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.

Lacy MacAuley, Media Relations Manager
(202) 445-4692; lacy@ips-dc.org;
"The good news in Obama's 2013 budget is that he proposes ambitious initiatives on public transit, clean vehicles, energy efficiency, and renewable energy issues, and has proposed to eliminate $4 billion in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.
"The good news in Obama's 2013 budget is that he proposes ambitious initiatives on public transit, clean vehicles, energy efficiency, and renewable energy issues, and has proposed to eliminate $4 billion in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. The bad news is that he doesn't go far enough on all fronts to ensure that the dirty energy industries of the past -- including offshore oil and gas drilling, nuclear power and coal--are taken off the dole and made to clean up their messes, thereby allowing truly clean energy to compete on a level playing field."- Daphne Wysham, Co-Director, Sustainable Energy and Economy Network, Institute for Policy Studies, daphne@ips-dc.org
"On the domestic side, the President's budget has some good proposals for investments and some progressive revenue-raisers. It works well as populist campaign document and is important as such. However, some programs for low-income families would suffer further unnecessary cuts and the President proposes, over 10 years, to reduce non-security discretionary spending from its current 3.1 percent of GDP to a 50-year low of 1.7 percent. We have to do better." - Karen Dolan, Fellow, Cities for Progress, Institute for Policy Studies, karen@ips-dc.org
"President Obama's proposed budget for the Environmental Protection Agency of $8.3 Billion, while reduced from the previous year by $105 million, also reflects some important increases to states and Indian tribes to better enforce the Clean Air and Clear Water Acts. About 60 percent of the Department of Energy's budget is going mostly for nuclear weapons and the cleanup of nuclear weapons sites. The single largest expenditure in DOE is for nuclear weapons, which commands 27 percent of DOE's entire budget." - Robert Alvarez, Senior Scholar, Nuclear Policy, Institute for Policy Studies, bob@ips-dc.org
"The preventive medicine in our security budget -- including diplomacy, peacekeeping, economic development, climate stabilization -- has been shortchanged for years as military spending has surged. Though the President has talked about investing more in prevention, his budget fails to do so. It leaves the extreme imbalance between military and non-military spending virtually unchanged through 2016." - Miriam Pemberton, Research Fellow, Foreign Policy in Focus, Institute for Policy Studies, miriam@ips-dc.org
Institute for Policy Studies turns Ideas into Action for Peace, Justice and the Environment. We strengthen social movements with independent research, visionary thinking, and links to the grassroots, scholars and elected officials. I.F. Stone once called IPS "the think tank for the rest of us." Since 1963, we have empowered people to build healthy and democratic societies in communities, the US, and the world. Click here to learn more, or read the latest below.
The Precision Strike Missile has never before been used in combat by the US military.
As experts and investigators analyze one of the first strikes carried out in the US-Israeli war on Iran, mounting reports point to a ballistic missile that had never been used before by the US military in combat—but which may have struck a residential area, a sports hall, and a school in the southern city of Lamerd.
Along with being accused of bombing a school in Minab, killing more than 160 children and teachers, the US reportedly attacked several facilities and civilian areas near an Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps facility in Lamerd, killing an additional 21 people, including children.
While analysts have found a US Tomahawk cruise missile was used in the Minab attack, munitions experts interviewed by the BBC and The New York Times in recent days said footage of the attacks and images of the targets after they were struck suggest a short-range ballistic missile called a Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) was used to bomb a sports hall, school, and residential neighborhood in Lamerd.
The missiles are newly developed and are designed to detonate just above a target and propel small tungsten pellets into the surrounding area.
As the Times reported, the PrSM is manufactured by Lockheed Martin and has the capability to hit targets at a 400-mile range, "but additional details about the weapon, including its expected accuracy and the quantity of explosives it carries, remain unknown to the public."
The Times reported that munitions experts had analyzed footage of a weapon in flight over a residential area about 900 feet from the sports hall and school, showing the missile erupting "in a large fireball midair."
Another video showed an explosion in midair just above the sports hall and nearby school, and photos of the aftermath showed the sites with numerous holes, presumably from the tungsten pellets.
The Times also verified a video that showed a plume of smoke rising in an area close to the other strikes at the same time, and local media reports said a cultural center had been hit in that attack. The target couldn't be independently verified.
Late last week, the BBC also reported that the PrSM was likely used on residential buildings in Lamerd on the first day of the war.
Experts at the defense intelligence firm Janes and at McKenzie Intelligence told the BBC that the shape, length, and size of the explosions created in verified footage they analyzed indicated the weapons were likely PrSM missiles.
"US Central Command has admitted to using PrSM in strikes from the desert of an unnamed Gulf country against Iran in the early phases of the conflict," McKenzie Intelligence emphasized.
Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Dan Caine also celebrated the use of the PrSM in a press conference on March 13, reported the BBC, saying the US military had "made history" and carried out attacks with "precision and determination that comes from relentless training and trust in each other and in their weapon systems."
But a spokesperson for US Central Command on Saturday told the Times that Pentagon officials are "aware of the reports and are looking into them," and claimed US forces "do not indiscriminately target civilians."
The US has also not officially taken responsibility for the attack in Minab that happened on the same day as the ones in Lamerd, but fragments of a Tomahawk missile that were found at the site are among the mounting evidence pointing to the Trump administration as the perpetrator.
The sports hall in Lamerd was reportedly being used by a children's volleyball team at the time of the strike; fourth grader Helma Ahmadizadeh and fifth grader Elham Zaeri were among those killed while at volleyball practice, according to an Iran-based journalist, Negin Bagheri.
Zaeri's father "described her as an avid volleyball player, who would always turn up to the sports hall 20 to 25 minutes early," the BBC reported.
The outlet also said the youngest victim of the suspected PrSM strike was two years old.
At Drop Site News, Mahmoud Aslan reported on the attack on the sports hall shortly after it took place, before analysts linked the bombing to the PrSM.
Hossein Gholami told Aslan his 16-year-old daughter, Zahra, had been training in the facility when he "noticed a strange gathering of people at the corner of the street leading to the sports hall."
“The screaming was rising from a distance," said Gholami. "A colleague ran toward me, waving his arm, and said in a shaken voice: ‘Zahra, the hall, there has been an explosion.'"
“The continuous screaming of the injured mixed with the sounds of secondary explosions," said Gholami, whose daughter was killed in the attack. "The ground was covered in debris and shattered glass. It was difficult to move with all the rubble. Ambulances arrived after about twenty minutes, but most of the injured were in critical condition. The smell of blood and burns covered everything."
“Every time I close my eyes," he said, "I see her face, her smile, and I hear the sound of the explosion."
"If the agency is going to allow such chemicals to be freely sold at Home Depot, Walmart, and farm supply stores, the very least the EPA must do is require a clear cancer warning on the label," said one critic.
The US Environmental Protection Agency has repeatedly failed to warn consumers of the cancer risks posed by pesticides—even when its own research has found those products to be carcinogenic, a pair of green groups said Monday.
The Center for Food Safety studied the EPA's permitted risk level in active components of both currently approved and legacy pesticides. CFS researchers found that the EPA allowed pesticides with a cancer risk "as high as 1 in every 100 people exposed, a far greater level than the EPA’s benchmark of a 1-in-a-million chance of developing cancer."
"Of the 570 unique pesticide chemicals that EPA’s Office of Pesticide program has classified for carcinogenic potential since 1985, over one-third (200, or 35%) are either possible human carcinogens (127) or likely to be carcinogenic to humans (73)," the CFS report notes. "The status of 62 others (11%) is uncertain, because EPA lacks sufficient data to make a determination.
A second report, from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), shows that of the 200 pesticides that are possible or likely human carcinogens, 125 are still registered for use.
CBD analyzed the labels of every pesticide currently approved by the EPA and found that the agency has placed cancer warnings on just 69 of 4,919 pesticide labels (1.4%) "containing an active ingredient that the agency has designated a 'likely' human carcinogen." Additionally, the EPA has put cancer warnings on just 242 of the 22,147 pesticide labels (1.1%) that "contain an ingredient the agency has designated as a 'possible' human carcinogen."
CFS science director Bill Freeses said in a statement Monday: “It’s bad enough that the EPA approves cancer-causing pesticides. But if the agency is going to allow such chemicals to be freely sold at Home Depot, Walmart, and farm supply stores, the very least the EPA must do is require a clear cancer warning on the label. Warnings save lives by incentivizing users to wear protective equipment that reduces risk."
Lori Ann Burd, director of environmental health at the CBD, said on Monday that “it's dumbfounding that the EPA has failed to require any cancer warning on thousands of pesticide products sold to the public that the agency itself has linked to cancer."
“Why should anyone have confidence in the EPA’s ability to keep tabs on the pesticide industry and protect us all from harmful poisons when it won’t even compel companies to put long-term health warnings on pesticides it knows are really dangerous?" she added.
Last month, CFS, CBD, and others denounced the EPA's reapproval of the pesticide dicamba—which scientific studies have linked to increased risk of cancer and hypothyroidism in high-dose exposure—for certain cotton and soybean crops.
The new CFS and CBD analyses come ahead of next month's oral arguments in Monsanto Company v. John L. Durnell, a case before the US Supreme Court in which Bayer, the Germany-based pharma giant that bought Monsanto in 2018, is seeking substantial immunity from future lawsuits filed by people in the United States who used glyphosate-based products like Roundup weedkiller and were then diagnosed with rare pesticide-linked cancers. The company has paid out billions of dollars to settle such suits.
CBD and other advocacy groups have also warned that the industry-backed Farm Bill currently advancing in the Republican-controlled Congress weakens or delays pesticide safety regulation, preempts state-level cancer warning rules, and shields chemical companies from lawsuits.
"Republicans in Congress want to cut Americans' healthcare to pay for more war in Iran. Let that sink in."
"Republicans won't think twice about *literally* sacrificing you to get their way."
That's how Democrats on the US House Ways and Means Committee responded to Axios' Monday reporting on congressional Republicans considering more healthcare cuts to help fulfill President Donald Trump's request for $200 billion to continue partnering with Israel for an unconstitutional war on Iran—including a potential ground invasion.
Other critics said:
Michael Hardaway, a geopolitical strategist who has worked for top Democrats, argued that they "must convert this into a House AND Senate majority in November," noting that Republicans "took healthcare away from millions of Americans to pay for tax cuts for the 1%."
That was last year, when congressional Republicans and Trump used the budget reconciliation process to pass their so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Between $1 trillion cuts to Medicaid over the next decade and failing to extend expiring Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits, the OBBBA is expected to strip healthcare coverage from up to 15 million Americans.
While the impacts of the OBBBA will play out over years, already, "in red states and blue states alike, Republican healthcare cuts are hitting communities like a wrecking ball," Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said last week, while releasing a related report with House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ).
Wyden and Pallone found that over half of the people who reenrolled in an ACA plan this year have had to or plan to reduce spending on other essentials; at least 19 health facilities have closed across 11 states; and nearly 500 employees were laid off in four states because of the GOP's healthcare cuts last year.
"Despite attempts by Trump and his allies to cast blame elsewhere, the stories and facts are rolling in from across the country," Wyden said. "Democrats will not stop elevating the voices of Americans whose health is in harm's way as a result of Republicans' healthcare cuts."

One proposal that the GOP considered but ultimately did not include in the OBBBA related to ACA cost-sharing reductions. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the specific policy considered last year would save $31 billion but leave 300,000 more Americans uninsured through 2034.
Reporting emerged last week that House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) wants to bring back the push for that policy. It quickly spurred criticism, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) saying: "Republicans in Congress want to cut Americans' healthcare to pay for more war in Iran. Let that sink in."
"Republicans ransacked $1 trillion from Medicaid, and then they more than doubled premiums for over 20 million Americans in order to fund tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations," Leslie Dach, chair of the advocacy group Protect Our Care, said in a statement last week. "Now, care for 15 million working Americans will be ripped away, nursing homes and hospitals are on the chopping block nationwide, and Americans are buried under skyrocketing healthcare hikes."
"But that's not enough for Republicans who have been at war with working families' healthcare for decades—now they want to slash healthcare even more to bankroll the war in the Middle East and to fund ICE, Trump's unaccountable, lawless paramilitary force," Dach continued, referring to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "The American people reject these Republican priorities and will make their voice known in November."
Axios reported Monday on Arrington's preferred timeline for a new budget package: "60 to 90 days," he said.
Arrington is also eyeing some potential changes to Medicare, which provides health insurance coverage to Americans age 65 and older, according to Axios:
As for Medicaid, one of the programs attacked by the OBBBA, Arrington told the outlet that there is hesitancy "to open that back up," but some policies considered in 2025 could be revived.
In a Monday statement, Democratic National Committee rapid response director Kendall Witmer called out Trump and Vice President JD Vance for past and possible future GOP healthcare cuts, accusing them of breaking their campaign promises.
"Donald Trump and Republicans already made the largest cuts to healthcare in history, causing healthcare costs to skyrocket for millions of Americans while billionaires and big corporations get massive tax cuts," Witmer said. "Now, Republicans want to slash even more healthcare funding for working families to pay for their war with Iran."
"After promising on the campaign trail to stop the endless wars, reduce the national debt, and lower costs," Witmer added, "Trump and JD Vance have done the opposite: putting everyday Americans on the chopping block to wage their deadly and costly war of choice."