

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.

Energy companies are pumping billions of dollars into the nation's
political system to help maintain US dependence on their products,
according to a new Common Cause report released today.
Since 2000, the energy industry, including oil and gas
companies, electric utilities, mining companies and waste management
firms, has contributed more than $337 million to federal
candidates and party organizations, according to data from the Center
for Responsive Politics. Yet that number pales in comparison to what the
industry has spent lobbying Congress and the executive branch during
that same time: nearly $2.6 billion.
"No one would invest that kind of money into our government and
politics without expecting something in return," said Common Cause
President Bob Edgar. "And
what the industry got for its money was lax Congressional and regulatory
oversight and a host of federal policies that benefit its bottom line.
But with oil coating the Gulf of Mexico, it has never been clearer that
the industry's profits are coming at the nation's cost."
The report, released Tuesday, pulls together official campaign
finance and lobbying disclosure reports to highlight big energy's major
role in federal elections, as well as policymaking and regulation of the
industry. It looks specifically at giving by the industry to the four
congressional committees with jurisdiction over energy issues: the
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the
House Natural Resources Committee.
Additional report findings revealed:
For every $1 spent on political campaigns, the energy
industry spends more than $7 on lobbying. Since 2000, energy
companies have invested nearly $2.6 billion to lobby Congress and the
executive branch.
What does that mean on a daily basis? Consider this: Even
before the BP oil disaster occurred in April, the energy industry during
the first quarter of 2010 spent more than $3.2 million on lobbying for
each day that Congress was in session. That's more than $244,000 spent
per Member of Congress. Among major industries, only health
care interests have spent more.
Employees of and groups tied to BP, the company at the center
of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, have donated more than $3
million to congressional election campaigns since 2000.
Oil and gas companies are the energy industry's most
aggressive donors. They've contributed more than $154 million
to federal candidates since 2000, about 46 percent of big energy's total
donations. Electric utilities have donated more than $104 million and
mining interests just over $30 million.
The energy industry has aggressively hired former
congressional staff and other insiders to lobby. More than 300
lobbyists now working for oil and gas interests have past connections to
federal agencies or Congress.
"The nation's need for clean, renewable energy becomes clearer every
day," said Edgar. "But energy companies and other special interests use
their campaign contributions and lobbying clout to dominate debate in
Washington and block sensible regulations. We can start to change that
with passage of the Fair Elections Now Act, legislation that will let
candidates and officeholders end their dependence on big, corporate
contributions and rely instead on small donations from individual,
in-state givers. Then, elected officials would be beholden to
constituents, not their big donors."
Click here to view the full "Legislating Under the Influence"
report.
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) 833-1200The attack was announced hours after Trump threatened Iranian vessels near the Strait of Hormuz with "the same system of kill that we use against the drug dealers on boats at Sea."
The US military on Monday attacked a vessel in the eastern Pacific accused, without evidence, of engaging in "narco-trafficking operations." The strike killed at least two people and brought the known death toll from the Trump administration's lawless boat-bombing spree in international waters to more than 170.
As has been its custom since the boat bombings began last September, US Southern Command posted an unclassified video clip of the attack on social media. SOUTHCOM described the bombing as "a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by Designated Terrorist Organizations," but did not provide any evidence against the boat's operators.
Monday's deadly strike came days after the April 11 US bombings of two other boats in the eastern Pacific, attacks that killed at least five people. United Nations experts and human rights organizations have condemned the bombings in international waters as extrajudicial killings and murder—and argued those ordering and carrying out the attacks should be prosecuted for homicide.
"More murder," The Intercept's Nick Turse wrote in response to Monday's boat bombing.
Hours before SOUTHCOM announced the latest strike, Turse reported that the Trump administration is "waging a pressure campaign against the leading inter-American human rights watchdog to squash a potential investigation into illegal US attacks on boats in the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean."
Brian Finucane, a senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, said Monday that it is "funny how the Trump administration is very happy to continue to post snuff films of these lawless killings but not defend the legal merits of these strikes."
Last month, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights held a hearing during which experts testified to the illegality of the boat strikes.
“The administration’s desire to play imperial superpower in the region cannot be a reason to completely displace the foundations of international law," Angelo Guisado, senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, told the commission.
On Monday, US President Donald Trump threatened to expand his administration's illegal boat-bombing spree to Iranian vessels that "come anywhere close" to the US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz that the president ordered over the weekend.
Trump wrote on social media that Iranian vessels seen approaching the blockade "will be immediately ELIMINATED, using the same system of kill that we use against the drug dealers on boats at Sea."
"It is quick and brutal," the president added.
"The fact that a term like 'DoorDash grandma' exists should be a wake-up call," said the head of One Fair Wage. "It should never exist in the first place."
While "DoorDash Grandma" made the company's first food delivery to the White House on Monday to promote President Donald Trump's "no tax on tips" policy, the awkward encounter outside the Oval Office not only highlighted critiques of that provision of the GOP budget package but also sparked calls for a living wage and universal healthcare.
"A perfect image of the Trump era: A grandmother has to work at DoorDash in order to get by, while the president decorates his office in gold accent pieces," said Democratic strategist Max Burns, sharing a photo of the delivery on social media.
Saru Jayaraman, president of worker advocacy group One Fair Wage, told Common Dreams that "it's sad, and it's a sign of a failing society—not something to celebrate or turn into a photo op. We've normalized an economy where older people are pushed into gig work just to survive. The fact that a term like 'DoorDash grandma' exists should be a wake-up call. It should never exist in the first place."
"Corporations are paying poverty wages while policymakers offer Band-Aid solutions like 'no tax on tips' instead of paying a living wage," Jayaraman continued. "At the same time, cuts to Medicaid and food assistance are stripping away the safety net workers rely on to get by. This is all pushing people into greater dependence on tips and unstable income. Workers don't need gimmicks—they need living wages, corporate accountability, and real economic security."
Trump and then-Vice President Kamala Harris latched on to the no tax on tips policy during the 2024 campaign, despite warnings from economists and others that it is a "deceptive ploy," as the Economic Policy Institute's David Cooper and Nina Mast put it last year.
"It does nothing to address the low wages, income instability, wage theft, and abuse tipped workers already face," the pair reiterated in February. "Instead, it may undermine efforts to raise tipped minimum wages, push more workers into tipped jobs, increase workloads, and prompt customers to tip less if they believe tipped workers receive special tax treatment."
After related legislation passed the US Senate last year, Jayaraman said that "for all the bipartisan celebration, this bill is a distraction from the real fight... If Democrats want to offer a true alternative, they need to say it loud and clear: It's time to raise the minimum wage and end the subminimum wage once and for all."
A no tax on tips policy was ultimately included in Republicans' so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act—which, as a recent Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy analysis details, featured tax breaks that primarily benefited wealthy individuals and corporations while cutting programs that serve working families, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Specifically, last year's GOP budget package established a temporary federal income tax deduction for tips, capped at $25,000 per year, through 2028. In a February report, the libertarian Cato Institute estimated that "the roughly 3% of tax returns projected to claim the tips deduction in 2026 will receive an average tax cut of about $1,370," and "as a share of after-tax income, the tips deduction broadly benefits those in the middle of the income distribution."
"These provisions also add to the already large number of tax deductions and credits that shield vastly uneven amounts of income from taxation based on family size and childcare arrangements," the Cato report notes. "In addition to the income limits, the tips deduction is only available to occupations that 'customarily and regularly received tips' before 2025."
Sharon Simmons, who wore a red shirt that read "DoorDash Grandma" while delivering McDonald's bags at the White House on Monday, told Trump that she benefited from the policy. In a statement, the company identified her as an Arkansas-based grandmother of 10 who "started dashing in 2022 to earn income while keeping control of her schedule."
During the delivery, the president asked Simmons whether she voted for him—"uh, maybe," she said—and about banning transgender women from competing in sports in line with their gender identity, on which she said she did not have an opinion.
Labor reporter Michael Sainato pointed out that Simmons previously lived in Nevada and advocated for the no tax on tips policy to the US House Ways and Means Committee last year. He also questioned her comments to Trump about having saved over $11,000 on her most recent tax bill.
The dasher claims "$11,000 in savings by not having to claim." You still have to claim tipsYou can only deduct up to $25k in tips, so $11k in savings off of one year didn't happenThe tax savings are actually minimal taxpolicycenter.org/fiscal-facts...
[image or embed]
— Michael Sainato (@msainato.bsky.social) April 13, 2026 at 3:39 PM
While Trump staff and congressional Republicans shared footage of Simmons' delivery to Trump to promote the budget package provision in the lead-up to tax day, US Rep. Dina Titus (D-Nev.) stressed on social media Monday that the president's "policy is severely limited and sunsets in 2028."
"We must make it permanent and increase the minimum wage to support our nontipped workers like childcare, fast food, and retail. We can do both by passing my LIFT Act," said Titus, whose Labor Income Fairness and Transparency Act is backed by One Fair Wage.
"Cutting taxes on tips might make for a good sound bite, but on its own, it's a hollow fix that ignores the real crisis: Wages so low that two-thirds of restaurant workers don't even earn enough to pay federal income taxes," Jayaraman said last year, when Titus introduced the bill. "In a time of skyrocketing costs, workers are drowning and need more than political gimmicks—they need a raise."
"Tips should be a bonus, not a substitute for a living wage," she argued. "By ending all subminimum wages and requiring that all workers be paid a full livable wage with tips on top, the LIFT Act addresses what working people need most: a fair wage, a level playing field, and the dignity that comes with being able to provide for their families."
Some observers on Monday also noted Simmons' appearance on Fox News, during which she acknowledged the financial burden of her husband's 2025 cancer diagnosis.
"Grandma shouldn't have to rely on DoorDash tips to make up for Republicans doubling the cost of healthcare," declared Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee, sharing a clip of the interview on social media.
Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of Campaign for New York Health, which advocates for universal, single-payer healthcare, emphasized that "'no tax on tips' does not make up for the fact that no one can afford healthcare."
Historian Timothy Snyder said, "So let’s have universal healthcare and help people live in dignity."
"We will unveil warfare methods that the enemy will have little ability to counter," said the IRGC spokesperson.
As the US military on Monday began a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz after the Trump administration's failed talks with the Iranian government, a spokesperson for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps issued a warning to the United States.
"If the war continues, we will unveil capacities that the enemy has no idea about," said Sardar Mohibi, according to the IRGC-affiliated Tasnim News Agency. "We will unveil warfare methods that the enemy will have little ability to counter."
As Iran's Press TV reported, Iranian Lt. Col. Ebrahim Zolfaqari also commented on the blockade, which began at 10:00 am Eastern time, stressing that "enemy-affiliated vessels do not and will not have the right to pass through the Strait of Hormuz."
"Other vessels will be allowed to transit the strait in compliance with the regulations of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran," Zolfaqari said. "If the security of ports of the Islamic Republic of Iran is threatened, no port in the Persian Gulf or the Sea of Oman will remain safe,
Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz to many ships after the US and Iran launched an illegal war six weeks ago. The waterway between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman is a crucial trade route, including for fossil fuels from the region, and has become a key negotiating point as the death toll across the Middle East has mounted.
After talks led by Vice President JD Vance broke down, Trump wrote Sunday on his Truth Social platform that "the United States Navy, the Finest in the World, will begin the process of BLOCKADING any and all Ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz. At some point, we will reach an 'ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO IN, ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO OUT' basis, but Iran has not allowed that to happen by merely saying, 'There may be a mine out there somewhere,' that nobody knows about but them."
"THIS IS WORLD EXTORTION, and Leaders of Countries, especially the United States of America, will never be extorted," Trump continued. "I have also instructed our Navy to seek and interdict every vessel in International Waters that has paid a toll to Iran. No one who pays an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas. We will also begin destroying the mines the Iranians laid in the Straits. Any Iranian who fires at us, or at peaceful vessels, will be BLOWN TO HELL!"
The president on Monday again threatened any Iranian vessels that "come anywhere close to our BLOCKADE," and also said that "34 Ships went through the Strait of Hormuz yesterday, which is by far the highest number since this foolish closure began."
As North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries on Monday made clear they did not plan to join Trump's blockade, China's defense minister, Dong Jun, said: "Our ships are moving in and out of the waters of the Strait of Hormuz. We have trade and energy agreements with Iran. We will respect and honor them and expect others not to meddle in our affairs. Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, and it is open for us."
Summarizing an interview with Salvatore Mercogliano, maritime historian at Campbell University in North Carolina, Al Jazeera reported Monday that "he expected the US Navy to turn around ships that come out of the strait while keeping at a distance from the range of Iran's missiles and drones."
It's possible the US action could result in "two competing blockades," Mercogliano said. "This has the potential to freeze shipping in and out the Strait of Hormuz entirely."