President Trump to justify his recent threats to take additional military action against Venezuela, Columbia, Cuba, Iran, and Denmark."
"Such unilateral use of military force absent an imminent threat to the United States violates international law and furthermore unconstitutionally intrudes on the power that rests with Congress alone to declare war," wrote Norman Eisen, Richard Painter, and Virginia Canter in their complaint. "In sum, the president and the Department of Defense, presumably relying on yet another confidential and classified memorandum from OLC, or perhaps more than one memorandum, have engaged in illegal acts of war and threats of illegal acts of war against sovereign nations."
The complaint was announced after Trump administration officials reportedly told US lawmakers in closed-door meetings this week that the Justice Department developed a new legal opinion in an attempt to justify the abduction of Maduro, an operation that killed at least 100 people, according to Venezuelan officials.
US Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that he believes the OLC opinion will declare the deadly military assault on Venezuela legal "because it was assisting a law-enforcement action."
BREAKING: Trump & enablers may THINK they can get away with invading Venezuela to seize its oil
But we @DDFund_ are not going to let them
Our push for legal accountability starts with our ethics complaint against the lawyers authorizing this illegality 👇
Much more to come... pic.twitter.com/ZJYgPb0GVM
— Norm Eisen (@NormEisen) January 8, 2026
The former ethics officials behind the new complaint against the Trump Justice Department said they are also filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request demanding that the OLC memo on the Venezuela assault be made public.
"Even before the weekend’s outrageous events, that illegality was on sharp display through Trump’s attempted escalation into a conflict with Venezuela through dozens of illegal strikes on alleged drug smugglers in international waters," the former ethics officials wrote in a blog post on Wednesday. "But the invasion of Venezuela represents a new—and wholly illegal—escalation."
The ex-officials emphasized that their push for transparency is just part of what must be an all-hands-on-deck effort to stop the administration's military assault on Venezuela and potentially other sovereign nations.
"Congress must look at other vehicles to limit the president’s unlawful aggression, perhaps with terms in spending bills that he could not so easily veto. The responsibility now lies with Congress to stop Trump," the former officials wrote, noting that GOP lawmakers in the House and Senate are likely to vote down War Powers Resolutions aimed at constraining the lawless president.
"But it does not end there," they added. "Others must step up as well, and that is why we are launching our dual legal actions of an ethics complaint and a FOIA demand. The cost of inaction against Trump’s forays into foreign wars is too high, and the window for safeguarding our nation from his illegal and corrupt blood for oil adventurism is narrowing."
"Republicans shamefully voted it down—demonstrating once again that they have never cared about law and order or keeping our communities safe," said the congresswoman.
Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley told her fellow members of the US House Oversight Committee on Wednesday that a motion she was introducing during a hearing was "pretty straightforward": The committee, she said, should conduct oversight regarding a federal agent's fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good, a woman in Minneapolis who was killed in her car earlier in the day.
But the motion failed, with every Republican on the panel voting against it.
Pressley (D-Mass.) introduced the motion during a hearing regarding a fraud scandal in the state, hours after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot Good, who was in the driver's seat of her car as multiple officers approached her. Good was acting as a legal observer, according to Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), monitoring ICE actions following the Trump administration's surge of federal agents into Minnesota, in part to target members of the Somali community.
Footage of the shooting shows an officer trying to open the car door and the driver turning the wheel before starting to drive forward. An agent who had approached the driver-side bumper draws his gun and shoots the driver multiple times.
Despite what is shown in the widely available video, President Donald Trump, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and Vice President JD Vance were quick to place blame on Good. Trump said she “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over” the ICE agent, while Noem said Good had committed an "act of domestic terrorism."
Pressley called on the congressional committee to investigate the case.
"Since this committee is responsible for oversight of federal law enforcement, we must investigate," she said. "This subpoena will get to the truth, and it should have bipartisan support."
Pressley condemned her GOP colleagues for blocking the effort to get to the bottom of what happened in Minneapolis, which has also been described by multiple eyewitnesses who dispute the Trump administration's narrative.
“DHS’ claim that an agent shot in self-defense is a bold-faced lie and the video footage is damning," said Pressley. "But after I moved to subpoena all records and footage related to this killing, Republicans shamefully voted it down—demonstrating once again that they have never cared about law and order or keeping our communities safe.
“What happened today is a despicable consequence of Donald Trump’s campaign of terror, fear, and demonization of vulnerable communities and we cannot allow it to be normalized in America," said Pressley. "I demand a thorough and independent investigation into this tragedy so the victim, her loved ones, and the public get the accountability and transparency they deserve. It’s time for the Trump administration to end its cruel, unlawful mass deportation agenda once and for all.”
The ACLU on Wednesday noted that Good was killed as Congress negotiates the Department of Homeland Security's budget for the coming year, months after lawmakers voted to add "an unprecedented $170 billion to the Trump administration’s already massive budget for immigration enforcement."
“For months, the Trump administration has been deploying reckless, heavily armed agents into our communities and encouraging them to commit horrifying abuses with impunity, and, today, we are seeing the devastating and predictable consequences,” said Naureen Shah, director of policy and government affairs at ACLU. “Congress must rein ICE in before what happened in Minneapolis today happens somewhere else tomorrow. That means, at a minimum, opposing a Homeland Security budget that supports the growing lawlessness of this agency.”