SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Public Citizen Files Emergency Complaint Alleging Possible Market Manipulation by Dynegy, Urges Investigation of Midwest Power Auction
Auction Led to Electricity Rate Spike for Illinois Consumers; FERC Should Halt Pending Rate Increase
WASHINGTON
Alleging possible illegal market manipulation, Public Citizen has filed an emergency request for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to block a pending utility rate increase that would inflate electricity costs for the average Illinois family by $140 annually. The new rate is scheduled to go into effect on June 2. Public Citizen also is calling for FERC to investigate.
At issue is a power auction conducted by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), the results of which were announced on April 14, 2015. The auction was intended to procure adequate supplies through 2016 for most of downstate and midstate Illinois.
In its complaint, filed late Thursday, Public Citizen alleges that the auction results suggest that Houston-based Dynegy, Inc. may have intentionally withheld several of its power plants from the auction or bid them at uncompetitive prices. The bidding strategies of Dynegy and other suppliers, combined with the rules under which the auction was conducted, pushed auction prices up for much of Illinois from $16.75 per megawatt-day last year to $150 this year, an increase of 800 percent.
Even if illegal manipulation did not occur, the dramatic spike - resulting in a rate for Illinois that is more than 40 times that in neighboring states despite abundant generating capacity in Illinois - indicates a violation of the Federal Power Act's fundamental requirement that rates be just and reasonable.
The Illinois attorney general filed a similar complaint with FERC late Thursday, also calling on the agency to block the increase.
This is not the first time that Dynegy has been suspected of manipulating energy markets. The company has in the past settled allegations that it engaged in illegal gaming of the California power market; accepted a $5 million penalty from the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission to settle allegations the company intentionally reported false natural gas prices to a key index for the purpose of manipulating the price; and paid a $3 million civil penalty for committing securities fraud for the company's illegal energy trades.
"Such a sudden and extreme rate increase could cause consumers to have to choose between keeping the lights on or buying groceries," said Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program. "For those with businesses, it may make the difference between profit and loss."
One key problem, Public Citizen's complaint notes, was that a top Dynegy executive served as vice chair of the MISO working group tasked with designing and helping implement auction rules. MISO last year dropped a proposal to make changes that could have resulted in a more competitive auction for Illinois after Dynegy objected.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
'Good Riddance': Trump Fires Kristi Noem From DHS, Names 'MAGA Warrior' as Replacement
"Trump's violent, cruel deportation agenda didn't begin with Kristi Noem, and it won't end with her firing," said Rep. Summer Lee, who called for dismantling DHS and prosecuting everyone "violating our rights."
Mar 05, 2026
Amid mounting calls for the ouster of US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem over her department's deadly immigration operations and detention facilities denounced as concentration camps, President Donald Trump announced Thursday that she will take on a new role and Sen. Markwayne Mullin will replace her.
Trump said on his Truth Social platform that the Republican senator from Oklahoma will take over the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on March 31, while Noem, "who has served us well, and has had numerous and spectacular results (especially on the Border!), will be moving to be Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas, our new Security Initiative in the Western Hemisphere we are announcing on Saturday in Doral, Florida."
The initiative will seemingly build on Trump's fatal bombings of boats allegedly trafficking drugs and a new joint operation that's sending US troops to Ecuador. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the governments attending the summit "have really formed a historic coalition to work together to address criminal narco-terrorist gangs and cartels and counter illegal and mass migration into not only the United States but the Western Hemisphere, which remains a key and top priority of this president."
After thanking Noem for "her service at 'Homeland,'" Trump promoted Mullin as "a MAGA Warrior, and former undefeated professional MMA fighter" who "truly gets along well with people, and knows the Wisdom and Courage required to Advance our America First Agenda."
Trump touted Mullin's Native American heritage and said he "will work tirelessly to Keep our Border Secure, Stop Migrant Crime, Murderers, and other Criminals from illegally entering our Country, End the Scourge of Illegal Drugs and, MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN."
Mullin's conduct in Congress has notably included threatening to physically fight Teamsters president Sean O'Brien during a 2023 Senate hearing. His formal nomination to lead DHS will require confirmation by the Senate, which is narrowly controlled by Republicans. According to Fox News, Noem "will likely be at least temporarily replaced by Deputy Secretary Troy Edgar, a Navy veteran and former mayor of Los Alamitos, California, in the line of succession for the agency."
Trump's announcement came just hours after the National Review reported that Trump "is privately furious" with Noem "for suggesting in her Senate Judiciary Committee testimony on Tuesday that he gave advance approval of a taxpayer-funded $220 million ad campaign contract that was subcontracted to one of her allies."
During that Senate hearing, Noem faced outraged Democrats and Republicans. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) ripped into her over DHS agents' killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis—a topic retiring Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) also addressed, noting the infamous passage of Noem's book in which she describes shooting her family's dog and goat.
Responding to Trump's announcement, Zeteo founder Mehdi Hasan said, "Good riddance to the racist, lying puppy killer."
Graham Platner, one of the Democrats running to challenge Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) in November, similarly said "good riddance" to what he called one of Collins' "worst confirmation votes ever."
The progressive oyster farmer and combat veteran also renewed his call to "dismantle" the DHS agency Immigration and Customs Enforcement, stressing that "the sickness at ICE goes far deeper than one person at the top."
Progressives currently serving in Congress joined Platner in welcoming Noem's departure from DHS but also reiterating criticism of the department leading Trump's mass deportation campaign.
"It's about time," declared Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.). "But Trump's violent, cruel deportation agenda didn't begin with Kristi Noem, and it won't end with her firing. We need to abolish ICE, dismantle DHS, and prosecute everyone responsible for violating our rights, bypassing due process, and killing people in our streets."
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) said that "this is a big win. Kristi Noem was a disaster, and people speaking up got her fired. But Kristi Noem is not the architect of Trump's dangerous mass deportation policies, and we can't let up the pressure. Fire Stephen Miller."
DHS remains partially shut down due to a congressional funding fight. Just a day after grilling Noem on the Fourth Amendment during a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Pramila Jayapal said "good riddance" to her while also arguing that "Congress still cannot fund DHS until there is real, tangible proof that this will be a meaningful, structural change."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Medicare Advantage Is Not Medicare': Democrats Proposal Would Unmask For-Profit Fraudsters
"We don't allow banks to call themselves the U.S. Treasury Investment Fund," said Rep. Mark Pocan. "We don't allow anyone to call themselves USPS Plus. So why allow insurance companies to call private insurance Medicare Advantage?"
Mar 05, 2026
A group of Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday reintroduced legislation aimed at reining in for-profit insurance companies who use the Medicare name to market their plans.
The "Save Medicare Act," being reintroduced by US Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), bars private insurers from using the word "Medicare" in marketing their plans, imposing "significant fines" for any insurer that doesn't comply.
At issue, the lawmakers said, is that insurers are flooding the airwaves with ads for Medicare Advantage plans during open enrollment periods. The ads are deceiving Americans into thinking their plans are just variations of Medicare services offered by the federal government, they said.
"Let’s be clear: Medicare Advantage is not Medicare," said Schakowsky. "These private insurance plans use Medicare’s trusted name while too often denying medically necessary care, restricting providers, and overcharging taxpayers by billions. That is unacceptable. We have seen insurers exploit the system to boost profits at the expense of seniors."
Khanna noted that Medicare Advantage is "a private insurance program that too often boosts profits by limiting coverage," even as it "misleads seniors into thinking it's traditional Medicare."
"That's wrong," Khanna emphasized. "This legislation will stop private insurers from cashing in on the Medicare name. We should be working to protect and expand real Medicare instead."
Pocan declared that "only Medicare is Medicare," adding that Medicare Advantage plans "often leave patients without the benefits they need while overcharging the federal government for corporate profit."
"This bill makes clear what is—and what is not—Medicare," added Pocan, "and ensures this essential program will continue to serve seniors and other Americans for generations to come."
Pocan also posted a video on social media where he talked about his elderly mother being unable to see the physician that came to her assisted living home because she relied on Medicare Advantage and the doctor in question was out of network.
"She would have had to go all the way across town to get that care," Pocan explained. "The problem is, she wasn't very mobile and she never got the medical care."
We don't allow banks to call themselves the U.S. Treasury Investment Fund. We don't allow anyone to call themselves USPS Plus.
So why allow insurance companies to call private insurance Medicare Advantage?
I’m reintroducing the Save Medicare Act with @RepRoKhanna and… pic.twitter.com/c6dAXpEJqY
— Rep. Mark Pocan (@RepMarkPocan) March 4, 2026
"We don't allow banks to call themselves the U.S. Treasury Investment Fund," said Pocan. "We don't allow anyone to call themselves USPS Plus. So why allow insurance companies to call private insurance Medicare Advantage?"
Many progressive critics have for years pointed to Medicare Advantage as a legitimate example of wasteful spending by the federal government.
A report released in January by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), an independent congressional agency that advises lawmakers on Medicare, estimated that overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans could total $76 billion in 2026.
One major factor in the overpayments is that patients using Medicare Advantage plans tend to be healthier than patients on traditional Medicare, with the result being that private insurers charge the government more than is necessary to meet these patients' needs.
On Wednesday, Schakowsky said that the "crucial legislation" she joined Khanna and Pocan in introducing "will end deceptive marketing and ensure beneficiaries understand the difference between traditional Medicare and private insurance plans."
"Seniors deserve transparency, accountability, and the full benefits they have earned," she said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressives Warn Democrats: Vote for Iran War Powers Resolution or Face Primary Challenge
"Today every House member will go on record and answer: Do they truly oppose endless wars and stand for the Constitution, or were those just empty campaign slogans?" said one group.
Mar 05, 2026
As the US House prepared to vote Thursday on a war powers resolution aimed at ending President Donald Trump's assault on Iran and Democratic leaders whip votes in support of the measure, progressive organizers ramped up pressure on lawmakers to side with the vast majority of the party's voters and support the resolution—or face consequences in upcoming elections.
Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats, told Axios Wednesday after Senate Republicans—and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania—voted down a companion resolution, that "any Democrat that votes against war powers is supporting Trump's war on Iran and deserves to be primaried because all voters across the political spectrum are wholeheartedly against it."
A poll released by Reuters/Ipsos this week found that just 25% of voters support Trump's decision to join Israel in launching airstrikes across Iran, which have so far killed more than 1,000 Iranian civilians. At least six US service members have also died or been killed since the unprovoked assault began over the weekend.
Only 7% of Democratic voters support "Operation Epic Fury," as the administration is calling the attacks, while 74% oppose it. A small majority of Republicans, 55%, said they approved of the White House's war on Iran, which the administration has justified with conflicting reasons—none of them convincing experts who say the attacks are a clear violation of international law.
After warning that "the American people will remember who voted to keep our service members in danger by supporting this dangerous, unnecessary, unpopular war" following the Senate vote on Wednesday, the advocacy group Demand Progress urged Americans to call their representatives in Congress and demand they support the war powers resolution introduced in the House by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
The measure is expected to fail due to the GOP majority; Republicans hold 218 seats in the House while Democrats control 214; Massie and one other Republican, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), have indicated support.
Groups are "organizing calls into their districts to make sure that every Democrat votes for" the bipartisan resolution, one House progressive told the outlet.
Organizers are directing particular ire at House Democrats who have a history of staunchly backing Israel and have unveiled a resolution that would allow Trump to continue striking Iran for 30 days.
That resolution was introduced by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), Greg Landsman (Ohio), and Jimmy Panetta (Calif.) and would authorize the attacks for roughly the same length of time the president has said he believes they'll last, although Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war could take twice as long and that, ultimately, there would be no timeline placed on the war.
Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser for Demand Progress, told The Intercept Wednesday that for "any representative that is actually against the war," the resolution introduced by Khanna and Massie is "the vehicle they should be voting for now, and not attempting to give Trump a blank check for 30 days."
“We have already seen in the past four days the death and destruction and escalation with this war. I can’t even imagine what things look like in 30 days," said Kharrazian.
Golden is not seeking reelection this year; the other five co-sponsors of the alternative war powers resolution are up for reelection and facing primaries in the coming months.
Axios asked other lawmakers including Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) how they plan to vote on Khanna and Massie's resolution, but did not receive clear answers, with Suozzi saying only that he was "going to do the right thing."
Moskowitz told The Hill that he has "decided" how he'll vote but is "not ready to say what my vote is."
Oliver Larkin, a democratic socialist running against Moskowitz in the primary, seized on the congressman's comment.
Britt Jacovich, a spokesperson for the grassroots advocacy group MoveOn, told Axios that the organization's members "have no plans to throw their support behind members of Congress who refused to do their job and stop Trump from expanding his war. All options are on the table to make sure that our members' voices are heard loud and clear."
MoveOn also said Wednesday that any lawmaker who supports a $50 billion supplemental funding package "should expect to hear from our members."
"MoveOn members consider a vote for the supplemental a vote in favor of Donald Trump's war," said the group.
In a private Democratic caucus meeting on Wednesday, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member, and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), made an "emphatic" case for Khanna and Massie's resolution, and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) has been leading efforts to whip votes.
One anonymous progressive House Democrat told Axios that a vote against the resolution would be "politically perilous" for any Democrat.
Advocacy groups are "already preparing" to organize primary challenges against Democrats who break ranks or vote to allow Trump to attack Iran for a 30-day window, said the lawmaker.
"If the filing deadline has passed, they'll do it in '28," they told Axios. "It's basically inviting a primary challenge."
Paco Fabian, a spokesperson for Our Revolution, told Axios that "when elected officials... fail to stand with working people demanding peace and accountability, they risk losing the trust of the voters who put them in office."
"And when that trust is broken," he said, "voters often begin looking for leaders who will fight for them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular