

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.

350.org, Brett Fleishman, (970) 376-5041
Senator Kevin de León, Claire Conlon, (916) 651-4024
With a vote of 43 for and 27 against, the California State Assembly voted to divest the state's public pension funds, CalPERS and CalSTRS, from thermal coal. Now that it's passed both houses of the state legislature, S.B. 185 will head to the desk of Governor Jerry Brown for his signature or veto. If signed into law, S.B. 185 would make the two massive and influential institutions the first statewide public pension funds in the nation to divest from any fossil fuels.
" Coal is losing value quickly and investing in coal is a losing proposition for our retirees; it's a nuisance to public health; and it's inconsistent with our values as a state on the forefront of efforts to address global climate change," said Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de Leon. "California's utilities are phasing out coal, and it's time our pension funds did the same."
The fossil fuel divestment is challenging institutions, individuals, and governments to show climate leadership and align their investments with their values by divesting from fossil fuels ahead of December's climate talks in Paris.
"This is a big moment for California, and for everyone around the world standing up to the most powerful and destructive industry in history," said May Boeve, Executive Director of 350.org. "Today's vote is so meaningful because it sends a strong message: political leadership on climate change means being willing to stand up to powerful moneyed interests, and call out the destructive practices of the companies causing the climate crisis. Even in California, there's still more to do -- like divesting public pension funds from oil and gas, and banning extreme energy extraction techniques like fracking -- but this is a big step that adds major momentum to our campaign. Leaders in New York, Massachusetts, and around the country would be wise to take note and follow suit."
This vote comes shortly after a report from Trillium Asset Management revealed that, combined, CalPERS and CalSTRS incurred over $5 billion in losses from their holdings in fossil fuel companies in the last year alone, strengthening the case for turning away from all fossil fuels.
"I wrote the first-in-the-nation resolution calling for fossil fuel divestment, which passed my Ventura County Democratic Party back in 2013, and was ultimately passed by the California Democratic Party this spring," said RL Miller, cofounder of Climate Hawks Vote and Chair of the California Democratic Party's environmental caucus. "Though S.B. 185 is narrower, as it only calls for coal divestment, the work within the state's Democratic Party has enlightened a lot of activists to the need for full fossil fuel divestment, and S.B. 185 is the right bill at the right time. Once passed, I expect the bill to unleash a flood of actions in other states with similar bills."
S.B. 185, introduced by Senator de Leon, is one of eleven bills included in the California Climate Leadership Package. Other noteworthy bills include S.B. 350, and S.B. 32, which call for significant reductions in fossil fuel use and emissions, as well as an increase in the use of renewables to generate electricity and energy efficiency.
"Addressing the climate crisis is a moral imperative," said Jim Miller, member of the American Federation of Teachers, Local 1931 VP/Chair SD-Imperial Counties Labor Council Environmental Caucus. "Although much more still needs to be done, S.B. 185 and the Climate Leadership Package are an important step in the right direction if we are serious about saving our children's future."
This announcement comes shortly after the Executive Director of the California Academy of Sciences, Jonathan Foley, issued a strong statement on the museum's extensive efforts to disentangle themselves from the fossil fuel industry. His statement was a direct response to a new campaign launched by The Natural History Museum and 350.org calling on the country's top science and natural history museums to cut ties with the fossil fuel industry.
The campaign for S.B. 185 is part of a growing worldwide push to divest the financial holdings of universities, religious institutions, municipalities, pension funds, and other investors from fossil fuel companies. For more information on S.B. 185, visit: https://focus.senate.ca.gov/climate.
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
"Efforts to undercut or undermine Medicaid for the children who rely on it are a bet against the future of the country," said the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The American Academy of Pediatrics warned Wednesday that the Trump administration's new rule governing Medicaid work requirements will damage the health of children across the US, as additional bureaucratic barriers make it more difficult for families to access and maintain coverage.
AAP, the largest professional association of pediatricians in the country, said it "strongly opposes" the rule unveiled by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) earlier this week, calling it "an intentional policy choice that will harm children’s long-term health and well-being." The group said the rule should be rescinded.
“When parents have healthcare coverage, their children are more likely to be covered and stay covered over time, allowing uninterrupted access to the care they need to grow up healthy," said Andrew Racine, AAP's president. "Work requirements have not been shown to help adults gain employment. Instead, the added red tape makes it more difficult for eligible people to stay enrolled in Medicaid and makes the program less efficient overall. These administrative barriers will disproportionately hurt people with disabilities, and parents of children with special healthcare needs will lose coverage."
"The new burdensome requirements that many parents will face under this rule will ultimately undermine families’ health and financial stability," Racine added. "The policies to narrowly define who qualifies for exemptions will add to the state costs to administer the program, create headaches for families trying to navigate the bureaucracy, and harm the very people that Medicaid is meant to serve. Medicaid is a program designed around the needs of children. Efforts to undercut or undermine Medicaid for the children who rely on it are a bet against the future of the country."
Analysts and advocacy groups have said the Trump administration's rule, which implements work requirements included in a Republican budget law enacted last summer, will likely push millions of people off Medicaid—including many who are eligible but fail to comply with complex new reporting procedures.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) noted in Wednesday analysis that state agencies "will have to significantly re-work policy and systems" in light of the new rule, likely resulting in "errors and delays that could affect health coverage and care for the entire Medicaid population—including groups to whom the work requirement doesn’t apply, such as children, seniors, and people with disabilities."
Nearly half of all children in the US are enrolled in Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). A recent analysis by the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University found that two million fewer children were enrolled in Medicaid in April compared to the start of President Donald Trump's second White House term—and the number of uninsured kids is expected to grow as the GOP budget law's unprecedented Medicaid cuts take hold.
In addition to its impacts on children, critics say the new CMS rule will harm people with serious illnesses such as cancer and HIV/AIDS. The rule does not necessarily exempt such people from the Medicaid work mandates, which require certain program enrollees to document at least 80 hours per week of employment or related activities. The requirement is set to take effect nationwide in January 2027.
Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, said in a statement earlier this week that the Trump administration's new rule appears to run afoul of the law.
"People who have special medical needs, including those with a serious or complex medical condition, are statutorily exempt from the community engagement requirement," said Schmid. "People living with HIV have a lifelong serious and complex medical condition and have special medical needs—they cannot stay healthy without continuous access to lifesaving HIV treatment. Any gap will put them at risk of serious health consequences."
"We are disappointed that the Trump administration ignored the law and, while they agree that HIV/AIDS and viral hepatitis are serious or complex medical conditions, they are proposing that states will have to determine for every individual if their health is impaired and that they can’t comply with the work requirement," Schmid continued. "This added requirement was not in the law and puts the health of people living with HIV and viral hepatitis at risk."
"Now it’s time for the Senate to act," said CodePink's Medea Benjamin. "Let’s keep the pressure on and send this resolution to Trump’s desk. No more illegal wars. No more blank checks for militarism."
Raucous applause erupted in the House of Representatives on Wednesday after US lawmakers passed a war powers resolution aimed at ending Donald Trump's illegal war of choice against Iran—although skeptics cautioned that the measure will likely have little impact on the actions of a president who has habitually shown utter contempt for the rule of law.
House lawmakers voted 215-208, with 7 legislators not voting, in favor of H.Con.Res.86, introduced in April by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) and cosponsored by Reps. James Himes (D-Conn.), Adam Smith (D-Wash.), Gabe Amo (D-RI), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH), and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
Every Democrat present voted for the resolution, while three Republicans—Reps. Tom Barrett (Mich.), Warren Davidson (Ohio), and Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.)—broke ranks with their GOP colleagues and joined Massie in voting to approve the measure, which directs Trump to "remove United States armed forces from hostilities with Iran."
“We are trapped in a war that won’t end because an incompetent president launched it thinking of only his own ego while failing to prepare for the consequences,” Meeks, the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said during floor debate ahead of Wednesday's vote. “Diplomacy is the only exit from this, not more bombing, not more bluster.”
The War Powers Resolution of 1973—also known as the War Powers Act—requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing troops to military action and limiting such action to 60 days, with a 30-day withdrawal period, unless lawmakers declare war or issue an authorization for the use of military force.
It's been 95 days since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran, which followed last summer's separate bombing campaigns by both allies. Since then, more than 3,400 Iranians—many of them civilians—have been killed and over 26,000 others wounded by airstrikes, while Iranian counterattacks have killed 13 US troops, 26 Israelis, and over 20 people in Gulf Arab states aligned with the US.
House lawmakers had tried and failed to pass Iran war powers resolutions on three previous occasions. Last month, after four US Senate Republicans helped Democrats advance one of the resolutions, GOP leadership in the House canceled two subsequent votes on the measure.
“Since President Trump’s illegal war of choice on Iran began, I have been extremely clear over and over again that Congress alone has the power to declare war," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—who did not vote Wednesday because she was in India due to a family health emergency—said in a statement. "This war has had disastrous effects for the American people and for the world in the nearly 100 days since Trump began it without congressional approval."
Jayapal continued:
"Waged with absolutely no imminent threat and no endgame, this war has already killed 13 US service members and injured many more; killed thousands of civilians in Iran and Lebanon, and displaced millions more; wasted billions in US taxpayer dollars that should have been spent on lowering healthcare and housing costs for Americans; and all while causing gas prices and grocery costs to skyrocket.
"The simple truth is that the American people are paying the price for Trump’s lawlessness," Jayapal added. “Every day that this war continues is a violation of our Constitution."
Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) asserted that "our victory—while monumental—does not change the truth that this war never should have began, and never would have began, had the president not disgraced America and our laws to ensure that it did."
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said on social media: "The American people are tired of presidents abusing their power by spending billions of our taxpayer dollars on unnecessary wars. I urge the Senate to quickly pass this bill to end Trump’s illegal war in Iran."
Civil society groups opposed to the war applauded Wednesday's vote, which Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the peace group CodePink, called a "total rebuke of Trump."
"After 95 days of illegal war, Congress is finally enacting the will of the people, who overwhelmingly oppose President Trump’s disastrous war on Iran," Eric Eikenberry, government relations director at Win Without War, said in a statement.
"While congressional action is welcome, it is woefully late. Congress should not have taken over three months to pass a resolution that would force Trump to end this war," he continued. "Their delay has left millions of people struggling amidst unnecessary, unacceptable human and economic consequences."
"Lawmakers who've placed their loyalty to Trump over acting to determine when and whether the United States goes to war have failed both their constituents and their constitutional duty," Eikenberry added.
Naveed Shah, political director of the veterans' group Common Defense, said following the vote, "Veterans understand the costs of war better than most Americans, which is why we commend the Republicans who joined Democrats on this vote and showed the kind of courage and independence this moment demands."
"This was an important step toward ending a dangerous war and ensuring that the American people have a voice through their elected representatives," Shah added. "It is long past time to put guardrails on this brazen president, who launched us into an illegal war with Iran."
Alix Fraser, vice president of advocacy at Issue One, a group dedicated to reducing the role of money in politics, said in a statement that “today’s vote is a huge win for the Constitution and for the American people."
"The House finally had the political willpower to stand up to the president’s unconstitutional war," Fraser added. "Americans should celebrate this massive victory, but have every right to feel frustrated that it took this long for Congress to work on behalf of the people. That must change. Our democracy will not survive if Congress fails to uphold its responsibility to check executive power at this critical juncture."
“Every day that this war continues is a violation of our Constitution.”
Some observers noted that Wednesday's vote is likely to be largely symbolic, pointing to Trump's veto—and the Senate's failure to overturn it—of a 2019 bipartisan war powers resolution directing him to end US military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen.
Still, lawmakers and advocates urged the Senate to pass the Iran resolution to uphold the rule of law and force Trump's hand.
"Ending this war is a moral imperative," said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.).
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) implored upper chamber lawmakers to "immediately follow suit and act to end this war."
Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) posted on Bluesky: "Now it’s time to pass the Senate. The power to declare war has been with Congress. Now let’s get it done and end this war!"
Benjamin said: "Now it’s time for the Senate to act. Let’s keep the pressure on and send this resolution to Trump’s desk. No more illegal wars. No more blank checks for militarism."
"Americans know they’re being ripped off and are demanding accountability."
The American Economic Liberties Project and Groundwork Collaborative on Wednesday released a joint report detailing how President Donald Trump's unprecedented corruption is padding his own pockets at the expense of US taxpayers.
The report—titled "The Price of Corruption: How Trump's Pay-to-Play Administration is Driving Up Costs for Working Families"—explains how Trump isn't just using the presidency to enrich himself, but leaving ordinary Americans to foot the bill for his corrupt dealings.
The report notes that the TrumpRx website, which purports to offer Americans deep discounts on drugs, is actually a scheme for funneling even more money to large pharmaceutical companies.
"When Trump rolled out TrumpRX earlier this year, the administration claimed it was a way for Americans to access more affordable prescription drugs," the report states. "Instead, the platform fails to disclose information about less expensive generic alternatives and, in some instances, charges consumers more for products that are available for less elsewhere."
Rather than providing real relief, the report charges, TrumpRx "serves as free advertisement for Big Pharma and may be lining the pockets of the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., who is on the board of prescription drug platform BlinkRX, which stands to benefit from the administration’s promotion of direct-to-patient medicine sales."
The report also highlights the way that Trump has used his tariffs, which raise the cost of imported goods for US consumers, as a personal self-enrichment tool, such as when he slashed tariffs on Switzerland "just a few days after Swiss business leaders presented him with a personalized gold bar worth more than $130,000 and a Rolex desk clock."
Trump levied tariffs against Brazil last year in retaliation for that country convicting a political ally, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, of plotting a coup to illegally stay in power after he lost an election to current President Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva.
"Americans paid the price for Trump’s international allies breaking the law," states the report, "as coffee imported from Brazil surged to a 40% increase in price."
One particularly egregious instance of Trump's corruption, the report explains, comes from the president's unprecedented number of pardons of political allies, including hundreds of rioters who violently stormed the US Capitol on his behalf on January 6, 2021.
Beyond the high-profile rioter cases, the report shines a spotlight on a number of white-collar criminals who have received presidential clemency, including Paul Walczak, "a nursing home executive convicted of tax evasion" who was pardoned "three weeks after his mother donated $1 million to Trump at a Mar-a-Lago fundraiser," and cryptocurrency mogul Changpeng Zhao, who received a pardon months after helping boost the Trump family's crypto venture.
The report notes that the Trump administration has also stacked regulatory agencies in ways that directly benefit the business interests of the president's family members, most prominently in the realm of online prediction markets tied to Donald Trump Jr.
"Over the past year, Donald Trump Jr. has served as a strategic advisor to Kalshi and a large investor in Polymarket, while the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)—the agency overseeing these firms—has acted as their ally, rather than their watchdog," the report says. "Both firms had actively lobbied Trump’s CFTC to block states from regulating prediction markets in the same way they regulate gambling companies."
Morgan Harper, director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, called the report on Trump's corruption "a reminder that we cannot afford to look away or pretend that any of this is normal."
"The country," Harper added, "is not Trump’s to liquidate."
Molly Claflin, senior fellow at Groundwork Collaborative, made the case that Trump's corruption and the economic pain being felt by Americans are inseparable.
“As working families buckle under the weight of Trump’s high prices, the president is further driving up costs by abusing his position to direct taxpayer-funded kickbacks to his family and political allies," said Claflin. "His erratic policymaking is making daily life more expensive. Americans know they’re being ripped off and are demanding accountability."