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.
The Wall Street reform bill
signed today by President Obama will severely restrict excessive
speculation on
agriculture commodity futures markets that has harmed U.S. farmers and
countries battling hunger, according to the Institute for Agriculture
and Trade
Policy (IATP).
"This landmark bill is a first step toward
preventing
the excessive speculation by big Wall Street banks that has created
enormous
price volatility in agriculture and energy markets," said IATP
commodities expert Steve Suppan. "This is an important win for farmers
and rural communities - whose economic futures are so tightly linked to
agriculture and energy."
The bill requires the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission
(CFTC) to set per commodity limits across all markets on the number of
derivatives contracts that can be controlled by any one entity and its
affiliates during a trading contract period. Previously, Wall Street
firms and
others took advantage of the "Enron loophole" and other regulatory
exemptions to purchase and then sell off derivative contracts for
agriculture
and energy without limits - driving prices up and down.
Just as importantly, the bill requires that most
derivatives
presently traded "Over the Counter," i.e. in private deals not
subject to CFTC rules and reporting requirements, be traded on public
and
regulated exchanges. The legislation also strengthens enforcement
standards and
prosecutorial resources for initiating fraud and market manipulation
investigations.
"This bill will help markets work for agriculture
and
all Americans, not just for Wall Street and the transnational
corporations that
hide their deals in private markets," said Suppan. "With a
return to a more transparent price setting process on public and
regulated
exchanges, farmers and ranchers again will be able to sell their
products in
advance to generate the cash flows they require for planting, livestock
purchases and other farm management expenses."
Greater transparency and tougher position limits in
the U.S.
will also benefit many developing countries. Countries dependent on
agriculture
imports for their own food security will be able to forward contract at
fairer
and more predictable prices. Developing countries that rely on
agricultural
exports will similarly benefit from greater price predictability and
stability
as they forward contract sales.
The bill also requires a study of proposed
mandatory trading
of carbon emissions credits under CFTC authority to induce investments
to meet
greenhouse gas emission targets. The study will estimate the price
volatility
and trading volume affects of carbon trading under proposed climate
change
legislation. Last year, IATP
reported on the risks of excessive speculation on proposed
carbon
markets.
"The next critical phase of Wall Street reform
comes
in the regulatory implementation of this bill," said Suppan. "Wall
Street lobbyists and industry associations fought hard to maintain their
insider privileges - this opposition will be at least as vigorous in the
rule-making process."
IATP will continue to work alongside the Commodity
Markets
Oversight Reform Coalition, Americans for Financial Reform and other
allies to
ensure effective implementation and enforcement. The implementation
process
with regards to agriculture will begin at an Agricultural Markets
Advisory
Committee meeting at the CFTC on August 5.
In 2008, IATP
first reported on the role of big financial firms in
contributing to
steep food price increases. This dramatic price volatility not only
affected
U.S. agriculture, but ultimately contributed to increased hunger in many
of the
two-thirds of developing countries that are food-import dependent and
that rely
on U.S. markets for predictable purchase prices.
The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
One ACLU leader warned it "would hand the Trump administration more tools to criminalize immigrants and terrorize communities at the same time they are deploying federal agents and the military to our streets."
Eleven Democrats voted with Republicans in the US House of Representatives on Thursday to advance the so-called Stop Illegal Entry Act, which critics have condemned as "dangerously overbroad" as well as "dehumanizing and horrific."
The final vote was 226-197. The 11 Democrats who joined all GOP members present in backing the bill were Reps. Henry Cuellar (Texas), Don Davis (NC), Laura Gillen (NY), Jared Golden (Maine), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Adam Gray (Calif.), Kristen McDonald Rivet (Mich.), Frank Mrvan (Ind.), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), Tom Suozzi (NY), and Gabe Vasquez (NM).
Introduced by Congresswoman Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), HR 3486 would increase sentences for undocumented immigrants who repeatedly enter the United States illegally or enter the country and then commit a felony. The bill still needs Senate approval to reach the desk of Republican President Donald Trump, who supports it.
After Thursday's vote, Mike Zamore, the ACLU's national director of policy and government affairs, warned that "HR 3486 would supercharge President Trump's reckless deportation drive, which is already damaging our economy and destabilizing communities."
"This legislation would hand the Trump administration more tools to criminalize immigrants and terrorize communities at the same time they are deploying federal agents and the military to our streets. It would also undermine public safety by diverting more resources away from youth services and prevention programs that actually improve community safety," Zamore said. "While the House narrowly passed this bill, we thank the members of Congress who held the line and voted against this harmful legislation."
"At a time when president is threatening American cities and the Supreme Court is greenlighting racial profiling, it is vital that a growing number of elected officials are standing together in rejecting Stephen Miller's dystopian agenda to criminalize and demonize people who come to this country seeking a better life," he added, calling out the White House deputy chief of staff for policy infamous for various anti-migrant initiatives from Trump's first term, including forcible separation of families.
Speaking on the House floor, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), an immigrant herself, called the bill "Republicans' latest attempt to scapegoat and fearmonger about immigrants."
US Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) also spoke out against the bill, saying on social media: "It does nothing to protect communities or make us safer. Instead, it piles on cruel mandatory minimums, explodes prison costs, and treats families seeking safety like violent criminals. We need real immigration reform, not another zero-tolerance failure."
Congressman Dave Min (D-Calif.), the son of immigrants, said in a statement that "in talking with local and state law enforcement officers, I learned that this bill will potentially make it harder for them to do their jobs. By increasing the scope of crimes that local police officers might be expected to enforce, while not providing any funding for this, HR 3486 would effectively reduce the resources our local law enforcement has to keep our communities safe and potentially lead to increases in violent crime."
Min also pointed to the US Supreme Court's Monday ruling that allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to engage in what critics have called "blatant racial profiling."
"This bill, combined with the Supreme Court's clearly wrong decision allowing ICE to detain people based on ethnicity, race, language, or place of employment, will give sweeping new authorities to ICE to perpetuate the mass incarceration of immigrants," he said. "I am deeply concerned that HR 3486 will lead to more violent attacks and unlawful arrests by ICE of the people I represent. For these reasons, I voted no earlier today."
One commentator noted that Brazil's Supreme Court "refused to cave to imperialist threats" from the Trump administration.
Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro was sentenced to over 27 years behind bars Thursday after four of five Supreme Court justices on a panel voted to convict the far-right leader and seven associates of plotting a military coup and assassination of current President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and other officials.
"This criminal case is almost a meeting between Brazil and its past, its present, and its future," said Justice Cármen Lúcia Antunes Rocha, on Thursday cast the third and decisive vote to convict the former president and seven co-plotters, referring in part to the two decades of US-backed military dictatorship, during which Bolsonaro served as an army paratrooper.
Lúcia joined Justices Flávio Dino, Cristiano Zanin, and Alexandre de Moraes—who, along with Lula and Brazilian Vice President Geraldo Alckmin were targeted for assassination by the plotters—in voting to convict the defendants of attempting to subvert Lula's victory in the 2022 presidential election.
The defendants—who in addition to Bolsonaro include army generals and former Defense Ministers Walter Braga Netto and Paulo Sérgio Nogueira de Oliveira; former Institutional Security Minister Augusto Heleno Ribiero; admiral and former Navy Commander Almir Garnier Santos; former Justice Minister Anderson Torres; and former presidential adviser Márcio Mirando—were found guilty of crimes including attempting a coup, involvement in an armed criminal organization, attempting the violent abolition of democratic rule of law, and aggravated damage of the state's assets.
Lt. Col. Mauro Cid, a former Bolsonaro aide who turned state's witness, was sentenced Thursday to two years of confinement under open conditions, the most lenient form of carceral punishment in the Brazilian justice system.
"The government wanted to remain in power by simply ignoring democracy—and that is what constitutes a coup d'état," Moraes said ahead of his vote on Tuesday. "The leader of the criminal group made it clear—publicly and in his own words—that he would never accept defeat at the ballot, a democratic loss in the elections, and that he would never abide by the will of the people."
Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years, 3 months in prison, with penalties for the other convicted defendants still uncertain as of Thursday evening. Bolsonaro, who is 70 years old, denies any wrongdoing. He is currently under house arrest and could remain there until after exhausting the appeals process. He is already banned from running for any office until 2030 due to his abuse of power related to baseless claims of electoral fraud.
Justice Luiz Fux voted Thursday to absolve Bolsonaro, asserting that there was "absolutely no proof" that the former president took part in or was even aware of the coup and assassination plot.
However, Lúcia argued that there was copious evidence indicating that Bolsonaro and his accomplices acted "with the purpose of eroding democracy and institutions."
"They acted to hijack the soul of the republic," she said. "The case files show a coordinated criminal enterprise by the defendants, who adopted the methods of a digital militia to attack the judiciary, the electoral system, and the electronic voting machines."
The landmark verdict came amid acute political polarization in Latin America's biggest democracy and threats from the office of US President Donald Trump to unleash American "military might" in defense of the "Trump of the Tropics," as Bolsonaro is often called. The Trump administration has already slapped 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports and has sanctioned Moraes.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio responded to Thursday's developments by vowing on social media that "the United States will respond accordingly to this witch hunt."
Like Trump in 2020, Bolsonaro made many baseless allegations that his loss in the 2022 election was due to fraud, fueling lies and conspiracy theories that led to the January 8, 2023 mob attacks on government buildings. Around 1,500 Bolsonaro supporters were arrested in the days following the storming of Congress and the presidential offices.
While many right-wing Brazilians were outraged by the convictions, leftist lawmakers and others applauded what Lula's Workers' Party (PT) called "a historic moment for Brazil."
Brazilian Secretary of Institutional Affairs Gleisi Hoffmann (PT) said on social media, "The conviction of Jair Bolsonaro and his accomplices by the Federal Supreme Court expresses the vigor of democracy and national sovereignty."
"They were convicted in due legal process, based on compelling evidence of the crimes they committed," she continued. "It is a historic, unprecedented decision so that they may never again dare to attack the rule of law and the will of the people expressed at the ballot box."
"It is also the proud response of Brazil's judiciary to the economic sanctions and absurd coercion of the Donald Trump government, in conspiracy with the traitors to the homeland in the service of Bolsonaro," Hoffmann added. "Today... Brazil told the world that crimes against democracy are intolerable. And they are unforgivable."
Federal Deputy Talíria Petrone (Socialism and Liberty-Rio de Janeiro) called Thursday "the greatest day ever," while former colleague Jean Wyllys also hailed this "great day."
Erika Hilton, a Socialism and Liberty federal deputy representing São Paulo, taunted Bolsonaro with the prospect of a lengthy stay at a notorious maximum security penitentiary.
Federal Deputy Benedita da Silva (PT-Rio de Janeiro) said on social media that "democratic Brazil is proud and celebrating the firm decision" of the high court, "whose members suffered countless threats, including death threats, from the conspirators against the democratic rule of law."
Referring to the United States, da Silva praised the justices, who "did not bow to the threats to our sovereignty from the greatest external power."
"Now we have to defeat the amnesty coup of the convicted plotters that they are still trying to pass," she added, a reference to efforts by the right-wing Congress to pass clemency legislation for Bolsonaro. "No amnesty!"Health insurance premiums are expected to rise significantly for approximately 22 million Americans after Republicans ended a tax credit for those enrolled in programs under the Affordable Care Act.
Democratic leaders said Thursday that they plan to hold up negotiations on a potential government shutdown unless Republicans agree to forfeit a policy change that is expected to dramatically raise health insurance premiums for millions of Americans.
Health insurance premiums are expected to rise significantly for approximately 22 million Americans enrolled in Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace plans after Republicans refused to extend enhanced tax credits when passing Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" in July.
In remarks on Capitol Hill Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he and Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) were in total agreement not to negotiate unless Republicans agree to extend the tax credits.
“On this issue, we’re totally united. The Republicans have to come to meet with us in a true bipartisan negotiation to satisfy the American people’s needs on healthcare, or they won't get our votes, plain and simple,” Schumer warned at a press conference.
"We will not support a partisan spending agreement that continues to rip away healthcare from the American people. Period. Full stop,” Jeffries said.
The enhanced tax credits, which were created in 2021 under the American Rescue Plan Act and later extended through the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, are credited with reducing the insurance premiums of millions of people who purchase health insurance through government exchanges.
The tax credits have reduced insurance premiums by 44% on average—over $700 per enrollee—and have contributed to the number of people purchasing insurance on the exchanges more than doubling to over 24 million in 2025.
According to a report released Wednesday by KFF:
Nine in 10 enrollees (92%) receive some amount of premium tax credit. If these enhanced tax credits expire at the end of 2025, out-of-pocket premiums would rise by over 75% on average for the vast majority of individuals and families buying coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplaces.
The increases come as insurance companies, citing "slumping share prices," per the Financial Times, are planning the largest hike to premiums in 15 years, including an 18% increase for those buying from ACA exchanges.
These increases will come on top of those already expected as a result of a Trump administration rule passed in June, which increased the maximum percentages of income and raw dollar amounts that insurance plans could charge patients out-of-pocket for care.
According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, these changes "will make coverage less affordable for millions of people." The CBPP estimates that "a family of four making $85,000 will have to pay an additional $197 in premiums for coverage in 2026" while a "family of two or more people on the same plan could face an additional $900 in medical bills if a family member is seriously ill or injured in 2026, and an individual enrolled in self-only coverage could face an additional $450 in medical bills."
In all, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in May that as a result of these mounting costs, over 5 million people will no longer be able to afford their health insurance plans.
"The death star of American healthcare, the insurance companies are preparing to blow up the lives of millions of middle-class families," warned journalist David Sirota in a podcast for The Lever.
Republicans in Congress are facing mounting pressure to extend the tax credits and stave off the premium hikes. Last week, 11 Republicans in Congress signed onto a bill that would extend the credits through 2026, allowing them to avoid the issue until after the midterm elections.
A survey conducted in July by two of Trump's most trusted pollsters, Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward, found that for Republicans in the most competitive districts, "a 3-point deficit becomes a 15-point deficit" against the generic Democrat if they allow the healthcare premium tax credit to expire.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has stayed coy about whether he and the Republican caucus plan to support extending the credits.
"I'm not going to forecast that right now," Johnson told reporters earlier this week, while also saying, "There's a lot of opposition to it as well."
Democrats, meanwhile, have proposed a competing bill to make the subsidies permanent and are hoping to use this month's budget showdown to force Republicans to make concessions on the issue.
As David Dayen wrote Monday for the American Prospect, it sets up a challenging strategic and moral dilemma for Democrats:
On the one hand, Democrats fighting for healthcare benefits speaks to an issue where they have the highest level of support from the public. They would credibly be able to tell voters that they fought for lower costs during an affordability crisis and won, and that more of that will happen if they are given power in the midterms.
On the other hand, Republicans willingly drove the healthcare system toward the point of oblivion, and some may question why Democrats would offer a lifeline to bail them out. In this reading, relieving Republicans of the consequences of their health care plans would be harmful to Democratic midterm chances; Trump would take credit for keeping health care costs low.
What's clear, Dayen said, is that "unless action is taken, it will be an enormous example of Trump's failure to rein in the runaway cost of living."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, urged Democrats to stand firm as the fight over a potential government shutdown heats up.
"If Republicans refuse to negotiate and move away from their cost-increasing agenda, then it is Republicans who will be forcing a government-wide shutdown," Gilbert said. "There should be no deal without assurances that the budget will be honored and not impounded, and one that returns care to the American people.”